:SUPERFUND
DIRECTORY OF REGULATIONS
(1987-1988)
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
..Offic^bf Solid Waste and Emergency Response
"'' 401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
STIPFRFTIND REGULATIONS
1987
01/22/87
Proposed
01/27/87 Proposed
02/17/87
03/16/87
03/16/87
03/19/87
04/02/87
04/09/87
04/13/87
04/17/87
04/22/87
04/28/87
Final/Correction
Proposed
Proposed
Final
Final
Notice
Corrections
Proposed
Final
Final/Correction
Amendment to the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan;
The "National Priorities List
Hazardous Chemical Reporting; Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Programs
Hazardous Substances; Corrections
(Research and Special Programs
Administration, Department of
Transportation)
Reportable Quantity Adjustments
Reportable Quantity Adjustment-
Radionuclides
Reportable Quantity of Hazardous
Substances (Research and Special Programs
Administration, Department of
Transportation)
Water Programs; Discharge of Oil
Hazardous Waste Management System;
Identification and Listing of Hazardous
Waste
Hazardous Waste Management System;
Burning of Waste Fuel and Used Oil Fuel in
Boilers and Industrial Furnaces; Technical
Corrections
Natural Resource Damage Assessments
(Department of Interior)
Extremely Hazardous Substances List and
Threshold Planning Quantities; Emergency
Planning and Release Notification
Requirements
Extremely Hazardous Substances List and
Threshold Planning Quantities; Emergency
Planning and Release Notification
Requirements
-------
STJPERFUND REGULATIONS
(Continued)
1987 (Continued)
05/06/87
05/13/87
05/13/87
06/04/87
07/13/87
07/14/87
07/20/87
07/22/87
07/22/87
07/24/87
Correction
Correction
Proposed
Proposed
Proposed/Withdrawal
i
Proposed
Proposed
Final
Proposed
Corrections
09/03/87
Notice
Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces
Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces
The National Priorities List-Listing Policy
for Federal Facilities
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting;
Community Right-to-Know
Withdrawal of Arbitration Procedures and
Natural Resqurce Claims Procedures for the
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Hazardous Chemical Reporting: Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know
• Programs; Public Meeting and Reopening of
Comment Period
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting
Community Right-to-Know
National Priorities List for Uncontrolled
Hazardous Waste Sites
National Priorities List for Uncontrolled
Hazardous Waste Sites; Federal Facility Sites
Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and
Equivalent Methods
Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Program; Denial of Toxic
Chemicals List Petition
Renewal of Exemptions from Requirement of
Tolerances
National Priorities List (NPL) for
Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites;
Deletion of Sites
-------
SIIPERFUND REGULATIONS
(Continued)
1987 (Continued)
09/08/87 Final/Withdrawal
10/15/87 Proposed
10/15/87
10/21/87
10/27/87
10/23/87
Final
Interim Final
Fact Sheet
Corrections
11/23/87 Proposed
•>r 11/23/87
Notice
Withdrawal of Arbitration Procedures and
Natural Resource Claims Procedures for
Hazardous Substance Superfund
Trade Secret Claims for Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Information;
and Trade Secret Disclosures to Health
Professionals
Emergency and Hazardous Chemical
Inventory Forms and Community Right-to-
Know Reporting Requirements
Reimbursement to Local Governments for
Emergency Response to Hazardous
Substance Releases
Reimbursement to Local Governments for
Emergency Response to Hazardous
Substance Releases
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting;
Community Right-to-Know (June 4)
Certain Chemical Premanufacture Notices
(October 9)
Initiation of Special Review; Oxydemeton-
Methyl (October 5)
Toxic and Hazardous Substances; Certain
Chemicals Premanufacture Notices
(Septe/mber 25)
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of Missouri;
Stack Heights
Extremely Hazardous Substances List;
Bacitracin
12/17/87
Final
Extremely Hazardous Substances List
-------
SUPERFUND REGULATIONS
(Continued)
1988
01/13/88 Proposed Reporting Hazardous Substance Activity
When Transferring Federal Real Property
-------
SIIPERFUND REGULATIONS
Index Bv Title
1987
Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods 07/24/87
Amendment to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency
Plan; The National Priorities List 01/22/87
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri; Stack Heights
11/23/87
Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and Industrial Furnaces 05/06/87
Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and Industrial Furnaces 05/13/87
Certain Chemical Premanufacture Notices (October 9) 10/23/87
Emergency and Hazardous Chemical Inventory Forms and Community Right-to-Know
Reporting Requirements 10/15/87
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Program; Denial of Toxic Chemicals
List Petition 07/24/87
Extremely Hazardous Substances List and Threshold Planning Quantities; Emergency
Planning and Release Notification Requirements 04/22/87
Extremely Hazardous Substances List and Threshold Planning Quantities; Emergency
Planning and Release Notification Requirements 04/28/87
Extremely Hazardous Substances List; Bacitracin 11/23/87
Extremely Hazardous Substances List 12/17/87
Hazardous Chemical Reporting; Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Programs 01/27/87
Hazardous Chemical Reporting: Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Programs; Public Meeting and Reopening of Comment Period 07/14/87
Hazardous Substances; Corrections (Research and Special Programs Administration,
Department of Transportation) 02/17/87
Hazardous Waste Management System; Burning of Waste Fuel and Used Oil Fuel in
Boilers and Industrial Furnaces; Technical Corrections 04/13/87
Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste
04/09/87
Initiation of Special Review; Oxydemeton-Methyl (October 5) 10/23/87
National Priorities List-Listing Policy for Federal Facilities 05/13/87
1
-------
SIIPERFUND
Index Bv Title
(Continued)
National Priorities List for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites 07/22/87
National Priorities List for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites; Federal Facility Sites
07/22/87
National Priorities List (NPL) for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites; Deletion of Sites
09/03/87
Natural Resource Damage Assessments (Department of Interior) 04/17/87
Renewal of Exemptions from Requirement of Tolerances 07/24/87
Reportable Quantity Adjustments 03/16/87
Reportable Quantity Adjustment-Radionuclides 03/16/87
Reportable Quantity of Hazardous Substances (Research and Special Programs
Administration, Department of Transportation) 03/19/87
Reimbursement to Local Governments for Emergency Response to Hazardous Substance
Releases 10/21/87
Reimbursement to Local Governments for Emergency Response to Hazardous Substance
Releases 10/27/87
Toxic and Hazardous Substances; Certain Chemicals Premanufacture Notices
(September 25) 10/23/87
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting; Community Right-to-Know 06/04/87
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting Community Right-to-Know 07/20/87
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting; Community Right-to-Know (June 4) 10/23/87
Trade Secret Claims for Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Information;
and Trade Secret Disclosures to Health Professionals 10/15/87
Water Programs; Discharge of Oil 04/02/87
Withdrawal of Arbitration Procedures and Natural Resource Claims Procedures for the
Hazardous Substance Superfund 07/13/87
Withdrawal of Arbitration Procedures and Natural Resource Claims Procedures for
Hazardous Substance Superfund 09/08/87
-------
SIIPERFUND REGULATIONS
Index Bv Title
(Continued)
1988
Reporting Hazardous Substance Activity When Transferring Federal Real Property
^ 01/13/88
-------
-------
Thursday
January 22, 1987
Part III
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 300
Amendment to National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan;
the National Priorities List; Proposed
Rule
-------
2492
Federal Register
Vol. 52. No 14 / Thursday. January 22. 1987 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
. 40 CFR Part 300
(SW-FRL-3144-6)
Amendment to National OH and
Hazardous Substances Contingency
Plan; the National Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA") is proposing the sixth
update to the National Priorities List
("NPL"). This update contains 64 sites.
The NPL is Appendix B to the National
Oil and Hazardous Substances
Contingency Plan ("NCP"). which-EPA
promulgated pursuant to section 105 of
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 ("CERCLA") and Executive
Order 12316. CERCLA requires that the
NPL be revised at least annually.
Today's notice proposes the sixth major
revision to the NPL.
These sites are being proposed
because they meet the eligibility
requirements of the NPL. EPA has
included on the NPL releases and
threatened releases of designated
hazardous substances, as well as
"pollutants or contaminants" which may
present an imminent and substantial
danger to the public health or welfare.
This notice provides the public with an
opportunity to comment on placing these
sites on the NPL.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before March 23.1987.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed
to Russet H. Wyer. Director. Hazardous
Site Control Division (Attn: NPL Staff).
Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response (WH-548E), Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460. Addresses for
the Headquarters and Regional dockets
are provided below. For further details
on what these dockets contain, see the
Public Comment Section. Section IV. of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
portion of this preamble.
Denise Sines. Headquarters. U.S. EPA
CERCLA Docket Office. Waterside
Mall Subbasement. 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460. 202/382-3046
Peg Nelson. Region 1. U.S. EPA Library.
Room E121. John F. Kennedy Federal
Bldg.. Boston. MA 02203. 617/223-5791
Carole Petersen. Region 2. U.S. EPA. Site
Investigation & Compliance Branch. 26
Federal Plaza. 7th Floor. Room 737.
New York. NY 10278. 212/264-8677
Diane McCreary. Region 3, U.S. EPA
Library. 5th Floor. 841 Chestnut Bldg..
9th & Chestnut Streets. Philadelphia.
PA 19107. 215/597-0580
Gayle Alston. Region 4. U S. EPA
Library. Room C-6. 345 Courtland
Street NE.. Atlanta GA 30365.404/
347-4216
Jeanne Griffin. Region 5. U.S. EPA. 230
South Dearborn Street. Chicago. IL
60604. 312/888-3007
Barry Nash. Region 6. U.S. EPA.
InterFirst II Bldg.. 1201 Elm Street
Dallas. TX 75270. 214/767-4075
Connie McKenzie. Region 7. U.S. EPA
Library. 728 Minnesota Avenue.
Kansas City. KS 66101. 913/236-2828
Dolores Eddy. Region 8. U.S. EPA
Library. 999 18th Street. Suite 1300.
Denver. CO 80202-2413. 303/293-1444
Jean Circiello. Region 9. U.S. EPA
Library. 6th Floor. 215 Fremont Street
San Francisco. CA 94105.415/974-
8076
Joan Shafer. Region 10. U.S. EPA. llth
Floor. 1200 6th Avenue. Mail Stop 525.
Seattle. WA 98101. 206/442-4903
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ann P. Sarno. Hazardous Site Control
Division. Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response (WH-548E).
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
Street SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
Phone (800) 424-6346 (or 382-3000 in the
Washington. DC. metropolitan area).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Content!
I Introduction
II Purpose of the NPL
III NPL Update Process
IV Public Comment Penod
V Eligibility
VI Contents of the Proposed Sixth NPL
Update
VII Regulatory Impact Analysis
VIII Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
I. Introduction
In 1980. Congress enacted the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act. 42 U.S.C. section 9601. et seg.
("CERCLA" or "the Act") in response to
the dangers of uncontrolled hazardous
waste sites. To implement CERCLA.
EPA promulgated the revised National
Oil and Hazardous Substances
Contingency Plan. 40 CFR Part 300. on
July 16.1983 (47 FR 31180). pursuant to
section 105 of CERCLA and Executive
Order 12316 (46 FR 42237. August 20,
1981). The National Contingency Plan
("NCP"). further revised by EPA on
September 16.1985 (50 FR 37624) and
November 20.1985 (50 FR 47912). sets
forth the guidelines and procedures
needed to respond to releases and
threatened releases of hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants
under CERCLA.
Section 105(8)(A) of CERCLA requires
that the NCP include cntena for
determining priorities among releases or
•threatened releases for the purpose of
taking remedial or removal action.
Removal action involves cleanup or
other actions that are taken in response
to emergency conditions or on a short-
term or temporary basis (CERCLA
section 101(23)). Remedial action tends
to be long-tern in nature and involves
response actions which are consistent
with a permanent remedy for a release
(CERCLA section 101(24)). These criteria
are included in Appendix A of the NCP.
Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Site
Ranking System: A User's Manual (the
"Hazard Ranking System" or "HRS") [47
FR 31219. July 16.1982).
Section 10S(8)(B) of CERCLA requires
that the statutory cntena descnbed in
the HRS be used to prepare a list of
national pnonties among the known
releases or threatened releases
throughout the United States. The list.
which is Appendix B of the NCP. is the
National Pnorities List ("NPL").
Today, in this notice. EPA is
proposing to add 64 sites to the NPL.
bringing the number of proposed sites to
248. > The final NPL contains 703 sites.
EPA is proposing to include on the NPL
sites at which there are or have been
releases or threatened releases of
hazardous substances, or of "pollutants
or contaminants." The discussion below
may refer to "releases or threatened
releases" simply as "releases."
"facilities." or "sites".
0. Purpose of the NPL
The primary purpose of the NPL is
stated in the legislative history of
CERCLA (Report of the Committee on
Environment and Public Works. Senate
Report No. 98-848. 96th Cong.. 2d Sess.
60 (1980)):
The priority lists serve primarily
informational purposes, identifying for the
States and the public those facilities and sites
or other releases which appear to warrant
remedial actions. Inclusion of a facility or site
on the list does not in mself reflect a
judgment of the activities of its owner or
operator, it does not require those persons to
undertake any action, nor does it assign
liability to any person. Subsequent
government action in the form of remedial
actions or enforcement actions will be
necessary in order to do so. and these actions
will be attended by all appropriate
procedural safeguards.
1 The total number of prapoied aitei reflect* the
removal of Silver Creek Tailing! sue from proposed
tlinu. u required by the Superfund Amendment!
end Reeurhonzation Act of 1986 (lection 118(p)l.
effective October 17.1988
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 14 / Thursday January 22.
1967 / Proposed Rules
2493
The primary purpose of the NPL.
therefore, is to serve as an informational
tool for use by EPA in identifying sites
that appear to present a significant risk
to public health or the environment. The
initial identification of a site for the NPL
is intended primarily to guide EPA in
determining which sites warrant further
investigation, to assess the nature and
extent of the public health and
environmental risks associated with the
site, and to determine what CERCLA-
financed remedial action(s). if any. may
be appropriate. Inclusion of a site on the
NPL does not establish that EPA
necessarily will undertake remedial
actions. Moreover, listing does not
require any action of any private party.
nor does it determine the liability of any
party for the cost of cleanup at the site.
In addition, a site need not be on the
NPL to be the subject of CERCLA-
financed removal actions, remedial
investigations/feasibility studies, or
actions brought pursuant to sections 106
orl07(a)|4)(B)ofCERCLA.
In addition, although die HRS scores
used to place sites on the NPL may be
helpful to the Agency in determining
pnonties for cleanup and other response
activities. EPA does not rely on the
scores as the sole means of determining
such pnonties. The information
collected to develop HRS scores is not
sufficient in itself to determine the
appropriate remedy for a particular site.
EPA relies on further, more detailed
studies to determine what response, if
any. is appropriate. These studies will
take into account the extent and
magnitude of the contaminants in the
environment, the risk to affected
populations, the cost to correct problems
at the site, and the response actions that
have been taken by potentially
responsible parties or others. Decisions
on the type and extent of action to be
taken at these sites are made in
accordance with the criteria contained
in Subpart F of the NCP. After
conducting these additional studies.
EPA may conclude that it is not
desirable to conduct response action at
some sites on the NPL because of more
pressing needs at other sites, or because
an enforcement action may instigate or
force private-party cleanup. Given the
limited resources available in the
Hazardous Substance Response Trust
Fund established under CERCLA. the
Agency must carefully balance the
relative needs for response at the
numerous sites it has studied. It is also
possible that EPA will conclude after
further analysis that the site does not
warrant response action.
III. NPL Update Process
There are three mechanisms for
placing sites on the NPL. The principal
mechanism is the application of the
HRS. The HRS serves as a screening
device to evaluate the relative potential
of uncontrolled hazardous substances to
cause human health or safety problems.
or ecological or environmental damage.
The HRS takes into account "pathways"
to human or environmental exposure in
terms of numencal scores. Those sites
that score 28.50 or greater on the HRS. -
and which are otherwise eligible, are
proposed for listing.
The Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act (SARA), enacted on
October 17.1986. directs EPA to revise
the HRS. The Agency will continue to
use the existing HRS until the revised
HRS becomes effective. Sites proposed
for. or included on. the NPL prior to the
effective date of the revised HRS will
not be reevaluated.
In addition. States may designate a
single site as the State top priority. In
rare instances. EPA may utilize the
listing provision promulgated as
S 300.66(b)(4) of the NCP (50 FR 37624.
September 16.1985).
Section 300.66(b)(4) of the NCP allows
certain sites with HRS scores below
28.50 to be eligible for the NPL. These
sites may qualify for the NPL if all of the
following occur
• The Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry of the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services has issued a
health advisory which recommends
dissociation of individuals from the release.
• EPA determines that the release poses a
significant threat to public health.
• EPA anticipates that it will be more cost-
effective to use its remedial authority than to
use its removal authonty to respond to the
release.
States have the primary responsibility
for identifying sites, computing HRS
scores, and submitting candidate sites to
the EPA Regional Offices. EPA Regional
Offices conduct a quality control review
of the States' candidate sites, and may
assist in investigating, monitoring, and
scoring sites. Regional Offices may
consider candidate sites in addition to
those submitted by States. EPA
Headquarters conducts further quality
assurance audits to ensure accuracy and
consistency among the various EPA and
State offices participating in the scoring.
The Agency then proposes the new sites
that meet the criteria for listing and
solicits public comments on the
proposal. Based on these comments and
further EPA review, the Agency
determines final scores and promulgates
those sites that still qualify for listing.
An original NPL of 406 sites was
promulgated on September 8.1983 (48
FR 40658). The NPL has since been
expanded (see 49 FR 19480. May 8.1984.
49 FR 37070. September 21.1984". 50 FR
6320. February 14.1985: 50 FR 37630.
September 16.1985: and 51 FR 21054.
June 10.1986) On March 7.1986 (51 FR
7935). EPA published a notice to delete
eight sites from the NPL. As of June 10.
1986. the number of final NPL sites was
703. Another 184 sites from previous
updates remain proposed for the NPL
(see 49 FR 40320. October 15.1984: 50 FR
14115. April 10.1985: 50 FR 37950.
September 18.1985: and 51 FR 21099.
June 10.1986). With the 64 sites in
proposed Update *6. 248 sites are now
proposed for the NPL
IV. Public Comment Period
This Federal Register notice proposing
sites for NPL Update «6 opens the
formal eo^day comment penod.
Comments may be mailed to Russel H.
Wyer. Director. Hazardous Site Control
Division (Attn: NPL staff). Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response
(WH-548E). Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street. SW.. Washington.
DC 20460.
The "ADDRESSES" portion of this
notice contains information on where to
obtain documents relating to the sconng
of these proposed sites. Documents
providing EPA's justification for
proposing these sites are available to
the public in both the Headquarters
public docket and in the appropriate
Regional Office's public docket.
The Headquarters public docket for
NPL Update =6 contains: HRS score
sheets for each proposed site: a
Documentation Record for each site
describing the technical rationale for the
HRS scores: and a list of reference
documents. The Headquarters public
docket is located in EPA Headquarters.
Waterside Mall Subbasement. 401 M
Street SW.. Washington. DC 20460. and
is available for viewing by appointment
only from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.. Monday
through Friday excluding holidays.
Requests for copies of the HRS
documents may be directed to the EPA
Headquarters docket office.
The Regional public dockets contain
HRS score sheets. Documentation
Records, and a list of reference
documents for each site in that Region
These Regional dockets also contain
documents referenced in the
Documentation Record which contain
the data EPA relied upon in calculating
or evaluating the HRS scores. The
reference documents are available only
in the Regional public dockets. These
reference documents may be viewed in
-------
2494
Federal Register / Vol 52. No 14 / Thursday. January 22. 1987 / Proposed Rules
the appropriate Regional Office, and
requests for copies of them may be
directed to the appropriate Regional
Superfund Branch Office Documents
with some relevance to the scoring of
each site, but which were not used as
references, are also available only in the
appropriate EPA Regional office, and
may be viewed and copied by
arrangement with that office An
informal written request, rather than a
formal request, should be the ordinary
procedure for obtaining copies of any of
these documents.
EPA considers all comments received
during this formal comment period.
Comments received are placed into the
Headquarters docket and. during the
comment period, are available to the
public only in the Headquarters docket.
A complete set of comments pertaining
to sites in a particular EPA Region will
be available for viewing in the Regional
Office docket approximately one week
following the close of the formal
comment penod. Comments received
after the close of the comment penod
will be available in the Headquarters
docket and in the appropnate Regional
Office docket on an "as received" basis.
An informal written request, rather than
a formal request, should be the ordinary
procedure for obtaining copies of these
comments. After considering the
relevant comments received during the
comment penod. EPA will add to the
NPL all proposed sites that meet EPA's
criteria for listing. In past NPL
rulemakings. EPA has considered
comments received after the close of the
comment penod. However, with the
increased frequency of NPL
rulemakings. EPA may no longer be able
to consider late comments.
V. Eligibility
CERCLA restricts EPA's authority to
respond to certain categories of releases
and expressly excludes some
substances from the definition of
release. In addition, as a matter of
policy. EPA may choose not to use
CERCLA to respond to certain types of
releases because other authorities can
be used to achieve cleanup of these
releases. Preambles to previous NPL
rulemakings have discussed examples of
these policies. (See. e.g., 48 FR 40658
(September 8.1983): 49 FR 37070
(September 21.1984): 49 FR 40320
(October 15.1984): and 51 FR 21058 (June
10.1988).) Sites proposed for the NPL in
this update meet these past eligibility
policies. The policies regarding Federal
facilities and Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) sites are
relevant to this update and are
discussed below.
Federal Facility Releases
CERCLA as amended by section
I20(a) of SARA, requires that Federal
facilities be subject to. and comply with.
the Act in the same manner as any non-
governmental entity In addition, listing
Federal facilities is consistent with the
NPL's purpose of providing information
to the public with respect to sites that
present potential hazards. CERCLA
section lll(e)(3). however, prohibits use
of the Trust Fund for remedial actions at
Federally-owned facilities.
For Update -6. the Agency is
proposing one Federal facility (listed in
Table 2) and requests comments on the
sconng of this site. As of today. EPA has
proposed 48 Federal facilities for the
NPL
Releases from Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) Sites
On June 10.1988 (51 FR 21057). EPA
announced components of a final policy
for placing sites on the NPL that are
subject to the corrective action
requirements of Subtitle C of RCRA. At
the same time, the Agency requested
comment on several proposed
components of the RCRA/NPL policy (51
FR 21109). Under the final policy, sites
not subject to RCRA Subtitle C
corrective action requirements will
remain eligible for the NPL Examples of
NPL-eligible sites include:
• Facilities that ceased treating, storing, or
disposing of hazardous wastes pnor to
November 19.1980 (the effective date of
Phase I of the Subtitle C reflations).
• Sites at which only materials exempted
from the statutory or regulatory definition of
solid waste or hazardous waste are managed.
• Hazardous waste generators or
transporters not required to have Interim
Status or a final RCRA permit
Sites with releases that can be
addressed under the RCRA Subtitle C
corrective action authonties generally
will not be placed on the NPL However.
RCRA sites may be listed if they meet
all of the other criteria for listing (e.g..
an MRS score of 28.50 or greater), and if
they fall within one of the following
categories:
(1) Facilities owned by persons who
are bankrupt.
(2) Facilities that have lost
authorization to operate, and for which
there are additional indications that the
owner or operator will be unwilling to
undertake corrective action.
(3) Sites, analyzed on a case-by-case
basis, whose owners or operators have
shown an unwillingness to undertake
corrective action.
EPA is reviewing comments submitted
in response to the proposed components
of the RCRA policy and is in the process
of developing a complete final RCRA
policy. However, based on the
application of the final components of
the RCRA/NPL policy announced on
June 10.1986 (51 FR 21057). EPA is
proposing four RCRA sites for the NPL.
Three of these sites are bankrupt.
• Parsons Casket Hardware Co..
Belvidere, Illinois
• Allied Plating. Inc.. Portland.
Oregon
• Palmetto Recycling. Inc.. Columbia.
South Carolina
EPA has determined that a fourth
RCRA facility is eligible for the NPL
because it has lost its RCRA
authonzation to operate and appears
unwilling to undertake corrective action.
This site is:
• Chem-Solv. Inc.. Cheswold.
Delaware
Chem-Solv lost authorization to
operate in August 1985 when the State
of Delaware denied its RCRA storage
permit. In 1984 and 1985 the State issued
two orders requmng Chem-Solv to begin
remedial action at the site in order to
address imminent hazards. Chem-Solv
has refused to comply with these orders:
the company has stated that it is
financially unable to perfopn remedial
action.
Documents supporting the decisions
for these RCRA-related sites are
contained in the appropnate Regional
dockets and are available for public
review.
VI. Contents of the Proposed Sixth NPL
Update
All sites in today's proposed addition
to the NPL received HRS scores of 28.50
or above.
Following this preamble is a list of the
64 sites proposed for addition to the NPL
(Table 1 and 2). Each entry on the list
contains the name of the facility, the
State and city or county in which it is
located, and the corresponding EPA
Region. Each proposed site is placed by
score in a group corresponding to groups
of 50 sites presented within the final
NPL For example, sites in Group 6 of
the proposed update have scores that
fall within the range of scores covered
by the eighth group of 50 sites on the
final NPL Each entry is accompanied by
one or more notations reflecting the
status of response and cleanup activities
at the site at the time this list was
prepared. Because this information may
change periodically, these notations
may become outdated.
Five response categories are used to
designate the type of response
underway. One or more categones may
apply to each site. The categones are:
Federal and/or State response (R).
-------
Federal Register / V'ol 52 No. 14 / Thursday. |dnudr\ 22 1987 / Proposed Rules
2495
Federal enforcement (F). State
enforcement (S). Voluntary or
negotiated response (V). and Categorv
to be determined (D)
EPA also indicates the status of
significant Fund-financed or private-
party cleanup activities underway or
completed at proposed and final NPL
sites There are three cleanup status
codes, only one code is necessary to
designate the status of cleanup activities
at each site since the codes are mutually
exclusive. The codes are:
Implementation activities are underway
for one or more operable units (I).
Implementation activities are completed
for one or more (but not all) operable
units, but additional site cleanup actions
are necessary (O). and Implementation
activities are completed for all operable
units (C).
These categones and codes are
explained in detail in earlier
rulemakings. the most recent on June 10.
1986 (51 FR 21075).
VII. Regulatory Impact Analysis
The costs of cleanup actions that may
be taken at sites are not directly
attnbutable to listing on the NPL. as
explained below. Therefore, the Agency
has determined that this rulemakmg.is
not a "major" regulation under
Executive Order 12291. EPA has
conducted a preliminary analysis of the
economic implications of today's
proposal to add new sites. EPA believes
that the kinds of economic effect* ' _ ..
associated with this revision are
generally similar to those identified in
the regulatory impact analysis (RLA)
prepared in 1982 for the revisions to the
NCP pursuant to section 105 of CERCLA
(47 FR 31180. luly 16.1982) and the
economic analysis prepared when the
amendments to the NCP were proposed
(50 FR 5882. February 12.1985). The
Agency believes the anticipated
economic effects related to proposing
the addition of these sites to the NPL
can be characterized in terms of the
conclusions of the earlier RIA and the
most recent economic analysis.
Costs
EPA has determined that this
proposed rulemaking is not a "major"
regulation under Executive Order 12291
because inclusion of a site on the NPL
does not itself impose any costs. It does
not establish that EPA will necessarily
undertake remedial action, nor does it
require any action by a private party or
determine its liability for site response
costs. Costs that arise out of site
responses result from site-by-site
decisions about what actions to take.
not directly from the act of listing itself.
Nonetheless, it is useful to consider the
costs associated with responding to all
sites included in a proposed rulemaking
This action was submitted to the Office
of Management and Budget for review
The maior events that generally
follow the proposed listing of a site on
the NPL are a search for responsible
parties and a remedial investigation/
feasibility study (RI/FS) to determine if
remedial actions will be undertaken at a
site Design and construction of the
selected remedial alternative follow
completion of the Rl/FS. and operation
and maintenance (O&M) activities may
continue after construction has been
completed.
Costs associated with responsible
party searches are initially borne by
EPA. Responsible parties may bear
some or all the costs of the RI/FS,
design and construction, and O&M. or
the costs may be shared by EPA and the
States.
The State cost share for cleanup
activities has been amended by section
104 of SARA. For pnvately-owned sites.
EPA will pay for 100% of the costs of the
RI/FS and remedial planning, and 90%
of the costs associated with remedial
action. The State will be responsible for
10% of the remedial action. Similarly, at
publicly-owned but not publicly-
opmatad sites, the cost share for
remedial action is 90%:10%. At publicly-
operated sites, however, the State cost
share is at least 50% of all response
costs. This includes the RI/FS. remedial
Ideslgrgand construction; an? O&&C ": •"
Wltf regard to O&M Tor cleanup
activities other than ground water or
surface water. EPA will share, for up to
1 year, in the cost of that portion of
O&M that is necessary to assure that a
remedy la operational and functional.
After that time, the State assumes full
responsibility for O&M. SARA provides
that EPA will share in the operational
cost associated with ground water/
surface water restoration for up to 10
years.
In previous NPL rulemakings. the
Agency has provided estimates of the
costs associated with these activities
(RI/FS. remedial design, remedial
action, and O&M) on an average per-site
and total cost basis. At this time.
however, there is insufficient
information to determine what these
costs will be as a result of the new
requirements under SARA. Until such
information is available, the Agency will
provide cost estimates based on
CERCLA prior to enactment of SARA:
these estimates are presented below.
EPA is unable to predict what portions
of the total costs will be borne by
responsible parties, since the
distribution of costs depends on the
extent of voluntary and negotiated
response and the success of arn cost-
recovery actions
Cost category
Average
total cost
per site'
RI/FS S875.000
Remedial design 850 000
Remedial action . ' 8 600.000
Net present value of O&M 3 , * 3.770 000
1 1986 US Dollars.
' includes State cost-share
3 Assumes cost of O&M over 30 years
5400.000 lor the first year and 10% discount
rate
SOURCE "Extent of the Hazardous Release
Problem and Future Funding Needs-CERCLA
section 30Ka)(i)(c) Study". December 1984.
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Re-
sponse. U S EPA
Costs to States associated with
today's proposed amendment anse from
the required State cost-share of (l) 10%
of remedial action and 10% of first-year
O&M costs at privately-owned sites and
sites which are publicly-owned but not
publicly-operated, and (2) at least 50% of
the remedial planning (RI/FS and
remedial design), remedial action, and
first-year O&M costs at publicly
operated sites. States will assume the
cost for O&M after the first year Using
the assumptions developed in the 1982
RIA for the NCP. EPA has assumed that
90% ofiheJQ non-Federal sites proposed
to be added to the NPL in this
amendment will be pnvately-owned and
10% will be State- or locally-operated.
Therefore, using the budget prelections
presented above, the cost to States of
undertaking Federal remedial actions at
all 63 non-Federal sites would be
approximately S294 million, of which
approximately S205 million is
attributable to the State O&M cost. As a
result of the changes to State cost share
under SARA, however, the Agency
believes that State O&M costs may
actually decrease. When new cost
information is available, it will be
presented in future rulemakings.
Listing a hazardous waste site on the
final NPL does not itself cause firms
responsible for the site to bear costs.
Nonetheless, a listing may induce firms
to clean up the site voluntarily, or it may
act as a potential tngger for subsequent
enforcement or cost-recovery actions.
Such actions may impose costs on firms.
but the decisions to take such actions
are discretionary and made on a case-
by-case basis. Consequently, precise
estimates of these effects cannot be
made. EPA does not believe that every
site will be cleaned up by a responsible
party. EPA cannot project at this lime
-------
2496
Federal Register / Vp| 52. No. 14 / Thursday. January 22. 1987 / Proposed Rules
which firms or industry sectors will bear
specific portions of response costs, but
the Agency considers: the volume and
nature of the wastes at the site, the
parties' ability to pay. and other factors
when deciding whether and how to
proceed against potentially responsible
parties.
Economy-wide effects of this
proposed amendment are aggregations
of effects on firms and State and local
governments. Although effects could be
felt by some individual firms and States.
the total impact of this revision on
output, prices, and employment is
expected to be negligible at the national
level, as was the case in the 1982 RIA.
Benefits
The Benefits associated with today's
proposed amendment to list additional
sites are increased health and
environmental protection as a result of
increased public awareness of potential
hazards. In addition to the potential for
more Federally-financed remedial
actions, this proposed expansion of the
NPL could accelerate privately-financed.
voluntary cleanup efforts to avoid
potential adverse publicity, private
lawsuits, and/or Federal or State
enforcement actions.
As a result of additional NPL
remedies, there will be lower human
exposure to high-risk chemicals, and
higher-quality surface water, ground
water, soil, and air. These benefits are
expected to be significant, although
difficult to estimate in advance of
completing the RI/FS at these particular
sites.
Associated with the costs or remedial
actions are significant potential benefits
and cost offsets. The distributional costs
to firms of financing NPL remedies have
corresponding "benefits" in that funds
expended for a response generate
employment, directly or indirectly
(through purchased materials).
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
requires EPA to review the impacts of
this action on small entities, or certify
that the action will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. By small
entities, the Act refers to small
businesses, small governmental
jurisdictions, and nonprofit
organizations.
While proposed modifications to the
NPL are considered revisions to the
NCR they are not typical regulatory
changes since the revisions do not
automatically impose costs. Proposing
sites for the NPL does not in itself
require any action by any pnvate party.
nor does it determine the liability of any
party for the cost of cleanup at the site.
Further, no identifiable groups are
affected as a whole. As a consequence.
it is hard to predict impacts on any
group. A site's proposed inclusion on the
NPL could increase the likelihood that
adverse impacts to responsible parties
(in the form of cleanup costs) will occur.
but EPA cannot identify the potentially
affected businesses at this time nor
estimate the number of small businesses
that might be affected.
The Agency does expect that certain
industries and firms within industries
that have caused a proportionately high
percentage of waste site problems could
be significantly affected by CERCLA
actions. However. EPA does not expect
the impacts from the proposed listing of
these sites to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small businesses.
In any case, economic impacts would
only occur through enforcement and
cost-recovery actions, which are taken
at EPA's discretion on a site-by-site
basis. EPA considers many factors when
determining what enforcement actions
to take, including the firm's contribution
to the problem and the firm's ability to
pay. The impacts from cost recovery on
small governments and nonprofit
organizations would be determined on a
similar case-by-case basis.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Air pollution control. Chemicals.
Hazardous materials. Intergovernmental
relations. Natural resources. Oil
pollution. Reporting and recordkeepmg
requirements. Superfund. Waste
treatment and disposal. Water pollution
control. Water supply.
Dated: January IS. 1987.
lack W. McCraw.
Deputy Assistant Administrator. Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
PART300-{AMENbED]
!
It is proposed to amend 40 CFR Part
300 as follows;
1. The authority citation for Part 300
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9605{8)(B)/CERCLA
lOS(B)lB).
2. K is proposed to add the following
sites by Croup, to Appendix B of Part
300:
Note.—In proposed rules, the number in the
left column corresponds to the Croup number
in Appendix B.
-------
Federal Rpgister ' Vu! S2. No 14 / Th-iisdcA |.inurtr> 2J 'u..p
Category. SLACUS^
V R F S 0
D
D
D
D
b
V R ' o
D
D
D
D
R 0
R I
S I
D
D
D
D
R I
V S I
D I
D
D
S
R 0
D
R 0
D
V F
1: Sites are placed In groups (Cr) corresponding Co groups of SO
on che final NPL
2: V - Voluntary or negotiated response
F • Federal enforcement
D - Category Co be determined
R - Federal and State response
S • State enforcement
3: 1 - Implementation activity underway, one or more operable units
0 - One or more operable units completed; others may be underway
C - Implementation activity completed for all operable units
-------
2498
NPL
Crl
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
* A
10
10
11
11
11
11
12
12
12
12
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
Se Site Name*
GA Diamond Shamrock Corp Landfill
IN Mccarty's Bald Knob Landfill
lA DuEchEown TreatmenE Plant
PA Aladdin Plating
PA American Electronics Laboratories
PA Anetelc. Inc (Hunter Spring Dlv)
PA Gentle Cleaners/Granite Knitting
PA J.W Rex/Allied Paint/Keystone
PA Spra-Fin, Inc.
PA William Oick Lagoons
MO Kern -Pest Laboratories
NJ Cosden Chemical Coatings Corp
NJ Curclo Scrap Metal. Inc.
VA Dixie Caverns County Landfill
KS Obee Road
NC Carolina Transformer Co.
NY Islip Municipal Sanitary Landfill
VI Toman Fairgrounds
CA Mathls Bros Lf (S Marble Top Rd)
IL Stauffer Chen (Chic Heights Pint)
MI Ford Motor Co. (Sludge Lagoon)
OK Tenth Street Dump/ Junkyard
PA Paoll Rail Yards
VA Rentokll. Inc. (VA Wood Pres Dlv)
VI Toman Armory
AR Jacksonville Municipal Landfill
AR Rogers Road Municipal Landfill
MI Metal Working Shop
UN Rltari Post & Pole
MO Wheeling Disposal Service Co. Lf
KJ Horscmann's Dump-
PA Translcoll. Inc.
SC Palmetto Recycling. Inc.
TN Mallory Capacitor Co.
City/County
Cedartovn
!*£ Vernon
Ascension Parish
Scott Township
Montgomeryville
Hatfield
Souderton
Lansdale
North Wales
West Cain Township
Cape Clrardeau
Beverly
Saddle Brook Tvp
Salem
Hutchinron
Fayeteevllle
Islip
Tonah
Kensington
Chicago Heights
Ypsllanci
Oklahoma City
Paoll
Richmond
Toman
Jacksonville
Jacksonville
Lake Ann
Sebeka
Amazonia
East Hanover
Worcester
Columbia
Vaynesboro
=^= -^ —
Response Cleanup
Gate gory 2 StatuSj
D
Q
£)
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
n
D
R F o
D
D
D
D
D
R F o
Vf
r
D
D
D"
D-
S O
• w
D
Nuiiiber of Sites Proposed for Listing: 63
National Priorities List.
Federal Proposed Update 6 Sites (by Croup)
January 1987
NPL
Gr. Sc Site Name
City/County
Response Cleanup
Category2 Status.
12 MN Twin Cities Air Force (SAR Lndfl) Minneapolis
Number of Federal Site* Proposed for Listing: 1
°:
:
"—•
D - Category to be determined
• :
3: ft " ?"PleMr"cton -ctlvley underway, one or more operable units
0 - One or more operable unit, completed; others may be underway
C - Implementation activity completed for all operable units
'FK Doc. 87-1353 Filed 1-21-67: 8:45 am|
«JJHO COM *MO-«0-C
-------
Tuesday
January 27, 1987
Part III
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 370
Hazardous Chemical Reporting;
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Programs; Proposed Rule
-------
2836
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27. 1987 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 370
ISH H-FRL-3137-7]
Hazardous Chemical Reporting;
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Programs
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: Section 312 of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 (SARA), signed into law on
October 17.1986. requires the
Administrator to publish a uniform
format for emergency and hazardous
chemical inventory forms within three
months. Under sections 311 and 312 of
SARA, facilities required to prepare or
have available a material safety data
sheet (MSDS) under the Occupational
Safety and Health Act (OSHA) and its
implementing regulations must submit
the MSDS and the inventory forms to
local and State officials. These reporting
provisions provide public access to
information on hazardous chemicals
present in the local community for a
wide variety of uses including
emergency response and environmental
and public health planning priorities.
The purpose of this proposed rule is to
publish for comment the inventory forms
and propose regulations to implement
the MSDS and inventory reporting
requirements.
DATES: Written comments should be
submitted on or before March 30.1987.
If this proposed rule is adopted as a
final rule, effective dates relevant to the
rule would include the following:
1. Initial submission of material safety
data sheets or alternative list: October
17.1987.
2. Initial submission of the inventory
form containing Tier I information:
March 1.1988.
ADDRESSES: Comments: Written
comments should be submitted in
triplicate to Preparedness Staff.
Superfund Docket Clerk. Attention:
Docket Number 300PQ-IF, Superfund
Docket Room Lower Garage. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Mail
Stop WH-548D. 401 M Street. SW..
Washington. DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathleen Brody. Program Analyst.
Preparedness Staff. Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response. WH-
548. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street. SW.. Washington.
DC 20460. or the Chemical Emergency
Preparedness Program Hotline at 1-800/
53S-0202: in Washington. DC at 1-202/
479-2449.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are listed
in the following outline:
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
B. Background
1. Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1986 (SARA).
2. Title III
3. Subtitle B
4. Section 311
5. Section 312
II. Analysis of the Proposed Rule and Forms
A. Reporting Requirements under Sections
311 and 312
1. Reporting obligation
2. Program scope
a. Definition of key terms and
exclusions
b. Threshold levels for reporting
3. Categones for reporting
4. Relationship of final fonn to Section
312(g)
B. Format of Forms
C. General Solicitation of Public Comment
III Relationship to Other EPA Program*
A. Other Title III Programs
1. Subtitle A—Emergency Planning
2. Subtitle B—Section 313 Toxic
Chemical Release Inventory
3- Trade Secret*
B. CERCLA Programs
1. CERCLA Reporting Requirements
Z. National Contingency Plan
IV. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
V. Supporting Information
A. List of Subjects
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
These proposed regulations are issued
under Title III of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
af 1986. (Pub. LM-499). ("SARA" or
"the Act"). Title ID of SARA is known
as the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-To-Know Act of 1988.
B. Background
1. Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
On October 17.1986. the President
signed into law the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 ("SARA") which revises and
extends the authorities established
under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response. Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA").
Commonly known as "Superfund",
CERCLA provides authority for federal
cleanup of hazardous substances sites
and response to releases of hazardous
substances. Title HI of SARA
establishes new authorities for
emergency planning and preparedness.
community right-to-know reporting, and
toxic chemical release reporting.
2. Title III
Title III of SARA, also know as the
"Emergency Planning and Community
Right-To-Know Act of 1986". is intended
to encourage and support emergency
planning efforts at the State and local
level and provide citizens and local
governments with information
concerning potential chemical hazards
present in their communities.
Title III is organized into three
subtitles. Subtitle A establishes the
framework for state and local
emergency planning. Subtitle B provides
the mechanism for community
awareness with respect to hazardous
chemicals present in the locality. This
information is critical for effective local
contingency planning. Subtitle B
includes requirements for the
submission of material safety data
sheets and emergency and hazardous
Chemical inventory forms to State and
local governments, and the submission
of toxic chemical release forms to the
States and EPA. Subtitle C contains
general provisions concerning trade
secret protection, enforcement, citizen
suits, and public availability of
information.
3. Subtitle B
Subtitle B of Title III is primarily
concerned with providing information to
appropriate local. State, and Federal
officials on the type, amount, location.
use. disposal and release of chemicals at
certain facilities.
Subtitle B contains three reporting
provisions. Section 311 requires facilities
subject to the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (OSHA) and
regulations promulgated under that Act
(IS USC 651 et seq.) to submit material
safety data sheets (MSDS). or a list of
the chemicals for which the facility is
required to have an MSDS. to local
emergency planning committees. State
emergency response commissions and
local fire departments. The facilities are
required to submit the MSDS or
alternative list by October 17.1987.
Under section 312. facilities which
must submit an MSDS under section 311
are also required to submit additional
information on the chemicals present at
the facility. Beginning March 1.1988.
and annually thereafter, the owner or
operator of such a facility must submit
an inventory form containing an
estimate of the maximum amount of
hazardous chemicals present at the
facility during the preceding year, an
estimate of the average daily amount of
hazardous chemicals at the facility, and
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27. 1987 / Proposed Rules
2837
the location of these chemicals at the
facility.
Section 313 requires that certain
facilities with ten or more employees.
which manufacture, process or use a
"toxic chemical" in excess of a
statutonly-prescribed quantity, submit
annual information on the chemical and
releases of the chemical into the
environment. This information must be
submitted to EPA and to the appropriate
State offices beginning on July 1.1988.
EPA is required under section 313(i) to
establish a national toxic chemical
inventory data base for the management
of this data and to publish a reporting
format by June 1,1987.
4. Section 311
Facilities which are required to
prepare or have available an MSDS for
a hazardous chemical under OSHA and
regulations promulgated under that Act
(15 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) are subject to
sections 311 and 312.
Section 311 requires facilities to
submit an MSDS for each chemical for
which the facility is required to have an
MSDS. or a list of such chemicals, to the
local emergency planning committee, the
State emergency response commission.
and the local Tire department. This is a
one-time reporting requirement which is
due October 17.1987. If the owner/
operator submits a list of chemicals, the
MSDS for any chemical on the list must
be submitted to the local emergency
planning committee, upon the local
committee's request. However, updates
to the list or the MSDS submission are
due within three months after the
owner/operator of a facility is first
required to prepare or have available an
MSDS for a specific hazardous chemical
under OSHA regulations. Additionally.
if there is significant new information on
an MSDS which was previously
submitted, a revised MSDS must be
submitted. Section 311(c) provides
public access to this information through
the local emergency planning committee.
Under section 311(b) the
Administrator has the authority to
establish threshold quantities for
hazardous chemicals below which no
facility is subject to the MSDS reporting
requirements under Title III. Today's
proposal sets forth threshold quantities
and regulations implementing the
section 311 reporting requirements.
5. Section 312
The owner or operator of a facility
required to submit an MSDS or list of
chemicals under section 311 is also
subject to the provisions of section 312.
Section 312(a) requires owners or
operators of such facilities to submit an
emergency and hazardous chemical
inventory form (hereafter referred to as
"inventory form") to the appropriate
local emergency planning committee.
State emergency response commission.
and local fire department on or before
March 1.1988. and annually thereafter
on March 1. Section 312 specifies that
there be two reporting "tiers" containing
information on hazardous chemicals at
the facility in different levels of detail.
"Tier I", containing general information
on the amount and location of
hazardous chemicals by category, is
submitted annually. 'Tier II". containing
more detailed information on individual
chemicals, is submitted upon request.
The public has access to Title III
information through the State emergency
response commission and local
emergency planning committee.
Under section 312(d)(l)(C). EPA may
modify the Tier I reporting categories
(the OSHA physical and health hazard
categories) by requiring information to
be reported in groups of chemicals
which present similar hazards in an
emergency or by requiring reporting on
individual hazardous chemicals of
special concern to emergency response
personnel. EPA is authorized under
section 312(b) to establish threshold
quantities belows which no inventory
form reporting is required. Under section
312(g), EPA must publish forms for the
submission of Tier I and Tier II
information within three months of the
enactment of SARA. January 17,1987. If
EPA fails to publish the forms, the
owner/operator must submit the
information by letter. In today's rule.
EPA publishers these forms and
proposes regulations implementing the
requirements of section 312.
II. Analysis of the Proposed Rule and
Forms
A. Reporting Requirements Under
Sections 311 and 312
I. Reporting Obligations
Title III prescribes two reporting
requirements in support of "community
right-to-know" at the State and local
level. Section 311 requires the owner/
operator of facilities that are required to
prepare or have available an MSDS
under OSHA's regulations to submit the
MSDS. or a list of all chemicals present
at the facility for which an MSDS is
required, to the State emergency
response commission, the local
emergency planning committee, and the
local fire department.
If the facility submits a list of
chemicals, section 311(a)(2) specifies
that the list include the chemical name
or common name of the chemical and
any hazardous component as provided
on the MSDS. The list of chemicals must
be grouped in categories of physical and
health hazards set forth under OSHA
regulations. In addition, under section
311(c)(l). a facility which submits a list
of chemicals in lieu of an MSDS for each
chemical must submit the MSDS upon
request of the local emergency planning
committee. Although facilities may meet
the section 311 reporting requirements
through submission either of a list or the
actual MSDS. the Agency encourages
facilities to exercise the list option
whenever possible. List reporting
reduces the information management
burden on recipients of the information.
In addition, the list may facilitate
management of the section 312
information since it can be used by
recipients as an index to the Tier I
report. Moreover, under section 303(d),
the local emergency planning committee
may require submission of such a list
where necessary for developing and
implementing the emergency plan.
For mixtures of hazardous chemicals.
under section 311(a)(3) an owner or
operator may meet the reporting
requirement by submitting an MSDS for.
or by identifying on a list, each element
or compound in the mixture which is a
hazardous chemical, or by submitting an
MSDS for. or identifying on a list, the
mixture itself. If the element or
compound option is selected and is
contained in more than one mixture,
only one MSDS or listing is necessary.
The option selected for the reporting of a
mixture under section 311 must also be
followed for Tier I reporting under
section 312.
Under section 311(d), the owner or
operator of a facility subject to section
311 must submit the MSDS or list within
twelve months after the date of
enactment of SARA, October 17.1987. or
within three months after the owner/
operator is first required to prepare or
have available an MSDS for a certain
chemical under OSHA, whichever is
later. Within three months of a
discovery by an owner/operator of
significant new information concerning
a hazardous chemical for which an
MSDS was previously submitted, a
revised MSDS must be submitted.
Section 311 provides public access to
any MSDS submitted under section 311.
Persons may request the MSDS of any
facility from the local emergency
planning committee. If the MSDS is
unavailable, the local committee is to
request the owner or operator of the
facility to submit the MSDS.
Section 312 requires the owner/
operator of the same facilities to submit
an emergency and hazardous chemical
inventory form to the same three entities
that receive the section 311 information.
-------
2838
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. Imnary 27. 1967 t Propoaedjbi|e»_
This i» a two-tier reporting, requirement
The first tier (Tier I) includes aggregate
'rmation on the maximum and
.rage daily amounts and general
nation of hazardous chemicals at the
acitity. reported by the categories
established under OSHA. The form
containing Tier I information must be
submitted to the State Commission.
local committee and Ore department
annually beginning Match 1.1988, and
will contain data with respect to the
preceding calendar year.
Section 312 also provides for the
submission of more detailed information
from the facility in the form of a
response to a request by State and local
officials for Tier II information. Upon the
request of a State emergency planning
commission, a local emergency planning
committee, or a local fire department
with jurisdiction over the facility.
section 312(e) requires the owner/
operator of a facility to provide Tier II
information to the person making the
request. Tier II is chemical-specific and
more detailed with respect to location
and manner of storage of the chemical
than Tier L Other State and local
officials may have access to Tier II
information through the State emergency
response commission or the local
emergency planning committee.
Under section 312(e)(3). any person
y make a request to the State
.iergency response commission or the
local emergency planning committee for
Tier II information from, a specific
facility relating to the preceding
calendar year. If the information is in
the possession of the State commission
or the local committee, the information
is to be made available to the requestor.
If the information is not in the
possession of the Stale commission or
local committee that received the
request, the State commission or local
committee must request Tier II
information from the facility concerning
chemicals stored in excess of 10.000
pounds at anytime during the preceding
calendar year. To obtain Tier II
information on other chemicals at the
facility, the requestor must submit a
general statement of need with the
request. The local emergency planning
committee or State emergency response
commission may then request such Tier
II information from the facility if it
chooses to do so. All Tier II information
obtained by the State commission or
local committee is to be made available
to the public, including the person
requesting such information. However.
upon request by an owner/operator of a
ficihty. location information on specific
ermcals will be withheld from public
jclosure.
Failure to comply with section 311 or
312 requirements may subject the owner
or operator to assessment of civil and
administrative penalties under section.
325. or citizen suit enforcement under
section 326.
States or local conummities may
under their own laws or ordinances
require submission of knfonnation from
owners or operators which hi
supplemental or additional to the
information required under sections 311
and 312. Section 321 preserves State and
local information submission
requirements except that any MSDS
required from facility owners or
operators under State or local taw
enacted after August 1.1985 must be
identical in form and content to the
MSOS required under section 311. For
either MSDS or inventory reporting
under section 312. a State or local
community may require the submission
of additional sheets attached to the
MSDS or inventory form.
2. Program Scope
a. Definition of key terms and
exclusions. The "community right-to-
know" reporting requirements under
section 311 and 312 are applicable to
any "facility" which is required to
prepare or have available an MSDS for
a "hazardous chemical" under OSHA
and regulations issued under that Act.
Thus, these reporting requirements
apply to any person who is the owner or
operator of: (1) A "facility". (2) at which
a "hazardom chemical" is present and
(3) for which an MSDS is required under
OSHA regulations.
"Facility" for the purposes of Title HI.
is defined as "all buildings, equipment
structures, and other stationary items
which are located on a single site or on
contiguous or adjacent sites and which
are owned or operated by the same
person (or by any person which
controls, is controlled by. or under
common control with, such person)."
For purposes of section 311 and 312.
the term "hazardous chemical" has the
meaning given by the OSHA regulations
at § 1910.1200(c) except as discussed
below. OSHA regulations define a
hazardous chemical as "any chemical
which is a physical hazard or a health
hazard."
Section 1910.1200(b) of the OSHA
regulations currently provides the
following exceptions:
(i) Any hazardous waste as such term
is defined by the Solid Waste Disposal
Act. as amended (42 U.S.C 6901 et seq.)
when subject to regulations issued
under that Act:
(ii) Tobacco or tobacco products;
(iii) Wood or wood products;
(iv) "Articles"—defined under
{ I9l0.1200(b) as a manufactured item:
—Which is formed to a specific-shape or
design during manufacture;
—Whfch has end use function^)
dependent in whole or in part upon
the shape or design during end use:
and
—Which does not release, or otherwise
result in exposure to a hazardous
chemical under normal conditions of
use.
(v) Foods, drugs, or cosmetics
intended for personal consumption by
employees while in the workplace. In
addition, section 311(e) excludes the
following:
(i) Any food, food additive, color
additive, drug, or cosmetic regulated by
the Food and Drug Administration:
(ii) Any substance present as a solid
in any manufactured Hem to the extent
exposure to the-substance does not
occur under normal conditions of use:
(iii) Any substance to the extent it is
used for personal, family, or household
purposes, or is present in the same form
and concentration as a product
packaged for distribution and use by the
general public
(iv) Any substance to (he extent it is
used in a research laboratory or a
hospital or other medical facility under
the direct supervision of a technically
qualified individual:
(v) Any substance to the extent it is
used in routine agricultural operations
or is a fertilizer held for sale by a
retailer to the ultimate customer. There
are cleady some areas of overlap
between the two sets of exceptions and
a combined list is included in
instructions to the reporting formats
published today for the convenience of
the user.
Currently, the OSHA MSDS
regulations are applicable to chemical
manufacturers and importers and all
employers in SIC Codes 20 through 38.
These codes include only manufacturing
industries. However, any facility that
has manufacturing activity is subject to
their requirements even if the facility
falls into more than one SIC code. In
addition, facilities outside the
manufacturing sector will be subject to
the requirements of sections 311 and 312
if and when OSHA MSDS requirements
are revised to apply to additional types
of facilities.
b. Threshold levels for reporting.
Under section 311f». the Administrator
may establish threshold quantities for
hazardous chemicals below which a
facility would be exempted from the
MSDS reporting requirement under
section Ml. A section 311 threshold
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27, 1987 / Proposed Rules
2A3Q
automatically becomes a threshold for
inventory reporting under section 312
since section 312(c) limits inventory
reporting to chemicals for which an
MSDS or alternative list is required
under section 311. Section 312(b) also
enables the Administrator to establish
higher threshold levels for inventory
reporting.
EPA evaluated several options for
establishing thresholds for reporting
under section 311 and 312, including the
option of choosing not to set a threshold
for reporting. The Agency is proposing
today to establish a threshold for
reporting under section 311. which
through section 312(c) also establishes a
threshold for inventory reporting under
section 312. EPA is proposing to
establish a phase-in threshold, but is
also considering establishing a
permanent threshold for reporting and
requests comments on both approaches.
No higher threshold level is proposed
today under section 312(b). The reasons
for establishing a reporting threshold.
the proposed threshold regulation, and a
brief description of the other reporting
threshold quantity options considered
by the Agency are discussed below.
The legislative history for Title III. as
well as comments from a limited number
of State and local officials and citizens'
organizations, indicate that there are
competing concerns underlying the Title
III community right-to-know reporting
provisions.
First the underlying premise of
community right-to-know is broad
access of individuals and local officials
to complete information concerning all
chemicals that may pose physical or
health hazards to their communities.
The need for broad access is heightened
by the potentially large number of user
groups, ranging from State and local
emergency responders. fire and health
departments and local planners to local
community organizations and the
general public. The information needs of
these varied groups are not necessarily
the same, nor are the interests of.any
given group uniform for all communities.
Second, there is a serious concern that
these provisions, particualrly MSDS
reporting under section 311. will flood
local communities and State agencies
with an unmanageable amount of
information. The universe of "hazardous
chemicals", as defined by OSHA.
includes tens of thousands of chemicals
and mixtures, which vary greatly in
degree and type of hazard. Estimates
indicate that there are approximately
350.000 facilities currently required to
have an MSDS: there are an additional
several million facilities outside the
manufacturing sector that may be
covered by section 311 as a result of
revision of the OSHA regulations. In
addition, some facilities may
individually maintain thousands of
MSDS sheets. State and local officials
emphasize that the usefulness of right-
to-know reporting lies in the
manageability of the information
received and that effective information
management, particularly the
establishment of a computerized data
base, will take some time to develop.
Creating an overwhelming paper burden
for State and local officials could thus
greatly reduce in the short and long
term, both the usefulness and the
accessibility of the information received.
In the threshold quantity regulation
that is being proposed today. EPA has
attempted to balance this interest of the
public under Title III in having access to
complete chemical information with the
need to provide a viable information
base, in both the short and the long
term. There are three primary aspects of
today's threshold quantity proposal.
First, thresholds for mandatory MSDS
submissions and Tier I reports are
phased in over three years. In the first
year a threshold of 10.000 pounds is
used, thus substantially reducing the
amount of information which States and
local communities must handle. In the
second year the threshold drops to 500
pounds (the approximate weight of a
standard 55-gallon drum) triggering
additional MSDS and Tier I
submissions. In the third year, the
regulation would specify that thresholds
be eliminated, i.e., that any quanity be
reported. The purpose of the "phase-in"
approach is to give State and local
communities time to establish data
management programs, while ensuring
during the interim that they are alerted
to the presence of any large quantities of
hazardous chemicals.
Second, in order to ensure that the
public has information on substances of
particular concern for emergency
planning, the extremely hazardous
substance list required by Section 302
of Title III. published in the Federal
Register on November 17,1986 (51 FR
41570) would have no threshold.
Finally, the proposal preserves the
interest of the public in having access to
information, notwithstanding the
threshold reporting quantities
established for the first two years.
Under the proposed regulation, the
threshold levels do not apply to requests
for information made by the local
emergency planning committees. Thus.
any individual may, prior to the
elimination of reporting thresholds.
obtain through the local committee
MSDS or inventory information on
chemicals present at any facility. In this
way. the public retains access to this
information even though its submission
is not otherwise required during the
phase-in period. The local committee
may organize public requests for
additional information in any
appropriate manner.
EPA also considered establishing
uniform thresholds for all chemicals
without a phase-in period. The uniform
thresholds considered included small
amounts (e.g., 2 pounds or 5 pounds).
standard container size (500 pounds)
and 10,000 pounds. As discussed above.
in evaluating alternative thresholds.
EPA must consider both the need to
produce a manageable data set and the
hazardous nature of the chemicals. A
uniform threshold has the advantage of
reducing the number of reports and so
enhancing the usefulness of the reported
information. Because of concerns about
information management, cost, and
paperwork burden, EPA is interested in
the identification of a permanent
threshold for reporting combined with
access to information below the
threshold upon request. Establishment
of a permanent threshold may be of
particular importance considering the
number of chemicals subject to section
311 and 312 reporting. The number of
hazardous chemicals, which may be as
high as 500.000, far exceeds the number
of extremely hazardous substances for
which EPA has recently published
threshold planning quantities and the
substances which have reportable
quantities under CERCLA. However,
this time, EPA does not have sufficient
data to support establishment of a
threshold which takes into consideration
the hazardous nature of all of these
chemicals. Therefore, EPA rejected this
option in developing today's proposal,
but solicits comment, and any
supporting data, on whether EPA should
establish permanent thresholds, for
which chemicals, and at what levels.
EPA considered other alternatives to
the proposed approach. One option was
to establish no threshold, ensuring
maximum receipt of information by
State and local officials. The advantage
of this approach is that it potentially
provides immediate access to complete
information on hazardous chemicals in
the community. EPA rejected that option
because the resulting paperwork burden
on State and local agencies may
actually result in a reduced access to
valuable information and may prevent
the development of viable long-term
management systems for the community
right-to-know programs. The phase-in
approach is, thus, preferred to no
threshold because it provides additional
time for States and localities to adjust to
increased data management demands.
-------
2840
Federal Register / VoL 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27.1987 / Proposed Rules
By spreading the paperwork over
several years, the phase-in approch
provides early information on the
expected size of the administrative
burden and on how best to manage the
data to suit the emerging needs of user
groups.
Another option that was considered
was modifying the phase-in approach to
include a lower cutoff in the first year.
e.g., 1.000 pounds for the first two years.
and no threshold in the final year.
Although this provides more information
in the first year, it also provides a
smaller reduction in reports during that
year than the proposed option. This
could decrease the incentive for
facilities to use the phase-in and thus
make the option less useful for
recipients of the information.
EPA also considered several other
options which involve more explicit
evaluation of the hazardous natures of
the chemicals, including setting
thresholds uniformly for chemicals
within a category (but varying the
threshold across categories), and setting
thresholds by individua) chemical.
Similarly, the Agency considered setting
thresholds based on facility type or SIC
codes based on employment (e.g.. tower
thresholds for smaller business), or
based on chemical uses (e.g., fuels.
medicines used in health care facilities.
or intermediate products). While many
of these groups are not currently
covered by Title 111. due to the present
scope of the OSHA regulations, they
were considered because they may be
covered by OSHA regulations in the
future.
The difficulty with these approaches
is that the level of nsk associated with a
chemical depends on a variety of
chemical and site specific factors.
including the identity of the chemical
involved, the nature of the site, and the
specific type of accident (e.g.> fire,
leakage) or other cause of the exposure.
In addition, the quantity of the chemical
that could be hazardous hinges on
whether the risks to emergency
personnel or those to the community at
large are being evaluated. Thus, an
option under which thresholds are set
based on the hazardous nature of the
chemicals was rejected due to the
difficulty of determining cutoffs that
adequately reflect the health and
physical hazards posed by the chemical.
In addition, a chemical-specific
approach was rejected due to the large
number of hazardous chemicals for
which a threshold must be established.
Establishing thresholds based on
number of facility employees or sales
volume was also rejected largely
because small businesses may be the
racilities about which fire departments
know little and are, therefore, more
concerned.
EPA also considered setting a low or
no threshold for MSDS reporting and a
higher threshold for Tier I reporUag
under section 312. The advantage of this
approach is that it provides access to
information on all chemicals present
while reducing the burden of providing
more detailed reports under section 312.
This approach was rejected because it
introduced additional complexities into
the program in exchange for a relatively
minor reduction in paperwork burden.
EPA solicits comments on the
proposed threshold reporting quantity
regulation, as well as on alternatives
discussed above or on suggestions for
any other approach to establishing
thresholds. The Agency specifically
requests comments on the following
issues:
(1) Is the phase-in approach
appropriate? Is the phase-in period, i.e..
three years. long enough?
(2) Are the thresholds for each year
appropriate?
(3) Should the threshold be entirely
eliminated in the last year as proposed
or is some permanent threshold level
appropriate? If a permanent level is
more appropriate, what should this
threshold level be? Should there be
different levels of thresholds for
different chemicals? What
methodologies could be used to
establish appropriate thresholds for aH
hazardous chemicals? What dala
supports these approaches?
(4) Is the concept of access to ail
information below the threshold upon
request of the local committee
appropriate?
(5) Should the threshold regulation '
contain an exception for extremely
hazardous substances, as proposed?
Should there be additional exceptions
(e.g~ CERCLA hazardous pnfr«*«iM«> list.
or the chemicals identified by Section
313 of Title my?
(6) Should a higher threshold be
established under Section 312?
3. Categories for Reporting
Section 3T1 list reporting and section
312 Tier I reporting requirements are
based upon the categories established
under OSHA regulations for grouping
chemicals by particular physical and
health hazards. There are currently 23
such categories. To facilitate the
usefulness of reporting under these
provisions, the Administrator may
modify the categories of health and
physical hazards set forth under OSHA
regulations by requiring information to
be reported in terms of groups of
hazardous chemical* which present
similar hazards in the emergency.
Additionally, for Tier I reporting, the
Administrator may require reporting on
individual hazardous chemicals of
special concern to emergency response
personnel
EPA has received several proposals
for modification of the OSHA categories
to date, including use of the eight
Department of Transportation hazard
labeling categories. The advantage to
this option is that emergency response
personnel are already familiar with
these categories. Another approach
would be to establish two health hazard
categories; immediate (acute) hazards
and delayed (chronic) hazards, and
three physical hazard categories; fire
hazards, sudden release of pressure
hazard, and reactivity hazards.
The Agency is not proposing any
specific modification to the 23 OSHA
categories at this time. However. EPA
recognizes that a smaller number of
reporting categories may facilitate the
manageability of the information and
enhance its usefulness, particularly
since information on chemicals which
present more than one hazard must be
provided in all applicable categories.
For this reason, the Agency is soliciting
comments on these and additional
approaches for modification or reporting
categories including the approaches
described above.
4. Relationship of Final Form to Section
312(g)
Section 312(g) of Tide in requires the
Administrator to publish a uniform
format for inventory forms by January
17.1987. If (he Administrator does not
publish such forms, section 312(g)
requires owners and operators of
facilities to provide the section 312
inventory information by letter.
Although with this proposal EPA
meets the publication requireicent under
section 312(g). the Agency expects minor
changes to the forms published today as
a result of public comment on this rule.
EPA intends to publish a final form well
in advance ofthe initial Tier I reporting.
which is due on March 1.1988. For that
reason, the content of these proposed
formats generally includes only
information specified by the statute.
Owners and operators of facilities
subject to the section 312 reporting
requirement should submit the revised
forms published in the final rule in hen
of the form published today.
B. Format of Forms
EPA requests comments on the design
and content of the Tier I and Tier II
forms and evaluations. IB particular.
EPA requests comments on whether
average daily quantity, as reported on
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27. 1987 / Proposed Rules
2841
the Tier I and Tier II forms, should
reflect an annual average or an average
for those days during the year when the
hazardous chemical is actually on site. •
The Agency also requests comment on
whether the ranges for reporting are too
narrow or too broad.
The Agency designed the Tier II form
to serve three purposes: (1) A worksheet
for preparation of the mandatory Tier I
format. (2) the format for response to
specific Tier II requests. (3) a substitute
for the Tier I format.
Although the main purpose of the Tier
II form is to provide Tier II information
in response to a request. EPA has
attempted to provide a form that
facilities might find convenient to use in
developing and reporting the Tier I
information as well.
C. General Solicitation of Public
Comment
EPA solicits comments on all aspects
of today's proposal, and specifically
requests comments on appropriate
threshold levels for both MSDS and
inventory reporting and revisions of the
OSHA hazard categories. EPA also
solicits comments on the content, layout
and instructions for the Tier I and Tier II
forms for reporting under section 312.
EPA's intent is to make the statutory
reporting as useful as possible for State
local emergency responders, local
emergency planners, fire departments,
and interested members of the local
community, and specifically requests
suggestions from these users of the
information on appropriate threshold
levels and the format of the forms
published today.
Comments must be submitted within
60 days of the publication of this
regulation. Upon completion of the
comment period, the forms and
regulations published today will be
revised as appropriate based on the
comments received and republished as a
final rule. EPA intends to publish final
forms and regulations for sections 311
and 312 reporting well in advance of the
date when the statute requires the first
reports to be submitted: October 17.
1987. for MSDS reporting and March 1.
1988. for inventory reporting.
III. Relationship to Other EPA Programs
A. Other Title III Programs
1. Subtitle A—Emergency Planning
Title III of SARA establishes several
reporting and notification requirements
in addition to sections 311 and 312.
Subtitle A of Title III contains several
notification provisions which are critical
to local emergency planning. In order to
facilitate local emergency planning.
under section 302. facilities which have
present an amount of an extremely
hazardous substance in excess of the
corresponding threshold planning
quantity must notify the State
emergency response commission by
May 17.1987. Section 303 requires that
such facilities must also provide to local
emergency planning committees
information concerning the facility
which may be relevant to emergency
planning. Section 304 establishes
immediate release reporting
requirements to enable timely and
effective local response to releases of
hazardous substances. These emergency
planning requirements are set forth in an
interim final rule published on
November 17.1986, 51 FR 41570. These
requirements are unaffected by today's
proposal.
Today's proposal sets out the
reporting requirements under sections
311 and 312, Subtitle B of Title III. The
focus of Subtitle B is public access to
information concerning chemicals in
their communities rather than
emergency response, and thus reporting
requirements under Subtitle B are both
broader in scope than Subtitle A and
continuing in nature. However, the
information obtained or made available
under sections 311 and 312 of Subtitle B
may also be of significant value to
emergency responders. Subtitle B will
make available to the local and State
emergency planners information on
other chemicals and facilities, beyond
those identified under Subtitle A, which
they may wish to include in their
emergency planning efforts. Tier n
information under section 312 will
provide specific information on the
quantities and locations of hazardous
chemicals. Thus, sections 311 and 312
provide information beneficial to
emergency planning required under
Subtitle A. As discussed in the
November 17.1988 interim final rule, the
facilities identified as a result of that
rule are only a "first cut" of the facilities
and potential chemical hazards for
which emergency planning may be
necessary.
2. Subtitle B—Section 313 Toxic
Chemical Release Inventory
Subtitle B also establishes reporting
requirements under section 313.
Beginning July 1.1988. certain
manufacturing facilities at which there
is a "toxic chemical" present in excess
of a statutory quantity must annually
report to EPA and the State, with
respect to each such substance, the
maximum amount present at the facility,
the treatment or disposal methods used,
and the annual quantity released into
the environment. These requirements
will be the subject of a separate
rulemaking. to be published later this
year. Not all of the facilities subjct to the
sections 311 and 312 requirements will
be required to submit information under
section 313.
3. Trade Secrets
Title III also establishes provisions for
the protection of trade secrets. Section
322 of Title III entitles persons required
to submit information under sections
303. 311. 312, and 313 to withhold the
specific chemical identity from
disclosure under certain conditions. In
order to withhold such information.
however, a person must submit the
withheld information and an
explanation to EPA. Under section
322(c), EPA is required to publish
regulations to implement the trade
secret provisions as soon as practicable
after the enactment of SARA. EPA
intends to propose trade secret
regulations under section 322 later this
year and in advance of the initiation of
the reporting requirements.
B. CERCLA Programs
1. CERCLA Reporting Requirements
CERCLA section 103 establishes
notification requirements for facilities at
which there is a release of a reportable
quantity (RQ) of a CERCLA hazardous
substance. Such releases must be
immediately reported to the National
Response Center (800-424-8802, or in the
Washington, DC metropolitan area at
202-428-2675). These reporting
requirements and the list of hazardous
substances and RQs are found in 40 CFR
Part 302 and are for the purpose of
alerting federal responders to a
potentially dangerous release of a
hazardous substance so that any
necessary response can be taken in a
timely fashion. These notification
requirements are similar to the release
notification requirements under Title III
which must be made to local and State
response personnel, and are unaffected
by today's proposal.
2. National Contingency Plan
The National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP), codified at 40 CFR Part 300.
establishes the national organization.
policy, and procedures for preparedness
and response to releases of pollutants
into the environment. On November 17,
1986 the Agency published the list of
extremely hazardous substances and
threshold planning quantities for State
and local emergency planning in an
interim final rule, as required under
section 302 of Title III. 51 FR 41570. In
that rule, the list and implementing
regulations were codified as a new
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27.1967 / Proposed Rules
cost of requeuing additional report*
from covered facilities or responding to
public or official requests for
information.
EPA solicits comment OB the
methodology employed, the unit costs
and the results of the Regulatory Impact
Analysis. In particular. EPA requests
comments on the following issues:
1. What systems will industry design
and use in order to comply with the
requirements of sections 311 and 312,
e.g., how will the necessary data be
managed and stored?
2. How will the number of hazardous
chemicals per facility affect the costs of
complying with sections 311 and 3127
3. Is the estimated number of material
safety data sheets accurate, both on
average and in total?
4. What systems will local and State
government develop and use to
implement sections 311 and 312; e.g..
how will the data be managed and
stored?
5. Are the unit cost estimates
reasonable for both industry and
government?
6. Are there other activities associated
with sections 311 and 312 which should
be considered? What costs are
associated with such activities?
7. What estimates are reasonable to
assume for public requests to
government entities for MSDS. Tier I
and Tier H information?
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq- whenever an agency
is required to issue for publication in the
Federal Register any proposed or final
rule, it must prepare and make available •
for public comment, a Regulatory
Felxibility Analysis which describes the
impact of the rule on small entities (te-
small business, small organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions) unless
the Agency's Administrator certifies that
the rule wUl not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. EPA conducted an economic
analysis to determine whether or not
this proposed regulation causes a
significant impact on small entities.
Preliminary estimates indicate that this
rule is not likely to have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The analysis is set out in the
Regulatory Impact Analysis in Support
of Rulemaking Under Sect/oils 311 and
312 of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthoraatiea Act of JMft which is
available for public review in the docket
for thia ptlamaking.
Accordingty. I hereby certify that this
proposed rule wiU aot have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
Subpart within the NCP. However, the
Agency stated that it would reevaluate
the appropriate placement of the Title III
rules in the context of the ongoing
revision of the NCP.
Because of the need to make the Title
III rules as usable as possible.
considering the wide range of persons
who may utilize or be affected by these
rules, and because the Agency believes
that all of the Title III regulations.
including appended forms and lists.
should be placed together in the Code of
Federal Regulations, the Agency has
decided to separate these rules from the
NCP. Today's proposal sets aside a new
series within Subchapter J of title 40 for
the Title III rules. The Agency will
recodify the emergency planning
regulations and list of extremely
hazardous substances in this series as
part of the revised final rule to be
published this year.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analyst*
Executive Order 12291 requires each
Federal Agency to determine if a
regulation is a "major" rule as defined
by the Order and to prepare and
consider a Regulatory Impact Analysis
(RIA) in connection with every major
rule. Because EPA has determined thai
the reporting requirements for
. hazardous chemicals in this proposal
constitute a major rule under Executive
Order 12291. EPA has prepared an RIA
to assess the economic impact of the
proposed regulation on affected industry
(manufacturing. Standard Industrial
Codes 20 through 39) and State and local
government entities. The following cost
results are presented in the analysis
documented in U.S. EPA. Regulatory
Impact Analysis in Support of
Rulemaking Under Sections 311 and 312
of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzotion Act of 1988. This
document is available in the public
docket for this rulemaking.
All of the costs associated with this
regulation result directly from the
requirements of the legislation passed
by Congress. Each of the assessed
regulatory options reduces both the
reporting burden on industry and also
the administrative burden on the
receiving agencies either by providing a
reporting framework, or by allowing for
the phased submission of reports to
State emergency response commissions.
local emergency planning committees.
and fire departments. The present value
of the cost to industry of the legislative
requirements over the first ten years is
estimated to be 1.14 billion.
For the proposed regulatory approach.
total industry caste of sections 311 and
312 are fairly similar for the first three
years of reporting as additional facilities
come into compliance, and fall
substantially in the fourth and
subsequent years when there is no
threshold reporting quantity.
Conservative cost estimates suggest that
industry costs associated with the
proposed phase-in approach equal $238
million in the first year. $303 million in
the second year, and S217 million in the
third year. They stabilize at $64 million
in the fourth and subsequent years. The
present discounted value of the costs
associated with this regulatory approach
over the first ten yean is estimated to
be $0.95 billion (using a discount rate of
10 percent). These estimates represent
the costs of reporting, but do not include
the costs of responding to requests for
additional MSDS or Tier 1 reports, or to
requests for Tier II information.
The other regulatory alternatives
considered had present value costs to
industry ranging between $0.84 and
$1.04 billion. Thus, although the
proposed regulatory option is not clearly
superior to the other alternatives based
on industry costs, there are several
benefits associated with the proposed
rule so that on balance, the proposed
option was preferred over the
alternatives considered. The benefits of
the proposed regulatory approach over
the alternative options described above
are based on the following. First.
phasing in the final threshold level
permits industry and receiving
government entities to adjust to the
paperwork burdens created by the
legislation over a longer period of time.
The advantage of this is that it prevents
government entities from being
overwhelmed by reports at the start of
the program and provides early
information on the expected size of the
administrative burden and the best
means of data management to suit the
emerging needs of user groups. The
proposed regulatory approach also has
benefits over a permanent non-zero
threshold level because it eventually
provides complete information access to
all users. Finally, the proposal generates
benefits because it provides complete
information access both to the public
and to officials.
Government coats include costs borne
by State emergency response
commissions, local emergency planning
committees and fire departments. Again.
conservative estimates suggest that a
cost of S34 million is incurred by
government entities in the first year. S24
million and S27 million are incurred tn
the-second and third years as additional
reporting is required, and costs equal to
$24 million in the fourth and subsequent
years. These costs do not include the
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 27.198T / Proposed Rules
2843
entities. This proposed rule, therefore..
does not require-a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1980.44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Submit comments on these requirements
to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs; OMB: 726 Jackson
Place. NW.. Washington. DC 20503
marked "Attention: Desk Officer for
EPA." The final rule will respond to any
OMB or public comments on the
information collection requirements.
V. Supporting Information
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 370
Chemicals, Hazardous substances.
Extremely hazardous substances,
Intergovernmental relations. Community
right-to-know. Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act Chemical
accident prevention. Chemical
emergency preparedness. Community
emergency response plan. Contingency
planning, Reporting and tecordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: January 15.1987.
Lee. M. Thomas,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
Preamble. Subchapter J of Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed
to be amended by adding Part 370 to
read as follows:
PART 370—HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL
REPORTING: COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-
KNOW
Sutapart A—General ProvWotw
Sec.
3701 Purpose.
370.3 Definitions..
3703 Penalties.
Subpart B—Reporting Requirements
Sec.
370.20 Applicability.
370.21 MSDS reporting.
370.25 Inventory form reporting.
370.28 Mixtures.
Subpart C—Public Access and AvaOabfllty
of Information
Sec
370.30 Requests for information.
370.31 Provision of information.
Subpart O—Inventory Forms
Sec
370.40 Tier I Emergency and Hazardous
Chemical Inventory Form.
370.41 Tier U Emergency and Hazardous
Chemical Inventory Form.
Autheril7LSeciioas 31U 312..3&4. 325,328,
329 of the Emergency Planning aad
Community Right-To-Know Act of 1988, Pub.
L 99-199.100 Stat. 1813.
Subpart A—General Provisions
9370.1 Purpose
These regulations establish reporting
requirements to provide the public with
important information on the hazardous
chemicals in their communities for the
purpose of enhancing community
awareness of chemical hazards and
facilitating development of State and
local emergency response plans.
J 370.2 Definitions.
Terms not specifically defined-m this-
section have the same meaning as in
Subpart A of Part 300 of this chapter.
"Act" means the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1988.
"Commission" means the State
emergency response commission (or. for
the purpose of emergency planning, the
Governor if there is no commission) for
the State in which the facility is located
"Committee" means the local
emergency planning committee for the
emergency planning district in which the
facility is located.
"Environment" includes water, air.
and land and the interrelattODsbip
-------
2844
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27. 1987 / Proposed Rulea
(i) On or before October 17.1987. for
all hazardous chemicals present at the
facility in amounts equal to or greater
than 10.000 pounds at any time during
the preceding year or which are on the
list of extremely hazardous substances;
(it) On or before October 17.1988. for
all hazardous chemicals present at the
facility between 10.000 and 500 pounds
(or 55 gallons) at any time during the
preceding year:
(ML) On or before October 17. 1989. for
all hazardous chemicals present at the
facility for which an MSDS has not yet
been submitted.
(2) The minimum threshold for
reporting in response to requests for
submission of an MSDS or a Tier II form
pursuant to §§ 370.21 (d) and'370.25(c) of
this subpart shall be zero.
§ 370.21 MSDS reporting.
(a) Basic requirement. The owner or
operator of a facility subject to this
Subpart shall submit an MSDS for each
hazardous chemical according to the
minimum threshold schedule provided in
paragraph (b) of § 370.20 to the
Committee, the Commission, and the fire
department with jurisdiction over the
facility.
(b) Alternative reporting. In lieu of the
submission of an MSDS for each
hazardous chemical under paragraph (a]
the owner or operator may submit the
following:
(1) A list of the hazardous chemicals
for which the MSDS is required, grouped
in hazard categories, as defined under
the Occupational Safety and Health Act
of 1970 and regulations promulgated
under the act:
(2) The chemical or common name of
each hazardous chemical as provided on
the MSDS: and .
(3) Any hazardous component of each
hazardous chemical as provided on the
MSDS.
(c) Update reporting. (1) The owner or
operator of a facility which has
submitted an MSDS under this section
shall provide a revised MSDS to the
Committee within 3 months after
discovery of significant new information
concerning the hazardous chemical for
which the MSDS was submitted.
(2) After October 17.1987. the owner
or operator of a facility subject to this
Section shall submit an MSDS for a
hazardous chemical pursuant to
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section
within 3 months after the owner or
operator is first required to prepare or
have available the MSDS.
(d) Submission of MSDS upon request.
The owner or operator of a facility
which submits a list of chemicals under
paragraph (b) of this section shall
submit the MSDS for hazardous
chemical on the list to the Committee
upon its request. The MSDS shall be
submitted within 30 days of the receipt
of such request.
§ 370.25 Inventory form reporting.
(a) Basic requirement. The owner or
operator of a facility subject to this
subpart shall submit an inventory form
to the Committee, the Commission, and
the fire department with jurisdiction
over the facility. The inventory form
containing Tier I information on
hazardous chemicals above the
threshold levels established in
§ 370.20(b) shall be submitted on or
before March 1 of each year, beginning
in 1988.
(b) Alternative reporting. With respect
to any specific hazardous chemical at
the facility, the owner or operator may
submit a Tier II form in lieu of the Tier I
information.
(c) Submission of Tier II information.
The owner or operator of a facility
subject to this section shall submit the
Tier II form to the Committee, or the fire
department having jurisdiction over the
facility upon request of such persons.
The Tier II form shall be submitted
within 30 days of the receipt of such
request.
(d) Fire department inspection. The
owner or operator of a facility which
has submitted an inventory form under
this section shall allow on-site
inspection by the fire department having
jurisdiction over the facility upon
request of the department, and shall
provide to the department specific
location information on hazardous
chemicals at the facility.
§370.28 Mixtures.
(a) The owner or operator of a facility
may meet the reporting requirements of
§ 370.21 (MSDS reporting) and 370.25
(Inventory form reporting) of this
Subpart for a hazardous chemical which
is a mixture of hazardous chemicals
by—(1) Providing the required
information on each element or
compound in the mixture which is a
hazardous chemical, or (2) Providing the
required information on the mixture
itself, so long as the reporting of
mixtures by a facility under 5 370.21 is
in the same manner as under § 370.25.
Subpart C—Public Access and
Availability of Information
§370.30 Request* for Information.
(a) Request for MSDS information. (1)
Any person may obtain a MSDS with
respect to a specific facility by
submitting a written request to the
Committee.
(2) If the Committee does not have in
its possession the MSDS requested in
paragraph (a)(l) of this section, it shall
request a submission of the MSDS from
the owner or operator of the facility
which is the subject of the request.
(b) Requests for Tier II information.
(1) Any person may obtain Tier II
information with respect to a specific
facility by submitting a written request
to the Commission or Committee in
accordance with the requirements of
this section.
(2) If the Committee or Commission
does not have in its possession the Tier
II information requested in paragraph
(b)(l) of this section, it shall request a
submission of the Tier II form from the
owner or operator of the facility which
is the subject of the request: provided
that, the request is from a State or local
official acting in his or her official
capacity or the request is limited to
hazardous chemicals stored at the
facility in an amount in excess of 10.000
pounds.
(3) If the request under paragraph
(b)(l) of this section does not meet the
requirements of paragraph (b)(2) of this
section, the Committee or Commission
may request submission of the Tier II
form from the owner or operator of the
facility which is the subject of the
request if the request under paragraph
(b)(l) of this section includes a general
statement of need.
§ 370.31 Provision of Information.
All information obtained from an
owner or operator in response to a
request under this section and any
requested Tier D form or MSDS
otherwise in possession of the
Commission or the Committee shall be
made available to the person submitting
the request under this section: provided
that upon request of the owner or
operator, the Commission or Committee
shall withhold from disclosure the
location of any specific chemical
identified in the Tier II form.
Subpart D—Inventory Forms
§370.40 Tier I Emergency and Hazardous
Chemical Inventory Form.
(a) The form set out in paragraph (b)
of this section shall be completed and
submitted as required in § 370.25(a).
(b) Tier I Emergency and Hazardous
Chemical Inventory Form.
BttUNO CODE H20-60-M
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27, 1987 / Proposed Rules
2845
_. EMERGENCY AND HAZARDOUS
Tier One CHEMICAL INVENTORY
Aggrtget* Information by Hazard Typt
Page
of
FOR
OFFICIAL
USE
ONLY
Oat
Important Read instructions before completing form
Reporting P«rlod
31 19
Facility Identification
••Jama
S
;„-, A«r...
CCoo.| | | | | |
Emergency Contacts
Dun & Brae
N
Owner/Operator
Mama
lumoarl 1 1 -| 1 1 H 1 1 1 .1
Till*
a
Physical Hazard
Health Hazard
-n-.' '
K£KSS-i i
iLf Average
Hazard Typt Amo°u*Hl- i£S'Jn • Central Location |_J Cftac* .1 •«• plan 11 attacnaa
CemDusitBto LKMia | | |
Comgrntaa Gal | [ |
l—l 1
CO"OSIVO 1 1 1
1 ' '
E«plOl'v» | | |
Fiammaoi* | [ |
C'Ban« Paroxoa | | |
. O..a.»r Ml
Pyropnaric | | |
W«t»r Raactlv* | | |
Careinoaan [ |
M.gr.1, Tonic | |
irr.tint [ |
Swill «• | |
TO.IC | |
81000 TOP)n [ |
Ey* na»ra [ [
.^^•01
Lu"g ro-m | j
•••r. S/i Toiin | |
Ba£roGucti«e Tomn 1 1
S..n Haziro | |
=
•
=
1 !
^j
~n
~n
ID
Certification tRtad and iign cfitr completing all teciiom)
i carT.'y u»o*r pcnany of 'a* trial I nav* personally •naimnM and am familiar witn
sn« mivaiion «uxr»lt«l in inn ana all aitacnao oacumonii. ana mat eawa an my
>ncviry ol tnou inaixouais immMiauty nMpansiDi* lor ooiaining in* information i
MI.».« mat ira tuDmiiiM information u iru*. aocu'aM ana compuia
•o"-« ano official "«• o> o«in«r or ownar • auinoniaa raor*««niaii»«
' Reporting Range Weight Range m Pounds
Ranges Value From . ~o •
00
Ot
02
03
04
OS
06
07
08
09
10
0
100
1000
10.000
100.000
1 000.000
10.000.000
50.000.000
100.000.000
500.000.000
1 bfflton
99
999
8.999
99.999
999.999
9.999.999
49.999.999
99.999 999
499.999.999
999 999 999
higher than 1 bOion
-------
2846
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27.1987 / Proposed Rules
TIER ONE INSTRUCTIONS
GENERAL INFORMATION ^ ^
Submission of this form Is required by Till* III ol the Supertund Amendments end Reauthorlzailoo Act ol
1986. Section 312. Public Law 99-499.
The purpose of this form Is to provide State and local
officials and the public with Information on the general
types and locations of hazardous chemicals present at
your faculty during the past year.
YOU MUST PROVIDE ALL INFORMATION RE-
QUESTED ON THIS PORM.
.. — - ff " ' f. • ?t y
You may substitute the Tier Two form for tWsTTfer
One term. (The Tier-Two lorm'provides detailed, „
information and must be submitted-to response^lo
a specific request from State or local officials.). -,,
f '•• ..'+*** *• 'i' v T ' ,* ^ '.+..•
WHO MUST SUBMIT THIS FORM
Section 312 of Title III requires that the owner or opera-
tor of a faculty submit this form If. under regulations Im-
plementing the Occupational Safety and Health- Act of
1970. the owner or operator Is required to prepare or
have available Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for
hazardous chemicals present at the facility. MSDS re-
quirements are specified m the Occupational Safety and
Health Admwtotratton (OSHA) Hazard Communtoatton
Standard, found m Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regu-
lations. Section 1910.1200.
WHAT CHEMICALS ARE INCLUDED
You must report the Information required on this form for
every hazardous chemical for which you are required M
prepare or have available an MSDS under the Hazard
Communication Standard.
OSHA regulations and Title III exempt some chemicals
from reporting. The combined Hst of exceptions In-
cludes:
I Any food, food additive, color additive, drug, or cos-
metic regulated by the Food and Drug Administration.
2 Any substance to the extent tt Is used for personal.
family, or household purposes, or Is present In the
same form and concentration as a product packaged
for distribution and use by the general public.
3 Any substance to the extent It l» used In a research
' laboratory or a hospital or other medical faculty under
direct supervision of a leclmtoalhr quaWted Individual.
4 Any substance to the extent ft Is used In routkw agrt-
' cultural operations or Is a fertilizer held for sale by a
retailer to the ultimate customer.
5. Any hazardous waste such Is defined by the Sofld
Waste Disposal Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 6901
etsoq,).
6. Tobacco or tobacco products.
7. Wood or wood products.
B Articles which are manufactured hems.
• Formed to a specific shape of design during
manufacture:
e With end use functions dependent In whole or hi
part upon the shape or design during end use:
and
e Which do not release, or otherwise result •» ex-
posure to a hazardous chemical under normal
conditions of use.
Also, minimum reporting thresholds have been estab-
lished under Tttle III. Section 30 You do not need to re-
port any hazardous chemical which has not been present
at your facility at any time during the year at or above
the levels Isted below:
• en or before October 17. 19«7....10.000 to*.
eon or before October 17. 1966....500 fcs.
e on or before October 17. 1989....0 toe.
WHEN TO SUBMIT THIS FORM
Beginning March 1.1988. owners or operators must sub-
mtt the Tier One form (or substitute the Tier Two form)
on or before March 1. of every year.
WHERE TO SUBMIT THIS PORM
One completed Inventory form must be sent to each of
the fottOMdng:
1. Your State emergency planning commission.
2. Your local emergency planning committee.
3. The fire departments with fcjrisdlotkxi over your
facility.
Any owner or operator of a fadtty who fab tOMMrft «
BUDDBes false Tier One Information shall be liable to the
United States for a elvi penalty of up to $25.000 for each
such violation. Each day * violation continues shad con-
stitute a separate violation. In addition, any citizen may
commence a cM action on Ns or her own behalf against
any owner or operator who faBs to submit Tier One Infor-
mation.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27. 1987 / Proposed Rules
2847
INSTRUCTIONS
Please read these Instructions carefully. Print or type all responses.
Mtf -M-lftA* t, * hfclt , ' • V . «. «w
You may use the Tier Two form as a worksheet for
completing Tier One. Fining In the Tier Two - -
•Chemical Information* section should help you '
assemble your Tier One responses.
If your responses require more than one page. fM In the
"Page Number' information at the top of the form
REPORTING PERIOD
Enter the appropriate calendar year. beginning January 1
ana ending December 31
FACILITY IDENTIFICATION
Enter the complete name of your faclNty (and company
Identifier where appropriate)
Enter me fun street address, state road, or other appro-
priate Identifiers which describe the physical location of
your facility (e.g longitude and latitude) Include city,
state, and zip code
Enter the primary Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
Code and the Dun and Bradstreet Number for your fa-
cility
OWNER/OPERATOR
Enter the owner's or operator's full name
dress and phone number.
mailing ad-
EMERGENCY CONTACT
Enter the name, title and work phone number of at least
one person who can provide emergency Information on
locations and types of chemical hazards at your faculty.
Provide an emergency phone number where such emer-
gency chemical Information will be available 24 hours per
day. every day
PHYSICAL AND HEALTH HAZARDS...
Descriptions, Amounts and Locations
This section requires aggregate Information on chemi-
cals by hazard categories as defined In the OSHA Hazard
Communication Standard-. 29 CFR 1910.1200. For each
hazard type. Indicate the total amounts and general lo-
cations of an applicable chemicals present at your faculty
during the past year.
. • What units should I use?
Calculate all amounts as weight In pounds. To
convert gas or liquid volume to weight In
pounds, multiply by an appropriate density fac-
tor
• What about mixtures?
M a chemical Is part of a mixture, you have (ne
option of reporting either the weight of the en-
tire mixture or only the portion of the mixture
which Is a particular hazardous chemical, (e g.
If a hazardous solution weighs 100 bs. but is
composed only 5% of a particular hazardous
chemical, you can Indicate either 100 Ibs or 5
B>s of the substance).
The option selected should be consistent with
your reporting of the chemical on the USDS, or
list of MSDS chemicals under Section 311.
• Where do I count • chemical which Is 'Ex-
plosive', 'Corrosive.' and a 'Carcinogen'?
Add the chemical's weight to your totals for ail
three hazard categories, and Include Its loca-
tion m all three categories as well Many
chemicals fan Into more than one hazard cate-
gory, which results In double-counting.
MAXIMUM AMOUNT
The amounts of chemicals you have on hand may vary
throughout the year. The peak weights — greatest single
day weights during the year ~ are added together In this
column to determine the 'maximum weight* for each
hazard type. Since the peaks for different chemicals
often occur on different days, this 'maximum amount*
will seem artificially high
. To complete this and the following sections, you may
. choose to use the Tier Two form as a worksheet. .
••- *r. ---- -• , -,- '. ' ' '•
To determine the 'Maximum Amount:*
1. List at of your hazardous chemicals Individually
2. For each chemical...
a. Indicate al physical and health hazards that
the chemical presents. Include all chemicals
even If they are present only for short peri-
ods of time during the year.
b Estimate the maximum weight In pounds that
was present at your faculty on any single
day of the reporting period.
-------
2848
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27.1987 / Proposed Rule*
For each hazard type — beginning with 'combusttote
liquids* and repeating for all physical and hearth haz-
ard types ..
a Add the maximum weights of aU chemicals
you Indicated as the particular hazard type
b Look at the Reporting Ranges at the bottom
of the Tier One form rind the appropriate
"range value" code
c. Enter this "range value" In the boxes labelled
"Maximum Amount "
EXAMPLE:
You are using the Tier Two as a worksheet
and have listed raw weights m pounds for each
of your hazardous chemicals > You have
marked an X m the Corrosive hazard column
for phenol and sulfurlc acid. The •Maximum
Amount" raw weights you listed were 10.000
Ibs and 50 Ibs. respectively You add these
together to reach a total of 10.050 Ibs. Then
you look at the "Reporting Ranges' at the
bottom of your Tier One form and find that
the value 03 corresponds to 10.050 Cos. Enter
03 as your 'Maximum Amount' for Corrosives
You also marked an X In the Combustible and
Highly Toxic hazard boxes for phenol. When
you calculate your 'Maximum Amount' totals
for these additional hazards, add the 10.000
Ib weight again.
AVERAGE DAILY AMOUNT
This column should represent the average datty amount
of chemicals ol each hazard type that ware present at
vour facility at any point during during the year.
To determine this amount:
1 List all of your hazardous ctv
as for Maximum Amount).
2 For each chemical...
rdeals IndMduaDy (
that
a. Indicate a« physteal and health hazards
the chemical presents (same as for
mum Amount).
Since some chemicals may be present only
for short periods of time, the average for the
year may seem artificially low.
b Estimate the average weight In pounds that
was present at your facility throughout the
year. To do this, total all dally weights and
divide by 365. or total all monthly weight* and-
divide by 12 — or use other calculations
which reflect an average for the entire year.
For each hazard type — beginning wtth Combustible
Liquids and repeating for all physical and health haz-
ards...
a. Add the average weights of all chemicals
you Indicated for the particular hazard type.
b.
Look at the Reporting Ranges at the bottom
of the Tier One form. Find the appropriate
'range value* cods.
c Enter this "range value* In the boxes labelled
•Average OaBy Amount *
EXAMPLE:
You are using the Tier Two form, you have
marked an X In the Highly Toxic hazard column
for nicotine and phenol. The average dally
weights you tasted were 1.000 Ibs. and 200 KM .
respectively. You add these together to reach
a total of 1.200 Ibs. Then you look at the
Reporting Ranges on your Tier One form and
find that the value 02 In corresponds to 1.200
Ibs Enter 02 as your 'Average Daily Amount"
for Highly Toxic Substances.
You also marked an X hi the Combustible and
Corrosive hazard columns for phenol. When you
calculate your 'Average Daily Amount* for
these additional hazards, use the 200 Ib. weight
again
GENERAL LOCATION
Enter the general location wtthki your faeBty
eh
hazard may be found. 'General* locations should Include
the names or identifications of buildings, tank fields, lots.
sheds or other such areas.
For each hazard type, list the locations of afl applicable
chemicals. As an alternative you may also attach a site
plan and 1st the site coordinate* related to the appropri-
ate locations If you do so. check the 'site plan* box at
the top of Column D.
EXAMPLE:
On your worksheet you have marked and X In
Flammable hazard column for acetone and
butane. You noted that these are kept In steel
drums In Room C of the Main Budding, and In
pressurized cylinders In Storage Shad 13.
respective*. You eoutt enter -Main BuMng
and Storage Shed 13* ae the -General
Locations* of your Ftammabte Hazards. How-
ever, you choose to attach a stte plan and
1st coordinates. Check the 'site plan* box at
the top of the column, and enter sna coord-
(nates for the Mam Building and Storage Shed
13 under "General Locations.*
If you need- more space to 1st locations, attach an addi-
tional Tier One form and continue your list on the proper
line.
CERTIFICATION
This must be completed by the owner or operator, or the
officially designated representative of the owner or op-
erator . Enter your full name and official title. Sign your
name and enter the current date.
BIU
«0 COPE
-------
Federal Register / VoL 52. No~17 / Tuesday. January, ffl, 1987 /• Proposed Rules 2849
§370.41 Ttor II Emergency and Hazardous
Chemical Inventory Form.
(a) The form in paragraph (b) of this
section must be completed and
submitted to EPA as required in
§ 370.25(c).
(b) Tier 11 Emergency and Hazardous
Chemical Inventory Form.
BltUra CODE 8560-M-U
-------
Tier Two
EMERGENCY
AND
HAZARDOUS
CHEMICAL
INVENTORY
Specific
Information
by Cntmical
filial *et»p
o
n>
ca
I
"5T
i
1st
N
8
m
Q.
2
-------
Tier Two
EMERGENCY
AND
HAZARDOUS
CHEMICAL
INVENTORY
Specific
Information
by Cntmical
Facility Identlllcatlon Owner/Operator
«l 1 1 1 1 1 SSn.V-,.1 1 M 1 1 N 1 1 1 1 P.-,
Important: Read all instruction* before completing form Reporting Period From January i loDacamu
Confidential Location Information Sheet
Cham
CAS.I 1 1
Cham
CAS.I 1 1
Cham
CAS.I 1 1
Cham
CAS.I 1 1
Cham
*!._•.
CAS.I 1 1
Cham
CAS.I 1 1
Cham
CAS.I 1 1
Cham
CAS. | | |
Cham
NaTtt
CAS.I 1 1
Cham
CAS.I 1 1
'1 1 II 1 1
1 1 II 1 1
mam
"i i n i i
i M n 1 1
innm
i i M 1 1
mam
m LJI 1 1
xnm
Certification (Head and iign ajttr completing all ttalotu)
I cuitiry undor pendiiy oll.iwin.il I hdvo nnrwnally •naminad and am familiar with the intonation mummed m Ihn and all allacnad documanii ai
on my inquiiy ot Ihow inoioidijdli immoauialy rasponsiDIa lor obtaining lha inhumation, 1 oelwva that lha lubmillad Inlormatlon It tiua. accuala i
Ndma Jina cl'icul I'l'e i.l ..wner Jf C* •••• s i..ti»..--ildti»a SujnJ'uia C1*1* S»|"wJ
Emergency Conuott
Till.
r-fl-t 1 '
24 Hour/Dlv ,
PBona Nurnbar 1 1
ir SI. t«
Location:
Confidential
JIM Location Storage Cod.j
l . ] C • ) ( • J
[ ](.)(.)
[ ](.)(.]
[ ](,)(,)
t ""]"(",")""("")
. L. . l C- ) ( -J
L 3 C • 1 ( • J
t ](.)(.]
L ](.)(,;
r ](.)(.)
[ ](.)(.)
"T ]""f","T"T7^
L ]..(..- I ( -J
L ](.)(,:
[ ](,)(.)
[ ](.)(.
[ ](,)(.)
Attachments (CHick one)
ind'ranviaTa O 1 hava allaehad a ma plan
r~| l n.ive dttachad a lit! o> ma
-------
28S2
Federal Register / VoL 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27.1987 / Proposed Rules
TIER TWO INSTRUCTIONS
GENERAL INFORMATION
Submission ol this Her Two form (when requested) Is required by TlUe IU of the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorlzatlon Ac* of 19«6. Section 312. PubMe Law 99-499. The purpose ol this Tier Two form Is te
provide State and local officiate and the public with specific Information on hazardous chemicals present
at your facility during the past year.
YOU MUST PROVIDE ALL INFORMATION RE-
QUESTED ON THIS FORM TO FULFILL TIER TWO
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
Thls-tona may also be used as A worksheet for eonv*
plating the Tier One form, or may be submitted In
place of the Tier One fopn.
* TT —
WHO MUST SUBMIT THIS FORM
Section 312 of Title III requires that the owner or opera-
tor of a facility submit this Tier Two formtf so requested
by a State emergency planning commission, a local
emergency planning committee, or a are department
with Jurisdiction over the facility.
This request may apply to the owner or operator of any
facility that Is required, under regulations Implementing
the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. to pre-
pare or have available a Material Safety Data Sheet
(MSDS) for a hazardous chemical present at the facility.
MSDS requirements) are specified In the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Hazard Com-
munications Standard, found In Title 29 of the Code of
Federal Regulations at Section 1910.1200.
WHAT CHEMICALS ARE INCLUDED
You must report the Information required on this form for
each hazardous chemical for which a request for Tier •
Information Is made.
The OSHA regulations and Title IH exempt some chemi-
cals from reporting. The combined list of exceptions In-
clude.
1 Any food, food additive, color additive, drug, or cos-
metic regulated by the Food and Drug Administration.
2 Any substance to the extent It Is used for personal.
family, or household purposes, or Is present In the
same form and concentration as a product packaged
for distribution and and use by the general public.
3. Any substance to the extent it is used In a research
laboratory or a hospital or other medical facility under
direct supervision of a technlcaly qualified Individual
4. Any substance to the extent It Is used In routine agri-
cultural Derations or Is a fertilizer held for sale by a
retailer to the ultimate customer.
5. Any hazardous waste such Is defined by the SoDd
Wast* Disposal Act as amended (42 U S.C. 6901.
etseq.).
8. Tobacco or tobacco products.
7. Wood or wood products.
8. Articles which are manufactured Kerns.
• Formed to a specific shape of design during
manufacture;
• Wtth end use functions dependent hi whole or In
part upon the shape or design during end use:
and
e Which do not release, or otherwise result In ex-
posure to a hazardous chemical under normal
conditions of use.
A requesting official may Hmtt the responses required un-
der Tier Two. by specifying particular chemicals or
groups of chemicals.
WHEN TO SUBMIT THIS FORM
Owners or operators must submit the Tier Two form to
trie requesting agency within 30 days of a written request
from an authorized official
WHERE TO SUBMIT THIS FORM
A completed Tier Two form must be sent to the request-
big agency.
PENALTIES
Any owner or operator who violates any Tier Two report-
big requirement* shad be Hable «o the United States for a
dvB penalty of up to S25.000 for each such violation.
Each day a violation continues ehafl constitute a separate
violation.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27. 1987 / Proposed Rules
2853
INSTRUCTIONS
Please read these Instructions carefully. Print or type all responses
You may use the Tier Two form as a worksheet for
completing the Tier One form. Filling In the Tier
Two 'Chemical Information* section should help you
assemble yourTier One Responses
If your responses require more than one page, fill In the
•Page Number' Information at the top of the form
REPORTING PERIOD
Enter the appropriate calendar year, beginning January 1
and ending December 31
FACILITY IDENTIFICATION
Enter the full name of your facility land company identi-
fier where appropriate)
Enter the full street address state road, or other appro-
priate Identifiers which describe the physical location of
your facility (eg. longitude and latitude). Include city.
state, and zip code.
Enter the primary Standard industrial Classification (SIC)
Code, and the Dun and Bradstreet Number for your fa-
cility.
OWNER/OPERATOR
Enter the owner's or operator's fufl name mailing ad-
dress and phone number
EMERGENCY CONTACT
Enter the name, title and work phone number of at least
one person who can provide emergency Information on
locations and types of chemical hazards at your facility
Provide an emergency phone number where such emer-
gency chemical Information will be available 24 hours per
day, every day
CHEMICAL INFORMATION...Description.
Amounts, Hazards, and Locations
The main section of the Tier Two form requires specific
Information on amounts and locations of hazardous
chemicals, as defined m the OSHA Hazard Communica-
tions Standard
• What units should I use?
Calculate all amounts as weight m pounds To
convert gas or liquid volume to weight In
pounds multiply by an appropriate density fac-
tor.
• What about mixtures?
if a chemical Is part of a mixture, you have the
option of reporting either the weight of the en-
tire mixture or only the portion of the mixture
which Is a particular hazardous chemical |e g.
If a hazardous solution weighs 100 Ibs. but Is
composed only 5% of a particular hazardous
chemical, you can indicate either 100 Ibs or S
bs of the chemical)
The option selected should be consistent with
your reporting of the chemical on the MSDS. a
list of MSDS chemical under Section 311
CHEMICAL DESCRIPTION
1. Enter the chemical name or common name of each
hazardous chemical
2 Enter the
(CAS*)
Chemical Abstract Service Number
If you are wftholdmg the name of a chemical In ac-
cordance with criteria specified m Title U. Section
322. enter the generic chemical-claw (e.g.. Bet
toluene dtaocynate.as organic.laocynate.) •' .
3. Circle ALL applicable descriptors- pure or mixture.
and solid, liquid or gas
EXAMPLE:
You have pure chlorine gas on hand, as well as
having two mixtures which contain liquid
chlorine You write 'chlorine' and enter the
CAS*, then you circle 'pure' and 'mix' —
as weR as kq. and gas.
MAXIMUM AMOUNT
1 . For each hazardous chemical, estimate the greatest
amount present at your faculty on any day during the
reporting period.
2. Find the appropriate 'range value' code In Table I
3 Enter this value as the 'Maximum Amount.'
-------
Federaa Regwter / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27.1987 / Proposed Rules
Table I
"REPORTING RANGES'
Range
Value
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
OB
09
10
Weight Range In Pounds
From To.
0
100
1000
10.000
100.000
1.000.000
10.000.000
50.000 000
100.000.000
500.000.000
1 biHton
99
999
9.999
99.999
999.990
9.999.999
49.999.999
99.999.999
499.999.999
999.999.999
tagher than 1 bUUon
If you are using this form at- a worksheet for com*.,,
pletlng Tier One. eater the actual weight In pounds ,'
in the shaded apace betow the response blocks. Do~<
this for both 'Maximum Amount* and 'Average' • ?
Daily Amount.* - ••' •*
EXAMPLE:
You received one large shipment of a solvent
mixture last year. The shipment filled your 5.000
gallon storage tank. You know that the solvent .
contains 10% benzene, which Is a hazardous
chemical. *
You figure that 10% of 5.000 gallons Is 500
gallons. You also know that the density of
benzene Is 7.29 pounds per gallon, so you
multtply 500 by 7.29 to get a weight of 3.645
pounds.
Then you look at Table I and flnd that the \
•range value* 02 correspond-; to 3.645. You -
enter 02 as the 'Maximum Amount'.
(If you ware uemg the form ae a worksheet for :
completing a Tier One form, you would have ,
written 3.645 m the shaded area.)
AVERAGE DAILY AMOUNT
1. For each hazardous chemical, estimate the average
weight In pounds that was present at your facility dur-
ing the year
To do this, total all daffy weights and etaride toy MS. or
total all monthly weights and divide by 12 — or wee
other calcutatoons which .-effect an average tor the en-
tire year.
(Since some chemicals may be present only tor short
periods of time, the average for the year may seem
artificially low)
2 Find the appropriate 'range value* In Table I.
3 Enter this value as the 'Average Dally Amount.
EXAMPLE:
The 5.000 gallon shipment of solvent you re-
ceived was gradually used up during the year
You measured the level each month and re-
corded 12 monthly levels- 5000.4500.4200. -
3900. 3500. 3200. 2800.2300.2100. 1900, J
1200. and BOO gallons. \
When you add al 12 measurements, you reach ;
a total of 35.400 gallons. You divide the total by '
the number of measurements (12) to get an
average of 2.950 gallons. ~f
You already know that the solvent contains 10%
benzene, which is a hazardous chemical. Since .
10% of 2.950 is 295. you figure that you had an
average of 295 gallons of benzene. You also
know that the density of benzene Is 7.29 pounds '
per gallon, so you multiply 295 by 7.29 to get
a weight of 2.150 pounds. %
Then you took at Table 1 and find that the 1
•range value' 02 corresponds to 2.150. You
enter 02 as the 'Maximum Amount*. {
(If you were using the form as a worksheet for j
completing a Tier One form, you would have
written 2.150 In the shaded area.) '•
PHYSICAL AND HEALTH HAZARDS
For each chemical you have listed, check aB the physical
and health hazard boxes that apply. These hazard cate-
gories are defined In the OSHA Hazard Communteattan
Standard. 29 CFR 1910.1200.
i«denttai ehemtoal toeattane ki thle column.
i typam/condWane associated weft each
LOCATION
List all non-oi
along with
location.
1. Attachments: Attach one of the following.
the appropriate 'Attachment*' box at the bottom of
the Tier Two form.
a. A Slta Plan with 'site coordinates' Indicated
for buildings, tots, areas, etc. throughout
your facility.
b. A Ust of 'Site Coordinate" Abbreviations
which correspond to buddings. Iota, areas.
etc. throughout your faculty. Use abbrevia-
tions that are three letters or less.
2. Site Location: For each chemical...
a Main location— Enter appropriate 'site co-
ordinates* or abbreviations to front of the
brackets.
b. Sub-location-- Enter the room, or area
(within the bunding or lot. etc.) within the
brackets.
If you have more than one bunding, lot. or area location.
continue your responses down the page as needed.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 17 / Tuesday. January 27.1987 / Proposed Rules
2855
EXAMPLE.
You have benzene In the main room of the
main budding, in tank 2 In tank field 10. and
in the back corner of the warehouse You
attach a site plan with coordinates as follows
mam building = 8-6 and warehouse = R-16
You fill in the "Site Location' as follows
Table III
"TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE CONDITIONS-
G-2 [Main Room]
"B-6'i"Tank"2""T
Since you need more room for the warehouse
location use the next line down on the form
(rather than using that Ime for a different
chemicai) and enter
CODES
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
Storage Conditions
(PRESSURE)
Ambient pressure
Greater than ambient pressure
Less than ambient pressure
(TEMPERATURE)
Ambient temperature
Greater than ambient temperature
Less than ambient temperature
Cryogenic conditions
P-16
J )_
"(rear)"
3 Storage Next to each location you have listed (build-
Ing and room, etc ) Indicate the types and conditions
of storage present
a. Look at Table II For each location, find the
appropriate 'Storage Typo(s).' Enter the
corresponding eode(s) In front of the paren-
theses
b Look at Table HI For each storage type, find
the'Temperature and Pressure Conditions'.
Enter the corresponding code within the pa-
rentheses
Table II
"STORAGE TYPES"
EXAMPLE:
The benzene m the main bidding is kept In a
tank Inside the building, at ambient pressure
and less than ambient temperature.
Table II shows you that the code for a tank
Inside a building Is C. Table III shows you that
code for ambient pressure Is 1. and the code
for less than ambient temperature Is 6.
Next to the 'Site Location* YOU enter-
C_ildLJL'JL _
( . I ( 7) "
Your complete Location response for the Main
Building storage location looks like this.
G-2 (Main Room]
.---
'1 . )
CODES
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
Types of Storage
Above ground tank
Below ground tank
Tank Inside building
Steel drum
Plastic or non-metallic drum
Can
Carboy
SUo
Fiber drum
Bag
Box
Cylinder
Glass bottle* or Jugs
Plastic bottles or Jugs
Tote bin
Tank wagon
Rail car
Other
4Jnder THto III. Section 324. you may elect to-wlthold lo-
cation Men nation on a epeciHc-chamlcaJ-from -disclosure
to the public If you choose to do eo:
• Leave the Non-Con/iOenUal Location section
blank tor each confidential location you claim
• Attach e Tier Tw& Confidential Location infor-
mation Sheet. (This sheet to designed to sepa-
rate confidential locattone from the disclosure
of other Information to the public) .
e Enter the name and CAS* of eaen 'confiden-
tial' chemical.
• Enter the appropriate location ami storage in-
formation. (ae described far non-confidential
locations •
CERTIFICATION.
This must be completed by the owner or operator, or the
officiary designated representative of the owner or op-
erator Enter your fufl name and official title Sign your
name and enter the current date
[FR Doc. 87-1626 Filed 1-26-87.8:45 am)
MUJNO CODE esto-so-c
-------
-------
Tuesday
February 17, 1987
Part II
Department of
Transportation
Research and Special Programs
Administration
49 CFR Parts 171 and 172
Hazardous Substances; Corrections
-------
Federal Register / VoL 52.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research and Special Programs
Administration
49 CFR Parts 171 and 172
(Docket No. HM-145F. Amdt No*. 171-90.
172-108]
Hazardous Substances; Corrections
AGENCY: Research and Special Programs
Administration (RSPA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule; corrections.
SUMMARY: This document corrects errors
in the regulatory text of a final rule
issued under Docket HM-145F.
Amendment Numbers 171-40 and 172-
108. entitled Hazardous Substances,
which was published in the Federal
Register on Friday. November 21.1988
[51 FR 42174]. This document also
authorizes the use of "D" numbers to
identify EPA unlisted hazardous wastes
which exhibit "ICRE" characteristics.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lee Jackson. (202) 366-4488 or George
Cushmac. (202) 366-4545. Office of -
Hazardous Materials Transportation.
RSPA. Washington. DC 20590. Questions
about hazardous substance designations
or reportable quantities should be
directed to the EPA. Call the RCRA/
Superfund hotline at (800) 424-9346. or.
in Washington. DC, (202) 382-3000.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 21.1986. RSPA amended the
Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR)
•by incorporating into the HMR. as
hazardous materials, all substances
designated as hazardous substances
under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response. Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA).
This action was necessary to comply
with the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986. In the final
rule, hazardous substances and their.
reportable quantities (RQs) were listed
in an Appendix to § 172.101. In addition.
the final rule contained amendments
making the HMR applicable to these
hazardous substances. The effective
date of that final rule was January 1.
1987. However. RSPA published an
amendment on December 24:1988 (51 FR
46672) which extends that effective date
to July 1.1987. to afford shippers
sufficient time to comply with the rule.
This amendment corrects the errors
which appear in the regulatory text of
that rule.
Paragraph (d)(l)(i) of 5171.11 is
revised to clearly indicate the correct
format for adding additional descriptive
information when the proper shipping
No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
name does not include the name of the
hazardous substance.
Sections 171.12a(a)(3) and 172.102(e)
are revised to reference applicable
description requirements for hazardous
substances in §§ 172.203(c) and 172.324.
This corrects certain grammatical errors
and clarifies the application of
requirements. Editorially, paragraph (c)
of S 172.101 is amended by removing the
reference contained in this paragraph to
paragraph (b)(4). since the symbol "E"
no longer appears in Column 1 of the
Hazardous Materials Table. Further, the
spelling of the word "ignitibility" is
changed everywhere it appears in the
regulatory text so that the spelling of the
word is consistent with EPA's spelling
(i.e.. ignitability).
In the Appendix to S 172.101 which
begins on page 42177. paragraphs 2. 3
and 4 of the introductory text to the List
of Hazardous Substances and
Reportable Quantities are revised for
clarity and to correct certain errors
which appeared upon publication. The
portion of paragraph 2 which appears on
page 42178 is revised to include
reference to "K numbers" since waste
streams are referenced by both "F' and
"K" numbers.
Several changes are made to the List
of Hazardous Substances and
Reportable Quantities. A few of the
reportable quantities are changed (either
raised or lowered) because of incorrect
entries in the original list. Many of the
broad generic categories of materials
which appear on the list in upper case •
letters are removed from the list because
there are no RQ's assigned to these
categories. Also removed from each of
these entries are the two asterisks (**)
which reference a footnote that stated
no RQ is being assigned to that
particular generic or broad class. These
entries and the footnote are removed
because, by definition, a material must
have a reportable quantity to be a
hazardous substance. Several
adjustments are made to certain entries
on the list by revising, removing, or
adding either the entire line entry or a
portion of the entry. Some entries on the
list are rearranged so they appear in
correct alphabetical sequence.
The symbols and "@" are deleted
from certain entries which appear on the
list because either the exact name of the
hazardous substance does not appear in
the § 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table
or the name of the synonym for the
hazardous substance which RSPA
added is inappropriate. The footnote at
the end of the list which is referenced by
the symbol is removed because it
refers to EPA requirements. This symbol
is also removed from the entries
"RADIONUCUDES". "Ferric dextran"
and "Iron dextran". The symbol "*"
which appears on the list after certain
"F' and "K" numbered wastes and at
the end of the list as a footnote is
removed because it is inappropriate.
The footnote represented by the symbol
"«" is revised to state explicitly that
solid metals which are in pieces whose
particle size is larger than 100
micrometers (0.004 inches) are not
hazardous substances under the HMR.
For convenience, the appendix to
{172.101 is reprinted in its entirety.
On page 42195. paragraph (c) of
S 172.203 is revised to clarify when the
name or names of hazardous substance
constituents must appear in parentheses
on the shipping paper in association
with the basic description. On this same
page, S 172.324 is revised for ease of
understanding and to plainly state when
the name or names of a hazardous
substance constituent must be marked
in parentheses on a package having a
capacity of 110 gallons or less. Changing
each of these paragraphs removes the
limitation contained in the final rule that
made the requirement for additional
information apply only to mixtures or
solutions. It now applies to shipments of
pure materials as well
The use of EPA waste numbers to
identify waste streams ("F1 and "K"
numbers) was discussed in the preamble
to the final rule (page 42175. column 2).
For waste streams, the EPA waste
number must be entered on shipping
papers in association with the basic
description [not... "in association
with the proper shipping name." ... as
originally stated). The EPA waste
number for the waste stream must also
be marked on non-bulk packaging*
(those of 110 gallons or less) in
association with the proper shipping
name.
Since the final rule authorized the use
of "F1 and "K" numbers to identify
waste streams, many people have
inquired about the acceptability of using
"D" numbers to identify EPA unlisted
hazardous wastes which exhibit "ICRE"
characteristics. Upon consideration of
these comments. RSPA agrees that the
use of "D" numbers should be an
authorized alternative to showing the
letters "EPA" and the applicable ICRE
characteristic. Therefore. RSPA is
revising the appropriate sections of the
rules text to allow the use of the terms
"EPA ignitability" or "EPA corrosivity"
or "EPA reactivity" or "EPA EP
toxicity", as appropriate or use of the
corresponding "D" number, as
appropriate, on shipping papers in
association with the basic description
and as marking on non-bulk packagin
(those of 110 gallons or less) in
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
4825
association with the proper shipping
Administrative Notices
Because the amendments adopted
herein were mandated by the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorize (ion Act
of 1988 (Pub. L. 99-499. October 17,
1988). it has been determined that notice
and public procedure are contrary to the
public interest. No determinations have
been made under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601. et sea.].
Under the terms of "DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures" (44 FR11034.
February 28.1979). since these
amendments are part-of an emergency
rulemaking governed by a short-term
statutory deadline, no determination has
been made as to whether it is
"significant".
I certify that these amendments do not
require preparation of an environmental
impact statement under the National
Environmental Policy Act (49 U.S.C
4321. et seq.).
Although the provisions of Pub. L 99-
499 provide insufficient time for RSPA to
perform the required analyses and make
required findings under the applicable
statutory, regulatory, and executive
authorities, the agency is aware that
amendments of such broad applicability
may produce significant impacts on
industry segments, a substantial number
of which may be small enterprises.
Because RSPA's role in regulating
hazardous substances is directly tied to
EPA's ongoing hazardous substances
responsibility, primarily through the
agency's determination of reportable
quantities, amendments will be made to
HMR as necessary to satisfy the intent
of Congress expressed in Pub. L 99-499.
In consideration of the foregoing, the
following changes are made to Docket
HM-145F [51 FR 42174. November 21.
1986], Amendment Numbers 171-00 and
172-108:
PART 171-GENERAL INFORMATION,
REGULATIONS. AND DEFINITIONS
1. In 5171.11. paragraph (d)(l)(i) found
in column 1 on page 42177 is correctly
revised to read as follows:
§171.11 Use of ICAO Technical
Instructions.
(d) • ' •
(I)*'*
(i) One of the following additional
descriptions shall be entered, in
parentheses, in association with the
basic description on shipping papers
and in association with the proper
shipping name required to be marked on
packages:
(A) The name of the hazardous
substance as shown in the appendix to
§ 172.101 of this subchapter, unless the
proper shipping name required by the
ICAO Technical Instructions already
includes the name of the hazardous
substance; or
(B) For waste streams, the waste
stream number; or
(C) For wastes which exhibit an EPA
characteristic of ignitability. corrosivity.
reactivity, or EP toxicity. the letters
"EPA" followed by the word
"ignitability". or "corrosivity". or
"reactivity", or "EP toxicity". as
appropriate or the corresponding "D"
number, as appropriate.
• • • • »
2. On page 42177. amendment number
4. "(a)(3)(i) is revised to read as follows"
is corrected to read "(a)(3) is revised to
read as follows" and the correct
paragraph is set forth below:
8171.12* Canadian shipments and
packaging*
. (a) ' ' '
(3) When a hazardous material which
is subject to the requirements of the
TDG Regulations is also a hazardous
substance.as defined in this subchapter,
the additional description requirements
for hazardous substances in
§§ 17Z203(c) and 172.324 are applicable.
• • • • •
PART 172-HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
TABLE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
COMMUNICATIONS REGULATIONS
3. The authority citation for 49 CFR
Part 172 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 1803.1804.1805. and
1808: Pub. L 99-499: and 49 CFR Pan 1. unless
otherwise noted.
1172.101 [Amended]
4. In $ 172.101. paragraph (c) is
amended by removing the reference to
paragraph (b)(4).
5. Beginning in the third column of
page 42177, the appendix to {172.101 is
correctly added to read as follows:
Appendix to {172.101—Urt of Hazardous
Substances and Reportable Quantities
1. This appendix lists materials and their
corresponding reportable quantities (RQs)
which are listed or designated as "hazardous
substances" under section 101(14) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response.
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA;
Pub. L. 98-510). A material in this list is
regulated as a hazardous material and a
hazardous substance under this subchapter if
it meets the definition of a hazardous
substance in 1171.8 of this subchapter.
2. Column 1 of the list, entitled "Hazardous
substances", contains the names of
hazardous substances. Elements and
eompnnds are listed first in alphabetical
sequence. Following the listing of elements
and compounds is a hating of waste streams.
These waste streams appear on the list in
numerical sequence and are referenced by
the appropriate "P" or "K" numbers. Column
2 of the list, entitled "Synonyms", contains
the names of synonyms for certain elements
and compounds listed in Column j. NO
synonyms are listed for waste streams.
Synonyms are useful hi identifying hazardous
substances and in Identifying proper shipping
names. Column 3 of the list, entitled
"Reportable quantity (RQf, contains the
reportable quantity (RQ). in pounds and •
kilograms, for each hazardous substance
listed in Column 1.
3. The procedure for selecting a proper
shipping name for a hazardous substance is
set forth In {172.101(c)(9).
4. A series of notes is used throughout the
list to provide additional information
concerning certain hazardous substances.
These notes are explained at the end of the
list.
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABUE QUANTITIES
AMfc«cM
100(484)
5000(2270)
1000(454)
1000 (454)
1 (0454)
1000(454)
1(0454)
1(0.454)
100(48.4)
8000(2270)
-------
4826 Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 31 /-Tuesday. February 17. \9S7j Rules and Regulations
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
5000(2270)
10 (434)
5000(2270)
100(454)
3000(2270)
Ante «od. fluoro-. Mdkn un
Acaoc Bat nwOunO) nn
5000(2270)
10 (4.54)
PropinanM*. 2-nydroxy-i
5000(2270)
100(454)
5000(2270)
1(0454)
5000(2270)
1000 (454)
1(0454)
6000(2270)
5000 (2270)
100 (45 4)
1 A3.4.10-101 Hi»rMnm 1,4.
M*
100(454)
1000(454)
Mumtaun phnpNd* •
1(0454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
1(0454)
100(454)
1000(454)
100(454)
Anrankm dktnmiM 9
tmmonbm MfluoiU
Aflvnortuni cvtiontfB *
5000(2270)
1000 (454)
6000(2270)
100(454)
Amnonwn Ikiondi
V«w*e *dd. •nmortun
5000(2270)
5000(2270)
1000(454)
100(454)
1000(454)
AMknony «MuOfkH *
POLVCHUDRINATED BIPHENVLS (PC8»)
POLVCHLORMATEO KPMENYU8 (PCS
POLVCHU3RINATED BIPMENVIS (PC8a)
POLVCHLORMATED OFHENVLB (KM
POLVCHUORINATED BIPHENVLS (PCI
POLVCHlOfflNATED BIPHENVLS (PCM)
POLVCHUXWMTED BPHENVLS (PCS
AfMricQU)
AiMrtc(V)
100(454)
5000(2270)
5000(2270)
5000(2270)
5000(2270)
1000 (454)
5000(2270)
10 (4.54)
10 (434)
10(454)
10 (4.54)
10(454)
10 (434)
1(0454)
1(0454)
5000 (2270)
5000(2270)
5000(2270)
-------
Afwia, dNMtlyt ..
Awanwia
Azaianna..
Azmphos methyl @
Be«[|l
Banzfclacndna
Banzai cMonda.
U-Banzanthncana
. .-
Banzanamna. 4.4I-fnalhyl
Banxenaimia. 2-flwtn*..
Baruanaimia. 2-fnamyt-
Oanzananima. 4-nrtra.
Banzana •
P*HMn*. CNOfllV .. „__
BOTMnv, cMwufiiQihyi-
Banzana, 1.2-4eMon>
Banzana. U-AcMoro-
Baraana. l.44cNon>
Banzane. dfcMorome*
Banzana. dram*
m- ._
.
B«n»n«.
.
. ,..-
Bonn. mcMoronwtriyt.
Bannn*. 1.3.5-mnrtr>
i.2-6«
Banzolalimnricana-.
Banzolblfluortnthana
Banzo(k)nuannmi
BanzoUklfluarana
BanzolgJuIpaiylana
Banzoiajpyrana .«..,
3.*>6anzopyrana . ..
P-Banzoounona ..._
Bat
Ij-amprMnunhana
Hnarfloui SuMinoa
• —
9 _.
• 2l0(iii!lmS!^J'<*one* •m^tHamnocartxinyltaiy
S.aa.eb.heKWiydro-aa^nemoxy-S-metfiy*.
*ana, 1.2<3-rnalhyl-
w. 7.12-*naBiyt. _
•carDomiidurtja (NLN-dknathjU..
htoro-2-methyt.. hy*ochlonda
lartuBul 4 uHaiMain.
-
0lfttnV. nyVDCMBMta 1M
am*S*«n>--
IHO. .. •
'<**•- -
on>_
on> _. .
DID-
netfwi-. ._
MMtonnnliyL
ro- ._
o- ... '
2«4zntR> _.
lanadmy « aw .
'"*'l*<*wj*y ^ pfopaiijd ._«„..__ — -
laiwtay^propyl.
Una- - — 1
r
«Ji^[£J*5?!^
«*te tad. dftuM aaar
lyle aod. dMnyl altar
y*c aod. dmmyl a«ar_
y.2-(mamyiainnoMM]- .
t entonoa ~ ' "~
3Hm.t.i-dmii)a.andMlts
" " — ••
-n.:-™--™- — j i
.__-.._._ --" — -:-—---] .
. , i_zzz=di
S^n.
0-m»i»»n. ._
Banzaninwia. 4.4'»har»t mametn 0
l.r-Behamn-t^'dliinn.
Saeehun «ntf ult. . . M
iamtalanOmBinfi
Ptumntlitm .. " ' ~~
L*Janmi»iana .
ianzaltlpvrana ' — __
.4-CydonaiaOanadmii ._ """ '
tanzana. Btchtoramath|il.
Raooruaia
Pound^KJogrtmi
1 (0454
1 (0454)
1(0454;
1 (0454)
• m 4S4|
1(0454)
1(0454)
10 (4 54)
1(0454)
1(0.454)
1(0454)
5000 (2270)
1(0464)
1(0454)
1(0454)
5000(2270)
1(0454)
1000(454)
1 (0454)
1 P454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
5000(2270)
1000 (454)
100(454)
100 (45 4)
100(454)
100 (45 4)
100 (45 4)
6000(2270)
100 (45 4)
1000(454)
1(0454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
1 (0.454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
6000 (2270)
1000 (454)
10 (4 54)
1(0454)
SOOO (2270)
1(0454)
10 (4.54)
1(0454)
6000 (2270)
1(0.454)
10(454)
1000 (454)
5000(2270)
5000(2270)
6000 (2270)
1000 (454)
100(454)
100(454)
100(454)
(0454)
(0454)
(0454)
(0454)
(0454)
100(454)
6000 (2270)
5000 (2270)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
10(454)
1 (0454)
1000 (454)
1 (0454)
-------
482B Federal Register / VoL 52. No. 31 / .Tuesday. February 17. 1987 / Roles and Regulations
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES MO REPCCTABIE.QUANTITIE&— Contmued
Hazardou* Sutastanoe
Benzyl cttonde • ... -
Beryftum «
Barytun eMonde *
BaryOun dux) «
Beryaun Buonde •
Bary*un mrala *
dpfte • BHC
beta -BHC
#-"a - B"C. . .
2_r-Baor.ne
(l.r-BvhenyQ-M^d-vra
(i.r-BonenyO-M'-o-Bi-
Bls(2-cMofoeiKo«y) maai
B^2autyrlc
Cacody-caod
Cadnwm*
Cadmum kramda
CadmuncNonde
Cafcam cartitde •
Catoum enramate
Cataum eyanda *
Calriun dodecyfcenzer
CMMjni nypocMonM •
Carnpnana. octacr-ore-
Cagan-
Cattanac aori. methym
CarbaiaJda. N ethyl N >
Carbaryl •
Cartmoirv1 *
Carbon ImMde •
CMtxinic •od. tfthrfhi
Cvtion OKyQuoridc . -»•
CarbonylcMonde
CMoral
CNoroane*
Mr ____________________
nettiyt-
m 0) "a
mamyl aalar
Barytkun du« (
Uroane • . •
-jv-C-inai^-iiifcii __
Ptl-uiue«iyl anar _ _
PropvM. 2_" m|b-<2 _
MeMna. Wbromo-. _____
Strychndn-KVoM. 2J-dane*ap>
n-Bnlyt Moohtf •
ElM iMtfqfl baton* 9 — •— i •.••.—...—.
M OU
-------
Hazaidoua Subttanee
Chlorine •
Chtanne cyanide .. .. _
Chkmaphaime ...
CNoroacelaldenyde. .
P-Chkraanlme
4-CNoro-nvcreaol
P-Chtaro-m-eresol...
2-Chtoroethyl vinyl ethar
CWoroiorm • . . ...
Chloronie_i_r_i —
- • — — - — —
- .
Chtaremetliyl methyl ether
betaOtemnaphmalene.. _.
T f*t>lna«iii-iii»ie* ii*
20-mph--..
c-Chtorophanol ,_..._
4Oiknpherwl ahanyl aHi-r
HoOtorephariyOthiouraa — •-— —
CWoreei-torte add '~ ————_-_ __
*HHMaaX*nm. iM-Bet-aml-
ChtonMntn.-
Chrome -ad-
Chrome add. oak-urn eat ~ "~~
Chrome -Jt-t. ""
Chramum * _ . .... --——---——-—————_—_____.
Chnjmeua cNprUa ______
Chryeena. .__ . "
Cobettoua tannaie ' — —
Coke Oven Em-a_ma__Ui: ~~
Coumaphoa •
Cnamam """
Craada • "™
o-Graada.
POaao-i "' " - •
Cnarie mat —
nvCreaola
Crotonaldehyda • _
Cumene
Cuprie acetate. _ .
Cuprie aoaioBraante •
Cuprtc nitrate •
Cuprie palate
Cuprie curtate _ _.. _
Cupnc aunate ammenatad
Cuprie tartrate.
Cvandea (sokiMe eyande aalta)
Cyanogen •
Cyanogen brornda •
Cyanogen (Monde • .. . .
1 .4-Cydohe-acfeenadcne
Cydohe-ane-
Cydoha-anone ..
Cyclophoiphamde _
2.44 Eaten _ ..
2.4-O*. aalta and aatara. _.
OOO .... _ . _
4.4--OOO
DOE. _ _
i
i
1
Synonyms
Cyanogen chloride •
-• 2-Napnthyla— — ne. N.N l>if2-cnkim_itiyH. ....
Acelaldehyde. chtoro-
Benzenamna. 4-ttmnte,
D0il_n>nv_™_al
Phenol. 4^Mor_-3-mnhyt.
. Phenol 4*r_araAm_tty.
Ep«»ilorohy_nn'_ —
ECM chkyi_l_i ^i -
J Etheno. J-chtoroomiwy. • "
Uoth-iJ-n, rMnm. ..
M«nvt cMancto • _.... "™ —
Methane. ch__-rwi_-th.wy.
Naomh__._n_i. 2.cMnfn. "
nWllfiL mtmtfliatlx*
Thnuraa. (2n_n_ fy*~f^ ....
>6en_oo>in-M
2.4^) '. aato and eaten . '"
t.«^>chlorop*^_x^io-(3-arnr«)..J.6^ne»OJr-«tor_M.-rnr>
'»^gy^anDeyl)alr»^>J.BJ^Me-allyalu
-------
4A9D
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17, 1987 / Rules and Regulations
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANO
Hazardou. Subalanca
4.4--DOE.
DOT •
DBBala
DiMnimiBliinna _
Oa_tan •
Dfcan-IUOaitthraeana — —
I^Mfeanxapyfana
DtMRdaJ]p»rana
l_-C*romo*e«oa)propBne — —
Dfeutyt pMhatata —
aLS-OKnlonMHi.l-aniainyM^nipyniiOUaiiiaii-ila —
DcNoabaraene (mbnd)
ij-DKMaiobaraena
*.tUnuiM-
.
3.rOchtorobera*ia .
1.4-OicNon>2-butana ,
Pd-uru-Huoromethana • .
Dchtondlphanyl dcMoroattiana ••• •
DcNereaBiyl attar
i*OK*Horeph8nol____ — —
DcHoraprepana •
l^DtcMorepropana —
DcNoroprapanaU) *—
2.3-Ochloropropana paomar)
l>DkMorepropana — —
2U2-acr_oroproponc aod • — —
OfcMonaa* . — —
[hOfcttl • -
O.O-Otetft»( M2-( dMnophMphata —
DmUiyHHiUopnanyl pnoapfiata
O.OOaOiyt CVpynKonift pneapnorooioBta
ES AND REPORTABLE OUANTTTTES— Confinuad
Synonyms
9DE .
I.4--OOT__
DOT' • —
Kapona'—- —
DftanmlaManmoana _ —
DtMRU4wM-«raean*___
D*anBriaJi)ar*nBana _
OtMiBltJilanmrmotn* . —
ab«ttt_jjp-«-__
i»Bi«yl pn-ialan " . __— — —
OtatH phMMa _ — — •
neatfi u-li^ati •
Piu»ia-u — —
Banana. l_K_ehlBn>___
Bamtna. IXkontato- — — _ —
nvOfclft-uUmiana .
Banana. lAdeMon- . —
Banana. 1 J-dttitao- . — —
IXtentorctMnzana- — . — —
Banana. l.-Aonkm- . •
Banzana. 1.4-dtcHaro- _ ___——_
1 ,4«cnloraba-ana — —
2-BuWna. l.44eNoio- —
TDE« . — — —
4.4--ODO — ~
DOT'. — •
Ettiana. l.l.JeMon>-__ — —
Ethana. 1.2-dfcNonx •
Emyttna dKMofWa • — •
Ettiana. 1.l-dlenlon>__ •
VlnyMana oMorida • — —
EMna. l.l'x-^t-.B-ehtoo- _ —
Phanol2«-ccnlan> . —
2.4-0 AekJ . _—
Pnanyl JUtooan-ia •, —
Piep»tana tfcManHf •
Prcpana. 1X__*xo- —
l4UU.tQ.l(MlaM-h..o K.l »pa»M^«A«.7AB>ouaii|iiliu^ido^->-l.«-S*
..r-BkBlrana _
. PIII-UIIIII •
PhnphoradMafc add. OXXOattiyl SWnaOiyl a«ar
_ Phaaphnne add. ilatiH tH*raphan»t aalar
OuamMRO)
tx-TaXK-ogrami)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
10 (4.54)
10(454)
1000 (454)
100(454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
5000(2270)
100(454)
100(454)
100(4540
100(454)
100(454)
100(454)
100(454)
1 (0454)
5000(2270)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1000(454)
6000(2270)
5000 (2270)
1000(454)
1(0454)
1001454)
100(454)
1(0454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
100 (45 4)
100(454)
100(454)
5000(2270)
10(454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
100(454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
100(454)
1000(454)
100(45'
1 (045>
_l 5000(2270)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17. 1987 / Rules,-and Regulations 483!
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
Dihydroaafrole .- .
Dusopropyl fluorophospnate
Bmelhoata . _
3.3'-(>man
1(0464)
100 («5 4)
10 (4 54)
1 (0454)
1000(464)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0464)
10(454)
100(454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0454)
100(454)
1(0454)
5000 (2270)
100(454)
6000 12270)
I 10454)
100(464)
10 (4 54)
100 (45 4)
|Q (4 54)
10(464)
1000(464)
1000(464)
1000(464)
1000(464)
6000(2270)
1(0464)
1 (0464)
100(46.4)
6000 (2270)
1 (0464)
1000(464)
1(0464)
100(45.4)
100(464)
100(454)
1000(464)
1 (0464)
1(0464)
1 (0464)
1 (0454)
1000(464)
•(0464)
1(0464)
1000(464)
1000(464)
1000(464)
6000(2270)
1(0.464)
1000(464)
1000(454)
6000(22701
1(0464)
1000(464)
100(464)
1(0464)
1 (0.454)
1(0464)
1(0464)
1(0464)
6000 (2270)
6000 (22 JU)
1(0464)
1(0.464)
6000 (2270)
6000 (2270)
1(0464)
1(0464)
1000(464)
6000 (227O)
-------
4832 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 31 / Tuesday, February 17, 1987 / Rules and Regulations
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANC
HUMOUS Subeunoe
f ,,-,.„-«.-»-.
Emma. inra-I.Z-dfcnloro-
EB-on'
2-Ethojtyethtnol
Emyi aaauta _______
Emyl acrytota •
Emyl carb-mata (Urethen)
Emyl chloride Q
• - -
Ethytane (ftcol moncxOryl «th>r * — —
Ethytenw-mir-ne talraacao. aod (EOTA)
Clhytanln-tie
Ethyl amor •
EthyHdone (-chloride
Ethy4flwth.crytata
Emyl mamyl ketone 9
Fanphur
Ff~c w-^-»^" rtm»
Ferric eMarida
Ferric da-Ban
Feme name •
Ruorvnhene
Fkjorene
Fluorine'
Ruoraaoat.rn.le
Forme add •
FiAnrae acKf mercury(ll)-_M
Fum-ric acri
Furmn-
Furan. MBVny.ro-
.-FunrcaftaaUihyde
Furfural'
-
F-rluran_
Gutt-on •
impia-hloi
Mea^teeeyclenanna (gamma i
l^°-ltttSS__6-7'€p"
1.2.3.4,10.10 llei-cntnm fi.7-epo»
H«c*-*or«*-*^.ndo-
1-8J.4.1Q.10 lia«-finnm 1.4.44.5
HaacMoraohena
Hexa-Moropropene
Hydra-ma*
i^1A4a5A7ABMCl.liydR>«p.laaiide-1^_W-
^1 , 4.4a,Sj6.7-6 -6>s)cl^iydr^i*c 1.<-JJ andB-r-B
Hydn-ona. li-amefhyl- .
ES AND REPORT ABLE QUANTITIES— Continued
Sl
monyrna
"U Ll'U Uir|'l •
etmchtaroalnana
,2-lnroOcnlor-e-iytena
mylene gtyool nmoamyl ether •
•Prepanac aod. etnyi aaw
O-oroelh-na.
Propmntne
thane, l-?<-otonio-
-tOcl-oroaoana
2-EVnryMhenal
Elh-ne. l.r-onyt*-
Ethane. 1.1-JeMen>
.lOcMoroamana
MhaneauNonlc add. *hyl eaar
2-euanone__
Methyl amyl knona '
Riueunurothk-e aod. aCVdknamyl O-Cp-[|oTrne-^.rnlnnHuBoriyll phenyl] eater
Iron dHnw
BaR-oOklHuarm
Aoammde. 2-nuon>
Aeebc add. flvoro-. aodlum Mtt
MMhenoceckl
Marcury UnnMa
FurturU'
MiMc.nhy.rkle'
4.7 Mamano-lrHnden.. 1.4AA7A.-
l^euatfena. 1.1-.3.4.I riai.-r.or.
amme.BHC
Undane'
1>Oy-iupai-»f-.ne. UJAt-Vhan
Endrtn*
Ohttto *
EXane. l.l.l-UJ^-Bachtoro-
1 -.3.4.10.10 lk»Kt«m-1A4aAM
HMcMorotN.— tiydnD4nBKMivvo(v
l-Prepana. 1.1.UA»4Naet-gn>-
Ta-auhoaphortc a-ttf, hanaftyl mtt
DknUna
HM--a--iyliyUi.-liia
l.mmiediyiiydrmna
cHoro- ____
a hermHyrtro l.4AB-en->,ande-
gq —
niiemyi-/ai«_tia. urayiiiiialn--! »
l->«mamytiydnBlna —
Methyl hydrazine ' __ •
Reponabki
OuanoMRO)
PM.MK.oar.rni)
1 (0454)
1000 (454)
10 (4.M)
1 (0454)
5000(2270)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
1(0454)
100(454)
10(454)
1(0454)
1000(454)
5000(2270)
1(0454)
1(0.454)
5000(2270)
5000 (2270)
5000 (2270)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
100(454)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
1(0454)
5000(2270)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
5000(2270)
100(454)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
1000(454)
100(454)
1000(454-
50001227V
10 (4 54)
100(454)
10(454)
1000 (454)
5000(2270)
10(454)
5000(2270)
100 (45 4)
1000 (454)
5000 (2.70)
5000(2270)
5000 (2270)
100(454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1 10454)
1(0454)
1 (0.454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
100(454)
1000(454)
100(454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1(045
10X4!
10(45
100(454)
J 5000(2270)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. te. Nb. 3T/- Tuesday. February 17, 1087 / Rules and Regulations 41)33
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORT ABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
1000(464)
100(45.4)
6000 (2270)
6000(2270)
6000 lAcrvi
1000 (454)
1 I
10 (4.64)
1(0464)
10(4.54)
10(454)
10(464)
10(464)
1(0,494)
10(4*4)
100(45.4)
1000(454)
1000(464)
1000(464)
1BW64)
1000(464)
1000(454)
8000 (2270)
1(0.464)
1(0454)
6000(2270)
10(464)
100(454)
5000 (JU/U)
6000 (227U)
100 (46-4) •
1 (0464)
100 (46.4)
1(0454)
6000 (2270)
1(0454)
6000 (2270)
6000 (2270)
100(454)
1(0454)
6000 (2270)
100(45.4)
1(0464)
1000(454)
-------
4834
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17. 1987 \ Rules^RegulatJona
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
r
Huardoia Substance
1 Memyliiriaaene
Methyl chtonde •
Methyl enorotormua 0
4.4' Mafli»lanobii(2-ehlon
Methyl ethyl katona • —
Mathyl ettiyl katona pen
Methyl nydradna •
MaftyltcoMa
Meaty) njobutyl ketone_
2 MothynacrBKrlrla
Many) panMon •
< Methyl 2 pemenone-
MuthylthaunKl
Mnomycm C
MumamyHnHna •
Naiad
5.12-Naphthaaanedkine.
1
I
- '
1
91
--
D«*n.) —
"
ode •
-
''SSia^S^^^^^mSau^ "** **'*'
t*«)lb*5«ii«o-Miy*a«yHamoift»n eaB,
1-Naulitliylanwie ——
2-NajMnytamne —
2-riapnthytarnne. NJ**eX2
O-.
p-
o-NUiuplienel
N Niuuiullerhinnlami
na • —
JPenlattena
Synonyms •
JeOiana. ct*on> ___ —
j.l-TrichtoroeMne *
Iftanyl cNanxarbonata •
:niocomethyl methyl ether —
Methane, creoromethoiy- —
9anlpaoaanthryiana. U-d»t
aamenamHa. 4^' niaeiyHnal
Menana. dcMoro-
Fumaldehyae *
2-Butanona __
EOy methyl ketone ®
2-fiubjnona panaUa
tecyank: ackt methyl e«ar_
Thomethanol
S-Propvnoc MkJL a^4Mtfip*i '
Ouanana-NimiuaoNmaBn
O.00kr_lnyl &p4MroiMnyl
AjrtxX2-J-a.4)pym3to(U-eJ
Mumy-mtneg
fto^mm^ — __
M(2 —
iMC-ntto-
pnoaphoroMoiM—
Moll l.T linni 11 a * tH — ****** T"~TI
•Hyttu Ba meBiu«y-»methyl
D— -**1
2-CNcn******* — J
irypanbkie — — ; •
CNomaphaHne — —
TMouraa, nnK«mny>- —
NckainJ) eyanda — —
Nickel eyantte • —
Nickel earbonyl • — • — •
Pyridne. (S>^lHtie«>yW-pyrn*»nyl)-. and (eta —
Mngantn) ooda .. "
Bananamna. «4*» —-
. NNroganpV) ooda — •
. MMcoride'
4-NflJU»jh.>nDl — —
. Phenol. 4*Bro- . —
4-Nmuphenol —
_ »NUiuprianol — '
_ p4Wrophenol — —
Phenol. 4-nnn> — —
_ Propane. 2-mtro- — • "
_ i-Butmal N nmoee — —
OuamrMRQ)
owttlKiiognn
100 (45 4)
1 (0454)
1000 (454)
1000(464)
1000 (454)
1(0464)
1(0454)
1(0454)
100(454)
1000(454)
1000 (454)
1000(464)
5000(2270)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
1(0464)
6000(2270)
1 (04S4)
10 (4.54)
100(454)
1000(464)
1(0464)
100 (454)
5000(2270)
1 (0454)
10(464)
1000 (454)
1 (0.454)
100(454)
100 (45.4)
10 (4.54)
1(0454)
toor
50001
5000 (2270)
1 (0464)
100(454)
5000(2270)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
100(454)
1(0464)
6000(2270)
1(0464)
5000(2270)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1000(464)
5000 (2270)
1 (0464)
100(464)
1000(4847
10 (4 64)
6000 (2270)
1000 (464)
10 (4 64)
10 (4 54)
10(464)
10(454)
100(454)
100 (45.4)
100 (45 4)
100 (45 4)
100(454)
1
\
I (0454)
-------
Federal Register / VoL S2. No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 4835
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
100 (45.4)
100 (45.4)
100(454)
100 (45.4)
10 (434)
1000(454)
10 (4 54)
100(464)
10(434)
10(434)
10(434)
10(434)
10(434)
1(0464)
1 (0.484)
tOO (48 4)
100(464)
100(484)
10 (434)
10 (4 54)
100(45.4)
6000(2270)
100(454)
1(0.464)
10 (4 54)
6000(2270)
10(434)
100(464)
1 (0464)
100(45.4)
1000(464)
1(0464)
1000(464)
100(48.4)
tOO (45.4)
1000(464)
5000 (2270)
5000(2270)
10(464)
-------
4836 Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17, 1987 / Rules and Regulations
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANO
Hazardous Substance
Potatsun araema •
Potassum bchremata
Potaaaun ehnmata
Potaaaum cyanda * -_ — __
Potaaaun dcnromate 0
Pom Bum ettver cyanaM
Pimiaiiada .
1-Propanal 2>epo*y-
1 -Propanamna
1-Propanamne. r^propyv.
Propane. 1_-d_forno-3<«*Dn>-
Propane. 2-rtln>
Propane. 2^-enrytts<2-cr*oro-
IJ-Propane auttone
Piupanamrlla
PiopanamWa. S-cntoro-
PropanenMa. 2-hy<»nry-2-inMrv4-
l.2>PrapenaMai. rMmu-
1-Propenol. 2-imHnyt-
2-Propanone
Pinpargaa
Propargyl alcohol •
2-Propenal
Propane. 1 J-deNoro-
1-Propene. 1.1^3J>hexaO*xo-
2-Piunenena-e
2-Propenenrtne. 2-methyV
2-Propenofc add _____
2-Pnpendc acat 2-meln)*-. ethyl aster
2-Propenoic add. 2-methyK methyl ester
2-Propen-l -ol
Proploota aad. 2^2,4.S«icnlo«ophanoon> .-
Prepnnfc anhydride
Pfopytene aehtorlde • ______________
•Topyiene o»oa — • •_-_
T^-Piupytei-i-ne •
2-Prnirfn-1-ol _____________
Pyrene __
PyieBinns-
Pyndme. 24(2Hihiie»»lari«no)altiyl)-2- manylamnol
Pyi aline. 2-nioBiyl .__... _._. _______
4D44nMhyU-a«o0-
Pyiuuhmnhon. aad. taraediyl ester
Ounotoe
RAWONUCUOeS
Saccnann and aatta
Safrote
Satamum «
Setenun oooda •
SeleiiounjB —
Snow «
SBver cyanda •
S*Mr mrate • —
g^^. r
ES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES— Continued
Synonyms
PotaMkjm bcnromcte —
tyocfytaktenyde —
n-Propytan-ne •
Otpropylamme,— .-— •— — — - —
B-12-chtoroaopropyO alnar :
^-OxatNolane. iZ-daaOa
Biyl cyanide
•- -•-•- •
na(2>dUuiiiepropyl)prioipriabi
laobulyl alcohol
cetone •.—•.....• — • ••••• •••"•• — 1_ i «•«• • m™™ .«— • • •— • • •«««»
Bromoacatona • ______
Acratan • .
^Ochtoropiopene
HaacMoraprepane •
Acrykmrate •. — —
Uettiai.irlonMa
oylc add * —
ithyl acrylat> • :
Ethyl methaerylaia —
2.4.5-TP ®
1-Propai-mne —
UOichtoropropane
Propargyl alcohol •
4 Ananopyrtfjne •••- • • ••
Mathejaytlana
M Huuammertdlna
2-Plooana — —
Mcoane • and safe •_ — —
MaatyRMourad
Tatraathyl pyraphoaphata •
N Hruu-jpynrrtalnt — —
Vol-i-an-lMarbaxylle add,11.17<«n>a»ox^tfr(a43-tnri««m(wyt>enK)»()oxy)-.
flMQ^n Mtflf
1.3-nanianartol ___ •
Benzene, l^inetnytenediory I ityl
SuNur Mtankto ...
C«U-nmldoielenolc add__
Axaiertne — — — •
Proponle add. 2^^*olenorophenoiy> _
2.4>TP 0 __ .
flaoortafa
OuanmylRO)
PoundMKilopnmi)
10(4S4)
1000 (454)
1000(454)
1000 (454)
1000(454)
10(454)
1000(454)
1000 (454)
100(454)
1(0454)
5000(2270)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
5000 (2270)
5000 (2270)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1000 (454)
1 (0454)
1000 (454)
10 (4 54)
1000 (454)
10 (4 54)
10(454)
1 (0454)
5000 (2270)
5000(2270)
1000 (454)
10 (4 54)
1000- (454)
1(0454)
5000(2270)
100(454)
1000 (454)
100 (45 4)
1000(454)
5000(2270)
- 1000 (454)
1000(454)
1000 (454)
100(454)
5000 (2270)
100(454)
9000(2270)
5000(2270)
1000 (454)
100(454)
1(0454)
] 1000 (454)
] 1(0454)
| 1000 (454)
1000(454)
5000(2270)
1(0454)
5000(2270)
1 (0454)
TO (434)
1 (0454)
5000(2270)
1(0454)
5000(2270)
5000(2270)
1(0454)
1 (0.454)
10 (4.54)
100(454)
10 (4 54)
1 (0454)
10(454)
1000(454)
1(0454)
1000(454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
100(454)
10 (4.54)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. ,52. No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 4837
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
Hazardous Substance
Sodium arsenate •
Sodium anerme •
Sodum ame •
Sodum bichromate
Sodwm MluonoB •
Sodwm bisulfite • .
Sodwm chromate . .
Sodium cyanide •
Sodwm dKhromate @
Sodwm dodecytbenzene sullonate
Sodium fluonde •
Sodwm hydros-Hide • ...
Sodwm hydroxide • .- . _.
Sodwm nypocnlome •
Sodwm melhytate '
Sodwm ntnte • _ . ......
Sodwm phosphate, dulse
Sodwm setente • ....
4 4--SMbenediol. alpruLalpha'-Otethyl.
Streptozoiocm
Strontium chromau ....
Strontium surroe
Stryehndm-lO-one. and sifts
Strychndm-iOone. 2.3-donelno.y. .
Strychnine • and salts *. ...
Slyrene
Sulturhydnde __!_
Sulfur phosphide
Sulfur setemde..
Suffunc MM _ .....
SuHurc aod. donethyl ester . _. _
Sutrunc aod. maUwmll) salt ... _
2.4.5-T MM.
2.4.5-T arranes .... _ _
2.4.5-T eaten . .
2.4.5-T salts
TOE •_
1 .2.4.5-Tetreehlorobemene
2 3 7.e-Tetraehkxod*enn>-p-d«uin (TCOO)
1.1.1.2-Tetrachtoroethine _ .. .._
1.1.2_?-TetracrHoroethane. __
TetracMoroemene
Tetrechloroethylene • . .
2.34.6-Tetnchtorophenol
Tetnetnyt leid • . _
Tetnethyl pyrophosphaia •
TetrMtnyMnnnpyropnosphate
Tetrahydrofuran " . . .
Tetrsratromemane •
Tetnphosphonc MM. hneethyl ester .
ThailBoade ... ._ . .
Thauwmt . . . .
TnaDwmd) acetate _
Thalhum(l) carbonate
Tha-wm(l) chloride
Thsllwmd) nitrate . .
Thalkum(lll) onde -
Thstlium(l) setorude _
Thsllwmd) sultan • ..
ThiotBnox . „ . . _
Thionwttwnol . . „
TNjphenol • . .
Thouree
Traourea. (2-cntorophenyl)- _
Thiourea. l-naphthaleny)-.
TNourea. phenyl- .....
Trnram . ._ .
Toluene • .....
Tokjenediamme * . ._ _
Toluene doocyanata * .- ..
O-ToluMine hydroonlonde _
o-TowMuie . _
--
— — _ _-..._«...._. . .. . ..
- ...... .... _ __ . ... .
••
H::':^
• -.
• ••
- ........ . m, „
•- -
— .
'-_•-- '" -_-j£ • _—'•""
.. ......
-- • •- -
. . .....
Synonym
------ ...... — . .
Sodwm dchromato @ ._ . ...
-• -
_ .. . ....
™ -.-...-..—...- .. .. . — ,
- ••••
— --
- - • •
_._.
t%G_J!IWin_""' z^^^3ji»tti*w*mo«iur"*>)- — —
Strychnine • and sslts •. Z.™
Bniene ... ...
StrychnM-vlO-one. and salts.
HydrosuNunc aod J HHH II 1
Selenum d-ujtfiri.
Dunemyl surlste • _.
ThaHwmO) suHite •-_ .
2.«.5-Tnchlorcphenoxyscetic sod •. _.
2.4.5-T • .
•"•"-.
...-....._..___ .__._ . .... _
" ' ""
.__.. .......1
* — —
2.4.5-Ttlenlaopheno-yiue-c acM •
. .
1 ""
JDD .
DichlorooTpheriyldKJitoroetnaiie. — _
4.4--ODD ..
Benzene. iA4.5-MF.cHon> _
Emme. 1.1.1^-MBMMoro- _. .
Ethane. 1.1__2-tttr»cr_oro-
ithene. l.l£2.tetncMon> _.
TeliicliluiueUiyleiie * .
•thane. l.i.U-t-nMNon>_
TetiacMuiueUieiie
"herd. 2J.4.6-MncNoro-
lurnbane. teuieUiyl- — . .
FViuphumilunu, i&U. tetraelhyf ester M
Wnopyrophosphonc acM, tetnemyl a
:ursn, leiiHiydiu- _______
wthine. tibiJMiio- __ «_ __._.
•hiiun(lll)o-Me._
* — " "—~ • • — — — — -
Aeenc end. milhim(l) salt
Carbonic aod, dmiaflun (I) sail .
Thal-c onde .. _ _
SuNunc acM. 0ialwm(l) salt.. ..
.3-Ometnyl-Himtr)y.rn).2-bulinone.(
!.4-Oithiabiunt..-_ .
lothsnvitaoi . .. .„ „ ... ...... .. _. . ,,,,
Methyl mereaptan •
•WbftfTMdO, 01i^ _._.«. .. .
(n OiHi>in^iBi!ylltl^M<'flt ILm.
tpht-Njumthyrni-ouiet «
Brsemytmiocam.WTi(^)toif^"r
-)8n26nfl, fiMthy^ i. ...... . ..„ . . .. ...M
Benzene. 2.4-dKSOcyanatomethyi.. _"_7_
Benzenimne. 2-methyl.. hydrocniortde.
2-Ammo.i4nelhylban.ene ... ... _.
.._. .... .
X(mainyUunino)c.itiony1) oxme
.. .. . ___. ._... _ . .__..__ . ..
_ _
-. _ . .. __ . _.
RsoonaWe
QuamnyjRQ)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
100 (45 4)
5000 (2270)
1000 (454)
to (4 54)
1000(454)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
5000 (2270)
1000 (454)
100 (45 4)
1000(454)
100 (45 4)
5000(2270)
100(454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1000 (454)
100 (45 4)
10 (4 54)
100 (45 4)
10(454)
1000 (454)
100(454)
1000 (454)
100 (45 4)
1 (0454)
1000 (454)
1 (0454)
100(454)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
6000(2270)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
1(0454)
5000 (2270)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0454)
10(454)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
100(454)
1000(454)
10 (4 54)
100(454)
100 (45 4)
1000 (454)
100(454)
100(454)
100(454)
100(454)
100 (45 4)
1000 (454)
100(454)
1 (0454)
100(454)
100 (45 4)
100 (45 4)
100(454)
100 (45 4)
1 (0 454)
100(454)
100(464)
100(454)
10 (4 54)
1000 (454)
1 (0454)
100 (45 4)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
-------
4838 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 31 / .Tuesday. February 17. 1987 / Rules and Regulationa
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANT
Md
p-Tdudra
2.4.5-TP @
2.4.5-TP and eaten
i.«.5-TI* odd ..
i M- 1 .2.4-Trtaiol-3-«nwie_
1i4-Tnehlorobenan.
1.1.1-TneMareaaiam * —
1 ,1 .2-TitaNereattiam
TricNoroettiene
Titehtenelhylona •
Trtchtoromethanesurienyt t
Trichtarophanol •
2^4-TlM*H
2J.e>TriBNoi
2.4.e-TffcMOI
3.4.S-ThcMa
2.4.5-Tnchtonpnanal
2A6-Trichtorophanol — u
1 J .5-TrianM. 2.4.Wrtrm
Hazardous Substance
Mend*
epnanol
££ —
ite aod •
enzene auHonata.. ____ — _.___.—..» —
Mhyl- :
Synonym
4^mno-«-nwmyt bannne.
Proper* aod. 2^2.4.5^nchlofOphena«y^
Z43.TP idd —
Proptont aad. 2-(2.4*«lc«oiop»ieno3iy> H
14.5-TP 0 _ —
Methyl chtoulonn • __ — —
TifcMenjelHylane •
TricNofoaAeni — —
MMhanm«enyt chloride, tncntoro-.. — —
Methane. UfcJiluicilluare- — —
Phenol. 2.' JMAcNem-
Phenol. 2.4.6^nchlon>
PnenoL 2.4.54rteNoio- — _
Phenol. H tHnJHUn- — — — — —
2.4.5-T •
Benzene. 1 ,3.5-Mnlbo-
PnkMiyde -»......,.
Ou8fflity(RO)
PoundalKitognim)
1(0454)
HB.454)
100 (45 4)
100(454)
100(454)
1 (0454)
100(454)
100 (45.4)
1000(454)
1(0454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
100(454)
5000(2270)
10 (4 54)
10 (4.54
10(454
1000 (454
1000(454
5000(2270
100(454
10(4.54
1000(454
1 (0454
1(0454)
100(454)
1 (0.454)
1000(454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
10 (4.54)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
100(454)
100(454)
100(454)
100(454)
1(0454)
1(0454)
100(454)
100(454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
5000(2270)
1(0.454)
5000(2270)
100(454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
5000(2270)
1000(454)
1000(454)
1000 (454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
1000(454)
10 (4.54)
1000(454)
1000(464)
1000(454)
1000(454)
5000(2274)
100(454)
ZlncphnvMa
-------
Federal Register /- Vol. 52, No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17, 1987 / Rules and Regulations
4R34
UST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
Hazardous Substance
Zinc slfeolUionde _
Zinc Dilfale . .
Zirconium nitrate • . _ . . _ _
Zirconum poussum nuonda ._
Zirconum surlate * ...
F001 ~ "~
The tenoning ipent naloaenaiea solvents used in degnMsng end sludges trail the
recovery af inn* Ktvents n degreasra opeiauons-
(•) TetradHoroethylene
(b) TncMoroemyleiie . ... ..
(d) l.t.l.TneMaroarhm*
(0 Chkmnated nuoraeuhani .
F002 _
The toBOMig tpenl hatogenated aonwnta and me ft* bottom from the recovery of
men solvents.
(a) TetncMaraeihylMM
(b) Memylene cMonds
(e) Tnchloroemytene ... __ ._
Id) l.l.l-TncNoroelhine
(el CHamtemn.
mi.1.2-Tnchlorc-1.2J-tnrluoroemane _
(g) rXMMorobenzene. _._ _.
(M TnehlomrliiamrnMruM
F003. _ _. ._
The Mtomkig cpent non-hilooeniMd •okMM* ml K*~X» _
Ill Xvtane
(b) Acetone
(e) Eny .MM.
(d) Ethyfeenuni
le) Ettwt ether _ ..
(I) Momvl •obutyl kettne . .
IM Ckdntannm.
(ilMMhMl-.
FOOt
The (oBowng ipanl rervhatogenMed eolventB m) the riMottorn from the recovery
ol theee iotvents_
Ill CrMBta/OMvfe m,iH
FOOS _ . _ .
The roUowmg cpent ravtMtogenaUd eoMenti end the cWboaomt rrom the recovery
ol theee totventm.
(•) Toluene . _ _ _ _
(b) Methyl ethyl Intone
(d) liobutinol _ .
(e)Pyrrtne- _ _. . ..
F008
Wntmrater netment Hudgei Iron, etoctropUUng openbone el^t from me
tottowig prooeuei (1) Sultune eod inodUng of eluminum.(2) tx pMng on
artaon steel. (3) Unc ptabng (segregued bnto) on cvborateel. (4) Huiwiurn or
•kjnwn.
FOOT
Fooa " v^^ -
Pitting tMh tk^lflei from thv bottom of plnnQ baths fiuimNoLliuijIiLiiu openibont
plttng bath Hudges) ' ' *
F00»_
Spent itnppmg and deamng bath iokitiona from etedrepUBng oparaMna wham
•tnpptng and deanng bath loMlona) "* "v"
F010 . . ._
Ouenchng bath nudge from ol bam. from metal heat treating oparatnna whan
eyanrjes are used m the prooaaa (eioept tar preooue meUK heat-treating
ojuonctwiQ balh ahidpea)
F011_
Spent cyande aoMona from salt bam pot clearing from metal heat Meting
operationa (except for preooua metala heat bvatmg apent cyande aduborvj from
•alt bam pot deamng)
F012 _.
Oienchng mstewaler treatment dudge* from metal heat Mating operatone where
eyandea an uaed n the process (except tor predoua metala heat Mating
F018 ._ _ .
Wastawater Hatment inxtoM from the chemical conversion coating of aluminum _._
^020
Wattaa (except wanewater and •pent carbon irom hyorogen ehtortde pumication)
Irom the production or manutacutng me (as a reeetant, chamcal «itermeotat«, or
datea u»ed to produce tner peanode danvamet (Tin hnng does not kxtade
fmmfmjmnm
ayiviyiiil
.. — _... . .. . — • — - •
RaoorUWe
QMWWMRQ)
6000 (2270)
6000 (2270)
t~ (0 454)
1000 (464)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
5000 (2270)
6000 (2270)
1 (0464)
1(0454)
1000 (454)
1000 (454)
100(454)
100(454)
100 (45 4)
•UVW1 JJ»n^JI.L
100(454)
6000(2270)
5000(2270)
5000 (2270)
6000(2270)
1000(464)
6000 (2270)
100(454)
6000 (2270)
1000(454)
1(0454)
10 (4.64)
10 (4.64)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
10 14.64)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
-------
4846
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17. 1«*7 / Rules and Regulation.
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AMD REPOKTABLE QuANrmES-C
^^^^
Synonym
Wastes (except wastewaler and spent carbon ftomhyAog*"**^ PJ™**^
from the production or manufacturing use (as a reaclai^ ehem^nlgnudaia. or
component « a formulawig process) ol pentaehloropnenol. or of ntermeoiates
used to produce «s danvauves.
'and apiint carbon from hydrogen cMorUe purMcaMnj
or manufacturing ine (aa a reactanv
(Thn toting does not
only lor M'producbanor use o» KM"***™*"™
bom h^nry punfied 2.4A*iehlorophenoL)
>24_
Wastes.
___- . -- — — ---
but not bnwed to dsMaHon resdue*. heavy ends.
.
tana, having carbon contant from one to **•
" do. no.
ded unused lonnulatioiia conu«n«ig compounds
Ola. (The tatng does not <^^^^S
«ed Horn prepurtled 2.4.54nulilure|i
tan resurcng Irom tiwnaration or themal treattonto
^A^a«.doua Waste Noe. F020. F021. FO& RH3. POW. and TO7
»e«atrnBnl el
umteasea that use creosote and/or pentaoMorapnanoL
kidge'iiom the producbon ol etw
(anhydrous and hydra«ed»
iuoS'*o^^^ "**
..- ... _..—..—•••—— —
Oven residue from the producton of
KOOB
OatHlation bottoms from the production of acetaMehyde Irom
K010 .-
OsMatian'BKle'cuts twm •» produeoon of nxuUah*U-~M
K011 •-
•tripper to tiie'pioductlon of acrytonH*
Bottom stream Irom the
K013 ... -
Bcflom'aveaVlfom'ine aeetowtnle column m the production "0*
_
acainiti*"S^^ «" >a**''g>
SM oonoina" from"nS 'SSiation' ol:oa^"cwonde .
Heavy •rt~(wnTTha"~dainll«BBn ol vmyl cnlonde
producbon.
AauBoi"epai7aiiDinony'^ttlvi« waste Horn «uoromelliaiie8 producbon.
^iio^'i^^
' bSuJnwIicinTtne production ol phthale anhydride Irom
-------
Federal Register / VoL 52. No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 4041
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE OuANrmES-Contmued
Hazardous Substance
Synonym
Reponabto
Ouanmy(RQ)
PoundslKriograms)
K025
Damnation bottoms Irom me production of nitrobenzene by the miration of benzene
K02S
Sniping soli lafe from me production ol methyl ethyl pyndmes
K027
Centrifuge and distritanon rescues from toluene dnocysnate production
Spent catalyst from the hydrochlanialui reactor m the production of 1 l.l-tnchlor-
oetnane
K029 .. . .
Waste from the product steam stopper m the production of 1.1.1-tnchtoroeinane ..
K030 _
Column bottoms or heavy ends from me combined production ot tricnkxoetnylene
and perchkxoetnylene
K031 _ . ..
By-product salts generated n ma production of MSMA and caeodylic acid - . - .
K032 . ._ . .
Wastewatar treatment sludge from the production ol chtordane
K033 . . . .
Wastewater and scrub water from the chlonnabon ol cvdooentadwne m the
production ol chtordane
K034 _ ._ _. _ .
Fdier sokds from the Miration of hexacnorocydopentaoiene n the production of
oMordane
K035 _. . .
Wastewater treatment sludges generated m me production of creosote ._. - ..
K036 . _ .._.... ....
Snll bottoms from toluene reclamation duUtaton m the production of dnuttoton -...
K037 ._ .
Wsstewater treatment sludges from the production of doultoton . ...
K038 .. .. . _ _.. ........ „ .. ..
Wastewaier irom me washing and snipping ol prorate production . .
K039 . . _ . . ._ ._ _.
Filer cake from me filtration ol dwthylphoephorodrtr»
prorate
K040-
Wastewater treatment sludge from me production of prorate
K041 . _ .. _..
Wastewaier treatn
production of
K042 .
JOQ0
Heavy ends or distillation residues from the doMlaton ot letrachlorobenzene n the
production ol 2.4.5-T
K043 ._
2.6-dcnlorophenel waste from the production ot 2.44). _ _. . . _
K044. . . . .
Wastewater treatment sludges from the manufactunng and processing ot e»p4eer
-------
4842 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
Hazardous Substance
KOB7 .....
K093
OsuBstion hQhi ends (font ifto pfoducbon of pntftabc annytfntfo from ortft^Kyteno—__
K09*
KM* ,
«M»
Heavy ends from thB heavy ends column from the production of 1.1.1-tncMoroeth-
one
«"•» . ...
Vacuum empper discharge aurii Bie cMordane chtonneior In the production ol
cMordnnOi '
noon
noon
umiTO'Md "tfr^vv *nm tho piortutimi of p *-p
i"M
Waste leaching solution from cod marhmrj of emasnn control dust/sludge from
secondary lead Sfflatang.
K101 _. _
Damnation tar reexkiea from the daMaBon ol ankne-based compound* In tha
production ol votemary Pharmaceuticals from inane or organo-ananc com-
pounds.
i"P2
Residua from the use ol actuated carbon tor decotonutton n the production of
•rinn
K1IU , ,._,..,
K10*
Mina
WMtBwatBf troatmsnt t*iPftQff from ttw fnotcuvy 08fl PPOOBBS n oWonn* production — »
K111
K11J
Reaction by-product water franrihe dryng column ki the production ol Wuenedto-
rnne »ta hydtooenation ol dannoluluena-
KlfJ
Cono8ns0o hoju*o IQM •not ROIVI Vis ptfMccbOA ol tofcJBnstfeWww In ttw pfooudion
K11.1
Vldnals from ttw purtflcafion of totuMWdtwivio In tho production of toluonMtafnnc
w hyc^ou,>n>hon of dafirtfoioiuon0«
KtiS... _ , ,,,,,r. .......
Hoavy •nos fforo ttw punfiCBbon of toluonooiwnlnt In th9 prooucuon of tohisnociB-
K119
K«17
Wastowatof irotn ino n action vont oas acniboar In Ino (w^wlu£*Wb of attvj^ana
bronvoo vta bfonnnBlion o* floiana^
Kllfl
•mytana dibromlds-
K11A
StaH boitoma from me punflcanon ol ethytene dlbromide In th« production el ethytene
o^bromida via bromlnalion of UOMNMJ..
rnnm» •!!•
oynonyvna
•
ReoonaWe
OuanmylBO)
P0unds|rulograin»
100 (45 4)
I (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
100 (4S 4)
1 (0454)
1 (0464)
1 10454)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 10454)
1 (0454)
1(0454)
1(0464)
1 (0.454)
1(0,454)
1(0454)
« • ma RO for these hazardous substances la United to mote pieces of the metal having a diameter smaller mm 100 rneromatars (0 004 Inches)
«* • me HO for asoeatoa • kmned to made forma only
* - mdcatea mat ma matenal appears by name «the Hazardous Matsnata TaMa __ ...
@ • means mat ma name was added by RSPA because (1) the name • a synonym for a specific hazardous substance and (2) the name appears m me Hazardous Materials Table as a
proper shipping name
5. In the first column of page 42195.
paragraph (e) of § 172.102 is correctly
revised to read as follows:
§172.102 Purpose and use of Optional
Hazardous Materials Table for International
shipments.
• • • • •
(e] When an appropriate shipping
name from the Optional Table is used to
describe a hazardous material which is
also a hazardous substance, the
additional description requirements for
hazardous substances in 88 172.203(c)
and 172.324 are applicable.
• t • • •
6. In 8 172.203. paragraph (c) which
begins in the first column of page 42195
is correctly revised to read as follows:
§172.203 Additional description
requirements.
• • • • •
(c) Hazardous substances. (1) If the
proper shipping name for a material that
is a hazardous substance does not
identify the hazardous substance by
name, one of the following descriptions
shall be entered, in parentheses, in
association with the basic description:
(i) The name of the hazardous
substance as shown in the appendix to
8 172.101; or
(ii) For waste streams, the waste
stream number or
(iii) For wastes which exhibit an EPA
characteristic of ignitability. corrosivity.
reactivity, or EP toxicity. the letters
"EPA" followed by the word
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 31 / Tuesday. February 17. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
4843
"ignitability", or "corrosivity". or
"reactivity", or "EP toxicity", as
appropnate or the corresponding "D"
number, as appropriate.
(2) The letters "RQ" shall be entered
on the shipping paper either before or
after the basic description required by
§ 172.202 for each hazardous substance.
For example: "RQ, Cresol. Corrosive
material. UN 2076"; or "Hazardous
substance, solid, n.o.s., ORM-E, NA91B8,
(Adipic acid). RQ".
• • • • •
7. Beginning in the second column of
page 42195. § 172.324 is correctly revised
to read as follows:
§ 172.324 Hazardous substances.
For each package with a capacity of
110 gallons or less that contains a
hazardous substance—
(a) If the proper shipping name does
not identify the hazardous substance by
name, one of the following descriptions
shall be marked on the package, in
parentheses, in association with the
proper shipping name:
(1) The name of the hazardous
substance as shown in the appendix to
§ 172.101; or
(2) For waste streams, the waste
stream number or
(3) For wastes which exhibit an EPA
characteristic of ignitability. corrosivity,
reactivity, or EP toxicity. the letters
"EPA" followed by the word
"ignitability", or "corrosivity", or
"reactivity", or "EP toxicity". as
appropriate or the corresponding "D"
number, as appropriate.
(b) The letters "RQ" shall be marked
on the package in association with the
proper shipping name.
Issued in Washington. DC. on January 30,
1987. under authonty delegated in 49 CFR
1.53.
M. Cynthia Douglasa,
Administrator. Research and Special
Programs Administration.
[FR Doc. 87-2532 Filed 2-13-87:8:45 am]
-------
-------
Monday
March 16, 1987
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Parts 117 and 302
Hazardous Substances; Reportable
Quantity Adjustments; Proposed Rules
-------
8140
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 117 and 302
ISW H-FRL 312*4)
Reportabla Quantity Adjustments
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA)
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: Sections 103(a) and 103(b) of
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). as amended
require that persons in charge of vessels
or facilities from which a hazardous
substance has been released in
quantities that are equal to or greater
than its reportable quantity (RQ)
immediately notify the National
Response Center of the release. Section
102(b) of CERCLA establishes RQs for
releases of designated hazardous
substances at one pound except those
for which RQs were established
pursuant to section 311(b)(4) of the
Clean Water Act (CWA).
Section 102(a) authorizes the
Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to adjust RQs
for hazardous substances and to
designate as hazardous substances
those substances which, when released
into the environment, may present
substantial danger to the public health
or welfare or the environment A final
rule published on April 4.1985 (50 FR
13456) adjusted reportable quantities for
340 hazardous substances. In a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) also
published on April 4.1985. the Agency
proposed adjusted RQs for 105
additional hazardous substances (50 FR
13514). A final rule published on
September 29.1988 (51 FR 34534)
finalized RQ adjustments for 102 of
these 105 hazardous substances.1 •
Currently, there are 717 CERCLA
hazardous substances. Twelve of these
substances were listed recently under
section 3001 of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
and adjusted RQs are proposed for
these twelve substances in this
rulemaking.* In today's rulemaking. EPA
1 Ai noted in that final nila. the Agency decided
10 retain the aututory one-pound RQa for lead.
pentachloroethane. and methyl chloride, pending
analysis of their potential carcmogenicity The RQ
for lead will be ediuated in a future rulemaking. The
RQa for methyl chloride and pentachloroethane are
reprapoied for adiuitment in thia rulemaking (for
further ducuaaion of thete two proposed RQ
adjustments, aee Section IU.0.1. of thia preamble).
1 The 1Z recently hated aubatanua for which
adjured RQi are proposed in thia rule an- waate
streams Kill KHZ. K113. K114. K11S. and K11& o-
tnluidine and p-toluidme (SO FR 42938). wane
proposes adjusted RQs for 273 of the 275
remaining hazardous substances whose
RQs were not adjusted by the April 4.
1985 final rule or the September 29.1986
final rule.3 By making these
adjustments, the Agency will be able to
focus its resources on those releases
which are most likely to pose potential
threats to public health, welfare and the
environment. In addition, these
adjustments will relieve the regulated
community of the burden of reporting
releases which are unlikely to pose such
threats. The RQ adjustments proposed
in this rulemaking will affect not only
the statutory one-pound RQs under
CERCLA. but also the RQs established
pursuant to section 311(b)(4) of the
CWA.
When there is a release of a
hazardous substance in a quantity equal
to or greater than its RQ as listed in 40
CFR 302.4. Table 302.4. as amended in
the September 29.1988 final rule (see 51
FR 34534. 34541). the person in charge of
the vessel or facility must immediately
notify the National Response Center.
The toll-free number of the National
Response Center is listed below under
"Addresses."
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 15,1987.
ADDRISSCS: The toll-free telephone
number of the National Response Center
is 1-800/424-8802: in the Washington.
DC metropolitan area the number Is
1-202/426-2673.
Comments: Comments should be
submitted In triplicate to Emergency
Response Division. Superfund Docket
Clerk. Attention: Docket Number 102
RQ-273C. Superfund Docket Room LG-
100. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401M Street. SW. Washington.
DC 20460.
Docket Copies of matenals relevant
to this rulemaking are contained in
Room LC—100 at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401M Street. SW.
Washington. DC 20480. The docket la
available for inspection between the
hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.. Monday
through Friday, excluding federal
holidays. As provided in 40 CFR Part 2,
a reasonable fee may be charged for
copying services.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. K. Jack Kooyoomiian. Senior Project
Officer. Response Standards and
Criteria Branch. Emergency Response
Division (WH-548B). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street. SW.
Washington. DC 20460. or the RCRA/
Superfund Hotline 1-600/424-9346. in
the Washington. DC metropolitan area
at 1-202/382-3000.
SUP9LCMCMTARV INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are lisu
in the following outline:
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authonty
B. Background of this Rulemaking
II Key Issues Not Addressed in thit Rule
A. Continuous Releases
B. Federally Permitted Releases
C Radionuclide RQs
in. Reportable Quantity Adiustments
A. Introduction
B. Summary of the General Methodology
Underlying the Reportable Quant.ty
Adjustments
C. Summary of the Methodology for
Adiusting the RQs of Potential
Carcinogens
1. Identification Methodology
2. Ranking Methodology
3. Changes in Ranking Methodology
0. Substance* for Which Adjusted RQs are
Proposed
1. Individual Hazardous Substances
i Hazardous Waste Stream*
IV. Reportable Quantity Adjustments Under
Section 311 of the Clean Water Act
V. Summary of Supporting Analyse*
A. Statutory Authority
The Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and babili'-
Act of 1980 (P.L 96-510). 42 U.S.C. 9f
et seq. (CERCLA or the Act), as
amended by the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthonzation Act of 1986 (Pub. L.
99-499) (SARA), establishes broad
federal authority to deal with releases or
threats of releases of hazardous
substances from vessels and facilities.
Section 101(14) of CERCLA defines the
term "hazardous substance" by
reference to other environmental
statutes. Currently, there are 717
CERCLA hazardous substances. The
Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) may designate
additional hazardous substances
pursuant to section 102 of CERCLA,
Section 103 of the Act requires that
the person in charge of a vessel or
facility notify the National Response
Center immediately when there is a
release of a hazardous substance in an
amount equal to or greater than the
reportable quantity (RQ) for that
substance.* Section 102(b) of CERCLA
itreami K117. K11S. and K13S (SI FR 5327). and 2-
ethoxyethanol (SI FR 6537) See alao note 5 below.
• Today's rule doet not propose adjusted RQ* for
lead and methyl isocyanate The statutory one-
pound RQs for these two substances will be
retained until adjusted in future rulemakinca.
• A release into the environment of a substance
which is not listed as a CERCLA hazardous
substance but which rapidly forms a CERCLA
haiardoua substance upon release is subieci to the
notification requirements of section 103 If (he
amount of the hazardous substance formed as such
Com
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
8141
establishes RQs for releases of
hazardous substances at one pound.
except those for which RQs were
established* pursuant to section 311 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA). Section
I02(a) authorizes EPA to adjust all of
these RQs by regulation.
A major purpose of the section 103 (a)
and (b) notification requirement is to
alert the appropriate government
officials to releases of hazardous
substances that may require a federal
response action to protect public health
and welfare and the environment Under
section 104 of CERCLA. the federal
government may respond whenever
(here is a release or a substantial threat
of a release into the environment of a
hazardous substance. Response
activities are to be taken, to the extent
practicable, in accordance with the
National Contingency Plan (NCP) (40
CFR 300). which was originally
developed under the CWA and which
has been revised to reflect the
responsibilities and authority created by
CERCLA. EPA emphasizes that a
hazardous substance release
notification is merely a trigger for
informing the government of a release so
that appropriate federal personnel can
evaluate the need for a federal removal
or remedial action and undertake any
necessary action in a timely fashion.
Federal personnel will evaluate all
reported releases, but will not
necessarily initiate a removal or
remedial action in response to aU
reported releases, because the release of
an RQ of a hazardous substance will not
necessarily pose a hazard to public
health or welfare or the environment
Government personnel will assess each '
reported release on a case-by-case basis
to determine the appropriate action. In
certain limited situations, when direct
reporting to the National Response
Center is not practicable, the person in
charge may report to the nearest Coast
Guard- or EPA-predesignated On-Scene
Coordinator (OSC). If it is not possible
to notify the National Response Center
or predesignated OSC immediately.
reports may be made immediately to the
nearest Coast Guard unit provided that
the person in charge notifies the
National Response Center as soon as
possible (40 CFR 30O63(b) and 33 CFR
153.203).
Section 103(b) authorises penalties,
including criminal sanctions, for persons
in charge of vessels or facilities who fail
to report releases of hazardous
substances which equal or exceed RQs.
Section 109 of SARA amends section
103(b) of CERCLA. increasing the
maximum penalties and years of
imprisonment. Any person who. as soon
m that person has knowledge of a
importable release, fails to report the
release immediately pursuant to section
103(b) or who submits any information
which he knows to be false or
misleading, shall, upon conviction, be
fined in accordance with the applicable
provisions of Title 18. United Slates
Code (not more than $250.000 or
$500.000. depending upon whether the
violator is an individual or an
organization), or impnsoned for not
more than three years (or not more than
Five years for second and subsequent
convictions), or both. Notifications
received under section 103(b) or
information obtained by exploitation of
such notifications cannot be used
against any reporting person in any
criminal case, except a prosecution for
perjury or for giving a false statement
Section 109 of SARA also provides for a
system of administrative penalties for
violations of CERCLA section 103(b).
enforceable through civil proceedings.
B. Background of Ma Automating
On May 25.1983. EPA proposed a rule
(48 FR 23552) to clarify procedures for
reporting releases of CERCLA
hazardous substances and to adjust RQs
for 387 of the then 696 CERCLA
hazardous substances.' The May 25.
1983 NPRM also compiled for the first
time the list of "hazardous substances"
defined under section 101(14) of
CERCLA. The NPRM discussed in detail
the CERCLA notification provisions
(including the persons required to notify
the National Response Center of a
release, the hazardous substance* for
which notification is required, the types
of releases subject to the notification
requirements, and the exemptions from
these requirements), the methodology
and criteria used to adjust the RQ levels.
and the RQ adjustments proposed under
section 102 of CERCLA and under
section 311 of the CWA. On April 4.
1985. EPA promulgated a final rule (50
FR 13456). that clarified reporting
procedures and finalized RQ
• reaction product equal* or eaceeda the RQ for that
(ubitance. the release muat be reported to tin
National Reiponir Onter.
• Since the May 25.1983 NPRM 21 additional
lubtiancta havt been lined under section 101(14):
watte stream POM under tecttan 3001 of Hit
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
(49 FR MOB), coke oven efldnkms under MCtnn 1U
of the Clean Air Act (CAAI (49 FR 36*69): waate
itreama F020, FW1. PBZ2. F023. F02S. FOP. and FOZ8
under lection 3001 of RCRA (SO FR197B): waete
stream* Kill. Kill KlU. Km. K1U. end Kilo,
o-iolutduie end p-toluidine under tecuon 3001 of
RCRA (SO FR 42S36). wane streams K117. K11B. and
KIM under section 3001 of RCRA (91 FR S3Z7). and
2-eihoxyethamri under aecnon 3001 of RCRA (31 FR
6537).
adjustments for 340 hazardous
substances, including 21 waste streams.
The April 4.1985 Federal Register also
contained an NPRM proposing RQ
adjustments for 105 additional CERCLA
hazardous substances, including seven
waste streams (50 FR 13514). On
September 29.1986. the Agency
promulgated a rule (51 FR 34534) that
finalized RQ adjustments for 102 of
these 105 hazardous substances.
Today's NPRM proposes RQ
adjustments for a total of 273 hazardous
substances (including 78 waste streams).
The RQ adjustments proposed in this
rule would amend Table 302.4 of 40 CFR
302.4 and. consistent with 40 CFR 117.3.
would apply not only to CERCLA RQs.
but also to the RQs established for
hazardous substances under section
311(b)(4]oftheCWA.
Section II of this preamble discusses
key issues relating to RQ adjustments
and CERCLA notification requirements
that are not addressed in this
rulemaking. Section III discusses the RQ
adjustments and die methodology used
in making these adjustments, focusing in
particular on the methodology for
adjusting RQs based on potential
carcinogenicity. Section IV addresses
RQ adjustments under section 311 of the
CWA. Section V provides a summary of
the analyses supporting this proposed
rule.
It is important to note that other
provisions of CERCLA may apply even
when the statute does not require
notification. Therefore, nothing in this
rulemaking should be interpreted as
reflecting Agency policy or the
applicable law with respect to other
provisions of the Act For example.
unless specifically exempted under
CERCLA. a party responsible for a
release is liable for the costs of cleaning
up that release and for any natural
resource damages caused by the release.
even if the release is not subject to the
notification requirements of sections 103
(a) and (b). Similarly, proper reporting of
a release in accordance with sections
103 (a) and (b) does not preclude
liability for cleanup costs. The fact that
a release of a hazardous substance is
properly reported or that it is not subject
to the notification requirements of
sections 103 (a) and (b) will not preclude
EPA or other government agencies from
taking response actions under section
104. seeking reimbursement from
responsible parties under section 107. or
pursuing an enforcement action against
responsible parties under section 106.
Note also that this proposed rule does
not affect hazardous substance reporting
requirements imposed by other
-------
8142
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No 50 / Monday. March IB. 1987 / Proposed Rules
regulations and statutes (except the
CWA—see Section IV below).
Neither today's NPRM. the September
29.1986 final rule, nor the April 4.1985
final rule addresses the designation
under section 102(a) of hazardous
substances which are not designated
under other statutes listed in CERCLA
section 101(14). The Agency has
conducted several preliminary economic
and technical analyses on this subject
. and an Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemckmg (ANPRM) (48 FR 23602).
published on May 25.1983. invited
public comment. Section 302 of the
recently enacted SARA legislation
requires EPA to publish a list of
extremely hazardous substances. On
November 17.1988. the Agency
published this list (51 FR 41570). Because
some of the substances on this recently
published list are not CERCLA
hazardous substances. EPA has decided
to initiate a proposed rulemaking under
section 102 of CERCLA to designate
these extremely hazardous substances
as CERCLA hazardous substances, both
to better protect public health, welfare.
and the environment and to promote
regulatory consistency.
IL Key IMUM Not Addressed In This
Rule
A. Continuous Releases
Under sections 103 (a) and (b) of
CERCLA, no distinction it made
between episodic and continuous
releases. Section 103 (f)(2). however.
sets forth a reduced reporting
requirement for certain releases of
hazardous substances. Releases may be
reported less frequently than under
sections 103 (a) and (b) if they are
"continuous." "stable in quantity and
rate." and notification has been given
under sections 103 (a) and (b) "for a
period sufficient to establish the
continuity, quantity, and regularity" of
the release. Notification must still be
given "annually, or at such time as there
is any statistically significant increase"
in the quantity of the hazardous
substance being released. Thus, instead
of reporting every release as It occurs.
certain continuous releases may be
reported less often.
In the May 25.1983 proposal EPA
noted that enforcement efforts would be
focused on episodic rather than- - .
continuous releases. The Agency
presented alternative interpretations of
which releases could be included within
the continuous release definition, and
discussed an ongoing (e.g.. annual)
notification scheme for releases initially
determined to be within the definition.
The Agency received more than 40
comments in response to the discussion
of continuous releases in the Mdy 25.
1983 NPRM. At the present time. EPA is
in the process of developing continuous
release reporting regulations to clarify
this reduced reporting requirement.
B Federally Permitted Releases
One of the exemptions from section
103 reporting requirements is for
"federally permitted releases." The
definition of "federally permitted
release" in CERCLA section 101(10)
specifically identifies releases permitted
under certain other state or federal
programs.
In the May 25.1983 NPRM. EPA
explained its interpretation of each type
of release exempted by the definition of
"federally permitted release." The
Agency received many comments on the
scope of the federally permitted release
exemption, most of which urged a broad
interpretation of one or more of the
federally permitted releases. Due to the
complexity of the issues involved, the
Agency decided to examine further the
scope of the federally permitted release
exemption. Currently, the Agency is
developing a rule clarifying the
definition of "federally permitted
releases."
C. Radionuclide RQf
Radionuclides are hazardous
substances under CERCLA because they
are designated as a hazardous air
pollutant under section 112 of the Clean
Air Act (CAA). In the preambles to the
May 25.1983 NPRM and the April 4.
1985 final rule, the Agency recognized
that the statutory RQ of one pound may
not be appropriate for radlonuclides. but
deferred regulatory action to adjust this
RQ until me Agency's analysis of
radionuclides was completed. The.
statutory one-pound RQ for
radionuclides is proposed for
adjustment in a separate NPRM in
today's Federal Register.
IIL Repottable Quantity Adjustments
A. Introduction
Section 102(b) of CERCLA establishes
RQs for releases of hazardous
substances at one pound unless other
RQs were established under section 311
of the CWA. For these latter substances.
section 102(b) adopts the established
CWA RQs. This rulemaking proposes
adjustments to the statutory. RQs.based
upon specific scientific and technical
criteria that relate to the possibility of
harm from the release of a hazardous
substance in an RQ. These proposed
RQs. therefore, when finally adjusted.
will enable the Agency to focus its
resources on those releases which are
most likely to pose potential threats to
public health and welfare and the
environment. Such RQ adjustments will
also relieve the regulated community
and emergency response personnel from
the burden of making and responding
reports of releases which are unlikely
pose such threats.
This NPRM proposes adjusted RQs for
273 of the 275 hazardous substances not
assigned adjusted RQs by either the
April 4.1985 final rule or the September
29.1988 final rule. These 273 hazardous
substances have been evaluated for
potential carcinogemcity and/or chronic
toxicity. and the proposed RQ
adjustments are based on the results of
these evaluations. RQs are also
proposed for six of the constituents used
to determine the RCRA characteristic of
extraction procedure (EP) toxicity.4
The primary purpose of notification is
to ensure that persons in charge notify
the federal government so that federal
personnel can assess the need to
respond to the release. The different RQ
levels do not reflect a determination that
a release of a CERCLA substance will
be hazardous at the RQ level and not
hazardous below that level. EPA has not
made such a determination because the
Agency has found that the actual hazard
will vary with the unique circumstances
of the release, and extensive scientific
data and analysis would be necessary to
determine the hazard presented by each
substance under a number of possible
circumstances. Instead, the RQs are
designed to be a trigger for notification
and reflect the Agency's judgment that
the federal government should be
notified of certain releases to which a
federal response might be necessary.
The RQs represent a determination only
of possible or potential harm, not that
releases of a particular amount of a
hazardous substance necessarily will be
harmful to public health or welfare or
the environment
Many considerations aside from the
quantity released affect the
government's decision concerning
whether and how it should undertake a
response action pursuant to the NCP
with respect to a particular release. The
location of the release, its proximity to
drinking water supplies or other
valuable resources, the likelihood of
exposure or injury to nearby
populations, response actions taken by
responsib1e'partie». and other factors
must be assessed bythe federal OSC on '
a case-by-case basis. The reporting
requirement enables the federal
• For a dlKuMion of iheie lix constituent*.
including their prapoitd RQi »ee Section III 0 z of
this preamble
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
government to leam when such
assessments should be made.
Because the CERCLA RQ adjustment
methodology is broader than that used
pursuant to section 311 of the CWA.
some of the RQs proposed tocidy.dre not
the same as those initially promulgated
under the CWA. The April 4.1985 final
rule (SO FR 13456). amended 40 CFR
117 3 to nidVe RQs ad|usted under
CERCLA the applicable RQs for
purposes of CWA section 311. Thus.
when finalized, today's proposed RQ
adiustments will apply to both CERCLA
and the applicable CWA RQs. A person
in charge need not report a single
release twice in order to satisfy
CERCLA and CWA reporting
requirements: one report to the National
Response Center suffices.
B. Summary of the General
Methodology Underlying the Reportable
Quantity Adiustments
The Agency has wide discretion in
ddfusting the statutory RQs for
hazardous substances under CERCLA.1
Administrative feasibility and
practicality are important
considerations. The Agency's selected
methodology for adjusting RQs begins
with an evaluation of the intrinsic
physical, chemical, and lexicological
properties of each hazardous substance.
The intrinsic properties examined—
called "primary criteria"—are aquatic
toxicity. mammalian toxicity (oral.
dermal, and inhalation), ignitability.
reactivity, chronic toxicity. and potential
carcinogenicity.
The Agency ranks each intrinsic
property (except potential
carcmogenicity) on a five-tier scale.
associating a specific range of values on
each scale with a particular RQ value.
This five-tier scale uses the five RQ
levels of 1.10.100.1000. and 5000
pounds, originally established pursuant
to CWA section 311 (see 40 CFR Part 117
and 44 FR 50776). For hazardous
substances evaluated for potential
carcinogenicity. each substance is
assigned a hazard ranking of "high."
"medium." or "low." These hazard
rankings correspond with RQ levels of 1.
10. and 100 pound*, respectively. Each
substance receives several tentative RQ
values based on its particular
properties.6 The lowest of all of the
'At Senate Report No BO.9HhCuinieaa.
Second Seuran (leso) nom al page z* "!•
determining reporuMe QMOMitM und«r the
paragraph |Mction 3
-------
CI44
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
for ranking CERCLA hazardous
substances for potential carcmogenicity
The CERCLA methodology for
evaluating hazardous substances for
potential carcmogenicity is set out for
public comment for the Tint time in
today's proposal. The weight-of-
evidence portion of the CERCLA
methodology was developed
independently of this rulemaking. as
part of the Agency's Proposed
Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk
Assessment (49 FR 46284. November 23.
1984).* The CERCLA methodology is not
a risk assessment and it does not yield
an absolute measure of harm. Rather.
the methodology simply represents a
means of sorting potentially
carcinogenic substances into categories.
which may then be equated to RQ
levels.
The methodology for ranking potential
carcinogens begins by reviewing
available information in the scientific
literature on each substance identified
as a potential carcinogen. This
information is then evaluated using a
two-stage process. The first stage is a
qualitative assessment of the likelihood
that a particular hazardous substance is
a human carcinogen. During this stage.
the available data is evaluated using
EPA's "weight-of-evidence"
classification system, presented in the
Agency's Guidelines for Carcinogen
Risk Assessment The second stage is a
quantitative assessment 'designed to
predict the relative strength of a
hazardous substance to elicit a
carcinogenic response ("potency
factor"). The quantitative stage allows
the Agency to rank potential
carcinogens on a numerical scale by
identifying the most potent substances
as the most hazardous. The results of
the qualitative and quantitative
assessments are then combined to arrive
at a "hazard ranking" for each
hazardous substance evaluated for
potential carcinogemcity. The CAG
methodology for ranking potential
carcinogens is discussed in more detail
below.
During the qualitative assessment
stage, the Agency evaluate* the quality
and reliability of the available data to
determine the "weight of evidence" (or
degree of certainty) that a particular
hazardous substance is a human
carcinogen. The data used are derived
primarily from human epidemiology
• The Final Guideline for Carcinogen Risk
Assessment were signed by the Adouuitntor on
August 22. 19S& and publuhed In the P«
Register en September 24. IBM (Me 81 FR 33902).
The wetgBt^f-evtdenoe methodology contained In
the Proposed Guideline* was not changed in the
Final Guidelines or In the CERCLA methodology
described ebovo.
studies and animal bioassay studies, but
supportive information such as
mutagemcity and chemical structure
also is considered, in this process, the
degree of evidence in human and animal
studies is evaluated separately and
classified as "sufficient" evidence.
"limited" evidence, "inadequate"
evidence, "no data." or "no evidence."
The guidelines used for the weight-of-
evidence determination follow the
Agency's Guidelines for Carcinogen
Risk Assessment. These classifications
are then combined with supportive
evidence to amve at an overall weight-
of-evidence category (A. Bl. B2. C. D. or
E) representing the degree of certainty
that a particular hazardous substance is
a human carcinogen.
A hazardous substance is placed in
Croup A (known human carcinogen)
only if "sufficient" evidence from human
epidemiologic studies supports a causal
connection between exposure to the
hazardous substance and cancer. Group
B (probable human carcinogen) includes
hazardous substances for which the
weight of evidence of human
carcinogenicity based on epidemiologic
studies is "limited." or for which the
weight of evidence of carcinogenicity
based on anunal studies is "sufficient"
(in the absence of sufficient human
evidence). Group B is divided into two
subgroups. Bl and B2. Where there is
limited evidence of carcinogenicity from
epidemiologic studies, a hazardous
substance usually is placed in Group Bl.
Hazardous substances for which there is
"sufficient" evidence from animal
studies and "inadequate" evidence or
"no data" from human epidemiologic
studies usually are placed in Group B2.
Because it is reasonable to treat
hazardous substances for which there is
sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in
animals as if they present a carcinogenic
risk to humans- such substances are
classified as probable human
carcinogens (Group B). Group C
(possible human carcinogen) includes
hazardous substances with "limited"
evidence of carcinogenicity in animals
and "inadequate evidence" or "no data"
from human epidemiologic studies. A
hazardous substance is placed in Group
D (not classifiable for human
carcinogenicity) if there is "inadequate"
human and animal evidence of
carcinogenicity or no data are available.
Group B (evidence of non-
carcinogenicity for humans) Includes
hazardous substances that show no
evidence of carcinogenicity in at least
two animal tests in different species or
in both human epidemiologic and animal
studies. The designation of a Group E
substance is based on the available
evidence and should not be interpreted
as a definitive conclusion thai the
substance will not elicit a carcinogenic
response under any circumstances
Group D and E substances are not
considered to be "potential carcinogen
for purposes of this proposed
rulemaking (see note 11 below). No
hazard ranking is made for these
substances and other primary criteria
are used to assign RQs.
During the quantitative stage, the
Agency uses the available data to
estimate the dose of a hazardous
substance associated with a lifetime
increased cancer nsk of 10 percent
(ED,0). The estimated dose is then used
to calculate a potency factor (F). where
F equals 1/ED,0. The 10 percent lifetime
nsk is used because this risk level is
within the expenmental range and does
not require additional extrapolation to
estimate the carcinogenic response at
extremely low doses. Details of the
calculation of potency factors for
specific hazardous substances evaluated
for potential carcinogenicity may be
found in the individual chemical profiles
for each potential carcinogen. These
chemical profiles are available for
inspection at Room LG-100, U.S. '
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M'
Street SW. Washington. DC 20460.
Based on the calculated potency
factors, each potential carcinogen is
ranked and then placed in one of threr
potency groups. Group 1 includes tho
hazardous substances with the highes.
potencies. Other potential carcinogens
with medium and low potencies ere
placed in Groups 2 and 3. respectively.
Whenever available information
allows EPA to quantify potency, a
substance is placed in potency Group 1.
2. or 3. However, for certain potential*
carcinogens, there is either "sufficient"
or "limited" evidence of carcinogenic
effect but the quantitative information
is not adequate to allow the Agency to
estimate a potency factor using the
Agency's current methodology. There
are two classes of such substances.
First if the best available data indicates
that a substance may be a strong
carcinogen (i.e.. all animals exposed to
every experimental dose developed
tumors), the Agency will assign the
substance to the highest potency group
(Group 1). Second, if the best available
data are inadequate for calculating a
potency factor and allow no quantitative
Inferences to be made, the substance
will be assigned to Group 2. as though it
had a mid-range potency factor.10 These
'• For similar reasons, ssbettos 11 sislgnea 10
potency Croup 2. Aibnios n s unique case because
Connr
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16.
Proposed Rules
assigned potency factors enable the
Agency to assign hazard rankings to
these substances following the standard
procedure of combining the weight-of-
evidence group with the potency group.
as described below.
The final step in the hazard ranking
procedure is to combine the qualitative
weight-of-evidence groups and the
quantitative potency factor groups using
a matrix to yield a relative hazard
ranking for each substance. Thus.
hazard rankings are based jointly on
two factors—weight of evidence and
potency—that the Agency believes are
important in descnbmg carcinogenic
hazards. The three relative rankings are
identified as "high." "medium." and
"low." The matrix is arranged so that as
the weight of evidence and the potency
factors decrease, the hazard ranking
decreases also.
Depending on whether a weight-of.
evidence Croup B carcinogen falls into
potency Croups 1.2. or 3. a hazard
ranking of high, medium, or low ia
assigned. Hazard rankings are one level
higher (high. high, or medium) for
weight-of-evidence Group A
carcinogens. This increased concern is
justified because then is direct human
evidence establishing that Group A
substances cause cancer. Hazard
rankings are one level lower (medium.
low. or low) for Group C carcinogens.
This reduced concern is justified
because of the lack of evidence
implicating Group C substances as
human carcinogens. i.e.. either the
available studies are well-conducted but
unreplicated or the evidence ia of
marginal biological or statistical
significance.
Before settling on these hazard
ranking assignments, alternative ranking
schemes were considered. Proposals
that all Group A substances be ranked
high or that all Group C substances be
ranked low were rejected because the
Agency believes strongly that potency.
too. is important in describing a
carcinogenic hazard. Similarly. •
proposal to base hazard rankings on
potency alone was rejected because the
Agency believes that the weight of
evidence must be considered aa well.
The Agency believes that the hazard
scheme finally selected allows proper
consideration of both weight of evidence
and potency. For further discussion of
the hazard ranking matrix, see the
Technical Background Document to
Support Rulemaking Pursuant to
CERCLA Section 102. Volume 3.
although data are (variable, that* data are baaed OB
particle tiu rather than weight to thai a relative
potency ranking cannot be calculated for aibeitea
(aee ditcuuion In Section 111 01 of thia preamble).
December 1986. available for inspection
at Room LG-100. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street. SW.
Washington. DC 20460. The following is
the matnx the Agency used to arrive at
hazard rankings:
HAZARD RANKING
No naara iMong • made. The oMr
pmwy enuna ara uMd • aaaqn M Ma
E NO naura ramng • made. The oO*r
pnmar* cram •* uaaa « •Man tie Ma
This grouping of all potential
carcinogensll into "high." -medium,"
and "low" hazard categories on the
basis of biological information Is used to
assign RQ levels. RQ levels are assigned
to the hazard rankings as follows: high—
one-pound RQ; medium—10-pound RQ;
and low—100-pound RQ.
In deciding whether to assign RQs for
potential carcinogens at all five RQ
levels, the Agency examined the special
properties associated with these
substances, used the Agency's air
dispersion model to analyze the risks
posed by their release, and evaluated
them in light of the Agency's chronic
toxicity methodology. The Agency
decided not to use the two highest RQ
levels for potential carcinogens for
several reasons. Pint cancer can be
considered to be a chronic health effect
EPA therefore believes that reference to
the Agency's chronic toxidty
methodology is appropriate in assigning
RQs to potential carcinogens. Under the
chronic toxicity methodology, each
substance is assigned two rating values,
one based on the dose that causes a
particular effect and one based on the
severity of the effect The dose ratings
range from one to 10, with 10
representing the most toxic substances.
The effect ratings also range from one to
10. with 10 representing the most severe
effect The product of the dose and
effect ratings for each substance yields
a composite ranking score between one
and 100. For a more detailed discussion
of the chronic toxicity methodology, see
the Technical Background Document to
Support Rulemaking Pursuant to
CERCLA Section 102. Volume 1. March
1985. available for inspection at Room
LG-100. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401M Street SW. Washington.
DC 20460. Because cancer is a life-
1' For purpoaea of Ihia propoaed rule, the tern
"potential cardnogena" refen to all haiardoua
lubatancea aaaigned to Croup A. a or C under the
Agency'i weighl-of-evidence methodology.
814
threatening or life-shortening effect, the
effect rating for cancer would be 10 if
cancer were ranked on the chronic
toxicity scale. Therefore, the composite
score for any potential carcinogen
would be at least 10. A composite score
of 10 corresponds to an RQ of 1000
pounds. Thus, a 5000-pound RQ for a
potential carcinogen would be
inappropriate based on the Agency's
chronic toxicity scale.
Second, application of an air
dispersion model developed by the
Agency shows that substantial cancer
risks can result from releases of 1000
pounds or more of moderate to weak
potential carcinogens. The results of the
Agency's evaluation using the air
dispersion model indicate that reporting
levels of 100 pounds or less for potential
carcinogens are necessary to protect
public health from releases of these
hazardous substances. The model is
based on an exposure scenario that
includes the following release
conditions: the substance is a stable gas.
volatile liquid, or aerosol that remains in
the air long enough to reach the point of
exposure, the duration of exposure is 24
hours, the release occurs under stable
meteorological conditions (one meter
per second wind speed), and exposure
occurs 30 meters downwind from the
point of release. For a more detailed
discussion of the Agency's air
dispersion model and the assumptions
on which it is based, see the Technical
Background Document to Support
Rulemaking Pursuant to CERCLA
Section 102. Volume 3. December 1986.
available for inspection at Room LG-
100. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street SW. Washington.
DC 20480.
The Agency has rejected the use of
scenarios for RQ adjustment purposes ia
previous RQ rulemakings (aee 50 FR
13456.13466. April 4.1965). In this
proposed rulemaking. however, the
Agency has used worst case exposure
assumptions in its analysis. The Agency
made these assumptions because of
uncertainty about the duration.
magnitude, and route of future
exposures. Because of the factors
described below, future exposures to
potential carcinogens may be of
concern. First in contrast with other
toxic effects, threshold levels of
exposure below which a potential
carcinogen does not present some risk of
cancer have not been demonstrated.
Doses that have been shown to cause
cancer are generally lower than the
lowest dose that induces a chrome
effect The linear non-threshold
mechanisms of carcinogenesis contained
in the Agency's Guidelines for
-------
8146
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
Carcinogen Risk Assessment (51 FR
33992) suggest that appropriately-
designed studies could demonstrate
onset of cancer at even lower doses.
Second, cancer risks are considered to
be cumulative, therefore a number of
small releases can be as serious as a
single large release. Because the cancer
risk depends on the cumulative dose.
uncertainties about Future exposures are
cause for concern. Future releases of the
same potential carcinogen add to the
nsk. Future releases of other potential
carcinogens that cause cancer by the
same mechanism also add to the risk.
Occupational exposures or ambient
environmental exposures increase the
nsk further. This is in contrast to non-
cancer health effect*, for which a
number of small exposures below the
threshold pose DO future risk. For these
reasons, together with the fact that
cancer has a latent period that does not
allow direct observation of carcinogenic
nsks from substances newly released
into the environment, the Agency
proposes to calculate the appropriate
maximum RQ leva! for potential
carcinogens using a model that is based
on conservative assumptions.
Although this proposed rule does not
assign 1000-pound or 5000-pound RQs to
any potential carcinogen. EPA solicits
comments with supporting data on
whether individual potential
carcinogens should be eligible for 1000-
pound or 5000-pound RQs because such
substances lack the special
characteristics that distinguish potential
carcinogens from other hazardous
substances. At this time, the Agency
does not plan to assign final adjusted
RQs of greater than 1000 pounds to any
potential carcinogen because this result
would be inconsistent with the Agency's
chronic toxicity methodology discussed
above.
3. Changes in Ranking Methodology
In its evaluation of CERCLA
hazardous substances Identified as
potential carcinogens, the Agency
initially employed a ranking
methodology that used a weight-of-
evidence scheme developed by IARC.
EPA subsequently revised the IARC
weight-of-evidence schema, and used
this revised wetght-of-evtdence
methodology in conjunction with
potency factors, to obtain hazard
rankings for CERCLA hazardous
substances that are potential
carcinogens. The revised ranking
methodology has been summarized in
Section IILCLz. of this preamble and is
discussed in greater detail in the CAC
report entided 'Technical Support
Document and Summary Table for the
Ranking of Chemicals Based on
Carcinogenicity." OHEA-C-073.
February 1986. This report is reproduced
as Appendix A oHhe December 1986'
Technical Background Document to
Support Rulemaking Pursuant to
CERCLA Section 102. Volume 3.
available for inspection at Room LG-
100. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street SW. Washington.
DC 20460.
EPA decided to use the revised
weight-of-evidence methodology
because the revised methodology refines
the IARC approach and has had
extensive peer review both within and
outside the Agency. In order to
distinguish more accurately those
substances for which there is limited
evidence of carcinogenictty. but not
enough evidence to satisfy Croup B
requirements. EPA divided IARC Croup
3 (insufficient evidence) into Croup C
(possible human carcinogen) and Croup
D (not classifiable for carcinogenicity).
The revised weight-of-evidence
methodology allows Croup C substances
to be assigned RQs based on potential
carcinogenicity. IARC Group 3
substances could not be so «««i[puMl
In addition, the Agency's Guidelines
for Carcinogen Risk Assessment provide
for consideration of certain benign as
well as malignant tumor data, when
appropriate, and pooling of significantly
elevated tumor sites and type*. Because
the RQ adjustment process for this
proposed rule was initiated while the
Guidelines stiO wen being developed.
the potency factors for some potential
carcinogens may not fully reflect the
position set forth ia the Guidelines
regarding consideration of benign
tumors and pooling of tumor sites and
types. Therefore, as the Agency
publishes this proposed rule, we are in
the process of verifying that ell poteacy
factor calculations are in accordance
with the Guidelines. Because many
potency fsstor calculations will not be
affected by this review and potency
factors would have to change
substantially to change hazard rankings,
we expect that few. it any, of the
substances *tu] undergoing verification
will have proposed RQs altered as a
result of dais review. Therefore, the
Agency has decided to proceed now
with this proposed rulemaking. The list
of substances subject to verification is
available for review in the public docket
for this rule. This verification process
will be completed during the comment
period and the resulting chemical
profiles and adjusted RQs will be
available in the public docket for public
review and comment. If necessary, the
public comment period will be extended
for those substances where reasonable
notice and comment time is not
available.11
D Substances far Which Adjusted RQs
are Proposed
Today's rule proposes to adjust RQs
for 273 of the remaining 275 hazardous
substances.1' The proposed RQs lower
the statutory RQs of 56 hazardous
substances, raise the statutory RQs of
123 hazardous substances, and leave the
statutory RQs of 94 hazardout
substances unchanged. The 273
hazardous substances include 195
individual hazardous substances and 78
hazardous waste streams. EPA requests
comments on the RQ adjustments for
particular hazardous substances
proposed in this rulemaking. as well as
the Agency's methodology for adjusting
the RQs for hazardous substances based
on potential carcinogenicity.
1. Individual Hazardous Substances
The bases for the proposed adjusted
RQs of the 185 individual hazardous
substances an as follows: 137 on the
basis of potential caronogeniaty alone.
23 on the basts of potential
carcinogenicity and at least one other
primary criterion, and 35 on the basis of
criteria other than potential
carcmogenicity.14 The following
discassion provides an explanation of
the proposed RQs for certain individual
hazardous sobetanc
Within the 273 hazardous substances
(195 individual hazardous substances
and 78 hazardous waste streams).
subject to today's proposed role, there
are four hazardous substances that were
not evaluated for the primary RQ
11 In addition. Ike Agency has completed •
separate primary review of the RQ profile! for each
of the 1011
i that
hava ben evalnawd for potential cafdnogcBKity
Carnally, lha Agency ia ~~^—»—q a secondary
level of review of Ibeee profile*. The Agency
expects thai tMe seconaYny review writ be
completed dortna lha pabbc consent period If. as a
reiult of due renew. reaaonabU name and
comment tin* la oat available far particular
substances, the public comment period will be
extended for thoae substance*.
19 The two aabetaneee whoee RQe en not
adjusted hi da* ntaakUftej are being evantated at
follow*: aMtbvl isecyaaaxa on the beam of
inhalation loudly: and lead on the baaia of
potential carctnogmlary. The tuiutory one-pound
RQe for mettoyi leuojenele and lead wHI be
retaned. pending canipteUua of the Agency's
analytn of their loudly or poMfidal
carcinogenicity.
" Thirty-one of th**a U lubataacei were
identified ai potential etitmugeiu. The proposed
RQi for Iheea M •abaMncaa are not bated on
potential carcinogematy. however, because their
tentative RQs based on potential carcinogenicity
are higher than the tentative RQs besed on other
criteria. Ponr of thaw IS substances were not
evaluated for potential cairrnogencity (tee
discussion following in tent)
-------
e era
Keysier / vcl 52. No. 50 / Monday March 16. 1987 / Proposed Pules
adjustment criterion of potential
carcmogenicity (chloral.
hexachlprocyclopentadi.ene. 2-
ethoxyethanol. and parathionK The
proposed RQs for these four hazardous
substances are based on primary
criteria other than potential
carcmogenicity.
Chloral originally was identified as a
potential carcinogen because it was
thought to hydrolyze to chloroform, a
potential carcinogen. The May 25.1983
NPRM (48 FR 23552) indicated that
chloral was to be evaluated for potential
carcinogenicity based on its potentially
carcinogenic reaction product,
chloroform. One comment received in
response to the May 25.1983 NPRM
noted, however, that chloral does not
readily hydrolyze. The Agency agrees
with this observation, and therefore has
decided to base the proposed RQ for
chloral (5000 pounds) on evaluation of
the primary criteria for chloral itself.
and not on an evaluation of the primary
cntena for any reaction products.
Parathion and hexachlorocyclo-
pentadiene have not been identified as
potential carcinogens for RQ adjustment
purposes. The RQs for both substances
are being reproposed from the one-
pound RQs proposed in the May 25.1983
NPRM for both substances on the basis
of the primary RQ adjustment criterion
of aquatic toxicity. A comment received
on the May 25.1983 NPRM cited more
recent aquatic toxicity data using
preferred species. The new aquatic
toxicity data support a proposed 10-
pound RQ for parathion. Since
publication of the May 25.1983 NPRM.
the Agency has also obtained additional
data on the degradation of hexachloro-
cyclopentadiene in the environment
These additional data support raising
the previously proposed one-pound RQ
for hexachlorocyclopentadiene to 10
pounds based on BMP. Finally. 2-
ethoxyethanol also has not been
identified as a potential carcinogen and
its proposed 1000-pound RQ is based on
the primary RQ adjustment criterion of
chronic toxicity. After the most recent
rulemaking proposing RQ adjustments
(50 FR 13514. April 4,1985). 2-
ethoxyethanol was added to the list of
CERCLA hazardous substances as a
result of Its listing as a hazardous waste
under section 3001 of RCRA (51 FR 8537.
February 25.1988). Therefore, the
proposed RQ adjustment for 2-
ethoxyethanol is included in this
proposed rule.
Two substances (pentachioroethane
and methyl chloride) for which adjusted
RQs originally were proposed in the
Apnl 4.1985 NPRM (50 FR 13514) have
their RQs reproposed for adjustment in
today's rule. As noted ir. the September
29.1986 final rule (51 FR 34534). the
statutory wit-pound RQs for these two
substances were retained, pending
analysis of their potential
carcmogenicity. That analysis is now
complete and the proposed RQ for
methyl chlonde is 100 pounds based on
ignitability and potential
carcmogenicity. Pentachioroethane was
evaluated for potential carcinogenicity.
but received a lower RQ of 10 pounds
based on aquatic toxicity. Therefore, the
proposed RQ for pentachioroethane is
10 pounds based on aquatic toxicity.
In the May 25.1983 NPRM (48 FR
23552). the Agency proposed to lower
the RQ for PCBs from the statutory level
of 10 pounds (established on the basis of
aquatic toxicity data under section 311
of the CWA) to one pound, on the basis
of other aquatic toxicity data. EPA
received 28 comment letters containing
88 total comments, all of which objected
to the proposed one-pound RQ for PCBs.
The Agency stated in the Apnl 4.1985
final rule that it was evaluating PCBs for
•potential carcinogenicity and would
retain the 10-pound statutory RQ until
that analysis was completed
The Agency's analysis of PCBs for
potential carcinogenicity is now
complete, and that analysis has yielded
a hazard ranking of "medium."
corresponding to a 10-pound RQ.
However, based on a re-examination of
all of the comments received on the
appropriate RQ for PCBs in response to
the May 25.1983 proposal and a re-
evaluation of all available aquatic
toxicity data concerning PCBs. the
Agency has decided to repropose a one-
pound RQ for PCBs in this rulemaking.
based on aquatic toxicity.
The Agency's current methodology for
adjusting RQs based on aquatic toxicity
favors use of data from teats using adult
life stages. However, use of data from
tests using juvenile life stages is
appropriate for adjusting the RQ for
PCBs because PCBs bioaccumulate. are
insoluble, and are sinkers. Because of
the combined effect of these chemical
and physical properties. PCBs pose a
particular threat to benthic organisms
(including the early life stages of many
aquatic species). The Agency used early
life stage data to support the original
proposed one-pound RQ for PCBs in the
May 25.1983 NPRM. As mentioned
earlier. EPA received extensive
comments opposing a one-pound RQ for
PCBs. None of these comments.
however, objected to the Agency's
reliance on early life stage data. In
addition, use of such data Is entirely
consistent with EPA's 1985 Guidelines
for Deriving Numerical National Water
Quality Cntena for the Protection of
Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses.
Available aquatic tpxicity data from
tests using early life stages supports a
one-pound RQ for PCBs. Available data
from tests using adult life stages
supports a 10-pound RQ for PCBs. The
Agency has decided that where both
early life stage and adult life stage data
are available for substances that are
bioaccumulative insoluble sinkers, the
early life stage data will be preferred
because this approach is consistent with
the Agency's 1985 National Water
Quality Guidelines mentioned above.
For further information on the
substances EPA has identified as
bioaccumulative insoluble sinkers, see
the Technical Background Document to
Support Rulemaking Pursuant to
CERCLA Section 102. Volume 3.
December 1980. available for inspection
at Room LG-100. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401M Street. SW.
Washington. DC 20460.
Thus. EPA reproposes to adjust the 10-
pound statutory RQ for PCBs to one
pound in today's rule. The Agency
solicits comments on the proposed one-
pound RQ for PCBs as well as the
possible future revision of the aquatic
toxicity methodology to provide for use
of early life stage data for hazardous
substances (such as PCBi) that are
bioaccumulative insoluble sinkers.
Asbestos has been identified as a
known human carcinogen (weight-of-
evidence Group A). However, exposure
to asbestos is measured by calculating
the size and number of airborne fibers.
and not by the standard method of
measuring quantitative exposure to
potential carcinogens based on weight
volume, or concentration. Therefore, a
numerical potency factor based on
weight cannot be calculated for asbestos
to achieve a direct potency ranking.
Thus. EPA has assigned asbestos to
potency Group 2. as though it had a mid-
range potency factor. Using the
Agency's matrix for ranking potential
carcinogens, a substance in weight-of-
evidence Group A and potency Group 2
receives a high hazard ranking, and thus
a one-pound RQ. EPA is. therefore.
proposing a one-pound RQ for asbestos.
For three hazardous substances
evaluated for potential carcinogenicity
(cacodylic acid, dlchlorophenylarame.
and diethylarsine). CAG found no
evidence demonstrating that these
substances themselves cause cancer.
However, because each of these three
hazardous substances can and will
degrade to arsenic trioxide and arsenic
pentoxide (both of which are potential
carcinogens) when released into the
environment, the Agency has decided to
-------
8148
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1967 / Proposed Rules
propose a one-pound RQ for each
substance, based on the one-pound RQs
for these two Hiurgante anemic Oxides. •
The proposed RQs for cacodylic acid.
dichlorophenylarsine. and diethylarsine
are consistent with the Agency's
established methodology of basing the ~
RQ of a substance on its more
hazardous degradation products, where
those degradation products have been
identified.
As discussed in Section ULB. above.
hazardous substances are eligible for a
one-level RQ increase on the basis of
BMP. For five hazardous substances
identified as potential carcinogens
(bis(chloromethyl)ether. chloromethyl
methyl ether, dimethyl sulfate.
formaldehyde, and 2-naphthylamine).
sufficient data are available to justify a
one-level RQ increase based on BMP.
Therefore, the RQs of these five
hazardous substances are increased to
10.10.100.100. and 10 pounds.
respectively (these increases are from
the one-level lower primary criteria
RQs).
In addition, one potential carcinogen.
sulfur selenide. hydrolyzes to form two
hazardous reaction products, hydrogen
sulfide and selenium dioxide. The RQ
for hydrogen sulfide is 100 pounds and
the RQ for selenium dioxide is 10
pounds. Therefore, a 10-pound RQ is
proposed for sulfur selenide. based on
the lower RQ of its two reaction
products. Another potential carcinogen.
3.3'-dichlorobenzidine. is subject to
rapid photolysis if released into the
environment yielding benadine as one
of the photolysis products. Therefore.
although the GAG methodology yields a
"medium" ranking (10-pound RQ) for
3.3'-dichlorobenzidine. the Agency is
proposing a one-pound RQ for this
hazardous substance, based on the
"high" hazard ranking (one-pound RQ)
for its photolysis product, benzidina.
2. Hazardous Waste Streams
In addition to the 195 individual
hazardous substances for which this
rulemaking proposes adjusted RQs. the
Agency also proposes to adjust the RQs
for 78 hazardous wast* streams. The
proposed RQ for each hazardous waste
stream is the lowest RQ associated with
the individual hazardous constituents of
the waste stream. However, under 40
CFR 302.6. if a person in charge knows
of the percentage composition of a
waste stream, the CWA mixture rule
may be applied. The CWA mixture rule
provides that "[discharges of mixtures
and solutions are subject to [regulation]
only where a component hazardous
substance of the mixture or solution is
discharged in a quantity equal to or
greater than its RQ" (44 FR 50787.
August 29.1979). As explained in the
April 4.1985 final rule (50 FR 13463). the
RQs for different ha«af4eas«vb*lancei
are not additive under the mixture rule.
so that the release of a mixture
containing half an RQ of one hazardous
substance and half an RQ of another
hazardous substance does not trigger
the CERCLA section 103 reporting
requirements.
The RQs for the 78 hazardous waste
streams for which today's rule proposes
adjusted RQs are all currently at the
statutory one-pound leveL The proposed
adjustments leave the RQs of 44
hazardous waste streams at one pound.
raise die RQs of 32 hazardous waste
streams to 10 pounds, and raise the RQs
of two hazardous waste streams to 100
pounds.
Today's rule also proposes RQs for six
of the constituents used to determine the
RCRA characteristic of EP toxicity for
unlisted hazardous wastes. These six
components have been assigned
proposed RQs as follows: one pound for
arsenic and chromium and 10 pounds for
cadmium, all on th« basis of potential
carcmogeaidty. 100 pounds for lead on
the basis of chronic toxicity: and one
pound for undane and toxaphene on the
basis of aquatic toxicity. Under 40 CFR
302.5(b). the proposed RQ applies to the
unlisted waste itself, not merely to the
toxic substance. The RQ for the metal
constituents is based on the RQ for
soluble metal salts, and not the metal
itself.
IV. ReporUMe Quantity Adjustments
Under Section 311 of the Clean Wats*
Act
The April 4.198S final rule (50 FR
13456) amended 40 CFR 117.3 to make
RQs adjusted under CERCLA the
applicable RQs for notification of
discharges of hazardous substances
pursuant to CWA section 311. Thus, the
RQ adjustments proposed in this
rulemaking will, when finalized, apply to
both CERCLA and CWA section 311
RQs. Of the 195 individual hazardous
substances in this rulemaking. 63 were
originally listed as hazardous
substances and assigned RQs under
section 311 of the CWA. The proposed
RQs lower the statutory CWA RQs of 49
of these substances, raise the statutory
RQs of two of the substances, and leave
the RQa of 12 of the substances at the
statutory level. RQs under both
CERCLA and the CWA are set forth in
Table 302.4. Where there is a release of
a hazardous substance in an RQ into
navigable waters, a single report to the
National Response Center by the person
in charge will satisfy the notification
requirements of both statutes. For
further discussion of the relationship
between CERCLA RQs and CWA
section 311 RQs. see the May 25.1983
pmposecLmlfi preamble at 48 FR 23569.
and the April 4.1985 final rule preamble
at 50 FR 13473.
V. Summary of Supporting Analyses
Executive Order 12291 requires that
regulations be classified as major or
non-major for purposes of review by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). According to E.O.12291. major
rules are regulations that are likely to
result in:
(1) An annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or more: or
(2) A major increase in costs or prices
for consumers, individual industries.
federal, state, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions: or
(3) Significant advene effects on
competition, employment, investment.
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
enterprises to compete with foreign-
based enterprises in domestic or export
markets.
An economic analysis performed by
the Agency, available for inspection at
Room LG-100. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401M Street SW.'
Washington. DC 20460. shows that .
today's proposed rule is non-major.
because the rule will result in net costs
of approximately $3.9 million annually.
The annual net cost savings of RQ
adjustments made to date (including
those proposed in this NPRM) is SIC
million. It should be noted that thest
costs and cost savings reflect only those
effects of the RQ adjustments that are
readily quantifiable in dollars.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
requires that a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis be performed for all rules that
are likely to have a "significant impact
on a substantial number of small
entities." To determine whether a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is
necessary for today's proposed rule, a
preliminary analysis was conducted
using a computer model that simulated
the typical operation of a small U.S.
chemical company. The results of the
simulation indicate that the upper-bound
total cost of compliance to small firms is
negligible. See the Regulatory Impact
Analysis of Reportable Quantity
Adjustments Under Sections 102 and 103
of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act. Volume III November 1986.
available for inspection at Room LG-
100. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street. SW. Washington.
DC 20460. Therefore, because today's
proposed rule is not expected to have a
significant impact on small entities. EPA
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
8145
certifies that no Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis is necessary.
Trie Information Impact Analysis
performed for the April 4.1985 final rule
indicated that that final rule would
decrease the paparwork burden imposed
on parties other than EPA by about
50.000 hours. Today's proposed RQ
adjustments will provide a small
increase in the paperwork burden
imposed on the regulated community for
information collection associated with
reporting releases. Because the effect of
this proposed rule on the paperwork
burden a minimal. EPA has determined
that no further Information Impact
Analysis need be performed.
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980. 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
sec. the reporting or recordkeeping
provisions that are included in this
proposed rule have been submitted for
approval to OMB under section 3504(h)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act Any
final rule will include an explanation of
how the reporting or recordkeeping
provisions contained therein respond to
any comments by OMB and the public,
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 117
Hazardous substances. Penalties.
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Water pollution control
40 CFR. Part 308--
Air pollution control. Chemicals.
Hazardous matenals. Hazardous
materials transportation. Hazardous
substances. Hazardous wastes.
Intergovernmental relations. Natural
resources. Nuclear materials. Pesticides
and pests. Radioactive matenals.
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Superfund, Waste
treatment and disposal Water pollution
control.
Dated: December 31.1988.
Lee M. Thomas.
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, it is proposed to amend Title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 302—DESIGNATION,
REPORTABLE OUANTITES AND
NOTIFICATION
1. The authority citation for Part 302 la
revised to read as follow*
Authority: Sec, 101 of the CaapreheaatTe
Environmental Response. Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980. as amended. 4* U.S.C.
9602: Sees. 311 and SOl(a) of ths Federal
Water Mhrttaa Control Act S3 U.S.C. 1321
and 1361.
2. Section 302.4 is amended by
revising the following entries in Table
302.4 and in its Appendix A to read as
set forth below. The note preceding
Table 302.4 is repubhshed without
change.
Note—The numbers under the column
headed "CASRN" are the Chemical Abstract*
Service Registry Numbers for each hazardous
substance Other name* by which each
hazardous substance is identified hi other
statutes and their implementing regulations
are provided in the "Regulatory Synonyms"
column. The "Statutory RQ" column lifts the
RQs for hazardous substances established by
section 102 of CERCLA. The "Statutory
Code" column indicates the statutory source
for designating each substance as a CERCLA
hazardous substance: "1" indicates that the
statutory source a section 311(b)(4) of the
Clean Water Act "2" indicates that the
source is section 307{a) of the Clean Water
Act "3" indicates that the source is section
112 of the Clean Air Act and -4" indicates
that the source is RCRA section 3001. The
"RCRA Waste Number" column provides the
waste identification numbers assigned to
various substances by RCRA regulations. The
column headed "Category" lists the code
letters "X". "A". "B". "C". and "D". which are
associated with importable quantities of 1.10.
100.1000. and 5000 pounds, respectively. The
"Pounds (kg)" column provides the proposed
reportabl* quantity adjustment for each
hazardous substance In pounds and
kilograms.
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES
Manvrinu* 4iih«ttu\M»
Acetamde. N-(4^rhoxyphenye-
Acetamide, N-fluoran-Z-yt-
Acenc acid, lead salt
2-Acetyiammofluorenfl
Alanine. 3-[p-bn(2-
chloroemyl)arnino]phenyt-.L-.
Aidnn
2-Ammo-l-fnethylbsnzan*... .
4- Amino- 1 -metfiytoanzene
Ammonium bichromate.
Aroctor 1018 _
Aroctor 1221 ._
Aroctor 1232 .
Aroctor 1242...
Aroctor 1248...
Aroctor 1254 ._
Aroctor 1280 _...
Arsenic n
Arsenic aod . ._
CASRN
75878
62442
53983
301042
53983
107131
148823
309002
95534
106490
6182S
7789095
7788989
12674112
11104282
11141165
53469219
12672296
11097691
11096825
7440382
1327522
7778394
Regulatory Synonyms
Chtoral _
t^n0R8C9Qn •>»•••••••*>••. ••.•••••.•«.M. .>..,..•. IV(BMMt>,l
AgBtaifwia* M-Hiinfam-J uL
MBtpnslsn _...........
hexahydro-l.4:5.8-endotaxo-
o-Tohndme
1H-1 .2.4.Tnazol-3-BfTnrM
Potycntonratad Biphenyts (PCBs)
• uifunuiMiHiMj uipiwuyis (r\*BS) _..._......,
..«..«.
Statutory
RO
1*
r
1*
5000
1*
100
r
i
r
r
i*
1000
1000
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
i«
r
Code
T
4
4
4
1.4
4
1.2.4
4
1.2.4
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
2.3
4
RCRA
Wast*
Num-
ber
U034
U187
U005
U144
UOOS
U009
U150
P004
U328
U353
U011
P010
Proposed RQ
Gate-
flory
D
B
A
A
A
A
X
X
B
B
A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Pounds
-------
-•J
.on-ay. ...area »_. r«7 \ proposed Kules
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS Sl^ST
AND RgPORTABLE OUANTITIES-Connnued
Hazardous Substance
Arsenic disuifide .
Arsenic (III) oxide
Arsenic (V) oxide
Arsenic pentoxide
Arsenic trichloride
Arsenic tnoxide
Arsenic tnsulfide
Arsine. diethyl.
Asbestos ttt
Auramine
Azasenne
Azmno(2>.3l.3.4)pyrrolo(1 ,2-a)indote-4.7-
dK>ne.6-ammo-8-
[((amrnocarbonyl)oxy)mettiyl]-
1 1 «-2 8 Ba_8lvhaMhw1m_A&jnaMvww.
5-methyl-
Benz[|)aceanthrylene. i.2-dihydro-3-
mettiyt-.
Benz[c)acridme
Benz[a]anthracene
1 2-Benzanthracene
i .c-Boiuariuiiavena, /, iz-omeinyv
Banzenaimn*, 4,4>2-metriyl-,
hydrochtonde.
Benzenamme, 4,4>^nethyleneb«M2.
chloro-.
Benzenamme. 2-methyt-. hydrochtonde .
Benzenamme, 2-methyt-5-nrtro»
Benzene , - ,,, ,
Benzene, chloromethyi-
Benzene, ftexachkxo- _
Benzene. 1 -methyt-2.4-dtmtro-
Benzene. 1 -mettiyM.6-dinilro-
Benzene. 1.2-methylenedioxy-4-aUyt-
Benzene. 1.2-methylenedioxy-4-propenyl-..
Benzene 1 2-methylenedioxy-4-propyV
Benzene, pentschlororutf o-
Benzene. (tnchloromethyl).
Benzeneacabc sod. 4-chtoro-atoha-(4-
chlorophoriyl-alpria-nydroxy-.ethyl ester.
1.2-Benzenedicarboxybc aod, (bo(2-
ethylhexyl)] ester.
i.2-Beruisotruazolin-3-one,1.1.dtoJode,
and salts.
Benzo [ a ] anthracene
BenzoCblfluorantnene _. ............
BenzoOOfluorantnene
Benzo(a]pyrene..__ _..
3,4-Benzopyrene
Denzotnchtonde _
Beryllium n
Beryllium chlonde
Beryllium dust ft
BerylHum fluoride _
CASRN
1303328
1327533
1303282
1303282
7784341
1327533
1303339
692422
1332214
492808
115026
151564
50077
56495
225514
225514
56553
56553
57976
492808
3165933
60117
101144
636215
99558
71432
100447
118741
121142
606202
94597
120581
94586
82688
98077
510156
117817
92875
81072
56553
205992
207089
50328
50328
98077
218019
100447
7440417
7787475
7440417
7787497
Regulatory Synonyms
Arsenic tnoxide
Arsenic pentoxide
Arsenic (V) oxide
Arsenic (III) oxide ...
Owthylarsine _
Benzenamme. 4.4>*fU(*]4Vlt)¥aC*ft*»
O-TO •
£-N troo.tnliiirlina^""' ""**"" "
_. ._. .
Benzyl chlonde
2.4-Olmti otoluene ..__ _
Satrotm
laaufmla
Plhuffcjmti J lU.
Pentachtoronitrobenzene ...
Ethyl 4,4* -dichlofOtosnziictM ............. .....i
Bis(2-ethymexyl) phthalate
(1 .1 '-BiphenylH^'dlarnms
Saccharin and salts ,„.
tlnmmn* llJlrtiUi i_ltuJl
Benzene, chtoromethyi-
wnn
Beryllium tt
Statutory - ProposeJ .=0
RQ
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
1
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
i*
r
1*
1000
100
1*
1000
1000
r
r
r
r
r
i*
r
r
r
100
5000
1*
5000
Code
t
i
1.4
1.4
1.4
1
1.4
1
4
2.3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2,4
2.4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1.2.3.4
1.4
2.4
1.2.4
1.2.4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2.4
2.4
4
2.4
2
2
2.4
2.4
4
2.4
1.4
2.3.4
1
2.3.4
1
RCRA
Waste
Num-
ber
poiji
P011
P011
"P012
P038
..............
U015
P054
U010
U157
U016
U016
U018
U018
U094
U014
U049
U093
U158
11999
U1B1
U019
P028
U127
U105
U106
U203
U141
U090
U185
U023
U038
U028
U021
U202
U018
"0022"'
U022
U023
U050
P028
P015
P015
Cate-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
B
A
X
A
A
A
A
A
A
X
B
B
X
A
B
B
A
B
A
A
B
B
B
A
B
X
A
B
X
B
A
X
0
X
X
X
A
B
A
X
A
X
Pounds(Kg'
1 (0.454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0.454)
100(454)
10 (4 54)
1 (0 454)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
1 (0.454)
100(454)
100(454)
1 (0 454)
10 (4 54)
100(454)
100 (45.4)
10 (4 54)
100(454)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
100 (45.4)
100 (45.4)
100 (45.4)
10 (4 54)
100 (45.4)
1 (0.454)
10 (4.54)
100 (45.4)
1 (0.454)
100(454)
10 (4.54)
1 (0.454)
5000 (2270)
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
10 (4.54)
100 (45.4)
10 (4 54)
1 (0 454)
10 (4.54)
1 (0 454)
-------
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE OUANTrnES-Confinued
Hazardous Substance
CASRN
Regulatory Synonyms
Statutory
RO
Code
RCRA
Waste
Num-
ber
Proposed RQ
Cate-
gory
Pounds(Kg)
Beryllium nitrate .- . .
alpha • BHC
beta - BHC
gamma-BHC
2.2'-Bioxirane _
(I.V-BiphenylM.^diamine
(1.1 '•Biphenyl)-4.4dKhloro-_..
(1.1 ••Bipheny)M.4>diaraine,3.3>dimetho^-
(1.1
_
4.7-MeffianoMaa. 1JZ.4.5.6JJ3-
i-Naprithylamlpe. N.N«a(2-ehloraethyO-
iiM«IUoratiyOf In«
OJorane. 2-{chlorometbyO-
Benzenarrane, 4
-------
8152
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES-Continued
Hazardous Substance
Daunomycin .
ODD
4.41-DDD .
ODE
4.4'.DDE
DOT
4.4I-ODT
Decachlorooctahydro- 1 ,3.4-metheno-2H-
cyctobuta- Cc.d ) -pentalen-2-one.
Dialiate
Diamine _
Diammotoluene
Oibenz[a.h]anthracerw
1 .2:S,6-Dtbenzanthracene
DibenzoC a.h] anthracene
1 .2:7,8-Dibenzopyrene
Dibenz[a.i)pyrene _
i .2-Dibromo-3-chloroprooane _
S-<2.3-DtcnJoroallyl)
dusopropytthtocarbamate.
3 3'-Dichlorobanzidina
Dichlorodiphenyl dehloroethane
Dtchlorodiphenyl tnchloroethane
i .2-Dichloroethan*
1.1-Dichloroethylene
Oichioroethyl ether
Oichlorophenyiarsme
Diatom ^ ,
1 2:3.4-Diepoxybutane ._
Diethylarsme ..
1 .4-Oieihylene dioxide _
N.N'-Owthylhydrazme
Dihydrosafrole
DrtnettiytoiiiHioazctoimzene"" ~
7 1^ Oirnalhultmnif 1 nttujLcjJut
3 3'-DimethylbenzKkrw
Dimethyicarbamoyl chloride
i . 1 -Dimethylhydrazme
l.2-Dimethytnydrazme.« :
|
CASRN
20830813
72548
72548
72559
72559
50293
50293
143500
2303164
302012
95807
496720
825405
25376458
53703
53703
53703
169559
189559
96128
2303164
91941
72548
50293
107062
75354
111444
696288
60571
1464535
692422
123911
1615801
56531
94586
119904
60117
57976
119937
79447
57147
540738
827SQ
1
Regulatory Synonyms
I 5.12-Naphthacenedione. (8s-cis)-8-acetyf-
j lO-[3-amino-2.3.6-tndeoxy-alpha-L-
lyxo-nexopyranoxyl)oxyl-7.8.9. 1 0-
tetrahydro-6.8. 1 1 -tnhydroxy- 1 -rnethoxy-.
Dichlorodipnenyl dicnioroethane
TOE
4.4--000
ODD
TOE
4.4--DDE
ODE
4.41-DDT
DDT
Kepone
S-<2.3-Dichloroaltyf)
Dibenzo[a.h]anthracene
_y. - - .. "" ......— ..........
Ditaenz[a.i]pyrene «._..._„_..__........ ....
1 ,2:7,6-Oibenzopyrene ..............
Propane, l.2-dibromo-3-cNon>
Oiallflta
(1.1 1-8iphenyl)-4.41diamm«.3,3IOJCftlon>
DUD
TOE
4.4--DDD
4.4i-ODT
Ethene. 1.1-dfcMoro-
Vmyhdene chloride
Ethane, l.v-oxytm[2
l.2.3.4.io.iO-HexacMoro-e.7-epoxy>
1 .4.4e,5.6.7.8.8a-octanydn>«ndo.exo-
,4.5.(Hlimethanonaphinawn«.
Arsme. dwthyl-
1 ,4-Dioxane ..... ....................................
Hydrazme, 1.2-dietnyV 1
4.4'-Strtbenediol, atpna.alpha'.dwthy*.
,» •eipnonyii 4.4 ........ «.
Statutory
RO
1'
1
1
i*
1
1
1
1*
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
i
i
5000
5000
r
Code
t
4
1.2.4
1.2.4
2
2
1.2.4
1.2.4
1.4
4
4
4
2.4
2.4
2.4
4
4
4
4
Z.4
1.2.4
1.2.4
1.2.4
1.2.4
2.4
4
1.2.4
9 A
RCRA
Waste
Num-
ber
U059
U060
U060
U061
U061
U142
U062
U133
U221
U063
U063
U063
U064
U064
U066
U062
U073
U060
U061
U077
U078
U025
P036
P037
U085
P038
U108
U086
U089
U090
U091
U093
U094
U095
U097
U098
U099
onat
Proposed RO
Gate-
A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
B
X
A
X
X
X
A
A
A
B
X
X
X
B
B
A
X
X
A
X
B
A
X
A
B
X
X
B
X
A
X
A
Poiinds(K
10 (4.54)
1 (0454)
1 (0.454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
t (0 454)
1 (0454)
100 (45 4)
1 (0.454)
10 (4.54)
1 (0.454)
1 (0454)
1 (0 454)
10(45*
10(454)
10 (4 54)
100 (45.4)
1 (0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0.454)
100 (45 4)
100 (45.4)
10 (4 54)
1 (0 454)
1 (0.454)
10 (4 54)
1 (0.454)
100 (45.4)
10 (4.54)
1 (0.454)
10 (4 54)
100 (45 4)
1 (0454)
1 (0.454)
100 (45.4)
1 (0 454)
10 (4 54)
1 (0 454)
in IA cat
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 19B7 / Proposed Rules
815
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITlES-Commaed
Hazardous Substance
Dimethyl sullate
Dimtrotoluene
3 4-Omitrotoluene
2.4-Omitrotoluene
2,6-Oimtrotoluene
i.4-Dioxane
i ,2-Oiphenyihydrazine
Dt-n-propylnitrosamine
Ethanamma. N-ethyl-N-nitroso-
Ethane. 1.2-dibromo-
Ethane. 1.2-dichloro-
Ethane. 1.1.1 .2.2.2-hexachlon>
Ethane. 1.r-oxybn[2-chlon>
Ethane, pentachloro-
Ethane, 1 .1 .1 ,2-tetrachtoro-
Ethane, l.i ,2.2-tetracfUoro-
Ethanethioamde
Ethane. 1 , 1 ,2-tnchkxo-
Ethanol. W-(nrtrosoirrano)ba-
Ethene. chtoro-
Ethene. 1.1-dehloro-
Ethene. 1.1.2.2-tetrachtoro-.... _
2-Ethoxyetrianol _ _
Ethyl carbamate (Urethan) !ZL"
Ethyl 4.4--dichlorobenziiate _..
Ethylene dehlonde
Ethylene Qlycoi monoethyl ether
Ethylene oxide
Ethytenetrwurea
Ethyl methaneaufraMto „ , ,
Formaldehyde.-
D-Gkicopyranose. 2-l.4,4a.5.8.8a-
"exahydro-1.4.5.0 endftexo-
oTmethanonaphthalene.
Hydrazm. 1.2-diemyl-
liydrame. 1.1-danetfiyt.
CASRN
77781
25321146
610399
121142
606202
123911
122667
621647
106898
55185
106934
107062
67721
111444
76017
630208
79345
62555
79005
1116547
4549400
75014
75354
127184
110805
51796
510156
106934
107062
110805
75218
96457
151564
62500
50000
18883864
765344
70257
76448
1024573
118741
87683
58899
77474
60571
67721
309002
302012
1615601
57147
Regulatory Synonyms
Suifunc acid, dimethyl ester
Benzene. 1 -methyl-2.4-dinrtro-
Benzene. l-methyl-2.6-
1 4-Diethylone dioxide
Hydrazine 1 2-diphenyl-
Oxirane 2-(chtoremethyl)>
1 •Chlon>2.3-epoxyprepane
N-Nitrosodiethylemine
Elhylene dichtonde
1.2-Dichloroemane
Hexachloroethane
Bis(2-ctikxoethyl) ether
Dichloroemyl ether
Pentachloroethane _
1.1.1 ,2-Tetrachioroethane
1 . 1 .2.2-Tetrachtoroethane
1 , 1 .2-Tnchloroethane ._
N-Nttrosodwthanolamine _.„...
N-Nitrosomethytvinylamne _..
Vinyl chloride
, i -utcnioroetnywne
Totrachloroathytene
Elhylene glycol monoethyl ether
Carbamc aod. ethyl eater
Ethane. 1.2-dtbromo-
Ethane. 1.2-dtehloro--
1.2-DichJoroethane
2-Ethoxyethanol
Methanemtfonic AQ& othvt ester
Methytene ovde •».*••*•.•.».*...«..........„...„«.....
4,74*ethano-iH-indene,1.4.5.6.7.B,8.
heptachtoro-3a.4.7.7a-tetrahydro-.
1.3-Butadiene. 1.l.i3.4.4-he«aehton> ....
gamma - BHC
mf-mftm—~ —
jnoane
1.3-Cyclopentedlene, 1.2.3.4.5.5-
Ethane. 1.1.1.2.2.2-hexacnlon>
Aldnn
)larrM«e _...„
Statutory Proposed RQ
RO
i*
1000
1000
1000
1-
1*
r
1000
i*
1000
5000
5000
1000
5000
r
1*
1*
1*
1000
r
i*
i
i*
r
i
r
r
1*
i*
r
Code
t
4
1.2
1.2.4
1.2.4
4
2.4
2.4
1.4
4
1.4
1.2.4
2.4
2.4
4
4
2.4
4
2,4
4
4
2.3.4
1.2.4
2.4
4
4
4
1.4
1.2.4
4
4
4
4
4
1.4
4
4
4
1.2.4
2
2.4
2.4
1.2.4
1.2.4
1.&4
2.4
1.2.4
4
4
4
RCRA
Waste
Num-
ber
U103
U105
U106
U108
U109
U111
U041
U174
U067
U077
U131
U025
U1B4
U208
U209
U218
U227
U173
P084
U043
U078
U210
U359
U238
U038
U067
U077
U359
U115
U116
P054
U119
U122
U206
U163
POS9
U127
U128
U129
U130
P037
U131
P004
U133
U086
U098
go!?" , poUnds(Kg;
1
B
A
A
B
B
A
A
B
X
X
B
B
A
A
B
B
A
B
X
A
A
B
B
C
B
A
X
B
C
A
A
X
X
B
X
A
A
X
X
A
X
X
A
X
B
X
X
A
A
1
100 (45 4)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
100(454)
100 (45 4)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
100(454)
1 (0 454)
! 1 (0 454)
100(454)
• tOO (45 4)
10(454)
10 (4 54)
100(454)
100 (45 4)
10 (4 54)
100 (45.4)
1 (0.454)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
100 (45 4)
100 (45 4)
1000 (454)
100(454)
10 (4.54)
1 (0 454)
100 (45 4)
1000 (454)
10 (4 54)
10(454)
1 (0454)
1 (0 454)
100 (45 4)
1 (0 454)
10 (4 54)
10 (4.54)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
10 (4 54)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
10 (4 54)
1 (0.454)
100 (45 4)
1 (0.454)
1 (0 454>
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
-------
8154
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. SO / Monday. March 13. 1987 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE OUANTTT!ES—Continued
Statutory
T
Proposed RO
Hazardous Substance
CA5RN
Regulator Synonyms
I
RQ
I RCRA , ,
i Code | waste I Gate- ! Ofli ttftfllf
i T • Num. | gory pounds(K
ber
Hydrazine. 1.2-dimethyi-
Hydraane. 1 .2-diphenyl-
Hydroxydimethyiarsme oxide —
2-imtdazoiidinetnione _
l.ic.'eno[i.2.3-cd!pyrene
isocyamc acid, methyl ester
Isosafroie.
Kepone _
Lasiocarptne _ _
Lead n _
Lead acetate __ _ . _ .
Lead arsenate
Lead phosphate ....
Lead subacetate
Lmdane...
Lithium ghtHHtym , _
Melphaian _. .
Mathana. ehlQTQ ,„ ^
Methane, chkxomethoxy- .
Methane, wdo-
Methane. oxybis(cnioro-
Methane, tetrachtoro- _
Methane, tnchloro- .._
Methanesulfomc acid, ethyl ester _
4. 7-Methane- 1 Hinder*. 1 ,4,5.6.7.8.8-
hepiachioro-3a.4.7.7a-ienhydro-.
4.7-Methanoindan. 1.2.4.5.6,7.8.8-
octachioro-3a.4.7.7a-tetranydro-.
Metnyl chtonde __ _ .
2-Metr>yiazindioe
3-Methyicholanthrene
4.4-.Methyienebis(2-chioroamhne) _
Methylene oxide .__ ..
Methyl iodide .
Metnyl isocyanate.
N-Methyl-N'-nitro-N-nitrosoguarMdine
Metrtyltfixxirad
Mitomycm C - ..
5.t2-Naphthacenedione. (61 en) 0 aoetyl-
10-13- arninc-2.3.6-Meoxy-alpna-L-
ryxo-hexopyranoxyl) oiyt-7.8.9.10»
tetrahydro-6.8.1 t-tnhydroxy-t-methoxy-.
2.7-NapMhalenedisulfonc aodJJ1-
[(3.3'- dimethyMI.V.biphenylJ-4.4'-diyl)-
bis(a20)]bis(5-arruno-*-riydroxy)-
tetrasodNim salt
1 -Nsphtttyhirfww ... ._.
2-Naphtnyiamine
alpha-Naphthylamine _
beta-NapMnytanurw
2-Naphtnytamlne. N.N^e(2i .3.4-metheno-2H.
cyciobuta-tc.d)-penU)«n-2-ofte.
Acetic acid, lead salt
Phosphoric aod. lead salt
oamrna - BHC
Alanne. 3-[p*H<2-
cNoroattiyttammolpnenyKL-.
Metnyl chtond* ,..,
Chtoromethyl methyl ether „
Methyl iodide .__.
Bis(chH)fDfnatnyl) other _ ... . .
Carbon ttrtracnlonde .
Ethyl methanmjMo'miff
Haplii^ftiftff _i.ii_n.»i-
CWordan« «...» .._™.«...-.....w
Chlofdftno. tttctvvcd
Methane, chtoro
1 2'Propylenffnfw
BenzC|)aceantt»ytenef l.2-d*iydro-3-
methyl.
ClUflf^.
Mall HIM •»*•-
taocytmc Add. inuDiit inter
Guamttne. N-firtroso-N-methyt-N'-nrtro-
2*thm^.
AOTo<2'.3'-3.4(pym»om«myi)-
0-
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
815
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE OUANTITIES-Cont.nued
Nickel ammonium sulfate
Nickel carbonyl
Nickel chionde
Nickel cyanide
Nickel(ll) cyanide
Nickel hydroxide
Nckrt nitrate
Nickel sulfate
Nickel tetracarbonyl ...
2-Nitropropane
N-NitrosodMi-butylainne
N-Nrtrosodwthanolamtne ".
N-Nitrosodwtnylamne !."!"
N-Nrirosodmettiylarrane. .."..Z.
N-NrtrosooWvpropylamlne
N-Nrtroao N othyiurea ...............
N-Nrtroao-f*-metriyturea
N-Nftrosometrtytwnytanwe...
N-NitroeopynubJine „
S-Nitro-o-ioludir»
1.2-Oxattvolane. U-dtorfde
chtoroethyl) arnroltetrahydro-2-oiode.
Oxrane .
Pentachtaroethane
PemachteronlButjeiueiie.,..
Perchloiuelliytene
Phanacettn
Phenol, pentachtoro-
Phenol. 2,4,5-McMon>...
Phenol. 2,4.e-Wchton>....
Ph«ny| dKhtoraanaie
I.IO-d^JtienylanakJyHma ,.,,,.,......
Phosphoric aod. lead salt _
PhpsghgiuUiKX aod. O.Odiethyl CMp.
nitrophenyijester.
Pobcntortnatad Biphanyfci (pea.) ..„„„ ,
PoryeMonnatad Diphenyls (PCBe)
PofrcMonnatad Dlphanyto (pea*) „
Pohrchtonnated mnhanyfa (PCfte)
PorycWonnatad Btoharn* (PCBs)
PofychtonnatBd mphehyfci (Pca«| „
Potasftum MM**
i-Prapanal 2.3-epoi£;!Z!L™"."'T"~l'
Propane, ?wvtrg»._. ..m._ _...„.„„......„_ - i
1.3-Propane sultone
1-Propanoi 2.3-dtoromo-. phosphate (3:1) .
2-Propenentrrie. .
Mnyof OM-
CASRN
15699180
13463393
7718549
37211055
557197
557197
12054487
14216752
7786814
13463393
79469
924163
1116547
55185
62759
621647
759739
684935
615532
4549400
100754
930552
99558
1120714
50180
75218
106898
56382
76017
82688
87865
127184
62442
67865
95954
88082
696286
193395
7446277
56382
1338363
12674112
11104282
11141165
53469219
12672296
11097691
11096625
7784410
10124502
777060*
7789006
765344
98128
7fl4A8
1120714
126727
107131
75558
100754
Regulatory Synonyms
Nickel tetracarbonyl
NiekeUltl rvanwta
Nickel cyanide
-
Nickel carbonyl
Propane 2-nitro-
l-Butanamme. N-buiyVN^itroso- 1
Etnanol. 2.2Xmtrosoimmo)bav
Elrianarmne. N-etnyt-N-nrtroao-
Dimetnylnitrosamne
r>n-propylnitrosafnne. ..
Carbamide. N-ethyt-N-nrtroao»
Carbamde. N-mettiyUtnrtroso
Carbarn* acid, methylnitroso-. ethyl ester
Ethenamne. N-metnyl-N-nitroeO'
Pyridine. hexahydro^-nitroeu--
Pyrrote. ieualiyilro^Miiiioso-..~™._...__...
Benxenamlne. 2-methyt.5-nitn>
1.3-Propane sultone „..
Ethyleiie oxide .. __ „ .
PhosphorettMc aod, O.OdMtiyl CMp-
ratropnenyi) ester.
Ethane, pentachlon>
Benzene. pentacMorontro-
Phenol, pentachloro- « _
Ethene. l.lA2-tetraeMoro-.
AroetorlOlS _
tractor 1221 . _ _
trader 1232 > .._
tractor 1242
-- — —
.2-OK»t)rnoO
-------
8156
Federal Register / Vol. 52. Mo. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
Statutory . Proposed RO
Hazardous Substance CASRN Regulatory Synonyms
4(1H)-Pynmidinone 2 3-dihydro-6-methyl-
2-throKC-
Pyrrole. letrahydro-N-nitroso-
RAOIONUCLIDES
Saccharin and salts
Safrole ... ...
Selenium disulfide .
L-Serme. diazoacetate (ester)
Sodium arsenate
Sodium arsenite.. .
Sodium bichromate .. . • .
Sodium chromate ..
4.41-Stilbenedol. alpha.afpha'-diethyt- .. .
Streptozotocm
Strontium chromate
Sulfur seJenide _. ...
Sulfunc aod. dimethyl ester
TOE ....
2.3.7.8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioun
(TCOD)
111 2-TetrarhlnrrwthnfM
i.i.2.2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
Tetrachloroethylene _
Thtoacetamtde _ .
Thiourea _
Toluenedamme _
o-Totwdine
p-Tofwdine. . . .
Toxaohene
IH-I 2.4-Tnazol-3-amine
i.i.2-Tnchloroethane
Trrchlofoethene. . .
Tnchloroethylene
Trichlorophenol
2.3.4-Tnchiofophenol
2.3.5-Tnchiorophenol
2.3 6-Tnchiorophenot
2.4.5-Tnchlorophcnot
2.4.6-tnchloroehenot
3.4.5-Tnchioropheno»
2.4.5-Tnchiorophenol _
2.4.6-Tnchlorophenol _
Tns(2.3-dibromopropyl) phosphate
Trypan blue
Unlisted Hazardous Wastes — _
Characteristic of EP Toxicrty
Arsenic ..... .-.
Cadmium
Chrormum(VI)
Lead
1 56042
' 93O552
NA
81072
94597
7488564
115026
7631892
7784465
10568019
7775113
56531
16883664
7789062
7488564
77781
72546
1746016
630206
79345
127164
127184
62555
62566
95807
496720
623405
25376458
95534
106490
636215
8001352
61825
79005
79016
79018
25167822
15950660
933788
933755
86062
809198
9-954
88062
126727
72571
NA
NA
NA.
NA.
NA
• Methytthiouraof
i
N-KMrosopyrrolKhrw
' l.2-Benzisothiazohr»-3-one.t.i-dio»de.
and salts.
Sulfur selenide
Azasenne
D-Glucepyranosa. 2-deoxy-2-(3-methyl-3-
nrtrosoureido).
Selenium rtnuthrin
000
4.4--ODD
cmana. 1.1.1 .z-ieuacrnuftx... _
Ethane. 1 . 1 .2.2-tetrachwro-
Ethene. 1 . 1 .2.2-tetrachtero-
Ethene. 1.1.2.2-tetrachtoro- _
Ethanethoarmtto
PmminntnliiiiffMi
A •iitrnl*
Ethan* 1.1.2-tncMofO-
Tnchtoroettiyton*
TncnkxoGthona
Pheno).2.4.6-tnchton>
Phenol 2 4 6-tnchtore-
-tropenoi, z.Mnoromo*. pnospnaie (3- ") •
bta(azo>lbis(5-emino-4 Hydrant-
tetrasodium salt
.
L
: RCRA
; b«T , 90ry
r
i
1000
1000
1000
1000
1*
r
1000
r
r
i
i*
r
r
i*
i*
i*
i*
1000
1000
10
10
10
1*
r
r
r
i*
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
t
1
1
1
4
4
t
4
4
1.2.4
2
4
2.4
2.4
2.4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1.2.4
4
2.4
1.2.4
1.2.4
t
1.4
1.2.4
4
4
4
4
4
2.4
U164
U180
U202
U203
U205
U015
U089
U208
U20S
U103
U060
U208
U209
U210
U210
U218
U2t»
U221
U328
U353
U222
P123
U011
U227
U22B
U228
U230
U23t
U23S
U236
0004
0006
0007
0008
A
X
B
B
A
A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A
B
X
X
B
B
B
B
A
A
A
B
B
B
X
A
B
B
B
A
A
A
A
A
X
A
X
B
»
tO (4 54)
1 (0 454)
9
100 (45.4)
100 (45 4)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
1 (0454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0454)
t (0454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0454)
10 (4 54)
100 (45.4)
1 (0.454)
1(0.454)
100 (45.4)
100 (45.4)
100 (45 4)
100 (45 4)
10(45
10 (4.5*.
10 (4 54)
100(454)
100 (45 4)
100 (45 4)
1 (0454)
10 (4 54)
100 (45 4)
100 (45 4)
100(454)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
10(454)
10 (4 54)
1(0454)
10 (4 54)
1 (0454)
100 (45 4)
-------
Federal Renter / Vot. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
815
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE OUANTTTES-Cortmuetf
Hazardous Substance
Undane.- .
Toxaphene ...
Uracrt. S-(bis(2-chloroetrtyl)amino]-
Uracrf mustarit. _
Vinyl chlonde.- _
Vinylidene chlonde _ _.
F001
The followjng spent halogenated
solvents used in degreaang and
sludges from the recovery of these
solvents m decreasing operations:
(a) Tetrachtoroethytene _
(b) TncMoroettiytane
(c) Motnytene crttonda
mCtibvmntfMl ffcinmr^ftuma
F002
The toflOMng spent halogenated
(b) Methytane cMonde-
(c) Tnchtottetftyfene.
(e) Cntoroberaene
(0 1.1.2-Tnchlcn>l.2.»infhJoroMhane.
(g) o-OKhtorobenzene.
F006
Wastewater treatment sludges from
from the following processes:
(U suBune aod anodtang ol
alummum..
(2) tin plating on carbon steel.
(3) are plating (segregated
bass) on carbon steel
(4) aluminum or zmc-alummum
piatng on cartoon steal..
(5) cleaning /stripping
associated with tm. anc and
aluminum ptatmg on cartoon
steel, and.
ioi uMnracai wcning and rmikng
of atumnunt.
F019
Wastewatar trBatmei'n sludges from
akmmum.
F020
CASRN
NA.
NA
66751
6675 1
75014
75354
127184
79016
7509Z
71556
56235
N.A.
127184
75092
79016
71556
108907
76131
95501
75694
•
Regulatory Synonyms
U'flcri mustard
Uraal 5* f bifif 9-£hlnrnattiwllamiffm 1.
Ethane, chloro-
Ethene. 1,1-dichloro-
i.i-Oichioroethyiena
-
Statutory
RO
1'
r
i«
i'
i*
5000
1*
1'
1000
f
1»
5000
1«
1*
1-
1"
1000
1-
100
1"
100
1-
!•
r
i«
Code
T
M
1.4
4
4
2.3.4
1.2.4
4
2,4
1.2.4
4
2.4
1.2.4
4
4
2.4
4
1.2.4
2.4
4
4
4
4
4
RCRA
Waste
Num-
ber
0013
DOTS
U237
U237
U043
U078
F001
U210
U228
U2>1
F002
U210
U228
Fooe
FOT9
F020
Proposed RQ
Cate-
gory
X"
X
A
A
A
B
A
B
B
C
C
A
o
a
B
c
B
C
B
O
B
D
X
X
X
Pounds(Kc
' 1 (0*54)
1 (0454)
10 (4 54)
tO (4 54)
10 (4 54)
100 (45 4)
10 (4 54)
100(455)
100(454)
1000(454)
1000 (454)
10(454)
5000 (2270)
100 (45 4)
100(454)
1000 (454)
100 (4S.4)
1000(454)
100 (45 4)
5000 (2270)
100 (45 4)
5000 (2270)
' 1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 4541
-------
S15S
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 18. 1907 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 302 4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
Hazardous Substance CASRN Regulatory Synonyms
i
Wastes (except wastewater and
spent carbon from nyarogen
chloride purification) from me
production or manufactunng use
(as a reactant. chemical
intermediate, or component in a
formulating process of tn- or
tetrachiorophenol. or of
intermediates) used to produce
their pesticide derivatives. (This
listing does not include wastes
from the production of
hexachlorophene from highly
purified 2.4.5-tnchlorophenol.).
F021
Wastes (except wastewater and
spent carbon from hydrogen
chlonde purification) from the
production or manufactunng use
(as a reactam. chemical
intermediate, or component m a
formulating process) of
pentachlorophenol. or of
intermediates used to produce Its
derivatives.
F022.
Wastes (except wastewater and
spent carbon from hydrogen
chlonde purification) from the
manufactunng use (as a reactant
chemical in- termediate. or
component in a formulating
process) of tetra-. penta-. or
hexachiorobenzenes under
alkaline conditions.
F023
Wastes (except wastewater and
spent carbon from hydrogen
chlonde purification) from the
production of materials on
production or manufactunng use
(as a reactant chemical
intermediate, or component in a
formulating process) of tn- and
tetrachlorophenois. (This listing
does not include wastes from
equipment used only for the
production or use of
nexacnioropnena rrom nxjray
purified 2.4,5-tnchlorophenol.).
F024 »
Wastes, including but not limited to.
distillation residues, heavy ends,
tars, and reactor cteanout wastes.
from the production of Chlorinated
aliphatic hydrocarbons, having
carbon content from one to five.
utilizing free radical catalyzed
processes. (This listing does not
include light ends, spent filters and
filter aids, spent dessicantxsic).
wastewater, wastewater treatment
sludges, spent catalysts, and
wastes listed m Section 261.32.).
F028
i
Statutory
RO
1*
1'
r
r
r
Code
T
4
4
4
4
4
RCRA
Waste
Num-
ber
F021
F022
F023
F024
F026
Proposed RO
Gate-
gory
X
X
X
X
X
PoundslKg
1 (0 454)
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
1 (0 454)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE OUANTITIES-Ccntmued
Hazardous Substance
Wastes (except wastewater and
spent cartoon trom hydrogen
chlonde purification) (rom me
production of matenafs o»
equipment previously used lor the
manufacturing use (as a reactant,
chemical intermediate, or
component in a lormulatmg
process) of tetrar. penta-. or
hexachiorobonzene under alkaline
conditions.
F027
Discarded unused formulations
containing trv. tetra-. or
pentachforophenol or discarded
chlorophenolt. (Th» latmg does
pi^Ajiiiiau *i.«.xncmotupn6noi M
F028
Resduos resulting from the
incineration or thermal treatment
of sod contammated wtti EPA
Hazardous Waste Not. FC20.
F021. F022. F023. F026. and
F027.
K001
Bottom sedimam sludge, from the
use creosote and/or
penuMnforopnenol.
K002 _ . .
Wastewater treatment sludge from
the production of chrome yellow
Koo3..~..7..™™!!r!.!T..r "*
Waatewater treatment riudgs from
the production ol morybdate
orange p^ment*
K004 _
Wastewater treatment etadge from
the production of anc yellow
ptgment*.
KOOS.._
Waetewatar trenment etarige frern
me production M enrome green
pigmonBL
KOM
green pigments pnnydroua and
hydrmted}.
K007
Wastewater treatment sludge from
the production of iron blue
pigmentSi
"906^ _^
Oven nMdbe from the production of
K009
CASRN
1
Regulatory Synonyms
•
Statutory | Proposed RQ
RQ
r
1*
1*
1'
1'
r
i-
i*
t*
f
^•
Code
T
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
RCRA
Waste
Num-
ber
F027
F02»
K001
K002
K003
K004
KOOS
K00»
K007
K00»
KOOft
Cate-
gory
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A
Pounds(Kg)
i
1 (0 454)
1 (0.454)
1 (0 454>
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
t (0 454)
1 (0 454)
t(0454)
H0454F
in I* «4i
-------
8160
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE OUANTITIES-Continued
Hazardous Substance
Distillation bottoms from the
production of acetaldehyde from
ethylene.
K010
Distillation side cuts from the
ethylene.
K011
Bottom stream from the wastewater
stopper m the production of
acryiomtnle.
K013
column in the production of
acrylonitnle.
KOI 5
Still bottoms from the distillation of
benzyl chloride.
K016
Heavy ends or distillation residues
from the production of carbon
tetrachtonde.
K017 _
Heavy ends (stfl bottoms) from the
purification column m the
production of epchlorohydnn.
K018
Heavy ends from the fractionation
production.
K019 __
Heavy ends from the distillation of
ethylene dichlonde m ethylene
dichtonde production.
K020
Heavy ends from the distillation of
vinyl chloride in vinyl chloride
monomer production.
(Components of this waste are
identical with those of K019.
immediately preceding.)
K021
Aqueous spent antimony catalyst
waste from fluoromethanea
production.
K022
Distillation bottom tars from the
production of phenol/acetone from
cumene.
K025 _
Distillation bottoms from the
production of nitrobenzene by the
nitration of benzene.
K027 „,
Centrifuge and distillation rsvdues
from toluene dnsocyanat*
production.
K028.._
Spent catalyst from the
hydrochlonnator reactor in the
K029
Waste from the product steam
stnpper m the production of 1.1.1-
tnchloroethane.
K030 _
CASRN
Regulatory Synonyms
•
i
t
.
RO
r
r
r
1*
r
r
i
r
r
i«
r
r
i«
i«
r
r
V
Statutory
Code
T
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
RCRA
Waste
Num-
w-^
K010
K011
K013
K015
K016
KOI 7
K01B
K019
K020
K021
K022
K025
K027
K028
K029
K030
Proposed RO
Cate-
gory
A
A
A
X
X
A
X
A
A
A
X
A
A
A
A
X
Pounds(K
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
1 (0 454)
1 (0.454)
10 (4 54)
1 (0.454)
10 (4 54)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
1 (0.454)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
1 (0 454)
-------
Federal Regi3ter / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1967 / Proposed Rules
8161
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE OUANTITIES-Continued
Hazardous Substance
Column bottoms or heavy ends from
the combined production of
trichloroethylene and
perchloroethyiene.
K031
By-product salts generated in the
production of MSMA and cacodylie
acid.
K032
W&StfiwatBf tTAAtmant filurtao fnvn
tho production of chlordflno.
K033
Wastewater and scrub water from
m the production of chlordane.
K034
Filter solids from filtration of
production of chlordane.
K035 _ _..
Wastewater treatment sludges
generated in the production of
creosote.
K038
Wastewater from the wairong and
»*"w"H u> pnoraie prooucnon.
the production of phorate.
(Components of this waste are
identical with those of K038.
above.)
K041
WnfltlUMntnf tmtttnwit ah ulna tijim
the production of toxaphene.
K042
from the distillation of
leiracnioroDoruene tn tne
production of &4.5-T.
K043
c.D-uwnioiopnonoi waste irom me
production of 2.4-O.
K048
Dissolved air flotation (OAF) Boat
from the petroleum fefinnig
industry.
K04fl
Slop ort emulsion solids from the
petroleum refining vidustiy.
KOSO
Heat exchanger bundto deejvng
sludge from the petroleum refMng
industry.
K051.._ ..
API separator sludge from the
petroleum refirang industry.
K080 ,
coking oporationi.
K061
_ . . ...
envstton control dust/sludge from
the primary production of steel «
electric furnaces.
K062
CASRW
Regulatory Synonyms
— -
—
••
Statutory
RQ
1*
V
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
V
r
r
r
r
Code
t
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
RCRA
Waste
Num-
ber
K031
K032
K033
K034
K035
K038
K040
K041
K042
K043
K048
K049
KOSO
K051
K060
K061
K062
Proposed RQ
Cate-
gory
X
A
A
A
X
A
A
X
A
A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Pounds(Kg)
1 (0 454)
10 (4.54)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
1 (0.454)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
1 (0.454)
10 (4.54)
10 (4 54)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0.454)
-------
8162
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1S87 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3(^4 . LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE OUANTITIES-Contmued
Hazardous Substance
CASRN
Spent pickle IIQUOT from steel ,
finishing operations. ,
K069 1
Emission control dust/sludge from
secondary lead smelting.
K073 ^
Chlorinated hydrocarbon waste from
the purification step of the
diaphragm cell process using
graphite anodes in chionne
production.
K084 _..
Wastewater treatment sludges
generated during the production of
vetennary Pharmaceuticals from
arsenic or organo-arsenic
compounds.
K085
Distillation or fracbonataon column
bottoms from the production of
chlorobenzenes.
K086
Solvent washes and sludges, caustic
washes and sludges, or water
washes and sludges from cleaning
tubs and equipment used m the
formulation of ink from pigments,
dners, soaps, and stabilizers
containing chromium and lead.
K095
Distillation bottoms from the
production of 1.1,1-
tnchioroethane.
K096
Heavy ends from the heavy end*
column from the production of
1.1.1 -tnchioroethane.
K097
Vacuum stripper discharge from the
chloroane chlonnator in the
production of chtordane.
K098
Untreated process wastewater from
the production of toxaphene.
K099
Untreated wastewater from the
production of 2,4,-D.
KlOO _. ^.
Waste leaching solution from aod
leaching of emission control dust/
amorang. (ixxnponenn oi ns
waste are identical with those of
K069.)
K1 01
Distillation tar residues from the
distillation of aniline-based
compounds in the pioducuon of
veterinary pharrnaceutcals from
arsenic or organo- arsenic
compounds.
K102
Rogutatory Synonyms
Statutory
no
1*
1-
1*
r
i'
1'
r
r
i«
r
r
r
!•
Code
t
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
RCRA
Waste
Nunv
K069
K073
K084
K08S
K086
K09S
K09B
K097
K098
KC99
K100
K101
K1Q2
Proposed RQ
Gate-
gory
X
A
X
A
X
B
A
X
X
A
X
X
X
PoundsC
1 (0.454)
10 (4.54)
MO 454)
10 (4.54)
1 (0.454)
tOO (45 4)
10 (4.54)
1(0454)
1 (0.454)
10 (4 54)
1 (0.454)
1(0454)
1 IDJUM
-------
8163
TABLE 302.4 - LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES-Contmued
Hazardous Substance
Re&due from the use of activated
carton lor decoloration in the
production of veterinary
Pharmaceuticals from arsenic or
organc-arsentc compounds
l\ 104.............,..11n the production of ethylene
K136..
Still bottoms from the purification of
ethylene dftromide in the
production of ethylene dbromide
via bromnation of ethene.
CASRN
t-
n
exceeds
*y Synonyms
.
—
RQ
V
1*
1'
1'
1'
!•
1«
r
i*
1«
r
Statutory
Code
t
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
RCRA
Waste
Num-
ber
K104
K10S
Kill
K112
K113
K114
K115
K116
K117
K11B
K138
Proposed RQ
Gate-
gory
I
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
X
X
X
Pounds(Kg)
/
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
10(454)
10 (4 54)
10 (4 54)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
source as defined by 1.2.3. or 4 below
rwc^ers(6^nrtS.hmr**" 8Ub8t*nC* " "*** " ** -hmil-r 0< ** pteeet <* •"• «<*d m«al released is equal to or
to friable.forms onty.
22 Jl^SSJ" "ub»*ane> «jndef CJRCLA is CWA Section 3ll(bK4)
22 KS22 !S!2S? UJS? SISS^ * S^A section ww
112
'—•—•—•»» »»^»w. -^f^* >^»«#-i •• «M H « ^jj^umi i ic
substance under CERCLA « RCRA Section 3001
-------
8164
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
i' - md.caies mat the i-pound RO is a CERCLA statutory RO
APPENDIX A-SEOUENTIAL CAS REG-
ISTRY NUMBER LIST OF CERCLA
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
CAS REG
NUMBER Hazardous Substance
50000
50077
50180
50293
50328
51796
53703
53963
55185
56042
56235
56382
56435
56531
56553
57147
' Formaldehyde
Methyiene oxide
' A2inno(2',3'3.4)pyrrolo(1.2-
| a)mdole-4.7-dione.6-amino-8-
[((aminocarbonyl)oxy)methyl]-
i . i a.2.B.8a.8b-hexahydro-8a-
methoxy-5-methyl-
Mitomycin C
Cyclophosphamide
2H- 1 j.2-Oxazapnosphonne.2-
Cbis(2-chtoroethyl)
aminoJtetrahydro-2-oxide
DOT
Dichlorodphenyt tnchtoroethane
4.4--DDT
Benzo(a]pyrene
3.4-Benzopyrene
Carbamic acid, ethyl ester
Ethyl carbamate (Urethan)
>benz la* ] anthracene
>benzo(a.h]anthracene
t .2-5.6-Dibenzanthracene
Acetamde. N-tluoren-2-yl-
2-Acetytaminofluorene
€lhanamine. N-etrtyt-N-mtroso-
N-Nitrosodiethyiamine
Methyfthiouracil
4(lH).pynmidinone. 2.3-dihydro-
6-methy|.2-thioxo-
Carbon tetrachlonde
Methane, tetrachloro-
Parathion
PhosphorottMC add, O.CHfeethyl
O-(p-nitrophenyl)ester
Benz[|]aceanthrytene, 1.2-
dihydro-3-mettiyt-
3-Methyicholanthrene
Oiethylstilbestrol
4.4'-Suibenedtol. afcha,alpha'-
diethyl-
BenzCalanthracene
Benzotalanthracene
i ,2-Benzanthracene
Hydrazme. l.l-
Hexachloraeitian*
Guanidine. N-rwtroso-N-methyl.
N ~mtr^
N-Memyt-N>-ntro-M.
APPENDIX A-SEOUENTIAL CAS RE
ISTRY NUMBER LIST OF CERCL
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES— Contm-
ued
CAS REG.
NUMBER
71432
72548
72559
72571
74873
74884
75014
75218
75354
75558
75605
75876
76017
76448
77474
77781
79005
Hazardous Substance
Benzene
ODD
Dichlorodipnanyl dichioroeihane
TOE
4.4--ODD
DOE
4.4--OOE
Trypanbtue
aad.3,3-.C(3J'. dmethyMl.v-
«»phenylM.4'^*yl)-
bts
, i -utcrnof oeinyiene
1.2-Propytenimloe
2-MethylazmdlM
CacodyHcaod
ydroxydunetnylarwie oxkto
Chloral
Ethane. pentachton>
Pentachkxoetnane
4.7-Methano-lH.
indene.l.4.5.6.7.8.8-
heptachlorc-3a,4.7.7s«
tetrahydio-
1 l^kfrlrrwantMltanii 1 9 1 4 ^ ^.
hmMtfikviv
Onethyt suHate
ElMne. 1.1.2-WcWoro.
1.1.2-TricWoroethane
-------
APPEND
ISTRY
HAZAF
ued
X A— SEQUENTIAL CAS REG-
NUMBER LIST OF CERCLA
DOUS SUBSTANCES— Contin-
CAS REG '
NUMBER Hazardous Substance
79016
79345
79447
79469
81072
82688
87683
87865
68062
91598
" 91941
92875
94586
94597
95534
95607
95954
96128
96457
98077
1
' Tnchloroethene
Tnchloroethylene
Ethane. 1 . 1 .2.2-letrachloro-
1 . i .2.2-Tetrachloroethane
Carbamoyl chloride, dimethyl-
Oimethylcarbamoyl chloride
Propane. 2-nitro-
2-Nitropropane
Saccharin and salts
1 ,2-Ran?isothiazolin-3-ono 1 1
dioxide, and salts
Benzene, pemachtororafro-
MqxachiQrobutadione
1.3-Butadwne. 1.1.2.3.4.4-
hexachloro-
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol, pentachtoro-
Phenol. 2.4.6-tnchloro-
2.4,6-Tnchlorophenol
beta-Naphftytamme
2-Naphthylamine
(I.V-Biphenyl).
3.3'-Oichlorobenzidine
O.l'-BiphenylM^diarime
Benzidine
Benzene. 1.2-mothyteneutary-*-
Dihydrosafrote
Benzene, 1.2-methytonedtoary-*.
ally).
Salroto
o-Tolutfm
ToluenedJarwne
OamnotohNm
Phenol. 2.4.5-tnchtoro-
2.4.5-Tnchiorophenot
Propane. l.2-dibromo-3-crUoro-
1-2-0*rorno-3-cntaoprop*ne
2-lrmdazolidinetruone
Jonzotnchlonde)
======
APPENDIX A-SEOUENTIAL CAS REG-
ISTRY NUMBER LIST OF CERCLA
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES- Contin.
ued
CAS REG ^ _
NUMBER Hazardous Substance
99558
100447
100754
101144
106490
106898
106934
107062
107131
107302
110805
111444
115026
117817
118741
119904
119937
120581
121142
Benzenamme. 2-metnyt-5-O4tro-
5-Nitro-o-toluidine
Benzene, chkxomethyt-
Benzyl chlonde
"••Nnrosoopenoine
Benzenamme. 4.4'-
methytenebis<2-chloro-
'i.'* -Mamyieneoiaiz-
p-Toluidine
4-Ammo-l-rnethyibenzene
Eptcntorobydnn
Oxirane. 2-(chloromethyt).
1 -Chk>ro-2,3-epo«ypropane
Ethane. 1.2-oTbromo-
Ethane. l.2-«chlon>
Ethylene dichlonde
1.2-Otchloroethane
Acrylonrtnle
2-ProoafMnitnitt
Methane, chkxomethoxy-
Ethylene gtycol monoethyl ether
2-Ethoxyethanol
Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
Ethane. I.r-oxytaat2-chlon>
Azasenne
L-Senne. diazoacetate (ester)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
tbis(2-ethylhexyl)) ester
Jonzene. hexachtoro-
I.V-Bphenyl).
3.3'-Dimethoxyberu3dine
1 . 1 >BiphenylH.4-4Hmine.3.3>.
dimethyl.
3.3'-Oimethylbenzidine
Owzwe, l.2.
l.4:5.8-endo.ex>
dimethanonaphthalene
-------
8166 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Mondav. March IB. -ma? / p, A B..U.
APPENDIX A-SEQUENflAL CAS REG-
ISTRY NUMBER LIST OF CERCLA
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES- Contin-
ued
CAS REG
NUMBER
319846
319857
492808
494031
496720
510156
540738
542681
543908
557197
606202
609198
610399
615532
621647
624839
630206
636215
684935
692422
696286
Hazardous Substance
alpha— BHC
beta — BHC
Auramme
Benzenamine. 4.4'-
carboninudoylbis (N.N-
dimethyl-
Chlomaphazine
2-Naphthylamine, N.N-ois(2-
chloroethyl).
Toluenediamine
Oianunotoluene
DofizeneacBuc BOO, 4-cnioro-
alpha-(4-chiorophenylalpha.
hydroxy-ethyl ester
Ethyl 4.4--dichlorobenzilate
Hurtjn,-B_ji_n. 4 4 W^K&^^.J
ydraztne. 1,2-dunethyl-
1.2-Oimethylhydrazine
Bis(chloromethyl) ether
Methane. oxybis(chloro-
Cadmium acetate
Nickel cyanide
Nwkeigi) cyanide
Jenzene. l-metrtyt-2,6-dimtro-
2.6-Dinitrotoluene
3.4.5-Tnchlorophenol
3.4-Oinitrotoluene
Carbarmc acid, methylnttroso-.
ethyl ester
N-Nitroso-N-methylurethane
Vrvpropylnitrosamlne
socyanic aod. methyl ester
Methyl isocyanate
Ethane. 1.1.1.2-tetracrHoro-
.1.1 .2-Tatrachtoroethane
Benzenamine. 2-methyK
hydrochlonde
o-Toluidine hydrochlonde
Carbamide. N-methyl-N-nitroso
N-Nitroso-N-methylurea
Arsine. diethyl-
Oiethyiarsine
Mchlorophertytarsine
Phenyl dichloroarsme
APPENDIX A-SEOUENTIAL CAS REG-
ISTRY NUMBER LIST OF CERCLA
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES-Contm-
ued
CAS REG
NUMBER
759739
765344
823405
924163
930552
933755
933788
1024573
1116547
1120714
1303282
1303328
1303339
1327522
1327533
1332214
1335326
1336363
1464535
1815801
1746016
2303164
3165933
4549400
Hazardous Substance
Carbamide. N-ettiyt-N-nitrosc-
N-Nitroso-N-ethylurea
Gtyodylaldehyde
l-Propanal. 2.3-epoxy-
Toluenediame
Diaminotoluene
N-Nitrosodt-n-butylamlne
1-Butanamme. N-butyt-N-ntreao-
». ». .
N*Nitrosopyrrolidine
Pyrrole. tetranydro-N-nrtroso*
2,3.6-Tnchkxophenol
2,3,5-Tnchlorophenol
Heptachlor epoxide
Ethanol. 2.r-(nitrosoimino)bi».
N-Nttrosodiethanolamne
1.2-Oxattuolane. 2^-dio«lde
1.3-Propane sultone
Arsenic pentoxkJe
ArsemcCV) oxide
Arsenic disulfide
Arserwc tnsulfide
Arsenic aod
Arsenic tnoxkte
Arsenic(lll) oxide
Asbestos
Lead subacetata
Polychlormated Biphenyls
(PCBs)
1 ,2:3.4-Oieooxybutane
!.2'-Bioxirane
Hydrazine. 1.2-dwthyl.
N.N'-Diethyihydrazine
2.3.7.8-Tetrachlorodibenzo»
dioxin (TCOO)
Diallate
S-(2.3-Dtchloroallyl)
diisopropylthiocarbamate
Benzenamine. 4
N-Nitrosomethylvinylamine
APPENDIX A-SEOUENTIAL CAS REG-
ISTRY NUMBER LIST OF CERCLA
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES-Contin-
ued
CAS REG.
NUMBER
7439921
744002C
7440382
7440417
7440439
7440473
7446277
7488564
7631892
7645252
7718549
773894S
7775113
7778394
7778441
7778509
7784341
7784409
7784410
7784485
7/86814
7787475
7787497
7787555
7788989
7789008
7789082
7789095
7789426
8001352
Hazardous Substance
Lead
Nickel
Arsenic
Beryllium
Beryllium dust
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead phosphate
Phosphoric aod, toad salt
Selenium disulfide
Sulfur setende
Sodiums/senate
Lead a/senate
Nickel chloride
Chromic acid
Sodium chromate
Arsenic aod
Calcium areenate
Potassium bichromate
Arserac trichloride
Leadarsenate
'otassurn arsenato
>odium arserdte
Nickel sulfate
lefyllium chloride
Beryllium fluonde
Beryllium nitrate
^mmorMum chromate
Potassium chromate
itrontwm chromate
Ammonium bichromate
Cadmium bromide
Uunphene. octachtoro-
w I -w-w
-------
Federal Regi.ter / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Pronn.pH Rules
APPENDIX A-SEQUENTIAL CAS REG-
ISTRY NUMBER LIST OF CERCLA
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES-Contm-
ued
CAS REG
NUMBER
Hazardous Substance
8001569 Creosote
10102484 Lead arsenate
10108642 Cadmium chloride
10124502 Potassium arsemte
10588019 Sodium bichromate
11096825 Aroctor1260
Polychlonnated Biphenvls
(PCBS)
11097691 Aroclor1254
Polychlonnated Biphenyts
(PCBs)
11104282 ArocloM221
Polychlonnated Biphenvts
(PCBs)
11115745 Chrome aod
11141165 Aroclor1232
Polychlonnated Biphenyts
(PCBs)
12002038 Cupnc acetoarsenite
12054487 Nickel hydroxide
12672296 Arodor 1248
Poiychlormated Biphenvts
(PCBs)
12674112 AroclorlOie
Polychlonnated Biphenyts
(PCBs)
13463393 Nickel carbonyl
Nickel tetracarbonyl
13597994 Beryllium nitrate
13765190 Calcium chromate
Chromic aod, cakaum salt
14216752 Nickel nitrate
14307358 Lithium chromate
15699180 Nickel ammonium suit ate
15950660 2.3,4-Tnchlorophenol
18883664 D-Glucopyranose. 2-deoxy-2-<3-
methyt-3- nitrosoureido)-
Streptozotocm
APPENDIX A-SEOUENTIAL CAS REG
ISTRY NUMBER LIST OF CERCLA
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES—Contin-
ued
CAS REG.
NUMBER '
20830813
25167822
25321146
Hazardous Substance
Oaunomyan
5.12-Naphthacenedione. (8s-
os)-a-acetvMO-[3- aminc-
2.3.6-tndeoxy-alpha-l-lyxo-
hexopyranoxyl) oxyl-7.8.9.10-
tetrahydro-6,8,11-tnhydroxy-l.
methoxy
Tnchlorophenol
Dirtrtrotoluene
81 fir
APPENDIX A— SEQUENTIAL CAS REG-
ISTRY NUMBER LIST OF CERCLA
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES— Contin-
ued
CAS REG
NUMBER
Hazardous Substance
25376458 . Toluenediamine
I Oiammotoluene
37211055 J Nickel chloride
52740166 J Calcium arsenite
53469219 j Aroclor 1242
I Polychionnated Biphenyis
' (PCBs)
PART 117-OESIGNATION, REPORTABLE QUANTITIES AND NOTIFICATION
1. The authority citation for Part 117 continues to read as follows:
C<""rel Act
ssr
0 asaooated wrth reponable qu^m*, of 1, 10. iS '
TABLE 117.3— REPORTABLE QUANTITIES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Material
Acetaldehyde.._
Acetic aod
Acetic anhydride !!!.
Acetone cyanohydnn
Acetyl bromKte...
Acetyl chtonde
Acrolwn
Acrylonrtrte
Adiptc acid
Aldnn
Ally! alcohol
Aluminum sulfakf
Ammonia
Ammonium acetate
Ammonium benxoate ,
Ammonum bicarbonate.
Ammonium bichromate..,
Ammonum biftuonde
Ammonium bisulfite
Ammonum carbamate....
Ammonium carbonate
Ammonum chloride
Ammonum chromate
Ammonum citrate
Ammonium flucborate
Ammonum fluoride
Ammonum hydroxide....
Category
C
D
0
A
D
0
X
A
0
X
B
C
0
B
D
0
0
X
B
0
0
0
D
X
0
0
B
C
RO in pounds (kilograms)
1.000 (454)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 &270)
10 (4 54)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
1 (0 454)
10 (4.54)
5.000 (2.270)
1 (0 454)
100 (45 4)
1.000(454)
5.000 (2.27C;
100 (45.4)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
1(0454,
100 (45 4)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
1 (0454)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
100(454)
1.000(454)
-------
8168
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 117.3—REPORTABLE QUANTITIES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES—
Continued
Material
Ammonium oxalate
Ammonium sihcofluonde
Ammonium suifamate
Ammonium sulhde
Ammonium sulfite
Ammonium tartraie
Ammonium thiocyanate
Ammonium truosullate
Amyi acetate
Aniline .'....
Antimony pentachlonde
Antimony potassium tartrate
Antimony tnbromde
Antimony tnchlonde
Antimony tnfluonde
Antimony tnoxide
Arsenic disulbde ."."......
Arsenic pentoxide
Arsenic tnchlonde
Arsenic tnoxide
Arsenic tnsulfide
Banum cyanide ,
Benzene
Benzoc and
Benzonitnle
Benzoyl chlonde._
Benzyl chlonde
Beryllium chlonde
Beryllium fluoride
Beryllium nitrate
Butyl acetate
Butyl arnme
n-Butyt pKhalate
Butyncacid
Cadmium acetate
Cadmium bromide
Cadmium chlondo..........
Calcium arsenate
Calcium arsenite
Calcium carbide
Calcium chromate
Calcium cyanide
Calcium dodecylbenzenesulfonate...
Calcium hypochlonte
Captan
Carbaryl
Carbofuran .-
Cartoon disulfide "".'.
Carbon tetrachlonde
Chlordane
Chlonne _... _.
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Chlorosurforuc acid
Chlorpynfos _.._._.......„.
Chrormc acetate
Chromic aod _
Chromic sutfate
Chromous chlonde
Cobaltous bromide
Cobaltous formate
Cobaltous sultamate
Coumaphos
Cresol
Crotonaldehyde
Cupnc acetate _
Cupnc acetoarsenite
Cupnc chlonde
Cupnc nitrate
Category
0
C
0
B
D
0
0
0
D
0
C
B
C
C
C
C
X
X
X
X
X
A
A
0
D
C
B
X
X
X
0
C
A
D
A
A
A
X
X
A
X
A
C
A
A
B
A
B
A
X
A
B
A
C
X
C
X
C
C
C
C
C
A
C
B
B
X
A
B
RO in pounds (kilograms)
5.000 (2.270)
1.000(454)
5.000 (2.270)
100(454)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
1.000(454)
100 (45.4)
1.000 (454)
1.000(454)
1.000(454)
1.000 (454)
1 (0.454)
1(0454)
1 (0454)
1 (0.454)
1(0454)
10(4.54)
10 (4.54)
5.000 (2770)
5.000 (2770)
1.000 (454)
100 (45.4)
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
5.000 (2770)
1.000(454)
10 (4.54)
5.000 (2.270)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
10 (4.54)
1 (0 454)
1 (0 454)
10(454)
1 (0.454)
10(454)
1.000 (454)
10(4.54)
10(454)
100 (45.4)
10 (4.54)
100 (45.4)
10 (4.54)
1 (0 454)
10 (4.54)
100(454)
10 (4.54)
1.000(454)
1 (0454)
1.000 (454)
1 (0454)
1.000 (454)
1.000 (454)
1.000 (454)
1.000 (454)
1.000(454)
10 (4.54)
1.000(454)
100(454)
100(454)
1 (0.454)
10(454)
100(454)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
8169
TABLE 117.3u-flEPORTABLE QUANTITIES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES—
Continued
Material
Cupnc oxalate ::.. ..
Cupnc suifate
Cupnc suifate ammomated
Cupnc tanrate
Cyclohexane _ _"
2.4-0 Acid
2.4-D Esters Z."...T""
DDT ".
Diazmon
Dcamba _ _
Dichlobenl
Dchlona
Dichloropfooane ._ . ,.,..„
BcMoroprepene-OicWocvopanaMoftjre
2.2-achloroerep.jihe and
Dtcrrtorvos
Dnttrin
Dathytanune . .
Dimetnytamne __
Dintoobenzene-. _
Dinrtrophenol
Dimtrotohnne..
Diguat__ _„ .
Diuron
EndoauNan
Endnn — ___
Eptthlorohyi>ifi „..„.__.
Ethwn
Ethylbenzene ..
Ettiytenedhunne .
Lmyiene amrarnuu
Ethvtene dfchlonte „
EDTA.
Feme ammonium atnttm — „ _ _
Feme ammonium oxalate .....
Feme chloride — , _ m
Feme fluonda
Fluvum jit.-...
emc nitrate i
FemcauHate ,
Ferrous ammonium -UH«_»
Ferraua ehlomte
Ferraua aurfate..
Formaldahyda „ . ._
Formic tati „.. __
Fumane aad
Furfural
Gumnn
Heotechlor
Hydmehlaiie ««tf
Hyrfmflunm* -nrf
(soprano
laopropanolamne
KatttuuM .,,
\juuimcftmt*
Laadcnlark_i „ ,
Le-_1 fluamte ......
Category
A
B
B
A
C
B
X
X
B
r
B
B
X
B
C
B
A
x
x
D
X
c
B
C
C
' B
X
A
B
A
C
x
B
RO in pounds (kdograms)
100 (454)
10 (4.54)
100 (45.4)
100 (45.4)
10 (4.54)
1.000(454)
100 (45.4)
1UU (49 4)
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
1,000 (454)
1UU (45.4)
1 (0.454)
100 (45.4)
.WUW (494)
100 (45.4)
100 (45.4)
5.000 (_^270)
ID (4.94)
1 (04S4I
100 (45.4)
1 MB f4K_k
100(45.4)
1O f_flC A\
10 (4.54)
1.000 (454)
(O.494)
100 (45.4)
1.000 (454)
(O.494/
(0.454)
KM f-tK A\
10 (4^4)
1,000(454)
6,000(2.270)
1(0.454)
1UU |4Ou^|
5.000(2^70)
l.UUU |494|
1.000 (454)
.wuw (454)
100 (45.4)
1.000 (454)
1.000(454)
1WJ (4d.4|
.UUU |4O4|
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2£70)
5.000 (Z^TQ)
1 (0.454)
1 (0.454)
10 (4.54)
5,000 (2270)
100 (46.4)
10 (4.54)
100 (45.4)
100 (45.4)
1.000 (454)
10 (4.54)
1 (0.454)
10 (4.54)
IUU (4O.4)
100 (45.4)
1OO/_Aft_t\
-------
8170 _jejgaJ_ggi«tBr / Vol 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 117.3—REPORTABLE QUANTITIES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES—
Continued
Material
Lead nitrate
Lead stearate..
Lead sultate
Lead sulfide
Lead ttiiocyanate
Lmdane
Lithium chromate...
Maiathion
Maleic acid
Maleic anhydride
Mercaptodimethur
Mercunc cyanide .
Mercunc nitrate
Mercunc sultate
Mercunc ttiiocyanate
Mercurous nitrate .....
Methoxychkx
Methyl mercaptan
Methyl methacrylate
Methyl parathion
Mevinphos
Mexacarbate
Monomethylamine
Naled
Naphthalene _
Naphthenic aod ......"..
Nickel ammonium sultate _ ..
Nickel chloride
Nickel hydroxide
Nickol nttrsto ••••••••••••••••••.••..••......,,........„....„,.
Nickel suifate
Nitncaod
Nitrobenzene _
Nitrogen dioxide
Nitrophenol
Nitrotoluene
Para formaldehyde
Parathion
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Phosgene
Phosphoric acid
Phosphorus ................„.....„..__.„....
Phosphorus oxychlonde
Phosphorus tnchtonde
Poiychlonnated biphenyls
Potassium arsenate . .
Potassium arsenrte
Potassium bichromate
Potassium cyanide _-»„_„...........
Potassium hyd»o"
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March IS. 1987 / Proposed Rules
8171
TABLE 117.3-REPORTABLE QUANTITIES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES-
Contlnued
Material
Sodium bisulfite .
Sodium chromate
Sodium cyanide
Sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate
Sodium fluoride
Sodium hydrosulfide
Sodium hydroxide
Sodium hypochlonte
Sodium methylate _
Sodium nitnte ... ,, ,,,-
Sodium phosphate dibasic
Sodium sotenita
StrontRjm chromata ,„,..„.„ -
Strychi M *.„.._._.„_„„_.„„„„„„„
Styrena ._
Sulfurtcaod
SuHur monoehlonda „ . , u
2.4.5-T acid ..
2.4.5-T wittm
2.4.5-T attMf .
2.4.5-T MM*.. ,.
TOE. _ -
2 4 S.TP ~*4
^.S-TPaeMMta.
TataMty H*tf , , ,
TohMM
YjkMA^^d^KA.
Tosapnan* ,„.. __._._.„, ,
T,g(^li,,-j- ,
TrtcNonattiylan*
1 IMJHIHIIfVMnrtl
Tf^^4t^MM*l*^^^BA
i iwmanoiamne
TnathytamkM ., „
TlfcB^MftikjIgk^^^dk
Umytnilmte
Vanadyl «*»«.
VnyhdOM eMqntft _
Xytan.
XytaMl
Zmeaeet«t>
ZnchOMlB BI
^•""'y'^tft
Ztaeflunfiri.
Tine tetiMte _,
ZnephcnplMte.
TineMrffntv
rmonhim o4Ma
Category
D
X
A
C
c
D
C
g
C
B
B
X
A
C
c
o
c
B
A
A
x
B
A
C
c
B
c
c
c
c
o
RQ m pounds (kilograms)-
s onn 19 97m
1 (0.454)
in M £4*
1.000(454)
1 OOO 1444)
e ngn / j 9701
1.000(454)
1 ftft MC A\
1.000(454)
100 (45.4)
5.000 (2.270)
5.000 (2.270)
I/ft jt^rflt
|U.494|
in IA *A\
lU (4.94|
.UUU (494|
1.000(454)
1 nnn MAA\
1 ftflA /AftjM
s ono t9 9?m
.OOO (454)
i non M^4i%
IW.4O4)
1UU |49.4|
1OA IAH A\
10 (4^4)
10 (4.54)
lUw (4O.4)
l.UUU (454J
I/ftjtftjt^
tftft /jtJKjtt
lUU |4&4)
100 (4M)
10 (4^4)
1.000(454)
5,090 (2,270)
1UU |4O.4|
1ftft l4tftjt%
*WW (494)
Inmt i^ft^n
C ftAA /9 9TM
9tWW VCv*f Wf
1ftfi IjtJdM
i,UUU (4O4)
1,WW (494)
1AAA l^tCAl
1 AM lAJCtfU
1 Oftft IA*A\
1 AAA idtft^M
1 nOA tAMA\
i.UWI (494)
10 (4.54)
IrOUU (494)
1.000 (494)
1.000 (454)
iiUUW |49*|
5,000(2^70)
i W (49.4)
5.000 (2f270)
1.000 (454)
1 nnn /jnj%
(FR Doc 87-344 Filed 3-13-ftT: 8:45 aa)
-------
8172
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
40 CFH Part 302
(FR-3122-7]
Reportable Quantity Adjuetment-
Radlonuclldes
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed njle.
SUMMARY: Sections 103(a) and I03(b) of
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). as amended.
require that persons in charge of vessels
or facilities from which a hazardous
substance has been released in
quantities equal to or greater than its
reportable quantity (RQJ immediately
notify the National Response Center of
the release. Section 102(b) of CERCLA
establishes RQs for releases of
designated hazardous substances at one
pound, except those for which RQs have
been established pursuant to section
311(b)(4) of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Section 102(a) authorizes the
Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to adjust RQs
for hazardous substances and to
designate as hazardous substances
those substances which, when released
into the environment may present
substantial danger to the public health
or welfare or the environment. The RQ
for radionuclides established by
CERCLA is one pound and has not been
adjusted by regulation. EPA recognizes
that thisRQ may not be appropriate
because releases of much less than one
pound of radionuclides may present a
substantial threat to public health or
welfare or the environment. This
proposed rule adjusts the RQ for
radionuclides established under section
102(b). This RQ adjustment is intended
to allow EPA to focus its resources on
the most serious releases and to protect
public health and welfare and the
environment more effectively.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May IS. 1987.
ADDRESSES: The toll-free telephone
number of the National Response Center
is 1-800/424-8802: in the Washington.
DC metropolitan area the number is 1-
202/426-2675.
Comments: Comments should be
submitted in triplicate to: Emergency
Response Division. Docket Clerk.
Attention: Docket Number 102RQ-RN.
Room LG-100. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street. SW.
Washington. DC 20460.
Docket: Copies of materials relevant
to this rulemaking are kept in Room LG-
100 at the above address. The docket is
available for inspection between 9:00
a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through
Friday, excluding federal holidays. As
provided in 40 CFR Pan 2. a reasonable
fee may be charged for copying services.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Barbara Hostage. Project Officer
Response Standards and Criteria
Branch. Emergency Response Division
(WH-548B) U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street SW.
Washington. DC 20480
or the
RCRA/Superfund Hotline. 1-800/424-
9346; in Washington. DC. 1-202/382-
3000.
SUmCMCNTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are listed
in the following outline:
I. Introduction.
A. Statutory Authority.
B. Background of this Rulemaking.
0. Releases Covered by this Notice.
A. Hazardous Substances Subject to this
Notice.
B. Definition of Releases Subject to this
Notice and Statutory Exemption*.
III. Duplicate Reporting/Regulatory
Consistency.
IV. Reportable Quantity Adjustments for
Radionuclides.
A. Introduction and Previous RQ
Adjustment Methodology.
B. Options Considered and Radionucllde
RQ Methodology.
C Alternative Approaches.
D. Reporting Requirements for Mixtures of
Radioimclides.
E. Other Issues.
V. Summary of Supporting Analyse*.
L Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
The Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (Pub. L 96-510). 42 U.S.C.
9601 et seq. (Soperfund. CERCLA, or the
Act), as amended by the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 (Pub. L 99-499) (SARA).
establishes broad federal authority to
respond to releases or threats of
releases of hazardous substances from
vessels and facilities. Section 101(14) of
the Act defines the term "hazardous
substances" by reference to other
environmental statutes. Section 102 of
CERCLA gives the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) authority to
designate additional hazardous
substances. Currently, there are 717
CERCLA hazardous substances.
Section 103 of the Act requires the
person in charge Of a vessel or facility '
to notify the National Response Center
immediately when there is a release of a
hazardous substance in an amount
equal to or greater than the reportable
quantity (RQ) for that substance.2
Section I02(b) of CERCLA establishes
RQs for releases of hazardous
substances at one pound, except for
those substances for which RQs were
established pursuant to section 311 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA). Section
102(a) of CERCLA authorizes EPA to
adjust all of these RQs by regulation.
A major purpose of the section 103 (a]
and (b) notification requirement is to
alert the appropriate government
officials to releases of hazardous
substances that may require a federal
response to protect public health and
welfare and the environment. Under
section 104 of the Act the federal
government may respond whenever
there is a release or a substantial threat
of a release of a hazardous substance
into the environment. Response
activities are to be taken, to the extent
practicable, tn accordance with the
National Contingency Plan (NCP) (40
CFR Part 300). which was developed
originally under the CWA and which
has been revised to reflect the
responsibilities and authority created by
CERCLA.* EPA emphasizes that a
hazardous substance release
notification is merely a trigger for
informing the government of a release so
that the appropriate federal personnel
can evaluate the need for a federal
removal or remedial action and
undertake any necessary action in a
timely fashion. Federal personnel will
evaluate all reported releases, but will
not necessarily initiate a removal or
remedial action in response to all
reported releases, because the release of
an RQ will not necessanly pose a
hazard to public health or welfare or the
environment in all circumstances.
Government personnel will assess each
reported release on a case-by-case basis
to determine the appropriate action. In
1 For Ihii proposed rule on radlonuclidn. II it
important 10 contlder the CERCLA definition of
"facility" in icetion 101(9). A number of consumer
producti such at walchei and imoka detectore may
contain (and at eome point rcleara) radionuclides.
The CERCLA definition of "facility" ipecifinlly
excludes any columnar product in consumer use
thut any release of radionucudaa from aucb
producti when in contumer uia are not lulnect to
the notification requirement! (lurnieeii in iJua
propotad rule.
' A release Into the environment of a tubtlaace
which it not luted at a CERCLA haiardoui
lubitance but which rapidly form* a CERCLA
hazardous lubitance upon release h) iub|ect to the
notification requirements of section 1O3 ffrhe
amount of the »«••—«i—r eubsianca formed as such
a reaction product equals or neeadi the RQ for thai
lubitance. the release must be reported to the
National Response Center.
• The NCP is being revised presently to ensure
that reiponeee to-releasea of radlonudidei else wilt
be undertaken continent with the Federal
Radiological Emergency Response Men (FRERP)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
8173
certain limited situations, when direct
reporting to the National Response
Center is not practicable, the person in
charge may report to the nearest Coast
Guard- or EPA-predesignated On-Scene
Coordinator (OSC). If it is not possible
to notify the National Response Center
or predesignated OSC immediately.
reports may be made immediately to the
nearest Coast Guard unit, provided that
the person m charge notifies the
National Response Center as soon as
possible (40 CFR § 300.83(b) and 33 CFR
§ 153.203)
Section I03(b) of CERCLA authorizes
penalties, including criminal sanctions.
for persons in charge of vessels or
facilities who fail to report releases of
hazardous substances which equal or
exceed RQs. Section 109 of SARA
amends section 103(b) of CERCLA.
increasing the maximum penalties and
years of imprisonment. Any person who.
as soon as that person has knowledge of
a reportable release, fails to report the
release immediately pursuant to section
103(b) or who submits any information
which he knows to be false'or
misleading, shall, upon conviction, be
fined in accordance with the applicable
provisions of Title la United States
Code (not more than $250.000 or
$500.000. depending upon whether the
violator is an individual or an
organization), or imprisoned for not
more than three years (or not more than
five years for second and subsequent
convictions), or both. Notifications
received under section 103(b) or
information obtained by exploitation of
such notifications cannot be used
against any reporting person in any
criminal case, except a prosecution for
perjury or for giving a false statement
Section 108 of SARA also provides for a
system of administrative penalties for
violations of CERCLA section 103(b).
enforceable through civil proceedings.
B Background of this Rulemaking
On May 25.1983. EPA proposed a rale
(48 FR 23552) to clarify procedures for
reporting release* and to adjust RQs for
387 of the then 696 CERCLA hazardous
substances. That Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM>also listed, for the
first time, the "hazardous substances"
designated by section 101(14) of
CERCLA. The NPRM discussed in detail
the CERCLA notification provisions
including the persons required to notify
the National Response Center of a
release, the substances for which
notification is required, the types of
releases subject to the notification
requirements, the exemptions from these
notification requirements, the
methodology and criteria used to adjust
the RQ levels, and the adjustments
proposed under section 102 of CERCLA
and under section 311 of the CWA.
These issues were discussed further in
the preamble to a rule making final 340
of the 387 proposed RQs, published on
April 4.1985 (50 FR 13458). They will be
discussed again in this preamble only to
the extent that EPA needs to provide
additional explanation of these issues in
the specific context of adjusting RQs for
releases of radionuclides.
It should be noted that other
provisions of CERCLA may apply even
where the statute does not require
notification. Therefore, nothing in this
rulemakmg should be interpreted as
reflecting Agency policy or the
applicable law with respect to other
provisions of the Act. For example.
unless specifically exempted under
CERLCA. a party responsible fora
release is liable for the costs of cleaning
up that release and for any natural
resource damages caused by the release.
even if the release is not subject to the
notification requirements of sections 103
(a) and (b). Similarly, proper reporting of
a release in accordance with sections
103 (a) and (b) does not preclude
liability for cleanup costs. The fact that
a release of a hazardous substance is
properly reported or that it is not subject
to the notification requirements of
sections 103 (a) and (b) will not prevent
EPA or other governmental agencies
from taking response actions under
section 104. seeking reimbursement from
responsible parties under section 107. or
pursuing an enforcement action against
responsible parties under section 106.
Note also that this proposed rule does
not affect hazardous substance reporting
requirements imposed by other
regulations and statutes.
ILReli
isi oy This Nouos
A. Hazardous Substances Subject to this
Notice
Congress incorporated six lists of
substances, identified primarily under
other environmental statutes, in the'
definition of hazardous substances
under section 101(14) of CERCLA. These
lists are:
(1) Substances designated pursuant to
section 311 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA):
(2) Hazardous wastes under section 3001
of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
(commonly known as the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act or
"RCRA"L but »*<*»M«H wastes die
regulation of which has been
suspended by Congress;
(3) Toxic pollutants listed under CWA
section 307(a):
(4) Hazardous air pollutants listed under
section 112 of the Clean Air Act
(5) Imminently hazardous chemicals or
mixtures for which EPA has taken
action under section 7 of the Toxic
Substances Control Act: and
(8) Substances designated pursuant to
section 102 of CERCLA.
Radionuclides. the subject of this
proposed rule, are considered hazardous
substances under CERCLA because they
were designated genencally as
hazardous air pollutants pursuant to
section 112 of the Clean Air Act. Even
though the source of their listing is the
Clean Air Act releases of radionuclides
to all media are covered under section
103 of CERCLA and the provisions of
this rule.
A radionuclide is a particular form
(isotope) of an element which is
unstable. To achieve a more stable
configuration, the nucleus releases
energy in the form of particles or
electromagnetic radiation by a process
of decay called radioactivity. Each
radionuclide decays at a different rate
and. as a result a pound of each of two
different radionudidm could represent
significantly different levels of
radioactivity. The principal health
concern associated with a radionuclide
release is carcuiogenicity. There are
approximately 1400 different
radionuclides and. because they are
listed genencally as a hazardous air
pollutant under the Clean Air Act all
1.800 are considered CERCLA
hazardous substances. Until adjusted by
EPA under section 102(a) of CERCLA.
all radionuclides have a statutory RQ of
one pound.
Uranyl acetate and uranyl nitrate.
which are specifically listed as CERCLA
hazardous substances because they are
included under section 311 of the Clean
Water Act have a final adjusted RQ of
100 pounds based on their chemical
toxiciry (51 FR 34534. September 29.
1986). These compounds are composed
of approximately 66 percent uranium.
most generally uranium-238. Because 100
pounds of uranium-238 is approximately
0.015 curie, a proposed RQ baaed on
radiological hazard could be higher than
the final adjusted RQ based on chemical
toxicity. Therefore, the final adjusted
RQ for uranyl acetate and uranyl nitrate
will remain 100 pounds if the RQ based
on radiological hazard is greater than
0.015 curie.
B.Definitio»of&
X to this
Notice and Statutory Exemptions
Congress defined the term "release"
to include within its scope virtually all
ways that substances may enter the
environment
-------
8174
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
"release" means any spilling, leaking.
pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying.
discharging, injecting, escaping.
leaching, dumping, or disposing into the
environment (including the
abandonment or discarding of barrels.
containers, and other closed receptacles
containing any hazardous substance or
pollutant or contaminant) (section
101(22) as amended by section 101(c) of
SARA).
Four types of releases are specifically
excluded from the definition of release
in CERCLA section 101(22) and thus do.
not need to be reported under section
103:
(1) Releases which result in exposures to
persons solely within a workplace for
which claims against the employer or
other persons are available;
(2) Emissions from engine exhaust from
a motor vehicle, rolling stock, aircraft
vessel or pipeline pumping station
engines:
(3) Releases of source, byproduct or
special nuclear material * from a
nuclear incident subject to
requirements of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission for financial
protection under section 170 of the
Atomic Energy Act: • and
(4) The normal applications of fertilizers.
Radionuclide releases may be
excluded from reporting requirements
because they fall under any of these four
provisions. For example, exposure of
persons to radionuclide releases solely
within a workplace and radionuclide
releases resulting from the normal
application of fertilizer containing
radionuclides are both possible. The
exclusion for radionuclides most likely
to be of greatest importance, however, is
for releases of source, byproduct or
special nuclear material from a nuclear
incident Nuclear reactors are the
primary type of facility subject to the
4 Source material It defined •• (1) natural
uranium, thonum. or any combination thereof or (2)
oret which contain 0.05 percent (by weight) of
uranium or thonum (Mction M(t| of the Atomic
Energy Act and Nuclear Regulatory Commiaatoa
regulation! In 10 CFR Put 40). Byproduct malarial it
(1) any material made redioacthre by mpoaure to
radiation in the process of producing or using
special nuclear material or (2) the wutea produced
by the extraction or concentration of uranium or
ihonum from ore (aectlon life) of the Atomic
Energy Act). Special nuclear material to defined aa
Plutonium, or uranium enriched IB the U-23S or U-
233 isotope (Atomic Energy Act section ll(aa)). All
of these materials an licensed by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission and It* Agreement Slates.
» A release of source, byproduct or special
nuclear material from a processing site designated
under sectioi.s 102(a|(l) or 302(a) of the Uranium
Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of IB7B to not •
••release" for purpoM* of response actions under
CERCLA. but is subiect to the notification
requirements of sections 109 (a) and (b) (see section
101(22)) and liability under section 107.
referenced section 170 of the Atomic
Energy Act. Section 170 essentially
requires certain licensees, as a condition
of receiving a license, to have and
maintain certain financial protection to
cover public liability claims.
In addition, there are three types of
statutory exemptions from the
notification requirements for releases of
hazardous substances:
(1) Federally permitted releases as
denned in section 101(10). (section
103(a)J;
(2) Application of pesticide products
registered under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). (section
103(e)): and
(3) Certain releases of hazardous wastes
which are required to be reported (or
specifically exempted from a
requirement for reporting) under the
provisions of RCRA and which are
reported to the National Response
Center (section 103(f)(l)).
While radionuclides conceivably
could be present in low levels in some
pesticides, the pesticide exemption is
not significant for radionuclides. RCRA
includes under its jurisdiction hazardous
wastes containing naturally occurring
and accelerator-produced radioactive
material (NARM). and therefore. NARM
releases reported under RCRA an
exempt from CERCLA's reporting
requirements. However, because RCRA
does not cover source, byproduct and
special nuclear materials other than in
mixtures with other hazardous wastes.
and does not cover NARM releases
other than in wastes, the RCRA
reporting exemption does not apply to
releases of these materials.
The federally permitted release
exemption is based on a lengthy
statutory definition of "federally
permitted release" in section 101(10) of
the Act that includes a reference to
radioactive material:
(10) "federally permitted release"
mean* . . . (K) any release of source, special
nuclear, or byproduct material at those
terms are defined in the Atomic Energy Act
of IBM. In compliance with • legally
enforceable license, permit regulation, or
order issued pursuant to the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954.
EPA plans to clarify the provisions of
CERCLA section 101(10) in a future
rulemaking. The preamble to that
regulation will contain some general
discussion of the federally permitted
release exemption, including the
provision referenced above, and a
response to comments received on the
May 25.1083 NPRM (48 FR 23552) which
first discussed the federally permitted
release exemptions. The following
discussion is a more detailed
explanation of the federally permitted
release exemption as it applies to
radionuclides.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
is responsible for many activities undei
the Atomic Energy Act. Licenses and
permits may be issued by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission or by states to
whom the authority to regulate
radiation-related activities has been
relinquished under an agreement with
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (i.e..
Agreement States). Releases in
compliance with licenses and permits
issued by Agreement States under an
agreement with the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission are federally permitted
releases. These licensing and permitting
activities generally cover production.
transfer, receipt, acquisition, use.
delivery, and ownership by any person
of source, special nuclear, or byproduct
material They include activities
regulated in conformanee with
Environmental Radiation Protection
Standards for Nuclear Powered
Operations (40 CFR Part 190) and
Environmental Standards for Uranium
and Thorium Mill Tailings (40 CFR Part
192] issued by EPA under the Atomic
Energy Act Facilities typically handling
source materials include uranium mills
and uranium processing facilities.
Byproduct materials are used at a wide
variety of facilities including
radiopharmaceutical manufacturers.
hospitals and clinics, sealed source
manufacturers, and laboratories. Special
nuclear material is primarily used as
fuel for nuclear reactors and in the
production of nuclear weapons.
Regulations issued by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission specifically
exempt certain facilities from the
Commission's licensing, permitting, and
regulatory requirements. Generally,
these include facilities operated under
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
contracts; transport carriers of source.
byproduct or special nuclear material:
those using "unimportant quantities" of
source material: and certain production
and utilization facilities operated by or
for the Department of Defense (see 10
CFR Parts 30.40.50 and 70). Because of
their specific exemption from licensing.
permitting, and regulatory requirements
of the Commission, the Agency does not
consider releases of radionuclides from
these facilities to be "federally
permitted." Therefore, such releases
would not fall under the reporting
exemption defined in section 101(10) of
CERCLA.
Administration of the Atomic Energy
Act does not reside solely with the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. To the
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Prooosed Rules
extent releases from sources are in
accordance with licenses, permits.
orders, or regulations iuued under the
Atomic Energy Act through provisions
not administered by the Commission.
they also would be considered federally
permitted releases. This would include
orders issued under the Department of
Energy's Atomic Energy Act authority.
Other aspects of the federally
permitted release exemption also could
apply in the case of radionuclides. The
exemption generally covers discharges
and emissions in compliance with
permits and control regulations under
various environmental statutes.
Radionuclides are. for example.
regulated by EPA as a hazardous air
pollutant under section 112 of the Clean
Air Act. Any radionuclide release
subject to a specific emission limitation
or control regulation established under
that section would be exempt as
federally permitted, if the release were
in compliance with the applicable Clean
Air Act limit. If the release, however.
exceeded the permitted level by an RQ
or more, the release would be subject to
the CERCLA reporting requirements.
This issue will be clarified further in the
separate rulemaking for the federally
permitted release reporting exemption.
In addition to the statutory
exemptions from the RQ notification
requirements for releases of hazardous
substances, section 103(f)(2) of the Act
provides a reduced reporting
requirement for releases that are
"continuous" and "stable in quantity
and rate." Such releases only need to be
reported annually or when there is a
statistically significant increase in the
quantity of the hazardous substance
released. Therefore, releases of
radionuclides that are "continuous" and
"stable in quantity and rate" may
qualify for this reduced reporting
requirement. The Agency plans to
clarify the language and the notification
requirements for continuous releases in
a future rulemaking.
In summary, release* of radionuclides
that do not fall within one of the four
specifically-listed exclusions under
CERCLA section 101(22) and do not fall
under one of the three statutory
exemptions under CERCLA section 103.
would be subject to this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking.
(II. Duplicate Reporang/Regulatefy
Consistency
Several federal agencies have existing
requirements to report radionuclide
releases, including the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission and the
Departments of Transportation and
Energy. EPA may also require reporting
under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). The relevant reporting
requirements of each agency are briefly
summarized in this section.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
controls the handling of source.
byproduct, and special nuclear materials
through an extensive licensing and
regulatory program. This program
includes several different requirements
for responsible parties to report releases
of radionuclides immediately in certain
cases of material loss or where a release
may have caused or threatens to cause
certain dose or intake levels to
individuals (see 10 CFR Parts 20. 30.40,
and 70). In addition to these
requirements, the Commission has
several other requirements to report
within a specified time after a release.
but not immediately (e.g.. within 24
hours or within 30 days for releases
involving potential for lower levels of
exposure and lower radioactive
concentrations).
The Department of Transportation
(DOT) is responsible for regulating
safety in the transportation of all
hazardous materials. Accordingly. DOT
has promulgated the Hazardous
Materials Regulations (49 CFR Parts
171-177) to govern the transportation of
hazardous materials, including
radioactive materials, and the reporting
of releases associated with transport
Reporting is required for each incident
occurring during the course of
transportation, including death, injury.
property damage exceeding $50.000, or
spillage or suspected contamination.
DOT defines radioactive material as any
material having a specific activity
greater than 0.002 microcuries per gram.
According to a Memorandum of
Understanding (44 FR 38890. July 2.1979)
between DOT and the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission. DOT will
promptly notify the Commission of any
accidents, incidents, and instances of
actual or suspected leakage involving
radioactive material packages if such an
event occurs in transit DOT also has the
responsibility of encouraging the non-
Agreement States to impose incident
reporting requirements for radioactive
matenals on shippers and receivers
subject to the states' jurisdiction.
The Department of Energy (DOE)
plays two entirely different roles in the
area of radionuclide releases. In the first
role, there are many established
requirements for DOE or its contractors
and other members of the regulated
community to report radionuclide
releases immediately, generally to a
DOE regional operation office, which
may in rum report the release to DOE
Headquarters. Many of these
requirements are self-imposed and are
spelled out in several different internal
orders written under the authority of the
Atomic Energy Act. Their purposes
include environmental protection.
safety, and health protection. In its
second role. DOE. through the Federal
Radiological Monitoring and
Assessment Plan, provides expertise.
guidance, and assistance in response to
radiological hazards created by others.
DOE is generally exempt from licensing
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
through the Atomic Energy Act. and is
thus exempt from the Commission's
reporting requirements discussed above.
However, as a matter of policy. DOE
requires reporting to external
organizations to keep them apprised of
important events at DOE facilities.
Section 8(e) of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) also may require
reporting where CERCLA does not.
Pursuant to « Statement of
Interpretation published March 16,1978
(43 FR 11110). all emergency incidents of
environmental contamination that
present a "substantial risk of injury to
health or the environment" must be
reported to EPA under TSCA section
8{e). Section 8(e) could require
notification even where no CERCLA
hazardous substances or RQs have been
released. Persons subject to the
notification requirement include both
natural persons and business entities
engaged in the manufacturing.
processing, or commercial distribution
of chemical substances or mixtures. No
notification is required if the
manufacturer, processor, or distributor
knows that EPA has been informed of
the nsk presented by the incident For
radionuclide releases subject to
CERCLA. a single notification to the
National Response Center will satisfy
both CERCLA and TSCA section 8(e)
reporting requirements: the Agency will
ensure that section 8(e) reports are
passed to the proper authorities.
CERCLA reporting requirements
remain applicable and mandatory
despite occasional overlap with the
reporting requirements noted above
under other statutes and authorities. At
most, the duplication that exists may
require that more than one telephone
call concerning a release be made by the
releaser and recorded by government
agencies. The releaser's responsibility to
notify other federal agencies Is not
affected by this proposed rule. EPA will
be continuing it» efforts to coordinate its
regulation of radionuclides and
cooperate with other federal agencies.
-------
IV. Reputable Quantity Adjustments for
Radionudides
A. Introduction and Previous RQ
Adjustment Methodology
The primary purpose of the CERCLA
notification requirements is to ensure
that releasers notify the government so
that the need for a federal response can
be evaluated and any necessary
response undertaken in a timely fashion.
With this purpose in mind. EPA has to
date promulgated two final rules.
adjusting a total of 442 of the statutory
RQs for CERCLA hazardous substances
(50 FR13456. April 4.1985: 51 FR 34534.
September 29.1986). All of these RQ
adjustments are based on specific
scientific and technical criteria that
relate to the potential toxicological and
chemical effects of a hazardous
substance. The adjusted RQs do not
reflect a determination that a release of
a substance will be hazardous at the RQ
level and not hazardous below that
level. EPA has not attempted to make
such a determination because the actual
hazard will vary with the unique
circumstances of the release, and
extensive data and analysis would be
necessary to determine the hazard
presented by each substance in a
number of possible circumstances.
Instead, the RQs reflect the Agency's
judgment of which releases should
trigger mandatory notification to the
federal government so that the
government may assess to what extent
if any. a federal removal or remedial
action may be necessary.
The RQ adjustments made to date
have been designed to:
(1) Protect public health and the
environment more effectively.
(2) Improve EPA's ability to
concentrate its attention and resources
on the releases that potentially are most
threatening to public health or welfare
or the environment* and
(3) Reduce the burdens of reporting on
the regulated community.
The selected strategy used for
adjusting RQs in previous nilemakings
begins with an evaluation of the
intrinsic physical, chemical, and
toxicological properties of each
designated hazardous substance. The
intrinsic properties examined—called
"primary criteria"—are aquatic toxicity.
mammalian toxicity (oral, dermal and
inhalation), ignitability. reactivity.
chronic toxicity. and potential
carcinogenic-ty. (For the purposes of this
rule, chronic toxicity is defined as
toxicity resulting from repeated or
continuous exposure to either a single
release or multiple releases of a
hazardous substance.)
The Agency generally ranks each
intrinsic property on a five-tier scale.
associating a specified range of values
on each scale with a particular RQ
value. Thus, each substance receives
several tentative RQ values based on its
particular properties. The lowest of all
of the tentative RQs becomes the
"primary criteria RQ" for that
substance.
After the primary criteria RQs are
assigned, substances are further
evaluated for their susceptibility to
certain degradative processes. These
natural degradative processes are
biodegradation, hydrolysis, and
photolysis, or "BMP." If the analysis
indicates that a substance degrades
relatively rapidly to a less harmful
compound through one or more of these
processes when it is released into the
environment the primary criteria RQ is
raised one level. The single RQ assigned
to each substance on the basis of the
primary criteria and BHP becomes the
adjusted RQ for that substance.
For purposes of RQ adjustments using
the primary criteria noted above under
CERCLA. (other than potential
carcinogenicity—see the separate NPRM
published in today's Federal Register).
EPA has adopted the five RQ levels of 1.
10.100.1000. and 5000 pounds originally
established pursuant to CWA section
311 (see 40 CFR Part 117). The Agency
adopted the CWA five-level system
primarily because (1) it has been used
successfully pursuant to the CWA. (2)
the regulated community is already
familiar with these five levels, and (3) it
distinguishes the broad range of
potential harm posed by CERCLA
hazardous substances.
Even though EPA will continue to use
this established five-level system for
most RQ adjustments, the Agency does
not believe that it represents an
appropriate approach for radionuclides
in either the choice of levels or the unit
of measurement (pounds). A one-pound
RQ for radionuclides. the lowest
currently available, would not trigger
timely reporting or response for releases
of many radionuclides. In many cases.
releases of radionuclides that are
several orders of magnitude smaller
than one pound can represent a health
and environmental threat that merits
reporting to the National Response
Center. A one-pound RQ also does not
conform to accepted units for radiation
protection. The commonly accepted
units for radiation protection are (1) rem
(or sieverts) which measure the amount
of biological damage resulting from
exposure to ionizing radiation, and (2)
curies (or becquerels) which measure
the rate of radioactive decay and thus
the rate at which radiation is given off
by a substance (activity level). Finally, a
one-pound RQ level would differ
significantly from reporting
requirements for radionuclides under
other regulations issued by EPA and
other agencies. For these reasons. EPA
is proposing a different approach for
radionuclides (see discussion of the
selected option in Section IV.B. of this
preamble).
Section 102(a) of CERCLA authorizes.
and the legislative history encourages.
the Administrator to set a single RQ for
any hazardous substance, regardless of
the medium into which that substance is
released. In order to develop simple and
practical notification provisions, the
Agency has to date established a single
RQ for each hazardous substance. If
multiple RQs which vary in accordance
with the environmental media into
which the substance is released were
established. It would be more difficult
for the regulated community to comply
with the reporting requirements.
Because releases often occur into more
than one medium, the releaser. under a
multi-RQ format, would be uncertain
which RQ would apply. EPA is
proposing, therefore, to continue the
single-RQ approach for each
radionuclide,
B. Options Considered and
Radionuclide RQ Methodology
EPA formed an interagency work
group consisting of representatives of
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, tl
U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Departments
of Energy and Transportation, and
several offices within EPA to discuss
issues and alternative approaches for
adjusting the radionuclide RQ. The work
group evaluated a number of options
before selecting the approach chosen in
this proposal The following principal
options were rejected:
Option 1: Leaving the radionuclide RQ
at one pound
The Agency considered establishing
an adjusted RQ for radionuclides equal
to the statutory RQ of one pound. As
discussed above in section IV.A. of this
preamble, a one-pound RQ level would
allow numerous potentially significant
releases of many radionuclides to go
unreported. Many such releases well
below one pound could represent a
potential health and environmental
threat. In addition, a one-pound RQ does
not conform to commonly accepted units
or accepted levels for radiation
protection, and it would differ
significantly from reporting
requirements under other radionuclide
regulations issued by EPA and other
agencies. Finally, one pound translates
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules 8177
into a different amount of radioactivity.
and thus a different hazard level, fur
each radionuclide.
Option 2: Establishing a dose-equivalent
level as the radionuclide RQ
A dose-equivalent level, in units of
rent or sieverts. is a measure of the
amount of biological damage resulting
from exposure to ionizing radiation.
Dose-equivalent limits are frequently
established in groups, such as 25
millirem to the whole body and 75
millirem to the thyroid gland.
Radionuchdes could be considered as a
class with a dose-equivalent level, or a
set of dose-equivalent levels (e.g., whole
body and thyroid gland separately)
could be assigned to the entire class.
Estimating a dose-equivalent level can
be quite complicated. The dose
equivalent may vary substantially for
different release circumstances, even if
the same quantity of radionuclide is
released. In addition, estimating dose-
equivalent levels requires making
numerous assumptions, and the level of
dose may vary drastically under
different assumptions. Because of all the
judgments and assumptions required to
estimate dose equivalents, the estimated
dose equivalent for two different,
releases with the same level of activity
of the same radionuclide may vary
drastically under different assumptions.
This potential variability makes it
difficult to (1) assure that the
government will be notified of all
radionuclide releases that it deems
necessary; and (2) enforce an RQ in
dose-equivalent units.
A dose-equivalent level is also more
difficult to estimate quickly during an .
actual release event than an activity
level. The Agency determined that an
RQ in terms of dose equivalent (rem)
would leave a significant amount of
judgment to the person in charge of the
facility or vessel. The person in charge
would be required to estimate the
quantity released, the potential rentes of
exposure, the period of exposure, and
the most vulnerable organ of the body
potentially affected by the release. In
essence, if the RQ wen to be
established in units of rem. the person in
charge of the vessel or facility would be
placed in a position of determining
whether the release posed a threat to
public health or welfare or the
environment. CERCLA establishes that
role for the federal government, not for
the person in charge of the vessel or
facility.
Option 3: Considering radionuclides as a
class with a single activity level
Activity level is measured in units of
curies or becquereis. and is an accepted
unit of radiation measurement. The
Agency considered establishing one RQ
m units of curies for the entire class of
radionuclides.
This option has the advantage of
being simple, and curies are relatively
easy to measure quickly during a
release. It does not. however, account
for the varying degrees of hazard posed
by the same activity level of different
radionuclides. The same level of
radioactivity (i.e.. the same number of
curies) of two different radionuclides
may yield two entirely different dose
levels. Therefore, while simplicity in
•reporting must be sought, it should not
be accomplished by glossing over
substantial differences among individual
radionuclides. It would be extremely
difficult to derive an RQ that is a single
level of activity and that would provide
timely reporting of the most hazardous
radionuclides while not requiring too
many reports for others. A single level of
activity could, however, be an
appropriate RQ if it were only applied to
a group of sim Jar radionuclides (see
Option 4 below).
Option 4: Grouping radionuclides into
categories with an activity level
assigned to each of the separate
categories
Radionuclldes may be separated into
various groups in such a way that a
single level of activity may be an
appropriate RQ for all the radionuclides
within a given group. One RQ. which
would assure timely reporting for
releases of the most hazardous
radionuclide(s). could then be assigned
to the overall group. For example.
radionuclides could be grouped into
"half-life categories" with progressively
higher RQs for those categories having
shorter half lives. Another example is to
separate radionuclides into groups of
alpha, beta, and gamma emitters. The
RQs for non-radioactive substances
have been established in a similar
fashion, with different RQs for different
groups of chemicals that exhibit similar
chemical properties.
The Agency chose not to adopt this
option with either of the above methods
of categorizing radionuclides. The
Agency believes that radionuclides
grouped into "half-life categories" with
progressively higher RQs for those
categories having shorter half lives may
not be protective of human health and
the environment. For radionuclide
releases which deliver the same total
radiation dose, radionuclides with
shorter half lives will emit radiation at a
higher rate. Therefore, for radionuclides
with relatively short half lives, the
federal government may wish to receive
notification of relatively small releases
of such radionuclides to determine
whether a response action is necessary.
even if the radiation danger is relatively
short lived. With regard to categorizing
radionuclides on the basis of whether
they are primarily alpha, beta, or gamma
emitters, the actual threat to human
health is less dependent on the nature of
the emission than on the route of
exposure. In addition, there are
numerous radionuclides that fall into
each of these categones. and a single
activity-level RQ for the group may not
be appropriate for all the individual
group members.
The Selected Approach.—The EPA-
preferred option begins with a decision
to establish an RQ in terms of activity
(measured in units of cunes) for
individual radionuclides. The primary
advantages of this strategy are:
• A level of radioactivity generally is
much easier to measure than dose
equivalent, would be easier to confirm.
and would provide more timely
reporting than an RQ in terms of dose
equivalent.
• Establishing RQs for radionuclides
individually would allow consideration
of individual radionuclide
characteristics.
This regulation proposes to revise
RQs for all of the approximately 1.800
currently known radionuclides. A large
majority of these, however, are listed as
a generic class with a single RQ.
To develop individual RQs in units of
curies, the Agency relied heavily on the
health data and human intake limits
published by the International
Commission on Radiation Protection
(ICRP). particularly as reflected in its
Publication 30 (Pergamon 1982). Data
were available for 757 radionuclides and
so analysis of individual radionuclides
was limited to this universe. The
Commission does not claim that this list
is comprehensive, but it does represent
all radionuclides for which data needed
by EPA to evaluate the effects of a
radionuclide release are available.
Thus. EPA is today proposing to
establish individual RQs for 757
radionuclides. Because of the
inadequacy of available data for all
other radionuclides. they are proposed
to be treated as a generic class with a
single RQ for the entire class.
Radionuclide RQ Adjustment
Methodology.—The development of the
individual proposed RQs begins with the
Annual Limitations of Intake (ALIs)
developed by the International
Commission on Radiation Protection.
The ALIs:
are the annual intakes of given radionuclide*
by 'Reference Man' which would result in
either (1) a committed effective dose
-------
8178
Federal Register / Vol. 52. NO. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
equivalent • of 5 rem to the whole body
(stochastic AU). or (2) a committed dose
equivalent' of SO rem to any organ or tissue
(non-stochastic ALJ).
The ICRP has presented Alls for both
oral ingestion and inhalation. The ALJs,
which are in units of microcuries. are
considered to produce harm comparable
to that of receiving a uniform whole
body dose-equivalent radiation
exposure of 5 rem. It is important to
clarify that the ALJs represent quantities
of radionuclides taken into the body, not
quantities released to the environment
These curie levels were adjusted by
EPA to reflect (i) the difference between
intake levels and release levels, and (2)
a lower dose equivalent of 500 millirem
(0.5 rem). a more protective limitation.
Federal Radiation Protection Guidance
recommends 500 millirem as an upper
bound on exposure to individual
members of the general public. The
Agency currently is considering making
a recommendation to lower this limit. In
anticipation of this action, the Agency i»
considering two alternative bases for
the calculation of radionuclide RQs.
These alternatives range between 25
millirem per year and 100 millirem per
year dose equivalent A 25 millirem per
year dot.e equivalent would result in
RQs of too the value of RQs in today's
notice. A100 millirem per year dose
equivalent would result in RQs of Vi the
value of RQs in today's notice. The 25
millirem limit reflects the standards in
existing regulations promulgated by
EPA. For example, rules which apply to
high-level radioactive waste disposal (46
CFR Part 191) limit exposure to the
general public to 25 millirem per year.
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) set
under the Clean Air Act (40 CFR Part 61)
also limit exposure to the general public
to 25 millirem per year. The higher
endpomt of the range, 100 millirem. is
believed to be a reasonable option for
the revision of the Federal Radiation
Protection Guidance.
For purposes of this mlenaking. the
Agency used conservative assumptions
regarding different releases to air and
water, and analyzed exposure through
inhalation, ingestion. and direct
exposure. The Agency then estimated
the smallest number of curies of e
radionuclide which, if released to the
environment, would be likely to result in
a person being exposed to a dose
equivalent of 500 millireBL
In developing proposed RQs. the
Agency does not account for radioactive
decay explicitly in its models. This is a
conservative approach resulting in
lower RQs for some short-lived
radionuclides because some short-lived
radionuclides decay prior to causing a
dose equivalent of 500 millirem. The
Agency took this conservative approach
to simplify the analysis and because few
radionuclide releases are expected to be
affected by this approach. EPA seeks
comment on the appropriateness of
incorporating explicitly radiological
decay in the models developed for the
exposure pathways discussed below. If
radionuclide half lives are incorporated
explicitly into the model calculations,
the RQs for some short-lived
radionuclides would increase.
Separate equations were derived to
adjust the ALJs to determine release
values in cunes for both the inhalation
and ingestion pathways. A third set of
equation* was derived to develop
release values on the basis of direct
exposure to a radionuclide release. All
of these equations are discussed briefly
below and in more derail in the
Technical Background Document to
Support Proposed Rulemaking Pursuant
to Section 102 of CERCLA:
Radionuclides (hereinafter Technical
Background Document), available for
inspection at Room LG-100 U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401M
Street SW. Washington. DC 20460. As
noted earlier, use of an activity level in
curies rather than a dose equivalent was
selected because it is easier to measure
and confirm, and would provide more
timely reporting than an RQ in terms of
dose equivalent
Inhalation.—The inhalation equation
derives e Release Value for each
radionuclide. Release Values are in
units of curies and represent the activity
level of each radionuclide which, if
released under conservative
circumstances, could result in an
exposed individual receiving a dose
equivalent of 500 millirem (0.5 rem). The
Release Values are derived by dividing
the ALJ for inhalation presented in the
ICRP Publication 30 by the product of
several factors:
Inhalation
Release Value
AU
10
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No 50 / Monday. March 15. 1387 / Proposed Rules
8179
radionuclides to reach the food chain is
following an atmospheric radioactive
release, e g. in the release from the
Chernobyl nuclear power plant many
F iropean countries had great concern
regarding the safety of food crops and
nnlk The Agency evaluated each of the
"57 radionuclides for which the ICRP
developed ALls and calculated Release
Values for two mgestion exposure
routes, fuuu crop and drinking water.
For the maiority of radionuclides. the
drinking water exposure route resulted
in lower Release Values (i.e.. was a
more critical route of exposure). Further.
for the radionuclides for which the food
crop pathway produced lower Release
Values, the Agency determined that in
the vast maionty of cases either
inhalation or direct exposure was even
more critical than food crop mgestion.
Therefore, the Agency has chosen to
proceed with development of a Release
Value for mgestion based on
consumption of contaminated drinking
water. In addition, to be most protective,
a ground-water exposure route was
selected over surface water exposure.
Based on our modeling assumptions, a
release of radionuclides into a river or
lake would likely result in larger dilution
factors than a release to an aquifer and
subsequently into a drinking water well.
This large dilution factor would result in
lower concentrations of radionuclides in
the drinking water and lower levels of
radioactive contamination. The
Technical Background Document has
further detail on the food crop, ground
water, and surface water exposure
routes. The Agency requests comments
and data pertaining to all exposure
scenanos.
The equation which EPA has adopted
for the calculation of Release Values
based on consumption of contaminated
ground water is:
Ingesiion
Release Value
All
10(DF)(CT)(WQ(1X10«J
where:
ALI=Lowest (ngettloci AU given in the ICRP
Publication 3ft
10=Conversion factor between 3 rem and 500
milhrem:
DF=Dilution Factor (I/liter):
CT- Contact time (days):
WC=Water consumption of "Reference
Man" (2 liters/day): and
1 x 10* = Conversion factor between
microcunes and cunes.
The maximum concentration in a
plume 30 meters downgradient from a
point source release is calculated using
ground-water advection-dispersion
modeling equations which take into
account sorption of the radionuclides in
the aquifer. This maximum
concentration is reflected in the Dilution
Factor (DF). Thirty meters is chosen for
consistency with the atmosphere model.
Contact time, calculated using the
advection-dispersion ground-water
model, is the total time a contaminant
plume will be in contact with a well
located 30 meters (in this case) from the
source. Contact time will vary by
radionuclide and will be related to the
sorption coefficient discussed above.
The daily water consumption estimate is
assumed by the ICRP to be 2 liters and
is used here.
Direct Exposure.—An equation with
the same parameters—the quantity of
radiation intercepted by "Reference
Man" (ICRP Publication 23. Pergamon.
1975) at a distance of 30 meters from a
release and limiting the exposure to 500
milhrem—also was developed to
calculate a value for a third route of
exposure, direct exposure to a point
source release of a radionuclide. The
direct exposure Release Values
represent the amount of radionuclide. in
curies, necessary to provide a gamma
ray dose of 500 millirad. the same as a
dose equivalent of 500 millirem. to an
individual 30 meters from a point source
release of radioactive material. Gamma
rays alone are considered in this
equation because the mean free path of
alpha and beta particles with energies
lower than 10 MeV is less than 30
meters. The Direct Exposure Release
Value equation is presented below:
(64lxiQ-»)(Dn)(S')
Direct Exposure
Release Value
when:
Dn - Dose equivalent (0.5 rem):
S° Distance from the release (30 mfc
Et ~ Summation of the product of the gamma
ray energies (MeV) and the gamma ray
fractions for each radionuclide:
o." Linear absorption coefficient for gamma
rays in air (cm*1):
T-Duration of exposure (Z4 hours); and
exp(-u^>)~ Atmospheric attenuation from the
point of release to the receptor.
The factor 6.41 x 10'5 is a constant
which relates gamma ray energy to
exposure, and is discussed in more
detail in the Technical Background
Document. The Agency requests
comments on this exposure scenario.
The Agency is also considering an
alternative method of calculating direct
exposure Release Values, using specific
gamma ray constants rather than the
direct exposure Release Value equation
discussed above. The gamma ray
constants are derived empirically and
are available only for a subset of
radionuclides. The Agency requests
comment on the appropriateness of
using the gamma ray constants
whenever available, and using the
equation discussed above for the
calculation of Release Values for
radionuclides when the constants are
not available.
A separate direct exposure equation
was developed for submersion in a
radioactive cloud of noble gas because
submersion in a radioactive cloud
results in an integrated dose from all
directions at varying distances from the
body, unlike direct exposure to a point
source. Ingestion and inhalation are not
significant exposure pathways for noble
gases as a result of their inertness, and
ALIs for ingestion and inhalation are not
presented by the ICRP for most noble
gases.
The direct exposure Release Values
for submersion in a radioactive cloud of
noble gas are denved for argon, krypton.
and xenon through the following
equation:
Direct Exposure Release
Value
asfDACim
10(X/Q)(1X101
where:
DAC«>Derived Airborne Concentration
(microcunes/cm*):
TB Duration of exposure (1 day):
10 •> Con version factor between 5 rem and 500
nullirenc
X/Q-Atmospheric Relative Concentration
Value at 30 meters (8.4 x 10'" day/cm*);
and
1 x 10* m Can version factor between
mlcrocunes and cunes.
The DAC value specifies the airborne
concentration that would result in a 5
rem whole body dose equivalent for a
2000 hour exposure period. To adjust the
airborne concentration from a 2000 hour
exposure period to a 24 hour exposure
period, we multiply the DAC value by 83
(2000 hours-!-24 hours). X/Q is the
ground-level concentration value 30
meters from the release point The
Agency requests comments and data on
this exposure scenario.
Establishing the RQ.—For each
radionuclide. therefore, three values are
-------
8180
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
derived. The Agency has selected the
lowest of the three values for each
specific radionudide with the intent of
choosing an RQ that is the most
protective of human health and the
environment. This is comparable to the
methodology used to adjust chemical
RQs >n previous rulemakings which
evaluates six intrinsic properties or
"primary criteria" for each hazardous
substance. After assigning tentative RQs
for the vanous properties, the lowest
tentative RQ becomes the "primary
criteria RQ" for that substance. A
detailed explanation of the methodology
used to derive proposed radionuchde
RQs can be found in Chapter 4 of the
Technical Background Document.
To simplify administration and
implementation of RQ reporting for the
757 separate radionuchdes. EPA has
decided to place each radionudide in
one of seven groups, each group
assigned a single specific proposed RQ.
The Technical Background Document
discusses this assignment of RQs in
greater detail The proposed RQs for the
seven radionudide groups are aa
follows:
Pro-
posed
adfusted
RQ(m
nines)
0.001
0.01
01
1
10
100
1000
Lowest release
value range (in
CuneS)
0001-0.0099
0.01-0.099 -. .
0 1-099
1-999
10-99.99
100-999.99
1000 and greater....
Number of
radtono-
cfade*
6 (0 .6%)
25 (3.3%)
24 (3.2%)
35 (4.6%)
342 (45.2%)
236 (31.2%)
89(11.6%)
AD known radionuclides not Hated by
the ICRP have been assigned a proposed
final RQ of one curie. Available
information on these radionuclides is
insufficient for any meaningful analysis
by the Agency of the appropriateness of
any particular RQ for individual
radionuclides in this group or the group
as a whole. A proposed RQ of one curie
was selected because it is the middle
RQ category, and the majority of
radionuclides (93 percent) examined
individually have proposed RQs at least
at this level. The Agency expects that
releases of an RQ or more of any of
these radionnclides would be rare.
Therefore. EPA is proposing a group RQ
that it believes is sufficiently protective
of public health and welfare and the
environment without posing an
unreasonable burden on the regulated
community.
Assignment of the individually
calculated RQ to one of the seven
groups and placement of other
radionudides in the genenc RQ group
should not be interpreted to mean that
all radionuchdes in any given group
represent the same threat or danger to
public health and welfare and the
environment. Two or more radionuclides
with the same proposed RQ do not
reflect a determination that a release of
one will be as hazardous as the release
of another, or even that the release of
one will be hazardous at the proposed
RQ level and not hazardous below that
level. The actual hazard will vary with
the unique circumstances of the release.
and extensive scientific data and
analysis would be necessary to
determine the hazard presented by each
substance under a number of possible
circumstances. The proposed RQs are
designed to be a trigger for notification
and reflect the Agency's judgment that
the federal government should be
notified of certain releases to which a
federal response might be necessary.
The RQs represent a determination only
of possible or potential harm, not that
releases of a particular amount of a
hazardous substance necessarily will be
harmful to public health or welfare or
the environment
C. Alternative Approaches
In addition to the method and
assumptions used to develop the RQ
adjustments proposed today. EPA is
soliciting comments on the underlying
assumptions discussed above and also
is considering other methodologies for
developing RQs for radionuclides. These
approaches are described below. EPA
requests public comment on whether
one of these approaches or a related
approach would be more appropriate for
establishing the RQ adjustments in the
final rule than that used for today's
proposal.
1. Use Similar Pathway-Based
Methodology, but with Different
Assumptions
In the method used to develop today's
proposed RQs. EPA has chosen to model
the pathways that could be taken by
released radionuclides. using three
exposure scenarios for each of the 757
radionudides for which intake limits are
available. Under this approach, the
assumptions governing exposure
scenarios are critical to the outcome.
While EPA believes the scenarios used
were reasonable, there could be
circumstances where an actual release
results in a dose equivalent higher than
500 millirem. Therefore, the Agency is
considering the use of different
assumptions, which could result in
different RQs for many radionuclides.
EPA recognizes that, when using
modeling techniques such as the three
selected exposure scenarios, there will
be instances in which the facts of a
particular situation may vary from the
assumptions relied upon in the model.
For example, the three exposure
scenarios incorporate the assumption
that the distance between the release
and the point of exposure is 30 meters, it
is possible, however, that an exposed
individual may be located nearer to the
release. A different assumed distance
would result in different calculated
Release Values for these pathways, and
different resulting RQs in some cases.
EPA is considering and soliciting
comments on whether a shorter distance
(perhaps as low as one meter) may be
more appropriate.
EPA also is considering whether other
assumptions used in the three exposure
scenanos are sufficiently protective of
public health, such as the penod for
direct exposure. Exposure to an
unreported release could continue
longer than the 24-hour period used in
the scenario. Therefore, an assumption
of six months or one year of exposure
may be more appropriate than a 24-hour
exposure period. The Agency solicits
public comment and data on this general
issue and suggestions for the most
appropriate choices for exposure
scenarios for the development of RQs.
2. Establish RQs aa a Multiple of the
ALIs
EPA also is soliciting comment on
alternative methodologies for
calculating RQs. For inhalation and
ingestion. one method under
consideration is to multiply the lowest
ALJ for each radionuchde by a selected
numerical constant. EPA is considering
numerical constants such as 5. For the
very worst case of exposure, i.e..
ingestion or inhalation of 100 percent of
a release by a single individual, an
amount of 5 times the ALJ would result
in a radiation dose of 25 rem. a dose at
which measurable immediate effects are
first observed. Because the numerical
constant of 5 is related to an assumption
that may be overly conservative. EPA
also is considering higher numerical
constants which might be justified by
considering exposures less conservative
than the very wont case. EPA also is
considering lower numerical constants
to reflect a lower acceptable dose
equivalent. EPA requests comment on
this approach, on a suitable choice for
the numerical constant, and on a
rationale for the numerical constant
chosen.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
D. Reporting Requirements for Mixtures
of Radionuclides
Some releases of radioactive
substances are likely to consist of
mixtures of radionuclides. These
releases will be one of two general
types: mixtures of known composition or
mixtures of unknown composition.
Mixtures of Known Composition
The Agency is proposing the following
method for evaluating mixtures of
known composition. This method ia
different from the mixture rule for other
hazardous substances established under
the Clean Water Act (see SO FR13456
April 4.1985).
Reporting requirements for releases
involving mixtures of known
composition can be obtained directly
from the proposed RQs for individual
constituents of the mixture. If the
identity and quantity (in curies) of each
radionuclide involved in a release event
is known, the decision whether to report
a release must be made in the following
manner for each radionuclide in the
mixture, determine the ratio between the
quantity released in curies and the RQ
for the radionuclide. If the sum of the
ratios for all radionuclides is less than 1.
the release need not be reported. If the
sum is equal to or greater than X. the
release must be reported to the National
Response Center.
For example, if radionuclides "a", "b".
and "c" are present in quantities Qa.
Qb. and Qc curies in a mixture, and if
the proposed RQs are RQa. RQb, and
RQc. respectively, then the quantity
released for the mixture does not equal
or exceed the proposed RQ and the
release need not be reported to tha
National Response Center if [Qa/
RQa+Qb/RQb+Qc/RQc) is less than 1.
This convention for handling releases of
radionuclide mixtures is recommended
by the ICRP and presently is used in
existing federal regulations (e.g, 10CFR
Part 20).
Mixtures of Unknown Composition
Reporting requirements for mixtures.
where either the amount or identity of
the radionuclides in the mixture an
unknown, cannot be based oa the
determination of quantities released,
There are three possibilities: (1) The
identity of the radionuclides involved i»
known, but the amounts released of
each is unknown. (2) the identity of the
radionuclides (or one of the
radionuclides] in the mixture is
unknown, but the amount released is
known in total curies per unit volume or
weight, or (3) the identity of the
radionuclides involved is unknown and
the amount of radionuclides released in
the mixture is unknown. For these cases.
EPA proposes that the decision to report
a release be made as follows:
(1) Identity known, but amount
unknown.
If the identity of each radionuclide in the
mixture is known but the amount of one
or more of the radionuclides is
unknown, the RQ for the mixture shall
be the lowest RQ of any radionuclide in
the mixture.
This method for determining the RQ of
a mixture assures a report to the
National Response Center if the total
number of curies involved in a release is
equal to or greater than the RQ in curies
of the substance with the lowest
proposed RQ in the mixture.
(2) and (3) Identity of radionuclides)
in the release is unknown.
If the identity of a radionuclide In a
release is unknown or if the identity of
one or more radionuclides in the release
of a mixture of radionoclides is
unknown, the release must be reported
to the National Response Center if the
total release is equal to or greater than 1
curie, or if the total release is equal to or
greater than the lowest RQ of any-
known radionuclide in the mixture.
whichever is lower.
Establishing an RQ of 1 curie for a
release in which the identity of the
radionuclide or radionuclides involved
is unknown is consistent with the 1 curie
RQ for the class of radionuclides for
which insufficient data exist to establish
individual RQs. This mixture rule
requires reporting if the release equal*
or exceeds 1 curie, or. if some
component of the mixture is known and
its RQ is less than 1 curie, then the total
release must be reported if it equals or
exceeds the RQ of the known
component The Agency also is
considering establishing an RQ for
unknown mixtures at 0.001 curie, the
lowest proposed RQ level This is based
upon the assumption that the release
may be of the most dangerous
radionuclide. This approach assures that
the government has the opportunity to
evaluate all uncertain bat potentially
dangerous radionuclide release* and
respond, if necessary.
Common Radionndide Mixtures
The Agency today also is proposing to
establish RQs for two common
radionuclide mixtures: radium-228 in
equilibrium with its daughters, and
natural uranium. The Agency ia
proposing these RQs for the
convenience of persons frequently
handling these mixture*. The RQs are
developed directly from the mixture ml*
discussed above.
Radium-228 has a half life of 1.600
years, substantially greater than the half
lives of its daughters. After a sufficient
period of time, however, a state of
equilibrium is established in the
mixture, such that the quantity of
activity present for each daughter
product and the parent radium is equal.
When radium and its daughters reach
this state of equilibrium, the RQ of the
mixture is 0.43 curie, in contrast to the 1
curie RQ for radium-228.
Natural uranium is composed of the
isotopes uranium-238 (99.27 percent by
weight), uranium-234 (0.0057 percent by
weight), and uranium-235 (0.72 percent
by weight). Because we know the
composition by weight of natural
uranium, we can denve the activity
levels of each of its components. The
proposed RQ for natural uranium.
derived through the mixture rule, is 0.1
curie, the same as the RQ for the 3
isotopes in the mixture.
Mixed fission products are also
recognized by the Agency as an
important and common radionuclide
mixture. However, the Agency today is
proposing RQ* only for the individual
radionuclide components within mixed
fission products because an RQ for this
mixture would have to be time*
dependent That is. at different times.
the concentration of the different
components of this mixture will be
different In addition, the composition of
mixed fission products depends upon
the type of reactor which produces the
mixed fission product Thus, different
RQs would need to be presented for
different mixed fission products.
E. Other Issues
Estimating the Effects of Radiation
The harmful effects of radiation on
humans have been the focus of most of
the research efforts concerning radiation
exposure in the past EPA. of course.
also is concerned with the broader
problem of potentially deleterious
effects to the environment, as well as to
humans. In adjusting radionuclide RQs.
the Agency's goal is to ensure, to the
extent possible, ample protection for the
most sensitive species of flora and
fauna. To identify the most sensitive
species, the Agency reviewed the
existing literature and determined that
present information indicates that RQs
chosen to provide adequate protection
of the human specie* would be
sufficiently protective of the
environment as welL The Agency has
determined, therefore, that RQ
adjustments developed with the goal of
protecting public health also will
adequately protect the environment
-------
EPA solicits public comments on this
approach.
Individual RQs
EPA is interested in receiving public
comment on the selected methodology
and on whether RQs for individual
radionuclides are believed to be too low
or loo high. EPA would be interested in
suggestions and data regarding what
criteria the Agency should consider in
technically or administratively adjusting
a proposed RQ for an individual
rjdionuclide.
Concentration Cutoff
Under this proposed rule, releases of
large volumes of dilute material, which
present little or no immediate danger to
public health, could be reportable.
Therefore. EPA is considering whether a
concentration cutoff (expressed in curies
per gram), below which the RQs for
radionuclides would not apply (similar
in principle to that used by DOT in
defining radioactive material (see
section III of this notice)) would be
appropriate to eliminate unnecessary
and excessive reporting.
The basis of the DOT concentration
cutoff is to avoid regulation of natural
objects for which the application of
transportation regulations governing
radioactive materials is not intended.
EPA is considering a similar'
concentration cutoff because there may
be no benefit in requiring reports of
releases of radioactive materials in such
low concentrations. However, if a large
quantity of low concentration material is
released, the release may represent a
threat to public health, welfare, and the
environment to which the federal
government may want to respond.
EPA requests comments on the
appropriateness of having a
concentration cutoff and on what that
cutoff should be. In particular, the
Agency requests comment on using 0.002
microcuries per gram (the DOT value) as
a cutoff.
V. Summary of Supporting Analyse*
Rulemaking protocol under Executive
Order 12291 requires that proposed
regulations be classified as major or .
non-major for purposes of review by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). According to E.0.12291. major
rales are regulations that are likely to
result in:
(1) An annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or more: or
(2) A major increase in costs or prices
for consumers, individual industries.
federal, state, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions: or
(3) Significant adverse effects on
competition, employment. Investment
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
enterprises to compete with foreign-
based enterprises in domestic or export
markets.
The Economic Impact Analysis for the
Proposed Reportable Quantities
Adjustments for Radionuclides under
section 102 of CERCLA (Economic
Impact Analysis), available for
inspection at Room LC-100. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
Street. SW. Washington. DC 20460.
shows that today's proposed regulation
is non-major, because adoption of the
proposed rule will result in an estimated
total annual cost of $178.000 to the
government and the regulated
community, with the letter's share being
less than $27.300 annually.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1960
requires that a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis be performed for all rules that
are likely to have a "significant impact
on a substantial number of small
entities." EPA certifies that this
regulation will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. See Chapter Six of the
Economic Impact Analysis.
EPA requires an Information Impact
Analysis to be carried out for all rules
that impose a paperwork burden on the
public. This analysis estimates the
burden imposed on parties outside EPA
for activities such as recordkeeping or
notification. It is anticipated that RQ
adjustments will change the paperwork
burden imposed on the regulated
community for information collection
associated with reporting releases. As
estimated in Chapter Six of the
Economic Impact Analysis, the
paperwork burden of notification and
recordkeeping on private parties will be
approximately 43 additional
notifications annually.
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of I960.44 U.S.C 3501 et
seq.. the reporting or recordkeeping
provisions that are included in this
proposed rule have been submitted for
approval to OMB under section 3504(h)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act. Any
final rule will include an explanation of
how the reporting or recordkeeping
provisions contained therein respond to
any comments by OMB and the public.
List of Subjects In 40 CFR Part 303
Air pollution control. Chemicals.
Hazardous materials. Hazardous
materials transportation. Hazardous
substances. Hazardous wastes.
Intergovernmental relations. Natural
resources. Source, byproduct and
special nuclear materials. Mineral
mining. Radioactive materials.
Radionudide. Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements. Superfund.
Waste treatment and disposal. Water
pollution control.
Ddled December 31.1986.
Lee M. Thomas.
AJministrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, it is proposed to amend Title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 302—DESIGNATION,
REPORTABLE QUANTITIES, AND
NOTIFICATION
1. The authority citation for Part 302 is
revised to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 102 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response. Compensation, and
Liability Act of I960, as amended. 42 U S.C.
9602: sect. 311 and SOl(a) of (he Federal
Water Pollution Control Act. 33 U.S.C 1321
and 1361.
8302.4 [Amended]
2. In Section 302.4. Table 302.4 is
amended by revising the entry for
"Radionuclides" under the "Final RQ"
column for "Pounds (kg)" to read:"{."
3. In Section 302.4. Table 302.4 la
amended by revising the footnote at the
end of the table explaining "{" to read:
"8—the adjusted RQs for
radionuclides may be found in
Appendix B to this table."
4. In Section 302.4. Table 302.4 is
amended by adding the following table
as Appendix B:
APPENDIX B-RADIONUCLIDES
Radionudide
RADIONUCLIDES
Actmwm424
Actmmnv225 .••—•.•............
Actrwum-226
Actmium-227
Actmium-228
Alurnmum-26 .
Amencwm-237
Amenounv238
Amenaum-239
Amenaum-240
Amenoum-241
Amencium-242m .__
Amenaum-242
Amenaun>243
Am«nckmv244m
Amenaum-244
Amenaum-245
Amenaum-246m
Amenaunv246...
Antmony-1 1 5
Antimony- 1 16m
Antimony- 1 18
Antbnony-117 ._ ..
Antimony* 1 16fn ......,,,....,.
Antimony- 1 19
Antunony-120 (16 mm)_
Atomc
Number
89
89
89
89
89
13
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
95
51
51
51
51
51
51
51
Proposed
RCMO)
1&
100
1
10
0001
10
10
100
10
100
10
0.01
001
100
001
1000
10
1000
10
10
10
10
10
100
10
100
1000
-------
federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
8183
APPENDIX 8— RADIONUCt
Continued
Radnnudide
Antimony- 120 (576
day)
Antimony- 122
Antimony- 124m
Antimony-124 .
Antimony- 125
Antimony- 126m ._
Antimony- 126
Antimony- 1 27
Antimony.128 (10.4
mm).
Antimony-128 (9.01 hr)..
Antimony- 129
Antimony- 130
Anbmony-131
Argon-39
Argon-41
Arserac-69 _
Arsemc-70 _
Arserac-71
Arsarac-72
Arsenc-73
Arsene-74 _..
Arsenc-76
Arserac 77 _
Arsarac-78 __
Astatine-207
Astatine-211 _
Banum-126
Banum-128
BanunvlSIm
Banum-1 31
Banum-I33m
Barium-133 _
Banum-1 35m _
Banum-1 39 _
Banum-1 40 _...
Banum-1 41 _
Banum-1 42.
Berkelium-245
Berkebum-246
Berkelium.247
Berkekum-249
Berketaum-250
Befylltum-7 _
Beryihum-10 _
Bismuth-200 _
Bismuth-201 _
Bismutrt-202
Bismum-203
Bismuth-205
Bismuth-206
Bismuth-207
Bismuth-210m _.
Bismuth-210
Bismuth-212
Bismuth-213
Bismuth-21 4 „
Bromne-74m
Bromme-74 _...
Bromne-75 _ _„.
Bromne-78 --,..,
Bromne-77 ___..
BfornneuOm
Bromm-BO .
Bromne-82
Brornne-83 —
Bromne-M""" — Z™J
Atomic
Number
51
51
51
51
51
51
51
51
11
s
51
51
18
18
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
85
85
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
97
97
97
97
97
4
4
63
83
83
83
83
83
83
83
83
83
83
83
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
.IDES—
Proposed
RO(Ci)
10
10
1000
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
1000
10
1000
10
100
10
100
10
10
100
10
10
1
100'
100
100
10
100
- 169- -
100
100
100
10
10
100
10
0.01
1
10
100
1
10 -*
10
100
10
10
10
10
0.1
10
100
100
10
10
10
10
10
100
1000
100
10
1000
10
APPENDIX B— flADlONUCLIDES—
Continued
Radionuchde
CadnMim-104 ._
Cadmum-107 .._
Cadnwjm-109
Cadmium- 1 1 3m
Cadmium- 1 13
Cadmium- 1 1 5m
Cadmium- 1 15
Cadmum-1 1 7m _
Cadtmjnvl 1 7
Caloum-41
Cataum-45
Calaum-47 _
Calrfornium-244
Calrtomnim-246
Califormum-248
Calrtomum-249
CaMomum-250
Cabfomum-251
Caldomium-252
CaMomium-253
Califorrnum-254
Carbon-ii
Cartxjn-14
Cenuro-134
Canun>13$
Cenun>137m
Cenum-137
CenuB-139
"CefiaA-141
Cenum-143
Cenum-144
Cesnan-125
Cesum-127
CiAlriMl in
Cniunt-130
Ceaun-131
HOTMIH 32 .__
Cesium- 1 34m"" !""""
CAUim.1«4
Cesun-135m
Cesnm-l 35
Ceawm-136
Sestim- 1 37 ......._
Ceaun-138 _ __.
CNoflne-3&
^nlonn8M39«.»HM.M*.H..H.n
Chrornlun>48
Ctvomum-49 ..._ _.
*hronuum-51 ..................
Cobatt-55
Cobaft-58™.™!™."!!.'".""
Cobrt-57.._.
Cobaft-SSm .
Cobaft-58
CobM-eOm
CobUMO
CobtfMI
Cobalt-62m „
Copper-60
Copper-61 __.
Copper^™ _.
^PPeF*£7 ........MM....... ..
Curfan-23&
Curtum-240:
Cunum-241
Curium-242_.. __.
Cunum-243.
Atomic
Number
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
20
20
20
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
98
6
6
58
58
58
58
*u
SB
58
55
55
•3S*"
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
17
17
17
24
24
24
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
29
29
29
29
96
96
96
98
96
Proposed
R0(CO
100
1000
10
1
1
10
10
10
10
1000
100
10
1000
10
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.1
10
0.1
10
10
100
10
1000
1000
100
10
100
1
100
100
y-io» e
100
. 1000V.
-1tf"
1000
10
10
100
10
10
10
100
10
10
10
100
1000
10
10
100
1000
10
1000
10
100
10
10
100
100
100
1000
1
10-
001 I
APPENDIX 8— RADIONUCLIDES—
Continued
Radionuclide
Cunum-244
Curium-245
Cunum-247 __ _
Cunum-248
Cunum-249 _
Dysprosium- 1 5S.._
Dysprosium- 157
Dysprosium- 1 59
Dysprosium- 1 65. _„
Dysprosium-166
EinstOTNjm-250-..
Einstauuum-251 _
Bnstemunv253__ _
Einstemium-254tn
Einstamium-254
Ertmm-161 _
Erbum-165 _
ErbHjm-169
Ertxum-171
Eroiuro.172.
EuropJum-145
Europum-146
Europwm-147
Europhim-148
Europium-149
Europwm-150 (126 hr)._
Europwm-150 (34.2 yr)_
Europum-1 52m
Europium-152
Europium-154
Europwm-155
Europwm-156 „.
CirapUMSr^li
Europlum-158
Fermum-252...__.._
Fermwm-254 _.
FemHum-255
Fermnim-257
Fluorine- 1 8
Franaum-222.._ _
Franokim-223 ..._
Gadoflmum-145
Gadoirmjfn-146 _ -_,
Gadofirttum-147
GadoHmum-148
Gadoimum-149
GadoBmum-151 _ _..
GadoBnium-l 52
Gadofirmim-l S3
GadobMjm-159
Gallun-65 _..
Gallum-66 -,—
Galfcjn>67
GnlliunuAA
Gallium-70 _J
GnllkM.72 |
Gallium.73 IJ
Germamum-66
Germarnum-67.
Germanwm-69
Genranunv7l .._...___
GUI mar Nunv75
GermanunvTT
Gormamjnv76
GoM-193 .._
Atomic
Number
96
96
96
96
96
96
66
66
66
66
66
99
99
99
99
99
68
68
68
68
68
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
100
100
100
100
100
9
87
87
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
32
32
3?
32
32
32
32
32
79
Proposed
RCMCi)
001
001
001
001
0.001
1000
10
100
100
100
10
10
100
10
1
01
10
1000
100
100
10
10
10
10
10
1000
1000
10
100
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
100
10
1
1000
100
100
10
10
10
0.001
100
100
0001
10
100
10
10
100
1000
1000
10
100
100
100
10
10
1000
1000
10
100
100
-------
8184
Federal Regi.te, / Vol. 52, No. „ , Monday Ma|c||
APPENDIX 8— RADIONUCLIDES—
Continued
Radnnuctide
Gold-194 ....
Gold- 195....
Gold- 198m..
Gold- 198..
Gold- 199
Gold-200m
Gotd-200 ....
Gold-201
Hafnium- 1 70 !....".
Hafntum-172
Hafmum-173
Hafnium- 1 75 "'"
Hafnwm-i77m...
Hafraum-i78m "
HafrHum- 1 79m
Hafmum-iaOm
Hafnium- 181
Hafnium- 1 82m
Hafnwm-182
Hafnum-183..
Hafraum- 184
Hokmum-155
HoJrrwmv 1 57
Holmum-159
Hotmium-161
Hohnum-i62m
Hobnwm-162.
Hotmunvl64m
Holmium-1C4
Holiimin>i66m
HOhnWflV1 1 fifl-T...MM,T..",,.,
Holmhjnvl67.
yorogofKJ ..................
lndlum-109 _
lndium-110 (69.1 mm)__
lndwm-110 (4.9 hr)
lndtum-1 1 1
Indium- 1 12
Indium- 1 13m
Indium- 1 14m
Indium- 1 15m J
lndKjm-115 _
Indium- 1 16m
lndium-117m _.
lndnim-117
Indium- 1 1 9m
Iodine- 1 20m
lodme-1 20
lodine-121
iodine-123
lodine-124
lodme-125
iodme-126
•odtne-128 _
lodme-129
lodine-130
lodine-131
todine-i 32m
lodine-132
lodine-133
Iodine- 1 34
lodme-135
Indium-ia2 ,
lndhjm-184
Indjum-ias
lndwm-186
lndMn-187
Indwnvipe
Atomic
Numbef
79
79
79
79
79
79
79
79
72
79
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
72
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
1
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
49
S3
53
S3
53
53
53
S3
53
53
53
53
53
53
53
S3
S3
77
77
77
77
77
77
Proposed
RO(Ci)
10
100
10
10
100
10
100
1000
10
1
100
100
10
0.1
10
10
10
10
0.1
10
100
100
100
100
1000
10
100
1000
1000
1000
100
100
100
10
10
10
100
100
10
100
0.1
10
10
10
1000
10
10
100
10
0.1
0.1
0.1
100
0.01
1
0.1
10
10
1
10
10
10
10
10
10
100
10
APPENDIX B— RADIONUCLIDES—
Continued
Radionuchde
Atomic
Number
lndu.n-189.. 77
i_j..._ .« I "
indium- 190m....
Indium- 190
Indium- 1 92m
lndium-192
Indium- 1 94m ".
tndium-194
Indium- 1 95m
lndium-196
lron-52
lfon-55
lron-59
IrorvSO
Krypton-74
Ktypton-76
..( 77
.. 77
.. 77
.. 77
77
77
77
77
- 26
.. 26
26
26
. 36
I .1A
Kiypton-77 .-. 36
Kfypton-79 36
Krypton-61 36
Kiypton-eSm.. J 90
Krypton-e5m
KrvDton-85
•™ jp*»w^*«* •«••»••••»«•••••••
Krypton-87 ..............
Krypton-88
Lanthanum-iSl
Lanthanum-132
Lanthanum-135
Lantttinun>137
lantnanum-138
Lantfianunvl40
Lanthanum-141
Lanthanum-142
Lantnanum-143
Lead-195m
Lead-198
Lead-199 . 1
Lead-200
Lead-201
Lead-202m. ._
Lead-202.
Lead-203 • .
Lead-205
LflarJ-2fM
LemAaia
Laad-211
Lead-212.. .
Laad.214
Lutettum-169 '.
LuteHunvlTO..
Lutrtum.171
Lulattum-ITa
Lutetkim-l 73
Lutettum-1 74m
Lutetum-1 74
Lutetum-1 76m
Luteflum-1 76
LuteUum-l 77m
LutetJum-1 77
LuteHum-1 78m
Lul9flum-178
Lutetium-179 .
Maoneawm-28. .. _,
ManganeaoSl ..,..,„.
Mangane9»S2m
Manganesc-52. .
Manganeae-53
ManganoBB 54...
Manoanes«-56
Mendetevwm-257
36
36
36
36
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
1 57
V
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
82
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
12
25
25
25
25
25
25
101
Proposed
RQ(O)
100
1000
10
100
10
10
10
100
100
100
1000
10
1
10
10
10
100
1000
1000
100
100
10
10
100
10
1000
10
1
10
100
10
100
10
100
10
100
10
10
10
100
100
1000
0.1
100
10
100
10
10
10
10
100
100
10
100
1
10
100
100
100
100
10
1000
10
10
1000
10
10 '
100
=^^^=^=
APPENDIX B-RADIONUCLIDES-
Continued
Radionuclide
Mendelevium-258 ..
Mercury-I93m...
Mercury- 193
Mercury- 194
Mercury- 1 95m
Mercury-195
Mercury-I97m
Mercury-1 97 _.
Mercury-I99m
Mercury-203
Molybdenum-90
Molybdenum-93m
Motytodenum-93
Molybdenum-99
Molybdenum-101
Neodymium-136
Neodymum-138
Neodymium.l39m
Neodymunvi39
Neodyrmum-141 ...
Neodyrnium-147
Neodymum-149
Neodyrmum-151 .......'....
Nepturaum-232
Neptunum-233
Neptunium-234
Neptuntum-235
Neptumum-236 (1.2 E
Syr).
Neptumum-236 (2U
hr).
Nepturium-237
Neptunum-238
Nepturuum.239
Neptunium-240
Nicke4-5B
Nchet-57
Nttket-59
Nwkel-63
NickeMS
NickeM6
N«biuitv«8 |
NntMjm-89 (66 mm) .
N«6iunv69(122mm)....
Niobwm-90
Niobium-93m
Nwbwn>94.
Ntotwm-95
Nnbium-96
Niotaum-97
Nwowm-ae
Osnmim-180
Osrmum-181
Oainwnvia2
Osmum-185
Osmwnvl89m ...»
Osmunvl9im
Osmium. 191
Osrmum-193
Osmkjm-194
PaHadium-100
Palladwm-101
Palladkim-1 03
Palladbm-107
Palladhim.109
Photphon»32 „
Phosphorus-33
Atomic
Number
.. 101
80
.. 80
.. 80
. 80
80
60
80
. 80
. 80
. 42
. 42
. 42
. 42
. 42
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
93
93
93
93
93
93
93
:
s
28
28
28
28
28
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
76
76
76
76
76
78
76
76
76
46
46
46
46
46
15
15
Proposed
R(j(G'
i
1
10
10
1
100
100
100
100
100
10
10
10
100
100
10
100
1000
10
100
1000
100
10
10
10
1000
10
1000
• o.i
100
001
10
100
10
10
10
1000
1000
10
100
10
10
10
1
100
10
100
10
10
10
100
1000
10
10
10
1000
100
100
100
1
100
100
1000
100
1000
1
10
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Proposed Rules
8185
APPENDIX B— RADIONUCLIDES—
Continued
Radtonuclide
Platinum- 186
Platinum- 188
Platinum- 189
Platinum- 191
Platinum- 193m
Platinum- 193
Platinum- 195m
Platinum- 197m
Platinum- 197
Platinum- 199
Platinum-200
Plutonium-234
Plutomum-235
Plutomum-236
Plutonium-237
Plutonium-238
Plutonium-239
Plutomum-240
Plutomum-241
Plutomum-242
Plutonium-243
Plutonium-244
Plutomum-245
Polontum-203
Pdonium-205
Polonium-207
Potonium-210
Potassium-40
Potassium-42 ._
Potasswm-43
Potasaum-44
Potassnjm-45
Praseodymium-136
Praseodymum-137
Praseodymunvl38m
Praseodymtum-139
Praseodymtum-142m
Praseodymium-142
Praseodymium-143
Praseodymium-144
Praseodymtum-145
Praseodymtum-147
Prometruum-141
Promethium-143
Promethtum-144
Promethium- 146
Promethium-147
Promethium-148m
Promethium- 1 48
Promethium- 1 49
Promethwm-150
Proniethnjm- 151 ......
Protactinium-227
Protactnium-228
ProtactirNjm-230
Proiacfcmum.231
Protactinium-232
Protactmium-233
Protactmum-234
Radium-223
Radwim-224
Radhim-225
Radfum-226..
Radium-227
RadHjm-228
Radon-220
Ra«0"-222
Atomic
Number
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
94
94
94
94
94
94
94
94
94
94
94
94
84
84
84
84
19
19
19
19
19
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
91
91
91
91
91
91
91
88
88
88
88
88
88
86
86
Proposed
RQ (CD
10
100
100
100
100
1000
100
100
100
100
10
1000
1000
0.1
1000
0.01
001
0.01
• 1
001
1000
0.01
100
10
10
10
01
100
100
10
10
10
10
1000
10
100
1000
100
100
1000
1000
10
10
100
10
100
10
10
10
10
1000
10
100
100
10
10
0.01
10
100
10
1
10
1
1
100
1
o.r
01
APPENDIX B— RADIONUCLIDES—
Continued
Radtonuclide
Rhentum-177
Rhenium-178
Rhemum-181
Rhenium-182 (12.7 hr)
Rhemum-182 (64.0 hr)
Rhenium- 1 84m
Rhenium- 184
Rhernum-186nt
Rhemum-186
Rhenium- 187
Rhenium-I88m
Rhenium- 188
Rhenium-189..
Rhodnjm-99m
Rhodium-99
Rhodtum-1On
Rhod*im-101m
Rhodujm-101
Rhodium- 1 02m
Rhodium-102
Rhodium- 103m
Rhodium- 105
Rhodium-106m
Rnodium-107
Rubidium-79
RubKfcum-81 m
RubKfcum-81
Rut*fcjm-82m_.
RubKtaim-83
Rubidium-84
RutMdnim-66
RuWdhim.87
RuMhjnvM
Rubtdwm-89
Rutnemum-94
Rutnemum-97
Ruthenium- 1 03 ._
Ruthenium- 105
Rutherwjm-106
Samarium- 1 41 m
Samanum-141
Samanum-142 __
Samanun>145
Samarium-148
Samanum-147
Samanum-151
Samanum-153
Samanum-155
Samanum-156
Scandlum-43
Scandmnv44m
ScandiunvM
Scandum>46
Scandium-47
Scandium-48
Scandium-49
Setenhim-70
Selemum-TSm
Selennjm-73
Setemum-75
Setonium.79 _
Setenhim-81m
Selemum-81
Setentum-83
Snicon-31
SikGon-32
Silver-102
Slvef-103
Atomic
Number
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
45
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
37
44
44
44
44
44
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
34
34
34
34
34
34
34
34
14
14
47
47
Proposed
RQ(Ci)
10
10
10
10
10
100
10
10
100
1000
1000
100
100
10
10
10
100
100
10
10
1000
100
10
100
10
100
10
10
10
10
100
1000
10
10
10
100
10
10
1
10
10
100
100
0.01
0.01
10
1000
100
100
100
10
10
10
100
10
1000
100
100
10
100
100
1000
1000
10
100
1
10
to
APPENDIX B— RADIONUCLIDES—
Continued
Radionuchde
Silver- 104m
Silver-104
Silver- 105
Silver- 106m
Silver- 106
SilveMOBm _..
Silver-IIOni
Sirver-111
Sdver-112
Silver-US
Sodwnv22
Sodium-24
Strontium-83
Strontwm-eSm
Strontium-85 —
Strontium-BTni
<*tmntHifn.QA
Strontium-91
Strontmm-92
Sulfur-35.
Tantalum- 1 72
Tantalum- 1 73
Tantalum- 1 74
Tanflnhjfihl 74
Tantalum-176
Tantalum- 1 77
TantaJum-178
Tantalum-179
Tantalum-I80m
Tamahim-180
Tantalum-lB2m
Tantalum-182 —
Tantalum-183
Tantalum- 184
Tantalum-185
Tantalum* 1 0A
Technetium-93m
Technetum-94m
Technetium-96m
Technetum-98
Technebum-97m
Technetium-97
Tecnnetium-98
Technetium-99m
Technetium-99
TecnnetninvlOl
Tecrmetwm-104
Tellurium- 1 16.......
Tellurium- 121m
Tellunum.121
Tellurium- 1 23m
Tellunum-123
TeUunum-125m
Tellurium- 127m
Tellunum-1 27
Tellunum-I29m
Tellunum-129
Telluraim-I3lm...
Tellunum-131 .
Tellunum.132
Tellunum-1 33m
Tellunum-1 33
Tellunum-1 34
Atomic
Number
47
47
47
47
47
47
47
47
47
47
11
11
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
16
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
Proposed
RO (Ci)
10
100
10
10
10
10
10
100
10
100
100
1
10
"10
100
100
10
100
• 10
1
10
10
10
10
100
10
10
10
100
100
1000
1000
10
100
10
10
10
100
10
10
10
10
10
1000
10
100
1000
10
100
100
100
10
100
100
10
100
100
100
100
1000
100
100
10
100
100
:oo
10
10
-------
8186
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 50 / Monday. March 16. 1987 / Propped Rules
«rrcwuiA B— HADIONUCLIDES—
Continued
Radionuclide
Terbium- 147
Terbium- 149
Terbium- iso
Terbium-151 „
Terbium-153
Terbium- 154
Terbium- 155
Terbium- 156m (50 hr).
Terbium- 156m (24.4 hr]
Terbium- 156 ..._ _.
Terbium-157 '",
Terbium. 158
Terbium- 1 60 _......!.".
Terbium- 161
Thallium- 1 94m ....!..""."!"
Thallium- 194 .
Thallium- 195
Thallium- 197 "™"."
ThaUum-l 98m ._
Thallium- 198
Thallium-199
Thallium-200
Thalluim-201 _ I
Thalkum-202
Thallium-204 '.
Thonum-226 _ _....
Thonum-227 ...
Thonum-228 _
Thonum-229 _ ".
Thonum-230
Thooum-231 ""
Thonum-232 _
Thonum-234. '.
Thuhum-162...._
Thuhum-166
Thuhum-167
Thulium- 170
Thulium-171
Thuhum-172
Thuhum-173
Thulium- 175 . ..._
Tin-110 .
Tm-1 1 1 _....
Atomic
Number
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
90
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
50
50
Proposed
RQ(Ci)
10
10
10
10
100
10
100
1000
1000
10
100
10
10
1000
10
10
10
100
10
10
100
10
1000
10
100
100
t
0.01
0.001
0.01
100
0001
1000
10
10
100
10
100
10
10
10
100
100
APPENDIX B— RADIONUCLJDES—
Continued
Radionudide
Tin.ii3.._
Tm-1l7m
Tin* 1 19m
Tin-121m
Tin-121 _
TirH23m _
Tin-123
Tin-125 _
Tin-126 _....
Tin-127 _...
Tin-128 _
Titannim-44
Titanium-45
Tungsten- 1 76
Tungsten- 1 77
Tungsten- 1 78
Tungsten- 1 79 — _
Tungsten- 1 81
Tungsten-185 _ _
Tungsten-187._
Tungsten- 1 88 _
Uranum-230
Uranwm-231
Urafwm-232
Uramum-233
Uranum-234
Uranum-236
Uranum-237
Uranum-238
Unuwm-239
Uranun-240
Vanadium-47
Vanadnim-48
Vanadium-49
Xenon- 120
Xenon- 1 21 __
Xenon-123 __
Xenon-125
Xenon-127
tenon- 129m
Xenon-I3lm
Atomic
Number
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
SO
50
50
22
22
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
92
23
23
23
54
54
54
54
54
54
54
54
Proposed
RO(G)
100
100
too
100
1000
100
100
too
10
10
10
1
100
100
10
100
1000
1000
100
10
10
0,14
1004
0.014
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
104
0.14
10004
104
1000
10
1000
10
10
too
10
100
10
1000
1000
APPENDIX B— RADIONUCLIDES—
Continued
Radnnuchde
Xenon- 133m
Xenon- 133 ".
Xenon- 135m...
Xenon-135 _
Xoftnn.1ia
YtieftMim-162
Ytterbium-166
Ytterbium- 1 67 ._
Ytterbium-l69_
Ytterbium-l75_
Ytterbium-l77._
Ytterbium-l78.._ _... .
Ynnum-86m
Yttnum-86..
Ynnum-87
Yttnum-88 _
Yttnum-90m .
Yttnum-90.
Yttnum-gim
Yttnum-91
Yttnum-92 '.
Yttrium-93
Yttnum-94
Yttnum-95
Zmc-62
Zmc-63
Zinc -65
Zinc-69m ..._.
Zinc-69
Zinc-7lm
Zinc-72
Zircormim-86
Zirconiurn-B8
Zircorttum-89
Zircontum-95
Ziroomum-97..
Atomic
Number
54
54
54
54
54
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
39
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
40
40
40
40
40
40
Proposed
RO(C
100
100
10
10
10
100
10
100
100
100
100
100
100
10
10
10
10
too
10
10
100
100
10
10
10
100
10
10
1000
10
10
too
10
100
1
10
10
4 The adjusted RO of one cune applies to
all radonuclides not otherwise listed, except
uranyt nitrate and uranyt acetate whose final
adjusted RQs are 100 pounds.
FR Doc. 87-343 Filed 3-13-87; ft45 am)
-------
0590
Federal Register / Vol 52. No 53 / Tnursdav. Marcn 19 1987 / R-j.es and
procedures for Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76
comparisons of retirement costs.
2 Background On October 29.1986.
OMB issued Transmittal Memorandum
No 4 which revised OMB Circular A-76
procedures for calculation and
comparison of retirement costs. The new
procedure provides for the deduction of
social security (except medicare) and
thrift/profit sharing plan contributions
from the price offered by the contractor
selected for comparison with the
Government's in-house bid. A
solicitation provision has been
developed and is being prescribed for
use in order to obtain the retirement
costs and substantiating documentation
from contractors.
^..Effective date. March 9.1987.
4 Expiration date. This circular
expires September 8.1987. unless
canceled earlier.
5. Explanation of changes.
a. Section S07.30S is amended to
designate the current text as paragraph
(a) and to add paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
507.305 Solicitation provision*) and
contract ctauM0»
(a)' • •
(b) The contracting officer shall insert
the provision at section 552.207-71.
Social Security (except Medicare) and
Thrift/Profit Shanng Plan Contnbutiona.
in all solicitations issued for the purpose
of companng the costs of contractor and
Government performance of work.
b. Section 507.306 is added to read as
follows:
507.306 Evaluation.
(a) The social security and thrift/
profit sharing plan contributions will not
affect the determination of the low
responsive offer and should not be
included on the abstract of offers. The
contributions should not be announced
at the public bid opening, but should be
included on the cost comparison form
and made available during the public
review period.
(b) Contracting officers shall request
documentation verifying contributions
from the low responsive responsible
offerer only if the contributions will
affect the outcome of the cost
comparison. The documentation
provided by the low offerer should not
be released to other offerers.
c. Section 552.207-71 is added to read
as follows:
552.207-71 Social Security (Except
Medicare) end Thrift/Prom Sharing Plan
ContrtDtitlone»
As prescnbed in section S07.305(b).
insert the following provision:
Social Security (Except Medicare) and Thnft/
Profit Shanng Plan Contributions
la) To prov iae for consistency of
ccrr.oar:son between Government and
Co-trac'ar costs, contributions to the Social
Security Fund (except medicare) and any
'K-ift/profit sharing plan costs included in the
price submitted by the offerer selected to
compare costs with the Government may be
deducted from that price for purposes of
comparison with the Government's in-house
bid.
(b) Offerers may provide, in the space
provided in paragraph (h). the estimated
contributions discussed above The estimated
contributions must be limited to those costs
that would be allocable to a contract
awarded under this solicitation for each year
of the contract period, including option years.
(c) Estimated contributions to thrift/profit
sharing plans to be deducted from the
offerer s pnce shall be limited to the
hifioncal costs incurred by the offerer in the
tax year previous to the solicitation date on •
per employee basis. Thrift/profit sharing
plans must be recognized by the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS). Cost estimates that
reflect improved plans will be accepted to the
extent that the historical data justify the
estimates used.
(d) For purposes of this provision, a thrift/
profit sharing plan is defined as:
A deferred compensation arrangement in
which an employee can contribute after-tax
contributions to an individual account
maintained in his/her behalf which may also
receive matching employer contributions at
some specified rate up to a maximum. A
"thrift/profit sharing plan" includes a profit
sharing plan as defined by 26 CFR 1.401-
l(b)(l)(il) and a stock bonus plan as defined
by 26 CFR 1401-l(b)(l)(lii). A thrift/profit
sharing plan is not a "pension plan" as
defined in 26 CFR 1.401-l(b)(l)(l).
(e) Upon the request of the Contracting
Officer, the low responsive offerer selected to
compare costs with the Government agrees to
provide, within S working days of the request
all documentation necessary to verfly the
reasonableness of the social security and the
thrift/profit shanng plan coat estimates
submitted. Such documentation shall include.
but is not limned to. the relevant pages of the
corporate IRS submission for the tax year
immediately prior to the date of the request
the number of contractor employees, the
number of employees in the thrift/profit
shanng plan, the number of employees
included in the pnce offered and any labor
hour worksheets used to develop the social
security or thrift/profit shanng plan
contnbuhons submitted with the offer.
(f) Failure to submit the estimated
contributions or to provide the requested
documentation supportive of the estimated
contnbutiona will not make the offer
nonresponsive. Such failure will however.
negate the offerer's opportunity to have such
costs deducted in whole or in part from the
pnce offered in the cost comparison with the
Government's in-house bid.
(g) Disagreements between the offerer and
the Contracting Officer over the validity of
estimated social secunty or thnft/profit
shanng plan contributions, which cannot be
rpsoKed by ;he offerer and the Contra:- -j
Officer will be resolved >lv: .ST :'~e Cene-^l
Services Adminstration A~~6 ^d.— i-isirj *e
Appeal Process established under OMB
Circular A-76 and Section 7 307 C'lap'e' 1
Title 48 Code of Federal Regulations
(h| Offerer social securit) and thrift-pro: :
sharing plan contributions oy >ear The
contributions indicated below will not be
used in the Government s determination of
either responsiveness or responsibility
[ SOCIM Svcufny . •
TOM
(i) The successful commercial offer will be
determined on the basis cf the price offered
and a determination that the low offer is
responsive and the offerer responsible The
offer will then be compared with the
Government bid. after the appropriate social
secunly (except medicare) and thrift/profit
shanng plan deductions have been made.
(End of provision)
Dated: March 9.1967.
Patricia A. Siervo.
Associate Administrator for Acquisition
Policy.
|FR Doc. 87-5684 Filed 3-18-67 8 45 am)
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research and Special Programa
Administration
4ft CFR Parts 171,173,174.175, 176,
and 177
[Docket Ho. HM-145E. Amdt. Nes. 171-92.
173-200,174-62.175-40,176-25, end 177-
691
Reportabte) Quantity of Hazardous
Subatanca*
AQINCV: Research and Special Programs
Administration. (RSPA). DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This document removes an
obsolete hazardous substance discharge
reporting requirement from the
Hazardous Matenals Regulations and
adopts a note in place thereof that
draws attention to existing reporting
requirements contained in U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Regulations. This action is necessary to
-------
Federal Register / V0| 52. No. 53 / Thursday March 19. ift,/ / Ruies and Resui--.cn
8591
remove an obsolete and misleading
requirement from the regulations.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Apnl 20. 19b7
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Thomas Charlton. Standards Division
Office of Hazardous Materials
Transportation. RSPA. 400 Seventh
Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20590.
(202) 366-4488.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On fune
23. 1986. RSPA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) under
Docket HM-145E (51 FR 22902) entitled:
Reportable Quantity of Hazardous
Substances. The notice proposed to
amend DOTs Hazardous Materials
Regulations (HMR. 49 CFR Parts 171
through 179) by incorporating into the
HMR many new hazardous substances
with their reportable quantities and
adjusting the reportable quantities of
hazardous substances already in the
HMR. In addition, the NPRM proposed
to change the definition of "hazardous
substance", as it is defined in § 171.8 of
the HMR. and to change the reporting
requirement for discharges of hazardous
substances found at § 171.17. Both
proposals were in response to actions
taken by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) in a final rule
published in the Federal Register on
Apnl 4.1985. (50 FR 13456) pursuant to
that agency's authority under section
102 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response.
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA).
On October 18.1988. the President
signed the Superfund Amendment and
Reauthonzanon Act (SARA) of 1988
(Pub. L. 99-499). In amending CERCLA.
Congress required, inter alia that within
30 days the Secretary of Transportation
list and regulate all hazardous
substances designated under section
101(14) of CERCLA. In response to this
Congressional mandate. RSPA
published a final rule on November 21.
I960, under Docket HM-145F (51 FR
42174). The rule listed and regulated all
hazardous substances at the reportabto
quantities designated by EPA pursuant
to their authorities under section 102 of
CERCLA and incorporated all
hazardous substances into the HMR. It
dealt with most of tfa* issues raised in
Docket HM-145E with the exception of
the reoorting requirement at 1171.17.
The amendments adopted herein deal
with that issue.
Hazardous substances first appeared
in the HMR in 1980. They were
designated by EPA. each with a
reportable quantity, in 1978 pursuant to
section 311 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (FWPCA). While
the original FWPCA substances were
later incorporated into the list of
CERCLA hazardous substances, they
were wa?er pollutants, and the FWPCA
required that "discharges ' of these
materials be reported. "Discharges"
were defined in the FWPCA as spills to
the waters of the United States or
adjoining shorelines. EPA and the Coast
Guard, who have spill response and
clean up responsibility for both oil and
hazardous substances under the
FWPCA. published separate regulations
requiring that discharges of these
matenals be reported to the Coast
Guard's National Response Center
(NRC). The Coast Guard reporting
requirements are found at 33 CFR Part
133. and EPA's at 40 CFR Part 117. When
RSPA placed these original hazardous
substances in the § 172.101 Table in
1980. it also placed a reporting
requirement for their discharge in the
HMR at § 171.17 which was similar to
the EPA and the Coast Guard
requirements. Section 171.17 presently
requires that the owner or operator of a
facility (including a transport vehicle)
report to the NRC any discharge of a
hazardous substance into the navigable
waters or upon adjoining shorelines as
soon as he has knowledge of the
discharge.
In addition to adding many hazardous
substances to those already designated
pursuant to the FWPCA. CERCLA
expanded the scope of spill reporting to
the biosphere (i.e.. navigable waters.
ground water, earth, and air). Under
CERCLA. a "release" (a term which
replaced "discharge") of a hazardous
substance in a reportable quantity to
any of these environmental media must
be reported under CERCLA. With
advent of CERCLA. the reporting
requirement at 1171.17 has become both
obsolete and misleading, since it
references only spills threatening water.
Section 103 of CERCLA contains specific
requirements to report "releases" to the
NRC. In addition. EPA published a
second hazardous substance reporting
regulation in 40 CFR Part 302 requiring
reporting of "releases" of hazardous
substances to the NRC
In its NPRM (Docket HM-145E). RSPA
proposed either to revise 1171.17 to
reflect the expanded reporting media, or
to remove 1171.17 from the HMR. RSPA
received one comment on the proposed
revisions to 1171.17 from EPA. urging
that 1171.17 be retained but corrected to
reflect the CERCLA requirements. No
other persona commented on hazardous
substances reporting. Based on a review
of this issue. RSPA is removing 1171.17
and references to that section from the
HMR. However. RSPA Is incorporating a
note drawing attention to existing EPA
regulations requiring that an owner or
operator of a CERCLA-coversd facility
report each hazardous subsiance release
to the NRC RSPA has taken -.-.,$ dci.or.
because § 171.17 duplicates r-.!es
promulgated by both EPA and Co.'
Guard There is no basis to conrl
another reporting requirement, us e
authority of the Hazardous Materials
Transportation Act (HMTA). would
enhance safely or environmental
protection. Indeed, it could confuse the
regulated community. RSPA believes
that it is better to reference EPA
regulatory requirements than to attempt
to duplicate them in the HMR.
Review by Sections
Section 171.13. which requires
immediate reporting of certain
hazardous materials spills, is revised by
including a note drawing attention to
EPA requirements at 40 CFR Part 302 to
report releases of hazardous substances
to the National Response Center.
Section 171.17 is removed and
reserved.
Section 173118a is revised by
removing the reierence to S 171.17 m
paragraph (b)(6).
Section 174 45 is revised by removing
the reference to { 171.17.
Section 175.45 is're vised by removing
paragraph (d) which references § 171.17.
Section 176.48 is revised by removing
the reference to { 171.17 m paragraph
(b).
Section 177.807 is revised by re- j
the reference to { 171.17.
Administrative Notices
Executive Order 12291
The RSPA has determined that the
effect of this final rule will not meet the
critena specified in section l(b) of
Executive Order 12291 and is. therefore.
not a major rule. This is not a significant
rule under DOT regulatory procedures
[44 FR 11034| and requires neither a
Regulatory Impact Analysis, nor an
environmental impact statement under
the National Environmental Policy Act
[49 U.S.C 4321 et sea.]. A regulatory
evaluation is available for review m the
Docket
Impact on Small Entities
Based on limited information
concerning the size and nature of the
entities likely to be affected. I certify
this rule will not as promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
The following list of Federal Register
Thesaurus of Indexing Terms apply to
this rulemaking:
-------
8592 Federal Register / Vol 52. No 53 / Th-j.-sd.u' Starch 19. 19fl7 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects
•19 CFR Part 171
Hazardous materials Cdospori.itinn.
Definitions.
P.?,-' 173
Hazardous materials transpur'dtion.
Packaging and containers.
49 CFR Part 174
Hazardous matennls trnnsporta':on.
Rail earners.
49 CFR Pert 175
Hazardous matenals transportation.
Air camera.
49 CFR Part 176
Hazardous materials transportation.
Maritime earners.
49 CFR Part 177
Hazardous matenals transportation.
Motor earners.
In consideration of the foregoing.
Parts 171.173.174.175.178. and 177 of
Title 49. Code of Federal Regulations
would be amended as follows:
PART 171—GENERAL INFORMATION,
REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 171
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C 1802.1803.1804. and
1308. and 49 CFR Part 1. unless otherwise
noted.
2. In { 171.15. a note is added after
paragraph (c). as follows:
«171.15 Immediate notice of certain
hazardous materials Incidents.
(c) ' ' '
Note.—Under 40 CFR 302.8 EPA requires
persons .n charge of facilities (including
transpor. vehicles, vessels, and aircraft) to
report an\ '"lease of a hazardous substance
m a quji:t.ty equal to or greater than its
raportable quantity as soon as that person
has knowledge of the release, to the U.S.
Cojst Guard National Response Center at
(Mil free) 800-1:4-8402 or (toll) 202-287-2875.
$171.17 [Removed and reserved)
3 Section 171.17 is removed and
reserved.
PART 1*3—SHIPPERS-GENERAL
REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS
AND PACKAGINGS
4. The authonty citation for Part 173 is
revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C 1803. 1804. 1805.1808.
1809: 49 CFR 1.53(e). 1.53. App. A to Part 1. 49
USC. 1855.1855(C).
S. In 1173.118a. paragraph (b)(6) is
revised to read as follows:
5 173.118a Exceptions for combustible
liquids.
(6) Reporting incidents as prescribed
by §§171.15 and 171 16 of this
subchapter and
PART 174—CARRIAGE BY RAIL
6. The authority citation for Part 174 is
revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U S.C 1803.1804.1808: 49
CFR 1 53(e|. 1 53. App. A to Part 1.
7 Section 174.45 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 174.45 Reporting hazardous materials
Incidents.
When any incident occurs during
transportation in which a hazardous
material is involved, a report may be
required (see {§ 171.15 and 171.16 of this
subchapter).
PART 175-CARRIAGE BY AIRCRAFT
8. The authority citation for Part 175 Is
revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C 1803.1804.1808,1807.
1808: 49 CFR 1.53(c). 1.33. App. A to Part 1.
9. In 1175.45. paragraph (d) is
removed as follows:
9175.45 Reporting hazardous materials
(d) [Reserved]
PART 176-CARRIAGE BY VESSEL
10. The authority citation for Part 176
is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C 1803.1804.1805.1808:
49 CFR 1.53. App. A to Part 1.
11. In 1178.48. paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
1178.4* Situation requiring report.
• • • • •
(b) When an incident occurs during
transportation in which • hazardous
matenal is involved, a report may be
required (see |§ 171.15 and 171.18 of this
subchapter).
PART 177—CARRIAGE BY PUBLIC
HIGHWAY
12. The authonty citation for Part 177
is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U S.C. 1803.1804.1808: 49
CFR 1.33(e). 1.53. App. A to Part 1.
13. Section 177.807 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 177.807 Reporting hazardous matenals
incidents.
When an incident occurs during
transportation in which a hazardous
material is involved, a report may oe
required (see \\ 171.15 and 171 16 of this
subchapter).
Issued in Washington. DC. on March 12.
1987. under authonty delegated in 49 CFR
1S3.
M. Cynthia Douglass.
Administrator. Research and Special
Programs Administration.
(FR Doc. 87-5901 Filed 3-18-67. 8 45 am)
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atnw^oherlc
Administration
50 CFR Parts) 611 and 67S
[Docket No. 61225-7052)
Groundf Ish of the Boring Sea and
Aleutian (aland*
AOINCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS). NOAA. Commerce.
Acnott Final rule.
SUMMAMV: NOAA issues s final rule to
implement Amendment 10 to the Fishery
Management Plan for the Croundfish
Fishery in the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Area (FMP). Amendment 10
contains four parts which will (l) close
an area of the exclusive economic zone
(EEZ) in the Bering Sea to all
commercial fishing with trawl gear, set
limits on incidental catches of Tanner
and red king crabs and Pacific halibut in
Bering Sea foreign and domestic
fisheries for yellowfin sole and other
flatfish, and require that these fisheries
cease when the incidental catch limits
are reached: (2) require weekly catch
reports from catcher/processor end
mothership vessels regardless of when
their catch is landed: (3) provide
authority to the Secretary of Commerce
(Secretary) to make certain inseason
changes to gear regulations, seasons.
and harvest quotas, and (4) provide the
Secretary with specific inseason
authority to reapportion surplus
amounts of groundfish within the
domestic allowable harvest category.
These measures are intended to respond
to biological, socioeconomic. and
administrative problems that have been
identified by the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council).
In addition. NOAA is making other
regulatory changes to clanfy domestic
reporting requirements. These additional
regulatory changes are not part of
-------
-------
Thursday
April 2, 1987
Part IV
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 110
Water Programs; Discharge of Oil; Final
Rule
-------
10712 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 63 / Thursday. April 2. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40CFRPart 110
[FRL 3119-6]
Water Programs; Discharge of Oil
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency is amending the discharge of oil
regulation (40 CFR Part 110). which
implements section 311 of the Clean
Water Act (CWA). The original
regulation established a trigger for
notifying the federal government of oil
discharges that are harmful to public
health or welfare. The regulation
defined a harmful quantity as the
amount of oil that violates applicable
water quality standards or causes a film
or sheen upon or discoloration of the
surface of the water or adjoining
shorelines or causes a sludge or
emulsion to be deposited beneath the
surface of the water or upon adjoining
shorelines. It has come to be known as
the "sheen regulation."
Today's regulation incorporates the
1977.1978. and 1980 amendments to
section 311 of the CWA and implements
section 18(m)(3) of the Deepwater Port
Act (DWPA) of 1974 by designating a
harmful quantity for DWPA purposes. In
addition, the Agency is responding to
two suggestions by industry for
modifications to the requirements of 40
CFR Part 110. The intended effect is to
upgrade the oil spill notification
requirements.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 4.1987.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hubert Walters. Response Standards
and Criteria Branch. Emergency
Response Division (WH-548/B), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
(202) 382-2463. or the RCRA/Superfund
Hotline. (800) 424-9346 (in Washington,
DC. 382-3000).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
proposed rulemaking was published on
pages 9776-9783 of the Federal Register
of March 11.1985. and invited comments
for 60 days ending May 10.1985. The
comment period was subsequently
extended to July 1.1985. Comments
were received from over 50 sources, and
today's preamble summanzes the
comments, suggestions, and actions
taken.
The contents of the preamble are
listed in the following outline:
I. Introduction
II Changes from Proposed to Final Rule
HI. Statutory Provisions Affecting the Oil
Discharge Regulation
A 1977.1978. and 1980 Statutory
Amendments
1 Extension of Geographical Scope
2. Modification of Harmful Quantity
3 Exemption of Discharges Subject to
Section 402 of the CWA
4 Exemption of Discharges Permitted
Under MARPOL 73/78
B Deepwater Port Act of 1974
IV. Other Sections of the Oil Discharge
Regulation
V. Requests for Changes in the Oil
Discharge Regulation
A. Volumetric Alternatives to Sheen Test
B. Special Use Applications of Oil
VI. Summary of Supporting Analyses
A. Classification and Regulatory Impact
Analysis
B Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
Vll. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 110
I. Introduction
On March 11.1985, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) proposed
amendments to the discharge of oil
regulation (40 CFR Part 110). The March
11.1985 preamble discussed in detail the
nature and purpose of the proposed
amendments.
Today, EPA is promulgating final
amendments to the regulation. In
preparing the amendments to the
regulation, EPA has carefully considered
all of the public comments submitted on
the proposed amendments and is
making some modifications in response
to those comments. Major issues raised
by commenters are addressed in this
preamble. A summary of all comments
and EPA's response to each is included
in the Responses to Comments
Documents, which may be found in the
public docket for this rulemaking.'
Section II of this preamble
summarizes those changes made to the
March 11,1985, proposed rule. Statutory
provisions, addressed in Section III of
this preamble, include the following:
1. Extension of geographical scope of
section 311 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)
from the contiguous zone seaward to
approximately 200 miles.
2. Modification of the harmful quantity
definition from discharges of such quantities
of oil that "will be harmful" to the public
health or welfare of the United States to such
quantities that "may be harmful" to the
public health or welfare of the United States.
3. Exemption of oil discharges subject to
CWA section 402 National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) from
coverage under section 311 provisions.
4. Incorporation of the provisions under the
International Convention for the Prevention
of Pollution from Ships. 1973. as modified by
the Protocol of 1978 (MARPOL 73/78). Annex
I.
5. Definition of harmful quantities of oil for
purposes of section 18(m)(3) of the Deepwater
Port Act of 1974 (DWPA).
Section IV discusses other sections of
40 CFR Part 110, and Section V
addresses two suggested changes
requested by the regulated community
for which comments were solicited in
the preamble to the proposed rule. They
are:
1. A request by Chevron to consider a
volumetric amount of oil discharge as a
trigger for notification to replace the sheen
test.
2. A request by Esgard that EPA exempt its
vegetable oil product, a corrosion inhibitor in
ballast tanks, from the oil discharge
notification requirements.
Section VI presents a summary of
supporting analyses, and Section VII
provides a list of subjects addressed by
this rulemaking.
II. Changes From Proposed To Final
Rule
This section summarizes the
substantive changes that have been
made to the proposed rule. Four
definitions have been modified slightly
and one has been deleted. Modifications
have also been made to the sections of
the rule concerning applicability.
prohibited discharges, demonstration
projects, notice, and DWPA discharges.
A copy of the final rule indicating all
changes from the proposed rule has
been placed in the docket for this
rulemaking and is available for public
inspection. The following summary is
organized in the same order as the
discharge of oil regulation (40 CFR Part
110) itself.
Section 110.1. The definition of
"applicable water quality standards"
has been amended to be consistent with
the EPA water quality regulation. 40
CFR Part 131. The proposed definition in
§ 110.1 stated that applicable water
quality standards were State standards
"adopted by the State and approved by
EPA... or promulgated by EPA. . ." In
contrast. 40 CFR 131.21(c) states that:
A State water quality standard remains in
effect, even though disapproved by EPA, until
the State revises It or EPA promulgates a rule
that supersedes the State water quality
standard.
Accordingly, the words "and
approved by EPA" have been deleted
from the definition of applicable water
quality standards in § 110.1 of the final
rule.
A reference to section 311 of the CWA
has been added to the definition of
"discharge" to clarify that a different
definition, as provided in § 110.11,
applies to the DWPA.
The regulatory explanation of the 1977
amendment language which extended
the scope of section 311's coverage
beyond 12 miles has been deleted from
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 63 / Thursday. April 2, 1987 / Rules and Regulations M713
40 CFR Part 110 because a number of
comments indicated confusion regarding
the scope of the specific statutory
language and the applicability of
discharge reporting requirements within
the area covered by the language. Under
the pre-1977 statutory language of
sections 311 (b)(3) and (b)(5), all
prohibited discharges of oil in the
territorial seas and contiguous zones
must be reported. With the enactment of
the 1977 CWA amendments, however.
Congress inserted additional language in
section 3Il(b)(3) which provided that
prohibited discharges "in connection
with activities under the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act or the
Deepwater Port Act of 1974. or that may
affect natural resources belonging to.
appertaining to. or under the exclusive
management authority of the United
States (including resources under the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act)" must be reported
Since the jurisdiction of the three
statutes referenced in the 1977
amendments extends within as well as
beyond the contiguous zone.1 there was
some question as to whether discharges
within the zone now need only be
reported if they are actually "in
connection with" one of the three
additional statutes. EPA believes that
the correct interpretation of section
311(b)(3) is that all discharges of oil in
the territorial seas and contiguous zone
that create a sheen must continue to be
reported. Discharges of oil beyond the
contiguous zone, however, that create •
sheen need only be reported if they are
"in connection with activities" under the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. the
Deepwater Port Act, or may affect
natural resources subject to U.S.
management authority under the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act. Today's rulemaking
clarifies this issue by simply specifying'
appropnate reporting requirements in
terms of whether the discharge and
resulting sheen occurred in the
territorial sea. the contiguous zone, or
beyond 12 miles.
The definition of "oil" has been
expanded to include references to both
the CWA and the DWPA definitions of
oil. Because oil is defined differently in
the DWPA than in the CWA and is used
> Specifically, the DeepwMerPcrt Act of 1B7»
regulates ports beyond "the lemlorwi lunrt* of the
United Slates." including associated components
and equipment, such as pipelines, located seaward
of the high water merit The Orter CaMmental Shelf
Lands Act'govems the Ouler Contnentai Shell
which lies beyond "navajabte wains." and Ike
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management
Act establishes a fishery conservation cone, which
lies beyond the temMnal we of the United
States."
in both contexts in the rule, the Agency
believes it is desirable to provide
references to both of these definitions of
oil in § 110.1.
The reference to the Canal Zone has
been deleted from the definition of
"United States." The CWA no longer
applies to the Canal Zone as a result of
the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977 and
the Panama Canal Act of 1979 (22 U.S.C.
3601 et seq.).
Section 1103. A sentence has been
added to the end of this section on
applicability to indicate that the
regulations also define the term
"discharge" for purposes of section
18(m)(3)oftheDWPA.
Section 110.6 (formerly 5 110.7). This
section sets forth the provisions of CWA
section 311(b)(3). which generally
prohibits oil discharges in quantities as
may be harmful, except for discharges
permitted under MARPOL 73/78. The
Agency believes that the MARPOL
exemption extends to discharges under
the DWPA as well. Section 19fa)(l) of
the DWPA provides, in relevant part,
that". . . the treaties of the United
States shall apply to a deepwater port
. . . and to activities connected,
associated, or potentially interfering
with the use or operation of any such
port. . .". Because MARPOL 73/78 is a
"treaty of the United States," EPA
interprets section 19(a)(l) as authorizing
the application of MARPOL 73/78
provisions to discharges under the
DWPA and. therefore, has also provided
for an exemption of MARPOL 73/78
permitted discharges from DWPA
requirements. This point has been
clarified in the final rule, and the section
on discharges defined for purposes of
the DWPA (S 110.11 in the final rale) has
been modified to except discharges
permitted under MARPOL 73/78.
Section 110.9 (formerly 5 110.10). In
response to a commenter's
recommendation to delete the
geographic scope language from
proposed { 110.10, the language has
been replaced with the phrase "under
section 311 of the Act." The Agency
concurs with commenter's statement
that the purpose of ( 110-9 is to provide
waiver authority to the Administrator.
and therefore it is unnecessary to repriat
the geographic scope m 1110.9.
Section 110.10 (formerly (110.11). The
Agency has amended f 110.10 to wake it
consistent with Coast Guard discharge
reporting regulations by incorporating
the language in 33 CFR 153.203. as
amended on May IB. 1988 (51 PR 17SB2).
Section 110.11 (formerly { HOB), fa
the final rale, the section concerning
discharges defined {or purposes of the
DWPA has been moved to the end of the
regulation. This section has been
modified to except discharges from
properly functioning vessel engines
(which are not deemed to be harmful for
CWA purposes) and discharges
permitted by MARPOL 73/78. The
proposed rule contained an exception
for DWPA discharges subject to section
402 of the CWA. but this exception has
been deleted. There is nothing in the
language or legislative history of the
DWPA to suggest that Congress
contemplated such an exception.
III. Statutory Provisions Affecting the
Oil Discharge Regulation
This section of the preamble describes
the five amendments to the sheen rule
that were required by changes to the
CWA and by the DWPA. Commenters
generally expressed support for these
regulatory changes. Major issues raised
by commenters concerning each of the
changes are discussed below.
A. 1977,1978, and 1980 Statutory
Amendments
1. Extension of Geographical Scope
In the 1977 amendments to the CWA
(Pub.L 95-217), Congress expanded the
geographical scope of section 311
beyond the contiguous zone, which
extends seaward to 12 miles, to include
oil discharges in connection with a
variety of activities out to
approximately 200 miles. Specifically.
sections 311 (b) and (c) of the Act were
amended to apply not only to discharges
of oil into navigable waters and the
contiguous zone, but also to such
discharges—
in connection with activities under the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act or the
Deepwater Port Act of 1974. or that may
affect natural resources belonging to.
appertaining to, or under the exclusive
management authority of the United States
(including resources under the Fishery
Conservation and Management Act of 1976)"
(33 U&C. 1321(b) and (c)).
The Agency has amended the
jurisdictions! provisions of 40 CFR Part
110 to reflect the expanded scope of
section 311 in i 110.5.
One commenter acknowledged that
the proposed extension of geographical
scope n consistent with the CWA
amendments, but had reservations about
the extension because of "the sheer size
of the area to be induded." The
commenter asserted that the extension
"will exacerbate the U.S. Coast Guard's
inability to investigate spills." EPA
notes that the major purpose of these
amendments to the oil discharge rule is
to implement stalotorily mandated
changes. The ability of the Coast Guard
to investigate spills in the extended area
-------
10714
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 63 / Thursday. April 2. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
depends, of course, on the number of
spills in the area at any one time.
enforcement discretion, the existence of
competing demands for Coast Guard
action at any particular time, and the
availability of resources. In their
comments submitted on this rule, the
Coast Guard has not indicated any
concern about their ability to carry out
necessary investigations.
2. Modification of Harmful Quantity
In 1978. Congress modified the
harmful quantity criteria of section 311
from discharge of oil that "will be
harmful" to discharges that "may be
harmful." More specifically. Congress
modified the scope of prohibited
discharges under section 311(b)(4) from
quantities the "discharge of which, at
such time, locations, circumstances, and
conditions, will be harmful" to such
quantities the "discharge of which may
be harmful" (Pub. L 95-576). Section
3ll(b)(3) was also amended .to reflect
this change.
The original oil sheen test was
promulgated pursuant to the pre-1978
standard of "will be harmful." The
Agency views the revised statutory
standard "may be harmful" as being, at
a minimum, at least as environmentally
stringent and protective as the prior
"will be harmful" standard, as discussed
in more detail below. EPA has reviewed
scientific research on the environmental
effect of oil spills. It has assessed State
and Federal experience in implementing
the present "oil sheen" test, and it has
carefully considered the alternatives
suggested by commenters. On the basis
of this review, the Agency has
determined that the "oil sheen" is an
appropriate, effective, and practical test
for harmful quantities of oil under
section 311(b)(4) of the CWA. As
discussed later in this preamble, the
Agency has made the same
determination for discharges under
section 18(m)(3) of the DWPA.
A number of commenters recognized
that the replacement of "determined to
be harmful for "as may be harmful" in
the regulations at 40 CFR Part 110 would
be consistent with the CWA
amendments. Some of these commenters
advocated, however, adoption of a
quantitative definition of harmful
quantity of oil discharge using a
volumetric trigger as an alternative to
the sheen test The scientific support for
the oil sheen test together with the
merits of adopting a volumetric trigger
are addressed in detail in the discussion
in Section V.A. concerning Chevron's
proposal for a volumetric substitute to
the sheen test.
3. Exemption of Discharges Subject to
Section 402 of the CWA
In the 1978 amendments to the CWA,
Congress also modified the definition of
"discharge" in section 311(a)(2) to
exclude from section 311 coverage three
types of discharges that are subject to
the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) regulations
under section 402 and the enforcement
provisions of section 309. Specifically.
Congress provided that the following
discharges be excluded from section 311
coverage:
... (A) discharges in compliance with a
permit under section 402 of this Act. (B)
discharges resulting from circumstances
identified and reviewed and made a part of
the public record with respect to a permit
issued or modified under section 402 of this
Act. and subject to a condition in such
permit, and (C) continuous or anticipated
intermittent discharges from a point source,
identified in a permit or permit application
under section 402 of this Act, which are
caused by events occurring within the scope
of relevant opportunity or treatment systems.
Congress intended this amendment to
clarify which section of the CWA
governs discharges of oil and hazardous
substances from point sources holding
NPDES permits. Foreseeable or chronic
point source discharges that are
permitted under section 402. and that
are either due to causes associated with
the manufacturing or other commercial
activities in which the discharger is
engaged or due to the operation of the
treatment facilities required by the
NPDES permit, are to be regulated under
the NPDES program. "Classic spill"
situations are subject to the
requirements of section 311. Such spills
are governed by section 311 even where
the discharger holds a valid and
effective NPDES permit under section
402.
Several commenters suggested a need
for EPA to clarify the three categories of
excluded discharges. EPA provided an
extensive explanation of these
exclusions in the March 11,1985,
preamble to the proposed rule, and the
Agency intends at the pesent time to
continue this interpretation of the CWA
provisions, which was based on the
language in 40 CFR 117.12 promulgated
in 1979 for reportable quantities of CWA
hazardous substances. This
interpretation, however, is currently
being reevaluated by the Agency in the
context of the present NPDES program
and the interpretation of "federally
permitted releases" under the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). The Agency
intends to address this issue more fully
in a forthcoming rulemaking on CERCLA
federally permitted releases.
4. Exemption of Discharges Permitted
Under MARPOL 73/78
Annex 1 of the International
Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution from Ships. 1973. as modified
by the Protocol of 1978 (MARPOL 73/
78). entered into force on October 2.1983
(see 48 FR 45704-45727, October 6.1983).
The purpose of MARPOL 73/78. which
supersedes the International Convention
for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea
by Oil. 1954. is to eliminate marine
pollution from ships. In 1980. the Act to
Prevent Pollution from Ships
implemented portions of MARPOL. 73/
78. Specifically, section 13(b) of Pub. L
96-478 amended section 311(b)(3)(A) of
the CWA to exempt certain discharges
into waters seaward of the territorial
sea permitted under MARPOL 73/78.
Such discharges include the operational
discharge of limited quantities of oil-
water mixtures from ships. Thus,
discharges into those waters from ships
made in compliance with the
requirements of Regulation 9 of
MARPOL 73/78, Annex I (as
implemented through 33 CFR Parts 151
and 157), are not subject to notification
and liability provisions under the CWA
even if they would otherwise be of "a
quantity that may be harmful" under the
CWA. The MARPOL exemption does
not apply, however, to discharges into
the internal waters and the territorial .
seas of the United States. Such
discharges must satisfy the CWA
harmful quantity discharge standard
even if the MARPOL 73/78 discharge
standards are met. Section 110.6 of the
sheen rule now includes this exemption.
One commenter pointed out that a far
greater amount of the oil discharged into
the world's oceans comes from tankers
rather than from U.S. Outer Continental
Shelf production operations and
therefore recommended that if an
exemption is granted to ships covered
under MARPOL 73/78. a volumetric
trigger should be set for offshore
platforms that operate in the same
waters and discharge less oil. In
response to this comment, the Agency
points out that the principal purpose of
this regulatory revision is to incorporate
Congress' specific exemption for
MARPOL permitted releases. The
Agency also notes, however, that the
standard under MARPOL is
concentration-based rather than
volumetric and that Regulation 9 of
MARPOL 73/78 applies to all "ships-
operating in the marine environment.
Such "ships" include all vessels and
both fixed and floating platforms. Thus.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 63 / Thursday. April 2. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 10715
the MARPOL 73/78 exemption includes
certain operational discharges from
offshore platforms as well as from
vessels (see Regulation 21 of MARPOL
73/78) Furthermore, some offshore
platforms operate under NPDES permits
with oil discharge limits, and discharges
in compliance with such permits are
also excluded from discharge of oil
regulation coverage. The Agency has
decided to retain the existing reporting
trigger for discharges from offshore
platforms at this time.
B. Deepwater Port Act of 1974
The Deepwater Port Act (DWPA) of
1974 (33 U.S.C. 150-1524) applies to the
construction and operation of deepwater
ports in waters beyond the territorial
limits of the United States, including
associated components and equipment.
such as pipelines, located seaward of
the high water mark. It contains
provisions that prohibit the discharge of
oil into the marine environment from a
deepwater port, from a vessel that has
received oil from another vessel at such
a port, and from vessels within a port's
safety zone. The DWPA also establishes
deepwater port licensee and vessel
owner or operator liability for cleanup
costs and damages that result from a
discharge of oil. Other features of the
DWPA include discharge notification
requirements, penalty provisions, and
the establishment of the Deepwater Port
Liability Fund. The fund is liable.
without regard to fault, for all cleanup
costs and damages in excess of those
actually compensated by a liable
deepwater port licensee or vessel owner
or operator.
Action under each of the key pollution
provisions of the DWPA is triggered by
a discharge of oil in harmful quantities.
Section 18(m)(3) of the DWPA defines
"discharge" in terms of those "quantities
of oil determined to be harmful pursuant
to regulations issued by the
Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency" (33 U.S.C.
1517(m)(3)). In the proposed rule. EEA
used the sheen test to complete the
definition.
Several commenters favored, in one
form or another, a volumetric trigger for
discharges under the DWPA. After
carefully reviewing the comments
submitted and considering them m light
of the statutory language of section
18(m)(3) of the DWPA and its supporting
legislative history. EPA has decided to
use the sheen test in the final rule to
define "harmful quantities" for purposes
of the DWPA. The Coast Guard, which
has the responsibility for implementing
the requirements of the DWPA. agrees
with this position. Both EPA and the
Coast Guard believe that Congress
intended that the DWPA definition of
harmful quantity be the same as the
CWA definition in the oil discharge rule.
According to the legislative history of
the DWPA. Congress expected the
Administrator". . . to define harmful
quantities of oil as defined in
regulations issued under section 311 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act" (Sen. Rep. No. 93-1217.93rd Cong.
2nd Sess. (1974)). As noted by
commenters. the section 311 CWA
harmful quantity determination was
promulgated by the Department of the
Interior in 1970 and adopted by EPA in
1971. When Congress enacted the
DWPA in 1974 it specifically chose in
section 18(m)(3) to define the word
"discharge" in terms of "regulations
issued by the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency". As
the legislative history noted above
makes explicitly clear, the regulations
Congress was referring to were those
issued under section 311 of the CWA.
Those regulations defined harmful
quantities in 1974 in precisely the same
terms as today's rulemaking. Therefore,
EPA and the Coast Guard believe the
rule adopted today at 40 CFR 110.11
fulfills Congressional direction in this
regard. Moreover, as discussed below.
the Agency believes that the sheen test
is an appropriate definition of harmful
quantities for purposes of the DWPA.
One commenter submitted data from
the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP)
monitoring program to show that there
were no measurable short-term or long-
term harmful effects that could be
attributed to oil spills from the LOOP.1
A review of the data submitted,
however, suggests that the monitoring
program was not specifically designed
to assess the impacts of spills that have
actually occurred at the LOOP.
Moreover, the inconclusive indications
that these data provide are more than
offset in EPA's view by other scientific
studies and research in the record that
clearly demonstrate a connection
between oil spills and adverse
environmental effects, both at offshore
oil platforms and other open ocean
areas, as well as in controlled
laboratory conditions. For this reason
also, EPA believes that the
determination in today's rulemaking that
the oil sheen is an appropriate harmful
quantity standard is reasonable and
fully supportable.
Another commenter argued that the
sheen test does not correspond with
either actual or potential harm from
* The LOOP is the only operating deepwater port
in the United States It is located approximately IB
miles off the coast of Louisiana in the Gulf of
Mexico
deepwater port-related releases, which
by definition, occur outside territorial
waters. According to the commenter. the
regulations assume that the same
quantity of oil which presents a
potential threat to the public health or
welfare of the United States when
spilled in navigable waters or in the
contiguous zone creates a comparable
potential for harm when discharged at a
remote offshore location. The
commenter challenges this assumption.
citing a 1974 study by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers on different areas of
marine environmental sensitivity. It
should be noted that this study does not
state that there is no harm from oil spills
offshore, but rather, that there is likely
to be less harm from oil spills offshore
than from those inshore. Other
researchers have related the potential
for harm from an oil spill to distance
from shore, by noting that the potential
for harm increases as water depths
decrease from thousands to hundreds of
feet. EPA believes that such a potential
for harm exists at the LOOP because
contrary to the commenter's suggestion
that the LOOP represents a "remote
offshore location," the depth of the
water surrounding the LOOP platform is
in fact on the order of one hundred feet.
Furthermore, as mentioned previously.
the DWPA definition of deepwater port
includes pipelines and other
components and equipment located
seaward of the high water mark. Thus.
LOOP discharges may occur within as
well as beyond territorial waters.
Another commenter has indicated
concern that unlike section 311 of the
CWA. the provisions of the DWPA.
specifically 33 U.S.C. 1517(c)(l).
statutorily mandate a response action in
every instance of a reported discharge,
regardless of extreme weather
conditions and resulting safety hazards
that cleanup actions may entail. The
Coast Guard, however, declines to adopt
this interpretation of the DWPA. As
explained in their comment letter of may
9,1985 (OS-9-43 in the public docket).
the Coast Guard interprets the
provisions of the DWPA to give the
Coast Guard discretionary authority to
determine whether or not a response is
necessary when a discharge occurs.
IV. Other Sections of the Oil Discharge
Regulation
A few commenters recommended
changes to other sections of the oil
discharge regulation, particularly to
§§ 110.1 and 110.8 of the proposed rule.
For reasons discussed in the Responses
to Comments documents, the Agency
has decided not to incorporate these
changes into the final rule.
-------
10716
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 63 / Thursday. April 2. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
V. Requests For Changes in the Oil
Discharge Regulation
A. Volumetric Alternatives to Sheen
Test
Chevron U.S.A.. Inc.. of San Francisco.
California, has commented to EPA that
the sheen test under section 311 of the
CWA is too stringent and that
alternative, volumetric limits would
provide sufficient water quality
protection at a lesser cost to the
company. Chevron has suggested that
the reportable quantity threshold be
changed to 1 barrel (42 gallons), except
where water quality standards are more
stringent. The company maintains that
spills of less than 1 barrel "rarely, if
ever, cause environmental damage."
Chevron claims, in material submitted to
EPA. that approximately 75 percent of
the spills it reports are of under 1 barrel
and estimates that the cost to the
company is $500 to $6.000 per spill
report. Some commenters have urged
that a volumetric test be adopted for
harmful quantity determinations under
the DWPA. as well.
A large number of commenters
expressed support for the sheen test
rather than a volumetric test. Several
commenters cited the greater
enforceability, administrative ease, and
higher level of environmental protection
afforded by the sheen test. A few
commenters pointed to the success of
the sheen test in promoting prompt
reporting and preventing larger spills, as
well as in encouraging spill prevention
and cleanup by industry. The
commenters also noted the problems
inherent in a volumetric reporting
trigger, including the potential for
environmental harm from small
quantities of oil in the aquatic
environment; these commenters
asserted that a volumetric trigger would
fail to account for diffenng susceptibility
of water to damage from oil. They noted
that the receiving waters and type of oil
spilled affect the environmental impact
more than the quantity of oil spilled.
Commenters opposed to the sheen test
raised questions about environmental
harm and concerns about the stringency
of the requirement. Several commenters
favoring a volumetric alternative to the
sheen test also addressed administrative
and policy issues as outlined below and
detailed in the Responses to Comments
documents.
1. Environmental Harm Issues
The majority of commenters opposing
the sheen test expressed the belief that
small oil spills do not have a significant
impact on marine ecosystems. A few of
the commenters referred to the fact that
many scientific studies have been
conducted since the Department of the
Interior's 1970 determination that a
sheen represents a "harmful quantity" of
oil. For example, one suggested that
many scientific studies have proven
small quantities of oil to be harmless,
and another asserted that EPA has
failed to consider new data in its
decision to retain the sheen test. Of all
the commenters who expressed these
opinions, only three submitted extensive
documentation of scientific studies and
literature reviews, which they felt
illustrated the substantial amount of
recent research that could support a
volumetric reporting trigger. One of the
commenters also recommended that
EPA review the 1985 National Academy
of Sciences study on the subject of oil
pollution.
EPA has carefully reviewed the recent
scientific literature on environmental
effects of oil pollution, including
documents submitted by commenters
and other documents referenced in
comment letters or compiled in the
public docket during the comment
period. EPA believes that the literature
clearly demonstrates that discharges of
small quantities of oil cause
environmental harm. A discussion paper
outlining the Agency's position and
citing specific documents in support of
that position has been placed in the
public docket.
Many types of adverse effects from oil
have been extensively documented,
proving harmful effects from oil spills
and chronic pollution in inland waters,
in coastal environments, and in waters
beyond 12 miles from shore. Evidence
from reviews of laboratory studies
further demonstrates that very small
amounts of oil. e.g.. less than 1 mg/L (1
ppm). can have lethal and sublethal
effects on a wide variety of organisms.
The National Academy of Sciences
(NAS), hi its 1985 comprehensive
review, noted that "low concentrations
(less than 1 mg/L) of petroleum
hydrocarbons can apparently interfere
with the normal behavior of marine
organisms, especially the more fragile
components such as the larval and
juvenile forms of the marine food
chain." The review articles and reports
prepared by industry representatives
that argue strongly for the commenters'
position are either limited in their
citation of scientific literature or highly
selective in the conclusions drawn. The
limited evidence cited by commenters to
show little or no harm from oil
discharges generally applies only to
certain areas of chronic pollution (e.g.,
Milford Haven, United Kingdom),
certain types of harm (e.g., permanent
harm on a broad scale), or certain
organisms. As discussed in the NAS
report and m EPA's discussion paper.
the studies of chronically polluted areas
in the Gulf of Mexico that were cited by
commenters are controversial and have
been criticized by some scientists for
their methodology and conclusions.
Commenters provided no evidence
disputing the widely recognized types of
physical harm that may result from
floating sheens of oil such as
asphyxiation of fish and benthic fauna
due to coating by oil, harm to waterfowl
because of loss of buoyancy or loss of
insulating capacity of feathers, and
adverse aesthetic effects of fouled
shorelines and beaches.
Moreover, some commenters appear
to have defined potential harm as
permanent biological harm on a broad
scale. There simply is no persuasive
indication in the statute that Congress
intended this narrow interpretation of
the harmful quantity standard. In fact.
the Congressional policy expressed in
CWA section 311(b)(l) "that there
should be no discharges of oil"
(emphasis added) suggests just the
opposite.
Equally important, nothing in the .
legislative history of the CWA or in
judicial interpretations of the Act
suggests that a demonstration of
permanent harm on a broad scale is
required. Congress stated in the 1978
CWA Amendments that a prohibited
discharge need only be a quantity that
may be harmful. In cases such as U.S. v.
Atlantic Richfield Company. 429 F.Supp.
830.837 (EJ). Pa.. 1977). the courts have
suggested that Congress believed that
even transitory pollution of waters was
deleterious to the environment.
Many of the studies submitted by
commentera support the fact that small
oil spills do cause harm in certain
waters (e.g., spawning grounds.
estuaries). Many opponents of the sheen
test concede that coastal and inland
areas and sensitive habitats may be
vulnerable to damage from low levels of
oil pollution, and many admit that there
may be at least temporary harm.
Documents compiled in the public
docket clearly show that small amounts
of oil are harmful in a variety of
locations and circumstances, including
spawning grounds and sensitive habitats
beyond 12 miles from shore. EPA has
therefore chosen to retain the sheen test
as an environmentally protective
reporting trigger for purposes of both the
CWA and the DWPA.
Several commenters favored the
establishment of different oil discharge
reporting triggers for different waters to
ensure that the more stringent sheen test
would be used for environmentally
sensitive areas, while a less stringent
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 63 / Thursday. April 2. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 10717
volumetric test would be applied to less
environmentally sensitive waters. To the
extent that they favor retaining the
sheen test for certain waters. EPA
agrees with these commenters. EPA
further believes that the sheen test must
be applied to all waters to ensure
certain, consistent and effective
implementation of the harmful quantity
standard. A single reporting trigger is
entirely consistent with Congressional
intent as reflected in the 197B CWA
amendments, which eliminated the
requirement that a determination of
harm must consider the specific "times.
locations, circumstances, and
conditions" of a given spill. Senator
Muskie. in the debates on these
amendments, stated that the
determinations of harmful quantities
under CWA section 311 "are nationally
applicable, before-the-fact decisions and
are not expected to reflect the myriad of
actual circumstances that may occur"
(Congressional Record at 519653.
December 15.1977). In the case of
hazardous substances, which, like oil.
are covered by CWA section 311, EPA
has previously expressed the view that
Congress intended a single reportable
quantity to apply to all waters. As
slated in the 1978 preamble to
regulations establishing reportable
quantities for hazardous substances,
"Congress was aware that requiring
tailoring of such determinations to water
body type and other circumstances is
administratively unwise and could
prevent achievement of the goals of the
[Clean Water] Act" (43 FR10491, March
13.1978). EPA believes that this same
principle should apply to discharges of
oil. EPA continues to believe that a
single reporting trigger is a practical and
environmentally sound requirement. It is
true that discharges of the same amount
of oil into different bodies of water may
result in different degrees of harm. The
boundaries and differentiation of
various ecologically significant waters,
however, are not clearly defined nor
readily discernible. Waters seaward of
the territorial seas or the contiguous
zone, which may contain neustonic
communities or productive fisheries, can
be sensitive to small spills. As
sensitivity of individual aquatic
environments to oil is dependent on
much more than just distance from
shore. EPA believes that it would be
impractical to establish varying oil
discharge reporting requirements for
different waters. The sheen test.
identifying a single threshold for all
waters, provides a clear and definitive
trigger for the reporting requirements of
40 CFR Part 110. A single reporting
trigger for all waters is thus practical.
effective, and fully reflective of
Congressional intent underlying both
section 311 of the CWA and section
18(m)(3) of the DWPA.
Several commenters argued that the
sheen test will result in over reporting of
discharges that may not be harmful.
This argument, however, is true of any
reporting trigger including the
volumetric test. Moreover, any reporting
trigger may in addition to requiring the
reporting of some discharges that are
not harmful, also allow some harmful
discharges to go unreported. In
comparison to the sheen test, for
example, the volumetric triggers
advocated by some commenters would
allow nonreportmg of a large number of
spills that may be harmful both on an
individual and cumulative basis. EPA
believes that a sheen is an appropriate
indicator of a discharge of harmful
quantities of oil. A sheen is typically
associated with discharges containing
concentrations of oil in the 10 to 20 ppm
range. In this regard, it is worth noting
that Regulation 1(16) of MARPOL 73/78
defines clean ballast as either ballast
that does not exceed 15 ppm, or ballast
that, if discharged into clean, calm
water on a clear day, would not produce
a visible sheen. Thus, for purposes of
this definition, a discharge causing a
sheen may be roughly equated to a
discharge with a concentration of 15
ppm. As detailed in the Agency's
discussion paper in the public docket,
adverse biological effects from oil occur
at concentrations many times lower
than 10-20 ppm. Furthermore, as noted
above, the physical properties of
floating sheens themselves may cause
harm, such as coating birds' feathers
and fouling beaches.
2. Administrative and Policy Issues
Some commenters suggested that a
volumetric trigger would reduce the
number of spill reports. With a reduction
in reports, commenters asserted that
there will be less of a paperwork burden
on both industry and the implementing
agencies and less need for
administrative follow-up procedures
such as inspections. EPA recognizes that
in some cases reporting is already
required under separate regulatory
systems created under the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA).
under MARPOL 73/78. and under
section 402 of the CWA. For facilities
regulated under the OCSLU. all spills or
leakage of oil or waste materials must
be reported to the Director of the
Minerals Management Service under 30
CFR 250.43 and OCS Order Number 7.
The additional cost of complying with
the reporting requirements under section
311 of the CWA would be minimal for
these facilities.
In liglit of comments from
implementing agencies. EPA believes
that the cost of reporting under 40 CFR
Part 110 are not excessive For example.
a State agency (Ohio EPA) estimated
that the actual reporting phone call to
the National Response Center's toll-free
number normally takes less than 15
minutes. Furthermore. Ohio EPA has
found that its data storage and
administrative costs have generally
been less than $20 per reported spill.
The Coast Guard pointed out that the
costs of reporting small spills are very
small in comparison to spill prevention
and corrective action expenditures. In
response to EPA's request for
information on administrative costs of
responding to small spills, the Coast
Guard suggested that spill response.
costs vary with the level of response
required. The cost per assessment will
not be reduced, according to the Coast
Guard, by a change to a volumetric
standard because each report would still
need to be assessed to determine the
actual amount discharged. Furthermore.
the volumetric test may not reduce the
overall costs of the regulation nor
simplify its administration because there
are additional implementation
considerations associated with a
volumetric test that are not associated
with current notification requirements.
The costs of installing, maintaining, and
repairing any required oil monitoring
devices could be substantial. Field.
verification costs of the releaser as well
as the State. Coast Guard, or EPA would
likely increase for a given spill, if
observers were required to determine
the quantity spilled rather than simply
the existence of a sheen.
Several commenters expressed the
belief that the adoption of a volumetric
standard would not entail a reduction in
their cleanup operations. The
commenters asserted that their
commitment to cleanup of all spills
should continue under the volumetric
standard. EPA commends the
commenters' desire for the continued
cleanup of all spills. EPA believes.
however, that the Coast Guard's efforts
to ensure cleanup will suffer in cases of
spills that do not meet the volumetric
threshold and are therefore unreported.
Moreover, if. as commenters assert.
voluntary cleanup of all spills will take
place, EPA does not believe that the
requirement of toll-free telephone
reporting places an undue additional
burden on vessels and facilities
handling oil.
A few other commenters expressed
the opinion that a volumetric reporting
-------
10718 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 63 / Thursday. April'2. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
trigger would be superior to the sheen
test because the appearance of a sheen
often depends on weather conditions
and water turbulence. However, as
discussed below, accurate volumetric
determinations also can be dependent
on weather and water conditions. The
Agency believes that any potential
shortcoming of the sheen test in
particular circumstances are far
outweighed by its overall usefulness.
simplicity, and enforceability. A sheen
provides a clear indication of a
reportable discharge, enabling a
responsible party to identify easily
which discharges must be reported and
facilitating third party (e.g.. citizen)
complaints or reports.
EPA also believes that the difficulty
involved in determining the quantity of
oil discharged, as evidenced in data
from regulatory agencies, is one factor
that makes a volumetric reporting trigger
less effective than the sheen test. In
many cases, the reports of oil spills are
extremely inaccurate. In addition, a
volumetric trigger may provide an
incentive for underestimating the
quantity discharged. In cases when an
estimate of slick area and thickness •
must be made, an observer may require
special training. Even under optimal
viewing conditions, with a reference
scale available for comparing
dimensions, only rough estimates of
volume may be possible. Moreover, in
less than optimal viewing conditions
(e.g., poor weather, turbulance,
darkness), it is not clear that even rough
estimates would be possible. Finally.
any time-consuming determination of -
the amount spilled would be contrary to
the spill reporting program goal of
immediate notification and quick
response to possible environmental
threats.
Many commenters suggested that a
volumetric reporting trigger would be •
consistent with the present reportable
quantity (RQ) criteria for hazardous
substances. EPA notes that an important
purpose of the RQ program is to provide
a readily implementable and easy to
understand reporting trigger for a
diverse set of hazardous substances.
EPA believes that the sheen test
satisfies this same regulatory objective
for oil. The sheen test has been shown
to be a successful notification trigger for
oil under a variety of circumstances. The
sheen test takes advantage of the
physical properties of oil, which cause a
film, sheen, or discoloration upon the
surface of the water. Because oil
generally floats, the sheen test may be
used to provide a more simple, easily
enforced, and reliable alternative to a
volumetric trigger.
B. Special Use Applications of Oil
EPA has authority under the CWA.
section 311(b)(3)(B). and Executive
Order 11735 (38 FR 21243) to permit the
discharge of oil "in quantities and at
times and locations or under such
circumstances or conditions" as the
Agency determines not to be harmful.
Thus. EPA may grant exemptions to
section 311(b) and the sheen regulation
under appropriate circumstances. The
Agency has received a request for an
exemption for vegetable oil products
used to prevent salt water corrosion in
the ballast tanks and void spaces of
ships and semisubmersible oil rigs.
Several comments were received on this
issue. There was disagreement among
the commenters as to whether vegetable
oil products cause harm.
EPA has decided not to exempt the
reporting of vegetable oil product
discharges under the oil discharge rule.
The Agency has reviewed the materials
cited by commenters on the impacts of
vegetable oils and believes that these
materials do not support the conclusion
that these oils do not cause
environmental harm. Some harmful
environmental effects of vegetable oils
are similar to those of petroleum oils
and include drowning of waterfowl.
fishkills due to increased biological
oxygen demand, asphyxiation of benthic
life, and adverse aesthetic effects.
Finally, the Agency believes that the
reporting requirement does not pose
such a burden that it would deter the
application of a useful vegetable oil
product.
VI. Summary of Supporting Analyses
A. Classification and Regulatory Impact
Analysis
Regulations must be classified as
major or nonmajor to satisfy the
rulemaking protocol established by
Executive Order 12291. E.O. 22291
established the following criteria for a
regulation to qualify as a major rule:
1. An annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more:
2. A major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries. Federal,
State, or local government agencies, or
geographic regions: or
3. Significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment.
productivity, innovation, or on the ability of
United States-based enterprises to compete
with foreign-based enterprises in domestic or
export markets.
The amended regulation is a nonmajor
rule because the Agency has concluded
that it meets none of the above criteria.
An analysis has estimated that the
upper bound total of annual economic
costs from notification requirements.
spill investigations, and increased
cleanup liability is S3.8 million, well
below (he Si00 million standard for a
major rule classification. Data
supporting this conclusion are in the
rulemaking docket.
This regulation was submitted to
OMB for review under Executive Order
12291.
B Regulatory Flexibility Act
In accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980. Agencies must
evaluate the effects of a regulation on
"small entities." That Act recognizes
three types of such entities:
1. Small businesses (specified by Small
Business Administration reguldlions):
2. Small organizations (independently
owned, nondommant in their field, nonprofit).
and
3. Small governmental jurisdictions
(serving communities with fewer than 5.000
people).
If the rule is likely to have a
"significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities," the Act
requires that a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis be performed. EPA certifies
that the amended regulation will not
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
There may be some incremental costs of
compliance owing the extension of
jurisdiction beyond the contiguous zone
to approximately 200 miles. These costs
will, however, be borne by companies
larger than those defined as small
entities.
The regulated industry is dominated
by a few dozen major corporations.
Because regulatory costs will ultimately
be borne by these major corporations,
the expected compliance costs will not
affect any identifiable group of small
entities and thus a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis is not required.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
Information collection requirements
contained in this rule have been
approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980.
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and have been
assigned OMB control number 2050-
0046.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 110
Administrative practice and
procedure, Coastal zone, Continental
shelf. Environmental protection.
Fisheries. Hazardous substances.
Intergovernmental relations, Liabilities.
Marine resouces. Natural resources. Oil
pollution. Penalties, Petroleum. Public
health. Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Rivers. Treaties. Vessels.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 63 / Thursday. April 2. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
10719
Water pollution control. Water
resources. Waterways.
Dated. March 24.1987.
Lee M. Thomas.
Administrator.
For reasons set out in the preamble. 40
CFR Part 110 is revised to read as
follows:
PART 110—DISCHARGE OF OIL
Sec.
1101 Definitions.
110.2 Applicability.
110.3 Discharge into navigable waters of
such quantities as may be harmful
110.4 Discharge into contiguous zone of
such quantities as may be harmful.
lias Discharge beyond contiguous zone of
such quantities as may be harmful.
110.6 Discharge prohibited.
110.7 Exception for vessel engines.
110.8 Dispersants.
110.9 Demonstration projects
110.10 Notice.
110.11 Discharge at Deepwater Ports.
Authority: Sees. 311 (b)(3) and (b)(4) and
501(a), Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
as amended (33 U.S.C. 1321 (b)(3) and (b)(4)
and 1381(a)); sec. 18(m)(3) of the Deepwater
Port Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. 1517(m)(3)): E.O.
11735. 38 FR 21243. 3 CFR Parts 1971-1975
Comp.. p. 793.
§110.1 Definitions.
As used in this part, the following
terms shall have the meaning indicated
below:
"Act" means the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act. as amended. 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., also known as the
Clean Water Act:
"Administrator" means the
Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA);
"Applicable water quality standards"
means State water quality standards
adopted by the State pursuant to section
303 of the Act or promulgated by EPA
pursuant to that section;
"Contiguous zone" means the entire
zone established or to be established by
the United States under article 24 of the
Convention on the Territorial Sea and
the Contiguous Zone;
"Deepwater port" means an offshore
facility as defined in section (3)(10) of
the Deepwater Port Act of 1974 (33
U.S.C. 1502(10)):
"Discharge." when used in relation to
section 311 of the Act. includes, but is
not limited to. any spilling, leaking.
pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, or
dumping, but excludes (A) discharges in
compliance with a permit under section
402 of the Act, (B) discharges resulting
from circumstances identified and
reviewed and made a part of the public
record with respect to a permit issued or
modified under section 402 of the Act.
and subject to a condition in such
permit, and (C) continuous or
anticipated intermittent discharges from
a point source, identified in a permit or
permit application under section 402 of
the Act, that are caused by events
occurring within the scope of relevant
operating or treatment systems;
"MARPOL 73/78" means the
International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973,
as modified by the Protocol of 1978
relating thereto. Annex I. which
regulates pollution from oil and which
entered into force on October 2.1983:
"Navigable waters" means the waters
of the United States, including the
territorial seas. The term includes:
(a) All waters that are currently used.
were used in the past, or may be
susceptible to use in interstate or foreign
commerce, including all waters that are
subject to the ebb and flow of the tide:
(b) Interstate waters, including
interstate wetlands:
(c) All other waters such as intrastate
lakes, rivers, streams (including
intermittent streams), mudflats,
sandflats. and wetlands, the use.
degradation, or destruction of which
would affect or could affect interstate or
foreign commerce including any such
waters:
(1) That are or could be used by
interstate or foreign travelers for
recreational or other purposes:
(2) From which fish or shellfish are or
could be taken and sold in interstate or
foreign commerce;
(3) That are used or could be used for
industrial purposes by industries in
interstate commerce;
(d) All impoundments of waters
otherwise defined as navigable waters
under this section:
(e) Tributaries of waters identified in
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this
section, including adjacent wetlands:
and
(f) Wetlands adjacent to waters
identified in paragraphs (a) through (e)
of this section: Provided. That waste
treatment systems (other than cooling
ponds meeting the criteria of this
paragraph) are not waters of the United
States;
"NPDES" means National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System:
"Offshore facility" means any facility
of any kind located in. on, or under any
of the navigable waters of the United
States, and any facility of any kind that
is subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States and is located in. on. or
under any other waters, other than a
vessel or a public vessel:
"Oil", when used in relation to section
311 of the Act. means oil of any kind or
in any form, including, but not limted to.
petroleum, fuel oil. sludge, oil refuse.
and oil mixed with wastes other than
dredged spoil. "Oil." when used in
relation to section 18(m)(3) of the
Deepwater Port Act of 1974. has the
meaning provided in section 3(14) of the
Deepwater Port Act of 1974:
"Onshore facility" means any facility
(including, but not limited to. motor
vehicles and rolling stock) of any kind
located in. on. or under any land within
the United States, other than submerged
land:
"Person" includes an individual, firm,
corporation, association, and a
partnership;
"Public vessel" means a vessel owned
or'bareboat chartered and operated by
the United States, or by a State or
political subdivision thereof, or by a
foreign nation, except when such vessel
is engaged in commerce:
"Sheen" means an iridescent
appearance on the surface of water:
"Sludge" means an aggregate of oil or
oil and other matter of any kind in any
form other than dredged spoil having a
combined specific gravity equivalent to
or greater than water.
"United States" means the States, the
District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Guam.
American Samoa, the Virgin Islands.
and the Trust Territory of the Pacific
Islands:
"Vessel" means every description of
watercraft or other artificial contrivance
used, or capable of being used, as a
means of transportation on water other
than a public vessel: and
"Wetlands" means those areas that
are inundated or saturated by surface or
ground water at a frequency or duration
sufficient to support, and that under
normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands generally include
playa lakes, swamps, marshes, bogs and
similar areas such as sloughs, prairie
potholes, wet meadows, prairie river
overflows, mudflats, and natural ponds.
§110.2 Applicability
The regulations of this part apply to
the discharge of oil prohibited by
section 311(b)(3) of the Act. This
includes certain discharges into or upon
the navigable waters of the United
States or adjoining shorelines or into or
upon the waters of the contiguous zone.
or in connection with activities under
the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
or the Deepwater Port Act of 1974. or
that may affect natural resources
belonging to. appertaining to, or under
the exclusive management authority of
the United States (including resources
-------
10720 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 63 / Thursday. April 2. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
under the Magnuson Fishery
Conservation and Management Act).
The regulations of this part also, define
the term "discharge" for purposes of
section 18(m)(3) of the Deepwater Port
Act of 1974. as provided under § 110.11
of this part.
§ 110.3 Discharge Into navigable waters of
such quantities as may be harmful
For purposes of section 311(b) of the
Act. discharges of oil into or upon the
navigable waters of the United States or
adjoining shorelines in such quantities
that it has been determined may be
harmful to the public health or welfare
of the United States, except as provided
in § 110.7 of this part, include discharges
of oil that:
(a) Violate applicable water quality
standards, or
(b) Cause a film or sheen upon or
discoloration of the surface of the water
or adjoining shorelines or cause a sludge
or emulsion to be deposited beneath the
surface of the water or upon adjoining
shorelines.
§ 110.4 Discharge into contiguous zone of
such quantities as may be harmful
For purposes of section 311(b) of the
Act. discharges of oil into or upon the
waters of the contiguous zone in such
quantities that it has been determined
may be harmful to the public health or
welfare of the United States, except as
provided in § 110.7. include discharges
of oil that:
(a) Violate applicable water quality
standards, or
(b) Cause a film or sheen upon or
discoloration of the surface of the water
or adjoining shorelines or cause a sludge
or emulsion to be deposited beneath the
surface of the water or upon adjoining
shorelines.
§ 110.5 Discharge beyond contiguous
zone of such quantities as may be harmful.
For purposes of section 311(b) of the
Act. discharges of oil into or upon
waters seaward of the contiguous zone
in connection with activities under the
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act or
the Deepwater Port Act of 1974. or that
may affect natural resources belonging
to, appertaining to, or under the
exclusive management authority of the
United States (including resources under
the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act) in such quantities that
it has been determined may be harmful
to the public health or welfare of the
United States, except as provided in
§ 110.7. include discharges of oil that:
(a) Violate applicable water quality
standards, or
(b) Cause a film or sheen upon or
discoloration of the surface of the water
or adjoining shorelines or cause a sludge
or emulsion to be deposited beneath the
surface of the water or upon adjoining
shorelines.
§110.6 Discharge prohibited.
As provided in section 311(b)(3) of the
Act, no person shall discharge or cause
or permit to be discharged into or upon
the navigable waters of the United
States or adjoining shorelines or into or
upon the waters of the contiguous zone
or into or upon waters seaward of the
contiguous zone in connection with
activities under the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act or the Deepwater Port
Act of 1974, or that may affect natural
resources belonging to, appertaining to,
or under the exclusive management
authority of the United States (including
resources under the Magnuson Fishery
Conservation and Management Act) any
oil in such quantities as may be harmful
as determined in §§110.3,110.4. and
110.5, except as the same may be
permitted in the contiguous zone and
seaward under MARPOL 73/78, Annex
I. as provided in 33 CFR 151.09.
§ 110.7 Exception for vessel engines.
For purposes of section 311(b) of the
Act, discharges of oil from a properly
functioning vessel engine are not
deemed to be harmful, but discharges of
such oil accumulated in a vessel's bilges
shall not be so exempt.
§11(18 Dtsperaants.
Addition of dispersants or emulsifiera
to oil to be discharged that would
circumvent the provisions of this part is
prohibited.
§110.9 Demonstration protects.
Notwithstanding any other provisions
of this part the Administrator may
permit the discharge of oil. under section
311 of the Act, in connection with
research, demonstration projects, or
studies relating to the prevention,
control, or abatement of oil pollution.
§110.10 Notice.
Any person in charge of a vessel or of
an onshore or offshore facility shall, as
soon as he or she has knowledge of any
discharge of oil from such vessel or
facility in violation of § 110.6.
immediately notify the National
Response Center (NRC) (800-424-8802;
in the Washington. DC metropolitan
area. 426-2675). If direct reporting to the
NRC is not practicable, reports may be
made to the Coast Guard or EPA
predesignated On-Scene Coordinator
(OSC) for the geographic area where the
discharge occurs. All such reports shall
be promptly relayed to the NRC. If it is
not possible to notify the NRC or the
predesignated OCS immediately, reports
may be made immediately to the nearest
Coast Guard unit, provided that the
person in charge of the vessel or
onshore or offshore facility notifies the
NRC as soon as possible. The reports
shall be made in accordance with such
procedures as the Secretary of
Transportation may prescribe. The
procedures for such notice are set forth
in U.S. Coast Guard regulations. 33 CFR
Part 153. Subpart B and in the National
Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan. 40 CFR Part 300.
Subpart E. (Approved by the Office of
Management and Budget under the
control number 2050-0046)
§ 110.11 Discharge at deepwater ports.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(b) below, for purposes of section
18(m)(3) of the Deepwater Port Act of
1974, the term "discharge" shall include
but not be limited to. any spilling,
leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting.
emptying, or dumping into the marine
environment of quantities of oil that:
(1) Violate applicable water quality
standards, or
(2) Cause a film or sheen upon or
discoloration of the surface of the water
or adjoining shorelines or cause a sludge
or emulsion to be deposited beneath the
surface of the water or upon adjoining
shorelines.
(b) For purposes of section 18(m)(3) of
the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, the term
"discharge" excludes:
(1) Discharges of oil from a properly
functioning vessel engine, (including an
engine on a public vessel), but not
discharges of such oil accumulated in a
vessel's bilges (unless in compliance
with MARPOL 73/78, Annex I); and
(2) Discharges of oil permitted under
MARPOL 73/78. Annex I.
|FR Doc. 87-7263 Filed 4-1-87; 8:45 am|
BILLING CODE 6S60-CO-M
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 68 / Thursday. April 9. 1987 / Proposed Rules
11513
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
(SW-FRL-3183-2)
Hazardous Waste Management
System; Indentiflcation and Listing of
Hazardous Waste
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notification of availability of
data and request for comment.
SUMMARY: Today's notice announces the
availability of ground-water monitoring
data for Bommer Industries
Incorporated's two evaportation ponds.
This data was collected by Bommer in
response to the Agency's request for
ground-water data obtained from their
recently expanded monitoring system in
an effort to more fully characterize the
waste included in their petition to
exclude specific wastes from hazardous
waste control. The ground-water data
has been included in the public docket
and will be considered by the Agency in
making our final delistmg decision for
Bommer1 s petition. The Agency requests
public comment on this data in relation
to the proposed exclusion of Bommer's
waste (see 50 PR 48930-48932. November
27.1985).
DATES: EPA will accept public
comments on this data until May 11.
1987. Comments postmarked after the
close of the comment penod will be
stamped "late".
Any person may request a hearing on
this notice as it relates to the proposed
exclusion of Bommer Industries' waste
by Tiling a request with Bruce Weddle.
whose address appears below, by April
24,1987. The request must contain the
information prescribed in 40 CFR
260.20(d).
ADDRESSES: Send three copies of your
comments to EPA. Two copies should be
sent to the Docket Clerk. Office of Solid
Waste (WH-562), 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460. A third copy
should be sent to Jim Kent. Variance
Section. Assistance Branch. PSPD/OSW
(WH-563). U.S. Environmental
protection Agencv «™ M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460. Identify your
comments at the top with this docket
number "F-87-BMAN-FFFFF".
Requests for a hearing should be
addressed to Bruce Weddle. Director.
Permits and State Programs Division.
Office of Solid Waste I WH-563). U S
Environmental Protection Agpncy. 401 M
Street SW.. Washington. DC 20460
The public docket where this
information can be viewed is located at
the U S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street SW (sub-
basement), Washington. DC 20460 The
docket is open from 9:30 a m to 3-30 p.m.
Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays Call Mia Zmud at (202)
475-9327 for appointments The public
may copy a maximum of 50 pages of
material from any one regulatory docket
at ne cost. Additional copies cost $0.20
per page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
RCRA Hotline, toll free at (800) 424-
9346. or at (202) 382-3000. For further
informdtion on this notice, contact Ms.
Lori DeRose. Office of Solid Waste
(WH-563), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460. (202) 382-5096.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 27.1985 the Agency proposed
to grant an exclusion to Bommer
Industries. Incorporated under 40 CFR
260.20 and 260.22 (see 50 FR 48930-48932
and regulatory docket number "Section
3001— Delistmg Petition (4)"). During the
public comment penod for that proposal.
one commentor suggested that the
Agency should obtain additional
ground-water data from Bommer to
more fully characterize any impact the
petitioned waste may have had on
ground-water. Subsequent to the
publication of the proposed exclusion.
Bommer added an additional well to
their ground-water monitoring system.
The monitoring data has been collected
and submitted to the Agency in support
of Bommer's petition. A copy of the data
collected by Bommer Industries has
been included in the public docket for
the Agency's proposed decision (see
docket number "F-87-BMAN-FFFFF").
This data will be considered and used
by the Agency in making its final
decision on Bommer Industries' delistmg
petition.
Dated: April 1.1987
Bruce R. Weddle.
Director. Permits and State Programs
Division.
|KR Doc. 87-7832 Filed 4-8-67. 8 45 am)
MUM CODE 6MO-MMI
40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-3141-1]
Intent To Revise the Hazard Ranking
System
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemakmg
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA") is reviewing anil may
revise the Hazard Ranking System
("HRS") The HRS is Appendix A to the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Contingency Plan ("NCF'J. which EPA
promulgated on |uly 16.1982 (47 FR
31180) pursuant to section 105(8)(A) of
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation and Liability
Act of 1980 ("CERCLA"). The HRS is the
principal mechanism EPA uses to place
sites on the CERCLA National Priorities
List.
This notice requests comments and
information related to revising the HRS
in advance of the proposed rulenuking.
These comments will be taken into
account by the Agency m revising the
HRS.
DATES: Written Comments: EPA will
accept written comments on revising the
HRS until May 11.1987.
Public Meeting. EPA will hold a
public meeting to hear comments on
revising the HRS at the location shown
in "ADDRESSES." This meeting will be
held on May 7 and 8.1987 from 9 a m. to
4.30 p.m. both days. Oral presentations
of comments should not exceed 15
minutes in length A sign-up sheet for
presentations will be available from 8.00
to 9:00 a m each day. Presentations will
be scheduled on a first-come basis for
that day only. Persons wishing to speak
are asked to provide EPA with a copy of
their comments at the time of the
presentations.
ADDRESSES: Written Comments:
Comments may be mailed to to Russel
H. Wyer. Director. Hazardous Site
Control Division (Attn- HRS Staff).
Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response (WH-548E). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
Street. SW. Washington. DC 20460.
Comments will be placed in the
Superfund docket. The Superfund docket
is located in EPA Headquarters.
Waterside Mall Subbasement. 401 M
Street. SW. Washington. DC 20460 and
is available for viewing by appointment
only from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday
through Fnday excluding holidays. To
obtain copies or make an appointment,
contact Demse Sines at 202-382-3046.
Public meeting. The public meeting on
the HRS will be held at the Westpark
Rosslyn Hotel. 1900 N. Fort Myer Drive.
Arlington. Virginia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jane Metcalfe. Hazardous Site Control
Division. Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response (WH-548E). U S
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
- Streei. SW. Washington. DC 20460.
Phone (800) 424-9346 (nr 382-3000 in the
Washington. DC. metropolitan area)
-------
11514
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 68 / Thursday. April 9. 1987 / Proposed Rules
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II CERCLA Amendments
III Technical Issues
IV Consideration of Comments
I. Introduction
In 1980. Congress enacted the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act. 42 U.S.C. 9601. el seq. ("CERCLA"
or "the Act") in response to the dangers
posed by uncontrolled releases of
hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants. To implement CERCLA.
the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) promulgated the revised National
Oil and Hazardous Substances
Contingency Plan. 40 CFR Part 300. on
July 16.1982 (47 FR 31180). pursuant to
section 105 of CERCLA and Executive
Order 12316 (46 FR 42237. August 20.
1981). The National Contingency Plan
("NCP"). further revised by EPA on
September 16.1985 (SO FR 37624) and
November 20.1985 (50 FR 47912). sets
forth the guidelines and procedures
needed to respond to releases and
threatened releases of hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants
under CERCLA.
Section 105(8)(A) of CERCLA required
that the NCP include criteria for
determining priorities among releases or
hreatened releases for the purpose of
taking remedial or removal action.
Criteria were to be based upon relative
risk or danger, taking into account the
population at risk, the hazardous
potential of the substances at a facility.
the potential for contamination of
drinking water supplies, direct human
contact, destruction of sensitive
ecosystems, and other appropriate
factors. The Agency developed the
Hazard Ranking System ("MRS") to
implement Section 105(8)(A). The HRS
was codified as Appendix A of the NCP.
Section 105(8)(B) of CERCLA requires
that the statutory criteria descnbed in
the HRS be used to prepare a list of
national priorities among the known
releases or threatened releases
throughout the United States, and that at
least 400 sites be designated for priority.
The list, which is Appendix B of the
NCP. is the National Priorities List
("NPL").
Hazard Ranking System
The principal mechanism for placing
sites on the NPL is the application of the
HRS. The HRS was designed to be a
screening device, one that would allow
the Agency to rank sites qim.kly, using
ti\uilable data. The HRS score reflects
the potential for harm to humans or the
•nvironment from migration of a
hazardous substance by routes involving
ground water, surface water, or air and
is a composite of separate scores for
each of the three possible contaminant
migration routes. The score for each
route is obtained by assigning numerical
values (according to prescnbed
guidelines) to a set of factors that
characterize the potential of the release
to cause harm. Sites with HRS scores of
28.50 or above have been placed on the
NPL
Generally, the Agency conducts a
Preliminary Assessment (PA) and a Site
Inspection (SI) at a site to evaluate it for
possible inclusion on the NPL. The PA
and SI are low-cost, initial data-
gathenng efforts designed to provide
input for HRS scoring.
National Priorities List
The purpose of the NPL is primarily to
serve as an informational tool for use by
EPA in identifying sites that appear to
present a significant risk to public health
or the environment. The initial
identification of a site for the NPL is
intended primarily to guide EPA in
determining which sites warrant further
investigation to assess the nature and
extent of the public health and
environmental nsks associated with the
site.
The NCP establishes that a site
cannot undergo Fund-financed remedial
action until it is placed on the final NPL
(40 CFR 300.68(a)]. The NPL does not
determine priorities for removal actions;
EPA may take removal actions at any
site, whether listed or not. that meets
the criteria of §§ 300.65-300.67 of the
NCP. Likewise. EPA may take
enforcement actions under CERCLA
against responsible parties regardless of
whether the site is on the NPL
Sites are placed on the NPL in
accordance with informal rulemaking
procedures of section 553 of the
Administrative Procedures Act. The NPL
now contains 703 sites. An additional
248 sites have been proposed.
II. CERCLA Amendments
On October 17.1986. CERCLA was
amended. The Superfund Amendments
and Reauthonzation Act of 1986
("SARA") requires EPA to promulgate
changes to the HRS not later than IB
months after the date of enactment and
implement these changes 24 months
after enactment. The amendments
require that EPA modify the HRS so
that, "to the maximum extent feasible, it
accurately assesses the relative degree
of risk to human health and the
environment posed by sites and
facilities subject to review."
Specifically, section 105(c) of SARA
requires:
• An assessment of (he human health nsks
associated with contamination or potential
contamination of surface waters, either
directly or as a result of the runoff of any
hazardous substance, pollutant, or
contaminant This assessment should lake
mlo account the use of these waters for
recreation and the potential migration of .un-
hazardous substance, pollutant or
contaminant through surface water to
downstream sources of drinking water.
• An evaluation of the damage to natural
resources which may affect the human food
chain and which is associated with any
release or threatened release.
• An assessment of the contamination or
potential contamination of the mnbiuul uii
which is associated with a release or
threatened release of hazardous substances
Section 125 of SARA requires EPA. in
its revision of the HRS. to specifically
assess those wastes described in section
3001(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA). These wastes include fly ash
waste, bottom ash waste, slag waste.
and flue gas emission control waste
generated primarily from the
combustion of coal or other fossil fuels
The amendments require EPA to
consider
(1) The quantity, toxicity. and
concentrations of hazardous constituents
which are present in such waste and a
comparison with other wastes:
(2) The extent of. and potential for. release
of such hazardous constituents into the
environment:
(3) The degree of risk to human health and
the environment posed by such constituents.
Additionally, section 118 of SARA
states that EPA shall give a high priority
to facilities where the release of
hazardous substances or pollutants or
contaminants has resulted in the closing
of drinking water wells, or has
contaminated a principal drinking water
supply
The legislative history of SARA
makes clear that Congress did not
intend that the revised HRS become a
mechanism for making detailed risk
assessments: rather, it was intended to
be consistent with the limited purpose of
the NPL—screening sites that might.
after further study, warrant fund-
financed remedial action. See 132 Cong.
Rec. S14931 (daily ed. Oct. 3.1986)
(Statement of Senator Baucus). Senator
Baucus emphasized:
The Congress recognizes that the Hazard
Ranking System must continue to function as
a screening tool that will allow the evaluation
of a litrge number of sites in an expeditious
mrtnner Id
In order to improve the accuracy of
the HRS. the Agency believes that a
modest expansion of data collection
activities may be necessary IIP fore a situ
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 68 / Thursday. April 9. 1987 / Proposed Rules
11515
i proposed for the N'PL to implement a
' ^d HRS. To maximize the use of
,-ces at the beginning of the
im. EPA must large! its data
_lion activities to specific areas
that would most increase the accuracy
of the MRS. As was discussed in the
preamble to the current HRS (47 FR
31187. July 12.1982). the amount of
information to be collected for HRS
scoring must be balanced against the
cost and time required to obtain that
information. EPA anticipates that
several thousand releases may be
evaluated in the next several years for
inclusion on the NPL In revising the
HRS, the number and types of factors
must be consistent with the costs of data
collection, the large number of releases.
and the resources appropriate for
implementing the program. Comments
on this notice would be most useful if
they would focus on those areas of the
HRS where an increase in accuracy is
achievable without a significant
increase in the time and costs
associated with data collection.
HI. Technical Issues
As an initial step in its review of the
HRS, EPA is requesting comments and
information related to revision of the
HRS. The comments and information
should take into account the recent
•ndments to CERCLA and the intent
iiongress for the HRS to remain a
chanism for screening sites to
determine which may need additional
comprehensive studies. EPA is soliciting
comments on the following areas:
• Existing HRS scoring factors
• Other model* for ranking hazardous
substance releases
• A mechanism for including dirpcl contact
in the HRS
• A mechanism for incorporating human
food chain exposures into (he HRS
Each of these areas for potential HRS
revision is addressed in more detail
below. In addition, the Agency would
like comments on any other methods for
improving the accuracy of the HRS.
consistent with the NPL's limited
purpose. The comments should address
the methodologies needed to implement
any such revisions, as well as the
associated data requirements and data
collection costs.
Existing HRS Scoring (actors
EPA is considering modifying the
current HRS scoring factors as
discussed below. The Agency solicits
comments and technical information on
the appropriateness of the changes.
techniques for incorporating these
changes into the HRS. (he additional
jta requirements such changes might
eeessitdte. and the costs associated
with collecting these data. In addition.
the Agency would like comments and
information on whether such a change
would increase the accuracy of the HRS
and provide better discrimination among
sites.
Ground Water Pathway. The existing
HRS evaluates the ground water
pathway using either "observed
release"—direct evidence of a release
from a facility to ground water—or
"route characteristics"—the potential
for a facility to cause a release to ground
water—taking into account the use of
the ground water ("the aquifer of
concern"), as well as the loxicity and
persistence of the hazardous substances
The HRS evaluates the population
drinking water from the aquifer of
concern within a three-mile radius,
except where there is a lateral
discontinuity in the aquifer which
prevents migration of contaminants. It
does not take into account the direction
of ground water flow, nor the potential
for hazardous substances to migrate
through Ihe ground water to the drinking
water wells. When the HRS was first
developed. EPA believed that requiring
a precise measure of the affected
population would add to the time and >
expense of applying the HRS. Provisions
for limiting the area of concern based on
ground water flow direction were not
included because of the lack of reliable
data on direction of flow and because
the direction of flow frequently varies.
See the preamble to the original NCP.
promulgated July 12,1982 (47 FR 31190).
for more background.
Although EPA still believes that it is
very difficult to define ground water
flow direction at the time of HRS
scoring, the Agency is requesting public
comment on the feasibility of including
more general flow direction data when
determining the target population
potentially affected by a release of
hazardous substances.
Currently, the HRS only takes into
account the existing use made of ground
water drawn from the aquifer of concern
within three miles of the site. In its
revision of the HRS. the Agency is
considering modifying this factor to
account for the future use of the ground
water, as well as existing use. EPA
would like comment on the
appropriateness of such a change, as
well as comment on methods for
incorporating the future use of ground
water into the HRS.
In response to Section 118 of SARA.
EPA is soliciting comments and
information on different mechanisms for
giving priority in the HRS to those
facilities thdt have caused the closing of
drinking water wells or have
contaminated a principal drinking water
supply.
Surface Water Pathway The surface
water pathway of the existing HRS is
scored in the same manner as the
ground water pathway, using either
"observed release" or "route
characteristics" and taking into account
the use of (he surface water body, as
well as toxicity and persistence of the
hazardous substances. The surface
water pathway does not lake into
account the mobility and fate of the
hazardous substances in the surface
water. EPA believed at Ihe time the HRS
was developed that such factors could
not be determined given Ihe amount of
data available about most sites at the
lime of HRS scoring.
Although EPA still believes that it
may be very difficult to precisely
determine the mobility and fate of
hazardous substances in the surface
water, EPA is requesting comments on
Ihe feasibility of including such
information in the surface water
pathway. EPA would like information
concerning readily-available and easy-
to-use methods for incorporating such a
factor into the HRS, the'reliability of
these methods to accurately assess the
mobility of hazardous substances, and
whether such a factor would increase
the accuracy of the HRS. For example.
published information on
biomagnification factors could be used
to evaluate the potential for a hazardous
substance to bioaccumutate.
The HRS currently uses a distance of
three miles to determine the target
population potentially affected by a
release of hazardous substances into the
surface water. EPA is soliciting
comments and technical information
concerning the adequacy of this distance
in determining the potential threat to the
population from contaminated surface
water, as well as alternatives for this
distance.
The HRS currently assigns values for
use of surface water, with drinking
water receiving the highest value of
three and recreation receiving a value of
two. However, the population using the
surface water for recreation is not takpn
into account in the HRS score. In
response to the recent amendments to
CERCLA. EPA must evaluate the need
for the HRS lo place a greater emphasis
on the recreational use of the surface
water, and would like comments on how
such a change could be accomplished.
For example, the Agency could evaluate
the importance of recreation on a
particular stream by looking at its Suite-
designuled stream classification and
assigning a score. EPA would also like
comments on what the weighting of
-------
recreational use of surface waters
•Snuld be in relation lo drinking water
f\ir Pathway. The air pathway in the
exiling MRS is scored only via an
olisrived release, using data that show
contaminant levels at or near a facility
that significantly exceed background
levels. Potential dir releases are
cunenlly not considered. EPA is
soliciting comments and information on
techniques for incorporating a route
chiir.-iclenstics/cunlainmunl component
into the air pathway that would allow
the Agency to rank potential releases.
The comments should address the data
thai would be needed when considering
such a component, the costs for data
gathering, and Ihe reliability of the route
characteristics components in assessing
potential air releases.
The existing air pathway score takes
• HIM account the population within a
mur-mile radius when determining the
target population potentially affected by
d release of hazardous substances to the
dir. EPA is soliciting comments on the
adequacy of the existing target distance
and on other distances that might more
accurately reflect the harm to humans
from a release of hazardous substances
to the air. Comments are also solicited
on whether alternative schemes to a
fixed distance may be more appropriate.
; rl-idcd with these comments should be
chnical information on the
methodologies available to determine
the appropriate target distance limit, the
reliability of these methodologies, and
the data requirements and data
collection coils.
Volume and Concentration of
Hazardous Waste. In scoring all
contaminant pathways of a site using
the existing HRS. EPA considers the
quantity of hazardous waste deposited.
rather than the quantity of hazardous
constituents within these wastes. EPA
ctl«o dues not consider the quantity of
hazardous constituents released into the
ground water, surface water or air. but
or.ly whether that release is significantly
above background When EPA
developed the MRS. the Agency believed
that determining Ihe quantity of
hazardous constituents would require a
significant amount of sampling and
nn.Yyses that would result in substantial
delays in the ranking of sites.
The Agency has experienced
difficulties in determining, even during a
Kemedial Invesligation. the quantity of
hazardous constituent' \-:\\>\\ the
waste \ lowevt-r. in response lo section
1i)5(y!l2) .mil seclion 125 of SARA, as
we'f js t.le legislative history of SARA.
I i'A is requesting commenls on ihe
feasibility of including such information
n a revised HRS. Comments should
address methods lo incorporate such a
factor into the structure of the MRS and
the amount of site-specific data
necessary lo accurately determine the
quantity of hazardous constituents
deposited. In addition, the comments
should address the issue of how to
calculate scores for sites for which it is
not feasible to obtain such information.
EPA is also considering taking into
account the concentrations of hazardous
constituents in the ground water, surface
water and air. The Agency is soliciting
comments on the feasibility of
considering environmental
concentrations in the HRS. as well as
simplified techniques for accomplishing
this, taking into account the amount of
data available at the time of HRS
scoring.
Additionally, in response to section
125 of SARA, the Agency solicits
comments and information concerning
the quantity, loxicity. and
concentrations of hazardous
constituents within wastes described in
section 3001(b)(3)(A)(i) of RCRA (fly ash
and associated wastes), and how such
characteristics compare with other types
of hazardous wastes.
Toxicity. Currently, the HRS
determines the toxicity of hazardous
substances using a scheme developed
by N. Irving Sax (1984). This scheme
rates the toxicity of hazardous
substances in ground water, surface
water or air. on a scale of 0 to 3 and is
primarily based on the acute toxicity of
the most toxic substance present. The
Agency solicits comment on how the
toxicity factor could be revised to more
accurately consider the effects from
acute, sub-chronic, and chronic
exposures. The Agency is also
interested in comments concerning the
number of substances that should be
considered when mixtures of chemicals
are being evaluated, as well as
information on methodologies that might
more adequately characterize the
toxicity of hazardous substances. The
comments should include a discussion
of the data requirements, costs, and
reliability of the methodologies.
Sensitive Environments. The existing
HRS considers distance to a sensitive
environment when evaluating the
"targets" affected by a release of
hazardous substances to surface water.
The current HRS limits the definition of
sensitive environments to wetlands and
critical habitats of endangered species.
EPA is soliciting commenls on the
appropriateness of modifying the HRS to
belter consider ecosyslcm effects or
environmental damages and the
weighting of such a factor relative to
public health concerns. EPA is also
soliciting comments on methodologies
for evaluating damage to sensitive
ecosystems and suggestions on
categories of sensitive environments to
be protected.
Other flanking Models
In its review of the MRS. EPA is
evaluating a number of alternative
models used to evaluate and rank
hazardous waste sites. EPA is soliciting
information on other systems that mighl
be available to rank relative risk al
sites, including specific information on
the technical aspects of these systems
The comments should address the data
requirements and costs of these
systems, and how these systems
compare to the HRS in measuring risks
to human health or the environment.
Direct Contact
For purposes of the NPL. the current
HRS does not-take into account direct
contact with hazardous wastes (soil
ingestion. inhalation, or dermal
exposure). However, based on EPA s
experience in cleaning up hazardous
waste sites, direct contact has been one
of the most significant factors in
selecting a remedy. The Agency believes
that it is appropriate to include such a
factor in a revised HRS and is
evaluating various mechanisms for
doing so. either as • part of one of the
current pathways (i.e.. ground water.
surface water or air), or as a separate
pathway. The Agency solicits comments
on how the structure of the HRS might
be modified to include direct contact
and what factors should be included in
such a revision.
Human Food Chain Impacts
The CERCLA amendments require
EPA to evaluate the effect of hazardous
waste sites on natural resources that
may affect the human food chain. In
response to this requirement EPA is
considering incorporating a human food
chain component into a revised HRS.
The Agency solicits comments on the
importance of a human food chain
pathway in evaluating human exposure
to hazardous substances and simplified
methodologies to assess these impacts.
EPA is also soliciting comments on now
to incorporate a substance's persistence
and its tendency to bioaccumulate into
the human food chain pathway. These
comments should address the reliability
of these methodologies in accurately
assessing the food chain contaminaiion.
IV. Consideration of Comments
Commenls on Ihese and other issues
related lo HRS revisions should be sent
to the location given above under Ihe
heading "ADDRESS". EPA will review
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 70 / Monday. April 13. 1987 / Ruins and Regulations 11819
confidential source, including a Stale.
local or foreign agency or authority or
any pnvate institution which furnished
information on a confidential basis, and.
in the case of a record or Information
compiled by a criminal law enforcement
authority in the course of a criminal
investigation, or by an agency
conducting a lawful national security
intelligence investigation, information
furnished by a confidential source: (5)
would disclose techniques and
procedure for law enforcement
investigations or prosecutions, or would
disclose guidelines for law enforcement
investigations or prosecutions if such
disclosure could reasonably be expected
to risk circumvention of the law. or (6)
could reasonably be expected to
endanger the life or physical safety of
any individual.
4. Section 212.42 is added to read as
follows:
{212.42 Emmption from 5 U.S.C. S52.
Whenever a request is made which
involves access to records described in
paragraph (g) of 1212.41 and the
investigation or proceeding involves a
possible violation of criminal law; and
there is reason to believe that the
subject of the investigation or
proceeding is not aware of its pendency.
and disclosure of the existence of the
records could reasonably be expected to
interfere with enforcement proceedings.
the Agency may. during only such time
as that circumstance continues, treat the
records as not subject to the
requirements of 5 U.S.C. 552 and this
subpart.
Dated: March 3.1987.
RAM Johnson.
Director. Office of Public Affair*. Bureau for
External Affair*.
|KR Doc. 87-6128 Filed 4-10-«7: MS am]
eiUJNO COM •!«-•»•«•
ENVIRONMENTAL NIOTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 26
ISW-Fm.-3183-S)
System; Burning erf Wast* Fuel and
Usad Oil Fuel In Boilarm and Industrial
Furnace*; Technical Corrections
AQENCV. Environmentiil Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Technical corrections to
hazardous waste fuel/used oil fuel rules.
SUMMARY: On November 29.1985. EPA
promulgated a final rule regulating
hazardous waste fuels and certain used
oil fuels. EPA has since identified
several provisions that require
correction or clarification. This notice
makes those changes and modifies thn
previous package accordingly.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 13.1987.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
RCRA Hotline, toll free, at (800) 424-
9348 or (202) 382-3000. For technical
information contact Robert Holloway.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
Slreet. SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
SUrFUMCNTAJtY IMFOftMATIOH:
I. Technical Corrections to Rule
A. Notification
The rules of hazardous waste fuels
indicate that marketers and burners of
hazardous waste fuels must submit a
one-time notification to EPA describing
their waste as fuel activities. See
{$ 266.34(b) and 266.35(b). Marketers.
transporters, and burners of off-
specification used oil fuel likewise are
required to file a one-time notification.
See it 26fl.43(b)(3) and 286.44(b). This
requirement first took effect on January
29.1986. and also applies to facilities
commencing hazardous waste fuel or
off-specification used oil fuel
management activities after that date.
Section 3010(e) of RCRA, as amended
by the 1984 amendments, requires
producers, marketers and burners of
hazardous waste or used oil fuel to
notify the Agency "(n)ot later than
fifteen months after the date of
enactment" of the statutory amendments
of February 8, 1988. This statutory
notification is a prerequisite to Interim
status. H. Rep. No. 198 at 41. The
Administrator may waive the statutory
notification requirement for certain
types of facilities. RCRA section 3010(a).
There is considerable confusion in the
regulations a» to whether the
notification requirement in the rules
implements the section 3010(a)
requirement (and hence Is a prerequisite
to interim status), or whether it
implements general information-
galhenng authorities (e.g.. section
3007(a)). In addition, neither the statute
nor the regulation clearly indicate which
facilities are subject to the section
3010(a) notification requirement The
statutory requirement could apply to
facilities in existence on November 8.
1984. or to those in existence on the date
when notification is due. February 6.
1986. In today's notice. EPA clarifies
both of these issues.
With respect to the issue of which
facilities were subject to the section
3010 notification requirement, neither
the statutory language nor its legislative
history provides these alternatives, and
F.PA did not address the issue m the
November 29.1905. rules Indeed the
issue may have been further confused
by the addition of a re«uUinr>
notification requirement which U,nk
uffcct on January 29.VJbb. und continued
thereafter for facilities commencing
activities after that date.
To avoid further confusion. EPA is
taking the following positions. First, the
notification requirements in the
regulation are in addition to. not in
replacement of. the statutory 3010
notification requirement*. Siv.nnd,
because of the lapsed time since the
publication of the rule and the date of
statutory notification and because EPA
believes a facility could reasonably
have chosen either interpretation, EPA
believes that a facility will have failed
to meet the section 3010(a) requirement
only if it was in existence on both
November 8.1984. and February 8.1986.
and did not notify by February a 1986.
(In this regard, facilities notifying on
January 29.1986. who were in existence
on November 8.1984. would be deemed
to satisfy this requirement.)
The most important clarifying change
we are making today is to indicate that
the notification requirement in the
regulations does not implement section
3010(a). and so is unrelated to eligibility
for interim status. This is shown by the
commencement of the regulatory
requirement on January 29.1986. for
facilities in existence on November 29.
1985 (rather than any of the possible
statutory dates), and by the fact that the
regulatory notification applies to
facilities commencing waste fuel
activities after February & 1988.
However, section 3010(a) notification.
where required, is still a prerequisite for
interim status. Thus, facilities in
existence on November 8. 1984. and
February 8,1988. must have provided a
3010(a) notice by February 8.1986. in
order to qualify for interim status.
(Conversely, facilities not in existence
on both of these dates are not required
to notify as a prerequisite to obtaining
interim status.)
Since SS 286.31.266.34. and 266.35
indicate erroneously that the
notification requirement applies "under
section 3010". we are striking this
reference. Thus, the notification
continues to be required under the
regulations but is not a prerequisite for
interim status. (Notification may
continue to be provided on F.PA Form
8700-12. We note, however, that this
form refers to section 3010(a). It should
be understood that this reference docs
not apply in all cases, and that the
nolifiralion is in reality required
-------
11820
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 70 / Monday. April 13. 1937 / Rules and Regulations
pursujnl to other RCRA information-
s'.ithering authorities.)
of Hazardous Waste Fuel
•iiin» Tanks
Another feature of the November 29
rules thjt could be better articuldted
involves regulation of tanks used to
blend hazardous waste fuels. These
tanks are found most often at hazardous
waste fuel marketers' facilities, where
hazardous wastes are blended with oil
and other materials to produce
hazardous waste fuels. Tanks can also
be used in npttle out impurities such as
bulk solids and water in the course of
hazardous waste fuel production.
Several persona have questioned
whether these tanks are considered to
be exempt recycling units. We believe a
fair reading of the rules reflects the
Agency's intent that these tanks be
regulated, not exempt.
The current rules require marketers
and burners to comply with all
"applicable" storage standards, and
thus do not address specifically the case
of hazardous waste fuel blending tanks.
See §{ 266.34(c). 286.35(c). The preamble
likewise does not speak directly to the
issue of fuel blending tanks. The
preamble does, however, articulate a
strong policy to regulate hazardous
waste fuels cradle to grave, to regulate
•>rdous waste fuel marketers strictly,
i remove certain existing
atory anomalies that had resulted
irTgaps in regulatory coverage. Thus.
EPA stated that
ail storage of all hazardous waste fuels IB
•object to regulation. . . The Agency is
today regulating the storage (and
t; msponation) of any hazardous waste used
to produce a fuel and of any hazardous waste
fuel so produced. . . As proposed, today's
rules subject hazardous waste fuels to
storage (and other) controls. This includes
s'orage by the initial marketers (e.g..
processors, blenders), storage by subsequent
irrirketers (e g.. distributors), and storage by
burners. SO FR at 49198 (emphasis original).
In the same discussion, the Agency
emphasized that it was eliminating
existing regulatory exemption! for non-
sludge wastes which are hazardous
solely because they exhibit a «•
characteristic of hazardous waste. Id.
The Agencv also eliminated an
exemption for blended hazardous waste
fuels produced by a person who neither
x generated nor burned the fuel. Id. at
4U168/1. The Agency took these steps
bncause the exemptions were without
environmental basis, and interfered with
the announced goals of controlling
hazardous waste fuels cradle to grave.
. Such exemptions also interfered with
'•cr staled Agency goal of strictly
lling hazardous waste fuel
marketers' dclivities. and making certain
that storage of both marketers' incoming
hazardous waste and outgoing
hazardous waste fuels is fully regulated.
lil at 49199.
Given that a chief, articulated purpose
of (he November 29 rules wds to control
storage of hazardous wastes used to
produce fuels, to further control storage
of the hazardous waste fuels once
produced, and that the Agency was at
pains to remove anomalous exemptions
relating to storage from the rules, the
Agency believes it clear that storage
controls apply to hazardous waste fuel
blending tanks. It simply makes no
sense to enact a cradle to grave
regulatory system but to leave a gap for
the blending operation. The Agency
notes further that where it wished an
activity relating to hazardous waste fuel
management to remain exempt, it
provided a specific regulatory
exemption, as for the act of burning.
There is no explicit exemption for
blending tank storage. We consequently
are clarifying in today's notice that the
reference to "applicable" storage
standards in the hazardous waste rules
subjects hazardous waste fuel blending
tanks (along with all other hazardous
waste fuel storage devices) to storage
regulations.
C. Exemption of Coke and Coal Tar
Produced From Coal Tar Decanter
Sludge by the Iron and Steel Industry
It has come to the Agency's attention
that certain iron and steel facilities may
be combining various hazardous wastes
with their coke and coal tar and
claiming that the resulting fuel is exempt
from regulation. This practice is not
intended to result in an exempt fuel
except when EPA Hazardous Waste No.
K087 is Involved. In response to industry
comment. EPA exempted from
regulation coke and coal tar produced
from iron and steel industry coal tar
decanter sludge (Hazardous Waste
K087) on the grounds that coke and coal
tar so produced contain the same
concentrations of hazardous
constituents as coke and coal ter
produced without the hazardous waste
sludge. 50 FR at 49170-171. The Agency
was absolutely explicit that coke and
coal tar produced from Hazardous
Waste K087 were the only waste fuels
being exempted. Id Likewise, the
comments on this issue, from the
American Iron and Steel Institute and
from Koppers. referred only to coke and
coal tar produced from Hazardous
Waste KU87.
EPA mistakenly codified this
exemption as applying to iron and steel
Industry coke and coal tar produced
from any iron and steel industry
hazardous waste, rather than just from
waste K087. This obviously was neither
the Agency's intent, nor commenters*.
since all discussion on this issue HJS
involved exclusively use of K087 m the
coking and coal tar processes. We
consequently are correcting the
language of the exemption to indicate
(hat it applies only to coke and coal tar
produced from coal tar decanter sludge
(EPA Hazardous Waste K087).
D. Notification by Burners of Used Oil
Meeting the Fuel Specification
EPA indicated in the preamble to the
final regulations that "burners who first
claim that used oil fuel meets the
specifications" must-notify EPA or an
authorized state of their used oil fuel
management activity. SO FR at 49195/3.
The Agency neglected, however, to
include this requirement in the used oil
fuel burner regulations (although the
parallel notification requirement for
marketers who first claim that used oil
fuel meets the specification is included
in the rules for used oil fuel marketers.
See t 286.43(a)(2)).
The Agency also indicated, however.
that notification requirements ordinarily
do not apply to burners of specification
used oil fuel. 50 FR 49195.49198. This
language only apparently conflict! with
the preamble language cited above. EPA
intended that burners who generate and
bum their own specification oil are not
required to notify. In contrast, burners
who receive off-specification oil from a
marketer and blend it themselves must
notify, since they are otherwise
prohibited from receiving shipments of
off-specification used oil from
marketers. See § 266.43(b)(5)(A).
Accordingly, we are also clarifying in
today's rule that burners who generate
and burn their own specification used
oil fuel—the only burners not affecied
by the requirement in § 266.43(b)(5)(A)—
are not required to notify.
In light of the Agency's clear intent
and inadvertent omission, we feel
justified in conforming the rule for
burners to reflect the preamble
statement and parallel regulations.
Thus, used oil fuel burners who are the
first person to claim that used oil fuel
meets the specification—but do not
themselves generate such oil—must file
a one-time notification of their activities
with the Agency. As a practical matter.
we expect this requirement to affect
only burners engaged in blending
activities.
£ Change to § 261.3fcJ
The final rules included a conforming
change to 8 2G1.3(c)(2)(ii)(B) referring to
materials exempted under
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 70 / Monday. April 13. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 11821
"J 281.3(el(3)(ivl. (vi). (vii). or (viii)".
This reference should be to the wastes
exempted by i 261.6(a)(3)(vHix). We
are correcting this erroneous reference
in today's notice.
F Definition of Marketer
Marketers of hazardous waste fuels
and off-specification used oil fuels are
subject to a number of regulatory
requirements including notification.
invoice (for used oil), certification.
manifest (for hazardous waste), and
storage standards for hazardous «aste.
A question has been raised whether
processors and blenders who send used
oil to brokers or distributors rather than
to ultimate burners are marketers of
used oil fuels.
These types of processors and
blenders are marketers under the rules.
The rules for hazardous waste fuel
marketers indicate explicitly that
"persons who receive hazardous waste
from generators and produce, process or
blend hazardous waste from these
hazardous wastes" are marketers. See
{ 266.34. Although the parallel provision
for used oil fuel marketers does not
contain this language (due to
inadvertent omission), the Agency was
at pains to indicate that intermediate
processors and blenders are marketers.
notwithstanding lack of sale to burners.
Thus, the Agency stated that "EPA ia
adopting today a system to track
hazardous waste fuel and off-
specification used oil fuel from the
initial marketers (e.g.. processors.
blenders, distributors, or generators who
market to burners) through
intermediaries (e.g.. transporters.
distributors) to the industrial users who
burn the fuel for energy recovery." 50 PR
at 49196/2. To the same effect see SO FR
49198/2 (storage controls apply to
"storage by the initial marketer (e.g.
processors, blenders), storage by
subsequent marketers (e.g. distributors).
and storage by burners").
The only persons who are not
marketers are initial generators and
transporters who do not not sell directly
to burners, and subsequent transporters
and brokers who do not take ownership
of the oil. Section 286.4XaXD and 50 FR
49195/1. An example is an industrial
facility that generates used oil in the
course of its operations. This type of
initial generator does not know that its
oil could be a fuel. Processors and
blenders, on the other hand, are in the
used oil business and know that fuel use
is the only reasonable disposition of the
used oil they process. Thus, virtually by
definition, processors and blenders
produce a used oil or fuel. We note that
Congress took this view in the 1984
RCRA amendments, stating that
hazardous waste fuel requirements
applied to both "blenders and
distributors". H. Rep. No. 198 at 40.
Likewise, m discussing used oil.
Congress provided an example of a used
oil processor removing contaminants
from used oil and selling the processed
oil to a retail dealer as an entity to be
regulated as a used oil fuel facility. Id. at
69. (Should any blenders or processors
deal exclusively with the handful of
rerefmers in the country, or if they are
processing used oil exclusively for road
oiling (an illegal activity in many
jurisdictions] they could conceivably
argue that they are not marketing used
oil fuel. These are very unlikely
scenarios, and the Agency knows of no
other circumstances when a processor
or blender would be dealing with
intermediaries and not be producing a
used oil fuel.)
In light of the Agency's explicit
statements. Congressional statements in
legislative history, and the fact that any
reading eliminating processors and
blenders from the existing rules would
result in the very type of unintended
loophole the rules and statute were
intended to prevent we think the only
sensible reading of the current rules is
that initial blenders and processors of
used oil (except those who generate the
waste itself and send it to a person who
does not burn it) are marketers. We
have added one clarifying sentence to
the current rules to make this point more
explicit, and incorporated the parallel
language from the definition of marketer
for hazardous waste fuel.
C. Typographical Erron
Today's notice also corrects several
miscellaneous typographical errors and
omissions in the rule.
IL Regulatory Impact
Under Executive Order 12291. EPA
must judge whether a regulation is
"major" and therefore subject to the
requirements of a Regulatory Impact
Analysis. Since this notice makes
technical corrections and does not
change the previously approved final
rule, this rule is not a major rule. and.
therefore no Regulatory Impact Analysis
is required.
List of Subjects la 40 CFR Parts 281 and
266
Hazardous waste. Recycling.
|. W. McGraw.
Acting Assitlanl Administrator for Solid
Waste and Emergency Response.
For the reasons set out in the
Preamble. Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
1. The authority citation fur Pur! 201
continues to read as follows:
Authority Sections 1008. 2002(ft|. 3001 nnd
3002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976. as amended (42 U S C.
6905. 6912(8). 6921. and 6922).
2, Section 281.3 is amended by
revising paragraph (c)(2)(u)(B) to reed as
follows:
g MO Definition ol hazardous waste.
• • • • •
(c)' ' '
(2) * ' '
(ii) * ' '
(B) Waste from burning any of the
materials exempted from regulation by
t 281.6(a)(3)(v-ix).
• • • • •
2. Section 261.8 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(3)(vii) to read as
follows:
9 261.6 Requirement* for racycable
materials.
(a) * • '
0)' * '
(vii) Coke and coal tar from the iron
and steel industry that contains EPA
Hazardous Waste No. KOB7 (Decanter
tank tar sludge from coking operations)
from the iron and steel production
process:
PART 266— STANDARDS FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF SPECIFIC WASTES
AND SPECIFIC TYPES OF WASTE
MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
1. The authority citation for Part 266
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sections 1006. ZOOZfa). 3004. and
3014 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976. as amended (42 U S.C.
6905. 6912(a). 6924. and 6934).
Subpart D—Hazardous Watte Burned
for Energy Recovery
2. Section 268.31 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(l) to read as
follows:
{266.31 ProMWtton*.
(a) ' • *
(1) To persons who have notified EPA
of their hazardous waste fuel activities
and have a U.S. EPA Identification
Number, and
• • • • •
3. Section 266.34 is amended by
revising paragraphs (c)(1)(i). (H) and the
-------
11822 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 70 / Monday. April 13. 1PH7 / Rules and Regulations
first sentence of paragraph (b) to read as
^follows:
Standards applicable M
teters of hazardous wmata fuel
• • . •
(b) Notification. Notification of
hazardous waste fuel activiles. ' ' *
• • • • •
(e) ' ' '
ID''*
(i) The burner or marketer has notified
EPA and identified his waste-as-fuel
activities: and
(ii) If the recipient it a burner, the
burner will burn the hazardous waste
fuel only in an industrial furnace or
boiler identified in | 266.31(b).
• • • • •
4. Section 26&3S is amended by
revising the introductory paragraph and
paragraphs (c)(3). (d)(l) and the first
sentence of paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
$266.35 Standards
of hazardous waste f usL
Owners and operators of industrial
furnaces and boilers identified in
S 266.31 (b) that bum hazardous waste
fuel are "burners" and are subject to the
following requirements:
(b) Notification. Notification of
hazardous waste fuel activities. • • •
fc) * • '
' For new storage facilities, the
' :able provisions of Subparts A
-~~»ugh L of Part 264. and Parts 270 and
124 of this chapter
(d) ' • •
(1) He has notified EPA and Identified
his waste-as-fuel activities; and
Subpart E—Used Oil Burned for
Energy Recovery
5. Section 266.43 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) introductory text
to read as follows:
S 266.43 Standard* appsfcatto to
marketers of used on burned tor energy
recovery.
(a) Persons who market used oil fuel
are termed "markelcis • ExcepfHS*
provided below, marketers tnemde
generators who market used oil fuel
directly to a burner, persons who
receive used oil from generators and
produce, process, or blend used oil fuel
xfrom these used oils (including persons
sending blended or processed used oil to
brokers or other intermediaries), and
persons who distribute but do not
process or blend used oil fuel. The
following persons are not marketers
. -liiect to this subpart:
6 Section 20644 is amended by
revising inn first sentence of paragraph
(b) to read as follows:
S 266.44 Standards applicable to burners
of used oil burned for energy recovery.
• • • • •
(b) Notification. Burners of off-
specificalion used oil fuel, and burners
of used oil fuel who are the first to claim
that the oil meets the specification
provided under $ 266.40(e), except
burners who burn specification oil that
they generate, must notify EPA stating
the location and general rie»rrintmn of
used oil management activities. Burners
of used oil fuel that meets the
specification who receive such oil from
a marketer that previously notified EPA
ere not required to notify. Owners and
operators of used oil-fired space healers
that burn used oil fuel under the
provisions of 8 266.41(b)(2) are exempt
from this notification requirement. • • •
to burners [FR roc. B7-8033 Filed 4-10-67; 8-45 am]
•111 I I
40 CFR Part 721
[OPTS-SOS32A: FRL-3185-3]
Methyl n-Butyl Ketone; Determination
of Significant New Use
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION; Final rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is promulgating a
significant new use rule (SNUR) under
section 5(a){2) of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) that requ:res
persons to notify EPA at least 90 days
before commencing the manufacture.
import, or processing of methyl n-butyl
ketone (MBK) (CAS Number 591-78-6)
for any use. EPA believes that this
action is necessary because MBK may
be hazardous to human health, and any
use of MBK and activities associated
with such use may result in significant
human exposure. The required notice
will furnish EPA with the opportunity to
evaluate the intended use. and. if
necessary, prohibit or limit that activity
before it occurs.
DATES: In accordance with 40 CFR 23.5
(50 FR 7271). this rule shall be
promulgated for purposes of judicial
review at 1 p.m. eastern time on April
27.1987. This rule becomes effective on
May 27.1987.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edward A. Klein. Director. TSCA
Assistance Office (TS-799). Office of
Toxic Substances. Environmental
Protection Agency. Rm. E-543. 4O1 M St..
SW.. Washington. DC 20460. Telephone:
(202-554-1404).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Authority
Section 5(a)(2) of TSCA (15 U.S.C.
2604(a](2)) authorizes EPA to determine
that a use of a chemical substance is a
significant new use. This determination
is made by rule after consideration of all
relevant factors, including those listed in
section 5(a)(2). Once a use is determined
to be a significant new uae. persons
must, under section 5(a)(1)(B), submit d
notice to EPA at least 90 days before
they commence the manufacture, import
or processing of the substance for that
use.
Persons subject to this SNUR must
comply with the same notice
requirements and EPA regulatory
procedures as submitters of
premanufacture notices (PMNs) under
section 5(a)(l)(A) of TSCA. In particular,
these requirements include the
information submission requirements of
section 5(b) and (d) (I), the exemptions
authorized by section 5(h) (1). (2). (3).
and (S), and the regulations at 40 CFR
Part 720. Once EPA receives a SNUR
notice, the Agency may take regulatory'
action under section 5(e). 5{f). 6. or 7 to
control the activities for which it has
received a SNUR notice. If EPA does not
take action, section 5(g) of TSCA
requires the Agency to explain in the
Federal Register its reasons for not
taking action.
Persons who intend to export a
substance identified in a proposed or
final SNUR are subject to the export
notification provisions of TSCA section
12(b). The regulations that interpret
section 12(b) appear at 40 CFR Part 707.
Persons who intend to import a
substance are subject to the TSCA
section 13 import certification
requirements, which are codified at 19
CFR 12.118 through 12.127 and 127.28.
Persons who import a substance
identified in a final SNUR must certify
that they are in compliance with the
SNUR requirements. The EPA policy in
support of the import certification
requirements appears at 40 CFR Part
707.
II. Applicability of General Provisions
In the Federal Register of September
5.1984 (49 FR 35011). EPA promulgated
general regulatory provisions applicable
to SNURs (40 CFR Part 721. Subpart A).
The general provisions arc discussed in
detail in the cited Federal Register
document, and interested persons
should refer to that document for further
information. These general provisions
apply to this SNUR. except as provided
-------
Friday
April 17, 1987
Part V
Department of the
Interior
Office of the Secretary
43 CFR Part 11
Natural Resource Damage Assessments;
Proposed Rule
-------
12886
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 74 / Friday, April 17. 1987 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of the Secretary
43CFRPart11
Natural Resource Damage
Assessments
AGENCY: Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: This proposed rule provides
amendments to the final natural
resource damage assessment regulations
to be codified at 43 CFR Part 11. The
natural resource damage assessment
regulations establish procedures for
assessing damages to natural resources
resulting from a discharge of oil or a
release of a hazardous substance, and
compensable under either the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA), as amended, also known
as Superfund. or under the Clean Water
Act (CWA). The regulations contain
procedures for two types of
assessments: standard, simplified "type
A" procedures: and alternative "type B"
procedures to be used in individual
cases. The final regulations were
published in two segments, the rule
published on August 1,1986 (51 FR
27674). contained the general
assessment process, applicable to both
types of assessments, and the type B
procedures. The rule published on
March 20.1987 (52 FR 9042). contained
type A procedures.
The natural resource damage
assessment regulations are provided for
the use of authorized Federal and State
officials referred to in CERCLA as
"trustees" for natural resources. These
procedures will assist authorized
officials to perform natural resource
damage assessments for use in court
actions or administrative proceedings
when seeking compensation for injuries
to natural resources.
This proposed rule is necessitated by
the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA), passed by
Congress and signed by the President on
October 17.1986. This proposed rule
modifies the final regulations to conform
with changes enacted by SARA that.
among others: extend the rebuttable
presumption to assessments performed
by State trustees; provide for the
recovery of prejudgment interest on
damage awards; provide for a statute of
limitations that revives certain past
claims: require notification of trustees in
cases of discharges or releases that
might injure natural resources of
concern to the trustee: create new
responsibilities for Indian tribes; require
Federal trustees to retain sums
recovered, without further
appropriations, for use only to restore.
replace, or acquire the equivalent
resources: and require State trustees to
use sums recovered only to restore,
replace, or acquire the equivalent
resources.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule
should be submitted by May 18.1987.
ADDRESS: Comments should be sent to
David Rosenberger, CERCLA 301
Project Room 4354, Department of the
Interior, 1801 "C" St. NW. Washington.
DC 20240. Comments will be available
for review at the above address during
regular business hours (7:45 a.m. to M5
p.m.) Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Rosenberger (202] 343-1301
Linda Burlington (202) 343-1301
Willie Taylor (202) 343-7531
Alison Ling (415) 556-8807
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:.
The contents of this preamble are
listed in the following outline:
I. Introduction
II. Overview of Proposed Rule
A. Rebuttable Presumption
B. Definitions
C. Prejudgment Interest
D. Prohibition on Doable Recovery
E. Statute of Limitations
F. Claims Against the Fund
G. Notice to Trustee*
H Statutory Exclusions
L Indian Tribes
J. Appropriations Process
K. Sixty-Day Notice
U Use of Sums Recovered as Damages
M. Correction
I. Introduction
Pursuant to section 301(c) of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). 42 U.S.C. 9601 el
aeq* and Executive Order 12316. August
14.1981 (46 FR 42237), the Department of
the Interior (the Department) published
final natural resource damage
assessment regulations on August 1,
1986 (51 FR 27674). and March 26,1987
(52 FR 9042). The regulation published at
51 FR 27874 contained procedures for
the overall natural resource damage
assessment process and specific
procedures for conducting type B
assessments in individual cases. The
regulations published at 52 FR 9042
contained simplified procedures for
conducting type A assessments ia
• coastal and marine environments.
Hereafter, these natural resource
damage assessment rules are
collectively referred to as the final-rules.
or rule. In the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1986
(SARA). Pub. L 99-499. October 17.
1986. Congress made several revisions
to sections of CERCLA directly relating
to the final rules promulgated by the
Department. In addition. Executive
Order 12580 (52 FR 2923. January 23.
1987) redelegated the responsibility to
promulgate the natural resource damage
assessment regulations to the
Department of the Interior. Today, the
Department is proposing to amend the
final rules to conform with the
amendments to CERCLA enacted by the
passage of SARA.
D. Overview of the Proposed Rule
A. Rebuttable Presumption
The final rule published on August 1.
1986. provided that the rebuttable
presumption attached only to
assessments performed by Federal
officials (see { 11.11 (51 FR 27726)). The
Department, in the preamble to the rule.
stated that it had adopted a position on
this issue that was consistent with the
Executive branch's prior interpretation
of CERCLA in this matter (51 FR 27694.
August 1.1966).
Section 107(d)(l) of SARA amended
section 107(f) of CERCLA to add a new
subsection (2)(C). which reads:
[Q REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION.—Any
determination or assessment of damages to
natural resources for the purposes of this Act
and section 311 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act made by a Federal or
State trustee in accordance with the
regulations promulgated under section 301(c)
of this Act shall have the force and effect of a
rebuttable presumption on behalf of the
trustee in any administrative or judicial
proceeding under this Act or section 311 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(emphasis added.)
• This SARA amendment specifically
allows the rebuttable presumption to
attach to natural resource damage
assessments performed in accordance
with the final rules to be codified at 43
CFR Part 11 to State trustees, as well as
Federal trustees. Section lll(c)(2) of
SARA deleted section lll(h). the section
of CERCLA that had previously
provided for the rebuttable presumption,
ami included the language providing for
the rebuttable presumption in section
107(f)(2)(C) of CERCLA.
To implement this change, the
Department proposes to amend the final
rules to provide that State officials may
receive the benefit of a rebuttable
presumption for assessments they
perform in accordance with the Natural
Reiource Damage Assessment
Regulations, to be codified at 43 CFR
Part 11. Therefore, amendments are
proposed to §§ 11.10.11.11.11.14(ff). ant
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 74 / Friday. April 17. 1987 / Proposed Rules •
11.91(c) of the final rule to add the
words "and State" to conform with the
new section 107(f)(2)(C) of CERCLA.
Also, the references in the final rule to
section lll(h) of CERCLA have been
revised to read, section 107(f)(2)(C) of
CERCLA.
B. Definitions
SARA amended certain definitions
contained in CERCLA. Because of these
amendments, and the inclusion of a new
definition for the term "Indian tribe." the
Department is proposing to amend
several definitions contained in S 11.14
of the final rule. Some of these changes
are technical in nature, to conform with
new language added by SARA. The
amendments to the definitions are as
follows:
"Authorized official" Because of the
new responsibilities of Indian tribes, the
Department is proposing to amend its
definition of "authorized official" to
include a designated official of an
Indian tribe as one who may, under the
conditions of section 12B(d) of CERCLA
(see later discussion), perform a natural
resource damage assessment.
"CERCLA" The Department is
proposing to amend the definition of the
term "CERCLA" to clarify that the term
means CERCLA, as amended by SARA.
"Damages" The Department is
proposing to amend the definition of the
term "damages" to include amounts
sought by an Indian tribe who may
assert a claim.
"Fund" The Department is proposing
to amend the definition of "Fund" to
conform with the designation of the
Fund as the "Hazardous Substance
Superfund" found in section 517(c)(2) of
SARA. •
"Lead authorized official" The
Department is proposing to amend the
definition of "lead authorized official" to
clarify that, under the conditions of
section 126(d) of CERCLA. there are
circumstances in which a designated
official of an Indian tribe may act as
lead authorized official.
"Natural resources" SARA amended
the definition in CERCLA of the term
"natural resources" to include resources
of an Indian tribe. Therefore, the
Department is proposing to amend the
definition of the term "natural
resources" in the final rule to include
such resources.
"Rebuttable presumption" As
discussed earlier in this preamble,
SARA added a new section 107(f)(2)(C)
to CERCLA to specifically provide that
assessments performed in accordance
with this rule by State trustees will be
eligible to receive a rebuttable for
assessments the States perform
pursuant to the final rules. The
Department is proposing to amend the
definition of the term "rebuttable
presumption" to conform with this new
language of CERCLA.
"Trustee" SARA added a new section
107(f)(2)(A) and (B) to CERCLA to
provide that:
(2) DESIGNATION OF FEDERAL AND
STATE OFFICIALS.—
(A) Federal.—The President shall designate
in the National Contingency Plan published
under section 105 of this Act the Federal
officials who shall act on behalf of the public
as trustees for natural resources under this
Act and section 311 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act. Such officials shall
assess damages for injury to. destruction of.
or loss of natural resources for purposes of
this Act and such section 311 for those
resources under their trusteeship and may.
upon request of and reimbursement from a
State and at the Federal officials' discretion.
assess damages for those natural resources
under the State's trusteeship.
(B) State.—The Governor of each State
shall designate State officials who may act
on behalf of the public as trustees for natural
resources under this Act and section 311 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and
shall notify the President of such
designations. Such State officials shall assess
damages to natural resources for the
purposes of this Act and such section 311 for
those natural resources under their
trusteeship.
This new language replaced the
previous language found in section
:il(h)(l) of CERCLA. which was deleted
by SARA. The new language was then
placed in section 107(f)(2)(A) and (B).
The previous language of section
lll(h)(l) of CERCLA stated:
In accordance with regulations
promulgated under section 301(c) of this Act.
damages for injury to. destruction of. or loss
of natural resources resulting from a release
of a hazardous substance, for the purposes of
this Act and section 311(f)(4) and (5) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act shall be
assessed by Federal officials designated by
the President under the national contingency
plan published under section 105 of the Act
and such officials shall act for the President
as trustee under this section and section
311(0(5) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act.
The Department is proposing to
amend the definition of the term
"trustee" to reflect the designation of
State officials by the State Governors.
"Indian tribe" The Department is
proposing to add the definition of the
term "Indian tribe." in fi 11.14(uu). as
found in section 101(36) of CERCLA, to
correspond to a new definition of that
term added by SARA.
C. Prejudgment Interest
The final rule made no reference to
the recovery of prejudgment interest on
damage claims. Section 107(b) of SARA
amended section 107(a) of CERCLA to
provide that:
The amounts recoverable in an action
under this section shall include interest on
the amounts recoverable under
subparagraphs (A) through (D). Such interest
shall accrue from the later of (i) the date
payment of a specified amount is demanded
in writing, or (ii) the date of the expenditure
concerned.. . .
The Department proposes to amend
{ 11.15 of the final rule to include
prejudgment interest in the amounts
recoverable as damages.
D. Prohibition on Double Recovery
SARA amended section 107(f)(l) of
CERCLA to provide a specific statutory
prohibition on double recovery of
damages. Section 11.15(3) is proposed to
be amended to ensure there is no double
recovery of damages or of assessment
costs. That is, damages or costs cannot
be recovered twice for the same
discharge or release and injured natural
resource.
£ Statute of Limitations
The final rule contained no discussion
of the statute of limitations for natural
resource damage claims. However, the
amendments to CERCLA have created a
new statute of limitations that is directly
related to the promulgation of the final
rule and to the CERCLA remedial action
program. For that reason, the
Department proposes to amend the final
rule to include a recognition of the new
statute of limitations.
Under the original CERCLA. section
112(d) provided that a claim for
damages must be commenced within
three years from the date of the
discovery of the loss or December 11,
1980. whichever is later. In SARA, the
statute of limitations for claims against
the Fund and actions for natural
resource damages were treated in
separate sections. Section 112(c) of
SARA relating to claims against the
Fund amended section 112(d) of
CERCLA to provide in part that:
No claim may be presented under this
section for recovery of the damages referred
to in section 107(a) unless the claim is
presented within 3 years after the later of the
following:
(A) The date of the discovery of the loss
and its connection with the release in
question.
(B] The date on which final regulations are
promulgated under section 301(c).
Section 113(b) of SARA amended
section 113 of CERCLA to add a new
section 113(g)(l) relating to actions for
natural resource damages:
Except as providec! in paragraphs (3) and
(4). no action may be commenced for
-------
12888
Federal Register / VoL 52. No. 74 / Friday. April 17, 1987 / Proposed Rules
damage* (as defined in section 101(6)) under
this Act. unless that action is commenced
within 3 years after the later of the following:
(A) The dale of the discovery of the loss
and its connection with the release in
question.
(B) The date on which regulations are
promulgated under section 301(c).
With respect to any facility listed on the
National Priorities Lial (NPU any Federal
facility identified under section 120 (relating
to Federal facilities), or any vessel or facility
at which a remedial action under this Act Is
otherwise scheduled, an action for damages
under this Act must be commenced within 3
years after the completion of the remedial
action (excluding operation and maintenance
activities) in lieu of the dates referred to in
subparagraph (A) or (B). In no event may an
action for damages under this Act with
respect to such a vessel or facility be
commenced (i) prior to 60 days after the
Federal or State natural resource trustee
provides to the President and the potentially
responsible party a notice of intent to file
suit, or (ii) before selection of the remedial
action if the President is diligently proceeding
with a remedial investigation and feasibility
study under section I04(b) or section 120
(relating to Federal facilities). The limitation
in the preceding sentence on commencing an
action before giving notice or before selection
of the remedial action does not apply to
actions filed on or before the enactment of
the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorizetion Act of 198ft.
The Conference Report states that
This section... requires that civil actions
for damages to natural resources generally be
delayed until completion of the RI/FS at NFL
sites and at certain other sites where the
President is diligently proceeding with the
RI/FS. The phrase "the President to diligently
proceeding with a remedial investigation and
feasibility study" includes cases where a
potentially responsible party hi performing aa
RI/FS under supervision of the President
The Conferees have adopted these
amendments relating to the time limits for
initiating for natural resource damages
because the ability for Federal and State
trustees to pursue such claims and actions
has been unpaired by the failure of the
President to promulgate regulations govering
[sic) procedures for filing claims and
assessing damages to natural resources.
These amendments are intended to revive
causes of actions for natural resource
damages that may have been foreclosed by
the running of the statute of limitations
relating to such actions under current law. A
corresponding set of amendments In section
112 pertaining to the time limit for filing
claims against the fund for natural resource
damages is also intended to revive claims
that may have been foreclosed.
HJt Rep. No. 99-962, 99th Cong.. 2d
Seas. 223 (1988).
It is proposed to amend S 11.15 by
adding a new subsection (d) providing
that actions must be commenced in
accordance with the statute of
limitations set forth in section 113 of
CERCLA.
That statutory amendment embodiei
in the law itself the guidance contained
in 9 ll.84{c) of the final rule that the
determination of damages shall account
for the effects of response actions. In
most cases now, natural resource
damage claims must wait until remedial
actions are completed or at least until a
remedy is selected.
F. Claims Against the Kind
The final rule does not include
procedures for the filing of claims
against the Hazardous Substance
Superfund (Fund). Rules for that purpose
have been promulgated by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
at 40 CFR Part 306. Section 517 of SARA
expressly deleted expenditures for
natural resource damages and
assessment costs from the Fund
However, the language authorizing such
claims was retained and amended by
Section 111 of SARA. The Department
will amend its rule in the future in
accordance with any action EPA may
take with regard to its Natural Resoure
Claims Procedures, published at 40 CFR
Part 306.
G. Notice to Trustees
Section 11.20 of the final rule includes
a reference to 55 300.52(d) and 300.64(d)
of the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Contingency Plan (NCP) that
provide for the On Scene Coordinator
(OSC] or lead agency to notify the
agency acting as trustee when natural
resources have been or are likely to be
injured by a discharge of oil or a release
of a hazardous substance being
investigated under the NCP. In the
reanthorization of CERCLA. a
notification and coordination
requirement was Included in the
language of CERCLA itself, making it a
statutory requirement. The Department
notes mat EPA is currently revising the
NCP to include notification to Federal
and State trustees and imUyi; tribes.
Section 11.20(a} of the final rule is
proposed to be amended to include the
new statutory requirement, and to
specify that trustees should respond, as
appropriate, and provide necessary
coordination in a timely manner.
H. Statutory Exclusions
Section 107(1) of CERCLA originally
contained several exclusions to liability.
These exclusions included that no
liability to the United States or a State
shall be imposed where it has been
demonstrated that the damages for
injuries to natural resources were
specifically identified as an irreversible
commitment of natural resources tat an
environmental impact statement or
other comparable environment analysis,
and the decision to grant a permit or
license authorizes such commitment of
natural resources, and die facility or
project was omerwise operating within
the terms of its permit or license. Section
107(f) was amended by SARA to extend
this exclusion to liability for natural
resource damages to an Indian tribe, "so
long as, the damages to an Indian tribe
occurred pursuant to a Federal permit or
license, and die issuance of that permit
or license was not inconsistent with the
fiduciary duty of the United States with
respect to such Indian tribe." Also.
section 114(a) of SARA amended section
114(c) of CERCLA to preclude recovery
of response costs or damages resulting
from a release or threatened release of
recycled oil from service station dealers
who are not owners or operators of
vessels or hazardous waste disposal
facilities, under certain condition!.
Because of these two additional
statutory exclusions from liability, the
Department proposes to amend 55 11-24
and 11.71 to include these provisions in
the damages mat are excluded from
liability .under CERCLA.
/. Indian Tribes
SARA amended CERCLA to provide
for the role of Indian tribes hi the
natural resource damage provisions. As
stated earlier in this preamble, the
definition of natural resources found at
section 101(10) of CERCLA was
amended by SARA to include resources
"belonging to, managed by. held in bust
by, appertaining to, or otherwise
controlled by... any Indian tribe, or if
such resources are subject to a trust
restriction on alienation, any member of
an Indian tribe." SARA also included
Indian tribes in section 107(aX4)(Al
which establishes the liability of
responsible parties for Federal or State
costs of removal or remedial action.
Section 107(1} of CERCLA was amended
to provide that liability for damages for
injury to, destruction of, or loss of
natural resources, including the
reasonable costs of assessing such
injury, destruction, or loss resulting from
a release, would also be to "any Indian
tribe for natural resources belonging to.
managed by, controlled by. or
appertaining to such tribe, or held in
trust for the benefit of such tribe, or
belonging to a member of such tribe if
such resources are subject to a trust
restriction on alienation."
Other amendments to CERCLA
relating to the role of Indian tribes
include: to amend section lll(b)[l) to
include Indian tribes as those who may
assert claims against the Fund for injury
to. or destruction or loss of natural
resources: to amend section lll(c)(2) to
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 74 / Friday. April 17. 1987 / Proposed Rules 12889
include Indian tribes as among those
who may recover from the Fund for the
costs of restoration, rehabilitation, or
replacement or acquiring the equivalent
of any natural resources injured.
destroyed, or lost as a result of a release
of a hazardous substance; and to
include Indian tribes in the section lll(i)
requirement for Restoration Plans. The
Department is proposing amendments to
pertinent sections of the final rule to
bring the rule into conformance with
these amendments to CERCLA.
Section 207 of SARA added a new
section 126 to CERCLA to provide in
part, that:
(a) Treatment Generally.—The governing
body of an Indian Tribe shall be afforded
substantially the same treatment as a State
with respect to the provisions of section
103(a) (regarding notification of releases).
section 104(c)(Z) (regarding consultation on
remedial actions), section 104(e) (regarding
access to information), section 10*(i)
(regarding health authorities) and section 105
(regarding roles and responsibilities under
the national contingency plan and submittal
of priorities for remedial action, but not
including the provision regarding the
inclusion of at least one facility per State on
the National Priorities List).
• • • • •
(d) Limitation.—Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Act. no action under this Act
by an Indian tribe shall be barred until the
later of the following:
(1) The applicable period of limitations has
expired.
(2) 2 years after the United States, in its
capacity as trustee for the tribe, gives written
notice to the governing body of the tribe that
it will not present a claim or commence an
action on behalf of the tribe or fails to
present a claim or commence an action
within the time limitations specified in this
Because of the language of this new
section 126 of CERCLA, the Department
proposes to amend Its final rule to give
Indian tribes substantially the same
treatment as that given to the States, in
accordance with the intent of Congress,
as discussed earlier in this preamble.
The changes to the rule provide that,
under certain circumstances, an Indian
tribe may perform an assessment and
bring a claim for damages determined
by the assessment, however, as
discussed below, CERCLA does not
provide the rebuttable presumption to
assessments performed by Indian
Tribes.
The SARA amendments to section
107(f) of CERCLA do not grant the
rebuttable presumption to assessments
performed by Indian tribes. Also,
section 126 of CERCLA, which specifies
that the governing body of an Indian
tribe shall be afforded substantially the
same treatment as a State, under certain
circumstances, with respect to certain
provisions of CERCLA. does not list the
provisions of section 107(f) of CERCLA
as among those provisions available to
Indian tribes. Furthermore, no
amendments by SARA in either section
lll(h). which previous to SARA
provided for the rebuttable presumption,
or in section 107(f)(2)(C) of CERCLA.
which now grants the rebuttable
presumption to Federal and State
trustees, contain any language extending
the rebuttable presumption to Indian
tribes. Therefore, from the language of
the statute, the Department does not
have the authority to grant the
rebuttable presumption to Indian tribes
within this proposed rule. The
Department points out that, of course, if
a Federal official, acting as trustee on
behalf of an Indian tribe, performs the
assessment of damages, that assessment
of damages by the Federal official will
be accorded the rebuttable presumption.
as provided in section 107(f)(2)(C) of
CERCLA.
/. Appropriations Process
Section ll.B2(d)(2J(iv)(B) of the final
rule provides that:
(B) If the acquisition of land for Federal
management constitutes the only viable
method of obtaining the lost services, the
appropriation process must be included in the
scheduling of such acquisition since funding
for such acquisition will have to be obtained
through appropriations.
Also. S 11.92(b) of the final rule
provides that
(b) Land acquisition. Any monies awarded
for the purpose of acquiring land for Federal
management shall be deposited in the general
fund of the United States Treasury. Federal
agencies shall acquire land for Federal
management solely with monies appropriated
for that purpose.
The preamble to the final rule, at 51
FR 27719. explained that the rule
contains a restriction on Federal land
acquisition aa a means of restoration or
replacement unless such acquisition is
the only feasible restoration or
replacement alternative. Even in this
case, funds to acquire the land must be
placed in the general hind of the Federal
Treasury and requested by the Federal
agency through the normal
appropriations process. The purpose of
this limitation was to restrict the
acquisition of private lands for Federal
management under CERCLA. and. thus.
the expansion of the Federal estate.
without specific Congressional approval
In the reauthorization of CERCLA.
Congress added to section 107(f)(l) of
CERCLA the provision that:
Sums recovered by the United States
Government as trustee under this subsection
shall be retained by the trustee, without
further appropriation, fcr use only to restore.
replace, or acquire the equivalent of such
natural resources, (emphasis added.)
Therefore, the Department proposes to
amend the final rule to delete the
provisions requiring the use of the
appropriation process for funds to
acquire new lands where such
acquisition is found to be necessary. The
Department notes, however, that the
acquisition of land for Federal
management should be used only when
such acquisition is the sole feasible
restoration or replacement alternative.
Also, in accordance with section
107(f)(l) of CERCLA and section
107(d)(2) of SARA, the Department is
proposing to amend the nile to require
that both sums recovered as damages
and sums recovered as assessment costs
by Federal or State trustees shall be
retained by the trustee that incurred the
coat
K. Sixty-Day Notice
Section 11.91(d) of the final rule
provided that the authorized officia!
should allow up to 60 days for the
potentially responsible party to respond
to the damage claim demand. Section
113(b) of SARA amended section 113 of
CERCLA to add subsection (g), relating
to natural resource damage actions.
Section 113(g] provides that, with
respect to any facility listed on the
National Priorities List any Federal
facility, or any vessel or facility at
which a remedial action is otherwise
scheduled, no action for damages may
be commenced prior to 60 days after the
authorized official provides to the
President and the potentially
responsible party a notice of intent to
file suit It is proposed to amend
S 11.91(d) of the rule to incorporate this
60-day notice requirement
L. Use of Sums Recovered as Damages
The final rule contained a requirement
in §§ 11.92 and 11.93 that all sums
awarded as damages under CERCLA be
used for the purposes of restoration,
replacement or acquisition of
equivalent resources. SARA amended
the language of section 107(0(1) of
CERCLA to make this requirement
explicit.
One area of confusion in the
amendments to CERCLA is in that part
of section 107(f] addressing the use of
the sums recovered. In section 107 of
SARA, that section specifically dealing
with natural resources. Congress
amended section 107(0(1) of CERCLA to
read:
Sums recovered by the United States
government as trustee under this subsection
shall be retained by the trustee, without
-------
12890
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 74 / Friday, April 17. 1987 / Proposed Rules
further appropriation, for use only to restore.
replace, or acquire the equivalent of such
natural resources.
Sums recovered by a State as trustee under
this subsection shall be available for use only
to restore, replace, or acquire the equivalent
of such natural resources by the State.
In section 207 of SARA, however, the
earlier language of section 107(f) of
CERCLA relating to the use of the sums
recovered was amended to read:
Sums recovered shall be available for use
to restore, rehabilitate, or acquire the
equivalent of such natural resources by the
appropriate agencies of the Federal
government the State government or the
Indian tribe, but the measure of such
damages shall not be limited by the sums
which can be used to restore or replace such
resources.
This amendment was worked to state
that the words "Indian tribe" would be
inserted after the phrase "State
government." Since section 107 of SARA
had already deleted this sentence and
replaced it with new language, it is
unclear whether or where Indian tribes
would be included in the final amended
language.
The Department notes that the
confusion in the language of CERCLA,
as amended, regarding the use of sums
recovered by Indian tribes does not
require further amendment to the final
•ule. The Department addressed the
issue of the use of all sums recovered as
a damage award in the final rules. The
purpose of § 11.92(e) of the final rules
(now § 11.92(c) of this proposed rule) is
to require that all sums recovered as a
damage award be used to restore or
replace the injured natural resources
according to the Restoration Plan
required by section 111 (i) of CERCLA.
In addition. Department notes that
section 111 (i) of CERCLA was amended
to require that:
Except in a situation requiring action avoid
an irreversable loss of natural resources or to
prevent or reduce any continuing danger
natural resources or similar need for
emergency action, funds may not be used
under this Act for the restoration.
rehabilitation, or replacement or acquisition
of the equivalent of any natural resources
until a plan for the use of such funds for such
purposes has been developed and adopted by
affected Federal agencies and the Governor
or Governors of any Slate having sustained
damage to natural resources beloging to.
managed by, controlled by, or appertaining to
such tnbe, or held in trust for the benefit of
such tribe, or belonging to a member of such
tribe if such resources are subject to a trust
restriction on alienation.
Because Indian tribes were explicitly
deluded in this restriction, all sums
covered as a damage award by a
ederal or State trustee, or an Indian
tribe, must be used to restore or replace
the injured natural resource.
M. Correction
In the final rule. 8 11.32(a)(l)(ii)(D)
states that:
(D) When there is a natural resource claim
against the Fund pursuant to section lll(c)(3)
of CERCLA, the lead authorized official will
be designated in accordance with the Natural
Resource Claims Procedures. 40 CFR
306.20(b).
The reference to section lll(c)(3] of
CERCLA is incorrect. Instead, the
reference should be to section lll(c)(l)
of CERCLA The Department proposes
to correct this statutory cite.
Authorship
The primary authors of this proposed
rule are Alison Ling and Linda
Burlington, Office of the Solicitor, David
Rosenberger. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and Willie Taylor, Office of
Policy Analysis, all with the Department
of the Interior. National Environmental
Policy Act. Executive Order 12291.
Regulatory Flexibility Act and
Paperwork Reduction Act.
The Department of the Interior has
determined that this proposed rule does
not constitute a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment Therefore, no
further analysis pursuant to section
102(2}(C) of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (43 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C))
has been prepared.
The Department of the Interior has
determined that this document is not a
major rule under Executive Order 12291
and certifies that this document will not
have significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.J. The proposed rule
provides technical procedural guidance.
for the assessment of damages to
natural resources. It does not directly
impose any additional cost. In addition,
the estimate of the potential economic
effects of this proposed rule is well
below $100 million annually. As the
proposed rule applies to Federal and
State agencies acting as trustees for
natural resources and Indian tribes it is
not expected to have an effect on a
substantial number of small entities. It
has been determined that this proposed
rule of 43 CFR Part 11 does not contain
any information collection requirements
that require approval by the Office of
Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980.44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
List of Subjects in 43 CFR Part 11
Continental shelf, Environmental
Protection. Fish. Forests and forest
products, Grazing land. Indian lands.
Hazardous substances. Mineral
resources National forest National
parks, Natural resources. Oil pollution.
Public lands, Wildlife. Wildlife refuges.
Under the authority of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980, and the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1988. and for the reasons set out in
the preamble. Title 43. Subtitle A of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed
to be amended as set forth below.
Dated: April 15,1987.
Gale A. Norton,
Associate Solicitor. Division of Conservation
and Wildlife.
PART 11—NATURAL RESOURCE
DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS
1. It is proposed to revise the authority
citation for 43 CFR Part 11 to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9B51(c). as amended.
Subpart A—Introduction
2. It is proposed to revise 8 11.10 to
read as follows:
911.10 Scope and applicability.
The Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA), as amended. 42 U.S.C.
9601 et seq.. and the Clean Water Act
(CWA). 33 U.S.C. 1251-1376. provide
that Federal and State agencies who are
authorized to act as trustees of natural
resources or Indian tribes may assess
damages to natural resources resulting
from a discharge of oil or a release of a
hazardous substance covered under
CERCLA or the CWA and may seek to
recover those damages. This part
supplements the procedures established
under the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP). 40 CFR 300. for the identification,
investigation, study, and response to a
discharge of oil or release of a
hazardous substance, and it provides a
procedure by which a Federal or State
agency acting as trustee or Indian tribe
can determine compensation for injuries
to natural resources that have not been
nor are expected to be addressed by
response actions conducted pursuant to
the NCP. The assessment procedures set
forth in this part are not mandatory.
However, they must be used by Federal
or State officials acting as trustees in
order to obtain the rebuttable
presumption contained in section
107(f)(2)(C) of CERCLA. This part
applies to assessments initiated after
the effective date of this final rule.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 74 / Friday. April 17. 1987 / Proposed Rules
12891
3. It is proposed to revise § 11.11 to
read as follows:
§11.11 Purpose.
The purpose of this part is to provide
standardized and cost-effective
procedures for assessing natural
resource damages. The results of an
assessment performed by a Federal or
State official according to these
procedures shall be accorded the
evidentiary status of a rebuttable
presumption as provided in section
107(f)(2)(C) of CERCLA.
4. It is proposed to amend S 11-14 by
revising paragraphs (d), (g). (1). (r). (w).
(z), (ff). and (rr) and by adding a new
paragraph (uu). to read as follows:
§11.14 Definitions.
• • • * •
(d) "Authorized official" means the
Federal or State official to whom is
delegated the authority to act on behalf
of the Federal or State agency
designated as trustee, or a designated
official of an Indian tribe, pursuant
section 126(d] of CERCLA. to perform a
natural resource damage assessment As
used in this part, authorized official is
equivalent to the phrase "authorized
official or lead authorized official." as
appropriate.
• • • • •
(g) "CERCLA" means the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980.42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.. as
amended.
« • • « •
(1) "Damages" means the amount of
money sought by the Federal or State
agency acting as trustee or Indian tribe
as compensation for injury, destruction.
or loss of natural resources as set forth
in section 107(a) or lll(b) of CERCLA.
• • • • •
(r) "Fund" means the Hazardous
Substance Superfund established by
section 517 of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986.
• • * • *
(w) "Lead authorized official" means
a Federal or State official authorized to
act on behalf of all affected Federal or
State agencies acting as trustees where
there are multiple agencies, or a
designated official of an Indian tribe
where there are multiple tribes, affected
because of coexisting or contiguous
natural resources or concurrent
jurisdiction.
• * • • •
(z) "Natural resources" or "resources"
means land, fish, wildlife, biota, air.
water, ground water, drinking water
supplies, and other such resources
belonging to. managed by, held in trust
by. appertaining to. or otherwise
controlled by the United States
(including the resources of the fishery
conservation zone established by the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act of 1976). any State, or
local government any foreign
government, any Indian tribe, or. if such
resources are subject to a trust
restriction on alienation, any member of
an Indian tribe. These natural resources
have been categorized into the following
five groups: surface water resources.
ground water resources, air resources.
geologic resources, and biological
resources.
• • * • •
(ff) "Rebuttable presumption" means
the procedural device provided by
section 107(f)(2)(C) of CERCLA
describing the evidentiary weight that
must be given to any determination or
assessment of damages in any
administrative or judicial proceeding
under CERCLA or section 311 of the
CWA made by a Federal or State trustee
in accordance with the rule provided in
this part.
• • * * •
(rr) 'Trustee" means any Federal
natural resources management agency
designated in the NCP, 40 CFR Subpart
G. and any State agency designated by
the Governor of each State, pursuant to
section 107(f)(2)(B) of CERCLA. that may
prosecute claims for damages under
section 107(f) or 111 (b) of CERCLA
(uu) "Indian tribe" means any Indian
tribe, band, nation, or other organized
group or community, including any
Alaska Native village but not including
any Alaska Native regional or village
corporation, which is recognized as
eligible for the special progams and
services provided by the United States
to Indians because of their status as
Indians.
5. It is proposed to amend $ 11.15 by
revising (a) introductory text and (c), by
removing the period at the end of
(a)(3)(iii) and adding the phrase "; and".
and by adding new (a)(4). (d), and (e) to
read as follows:
§11.15 Actions against the responsible
party for damage*.
(a) In an action filed pursuant to
section 107{f) of CERCLA. or section
311(f) (4) and (5) of the CWA. a Federal
or State agency acting aa a trustee, or
Indian tribe acting pursuant to section
126(d) of CERCLA. who has performed
an assessment in accordance with this
rule may recover
* • • • •
(4) Interest on the amounts
recoverable as set forth in section 107(a)
of CERCLA. Such interest shall accrue
from the later oft the date payment of a
specified amount is demanded in
writing, or the date of the expenditure
concerned;
• • * * *
(c) Where an assessment determines
that there is. in fact, no injury, as
defined in § 11.62 of this part the
Federal or State agency acting as
trustee, or Indian tribe acting pursuant
to section 126(d) of CERCLA. may not
recover assessment costs.
(d) There shall be no double recovery
under this rule for damages or for
assessment costs, that is. damages or
assessment costs may only be recovered
once, for the same discharge or release
and natural resource, as set forth in
section 107(f)(l) of CERCLA.
(e) Actions for damages and
assessment costs shall comply with the
statute of limitations set forth in section
113(g) of CERCLA.
Subpart B Pr
it Screen
6. It is proposed to revise §11.20 to
read as follows:
§11.20 Notification «nd detection.
(a) Notification. (1) Section 104(b)(2)
of CERCLA requires prompt notification
of Federal and State natural resource
trustees of potential damages to natural
resources under investigation and
requires coordination of the
assessments, investigations, and
planning under section 104 of CERCLA
with such Federal and State trustees.
(2) The NCP at 40 CFR 300.52(d) and
300.64(d) provides for the OSC or lead
agency to notify the Federal or State
agency acting as trustee when natural
resources have been or are likely to be
injured by a discharge of oil or a release
of a hazardous substance being
investigated under the NCP.
(3) Federal and State natural resource
trustees, upon such notification
described in paragraphs (a)(l) and (2) of
this section, shall take such actions, as
may be appropriate, to provide timely
response and coordination consistent
with the NCP.
(b) Previously unreported discharges
or releases. If a Federal or State agency
acting as trustee or Indian tribe
identifies or is informed of apparent
injuries to natural resources that appear
to be a result of a previously
unidentified or unreported discharge of
oil or release of a hazardous substance.
he should first make reasonable efforts
to determine whether a discharge or
release has taken place. In the case of a
discharge or release not yet reported or
being investigated under the NCP. the
-------
12802
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 74 / Friday. April 17-. 1967 / Proposed Rules
Federal or State agency acting as trustee
or Indian tribe shall report that
discharge or release to the appropriate
authority as designated in the NCP. 40
CFR 300.51(b) and 300.63(b).
(c) Identification of co-trustees. The
Federal or State agency acting as trustee
or Indian tribe should assist the OSC or
lead agency, as needed, in identifying
other Federal or State agencies or Indian
tribes whose resources may be affected
as a result of shared responsibility for
the resources and who should be
notified.
7. It is proposed to amend 8 11.21 by
revising (a)(l), (b). and (c) to read as
follows:
S 11.21 Emergency restorations.
(a) Reporting requirements and
definition. (1) In the event of a natural
resource emergency, the Federal or State
agency acting as trustee or Indian tribe
shall contact the National Response
Center (800/424-8802) to report the
actual or threatened discharge or
release and to request that an
immediate response action be taken.
• • • • •
(b) Emergency actions. If no
immediate response actions are taken at
the site of the discharge or release by
the EPA or the U.S. Coast Guard within
the time that the Federal or State agency
acting as trustee or Indian tribe
determines is reasonably necessary, or
if such actions are insufficient, the
Federal or State agency acting as trustee
or Indian tribe should exercise any
existing authority it may have to take
on-site response actions. The Federal or
State agency acting as trustee or Indian
tribe shall determine whether the
potentially responsible party, if his
identity is known, is taking or will take
any response action. If no-site response
actions are taken, the Federal or State
agency acting as trustee or Indian tribe
who may assert a claim may undertake
limited off-site restoration action
consistent with their existing authorities .
to the extent necessary to prevent or
reduce the immediate migration of the
oil or hazardous substance onto or into
the resource for which the Federal or
State agency may assert trusteeship or
the resource for which an Indian tribe
may assert a claim.
(c) Limitations on emergency actions.
The Federal or State agency acting as
trustee or Indian tribe may undertake
only those actions necessary to abate
the emergency situation, consistent with
their existing authorities. The normal
procedures provided in this part must be
followed before any additional
restoration actions other than those
necessary to abate the emergency
situation are undertaken. The burden of
proving that emergency restoration was
required and that restoration costs were
reasonable and necessary based on
information available at the time rests
with the Federal or State agency acting
as trustee or Indian tribe.
8. It is proposed to amend S 11.23 by
revising (b). (e) introductory text. (e)(2).
(0(4). (g)[l) introductory text. (g)(l)(ii).
and (g)(2) to read as follows: .
911.23
Reassessment
(b) Purpose. The purpose of the
preassessment screen is to provide a
rapid review of readily available
information that focuses on resources
for which the Federal or State agency
may assert trusteeship under section
107(f) of CERCLA. or for which an
Indian tribe may assert a claim, as
specified in section 126(d) of CERCLA.
This review should ensure that there is a
reasonable probability of making' a
successful claim before monies and
efforts are expended in carrying out an
assessment
• •••••
(e) Criteria. Based on information
gathered pursuant to the preassessment
screen and on information gathered
pursuant to the NCP, the authorized
official shall make a preliminary
determination that all of the following
criteria are met before proceeding with
an assessment
• • • • •
(2) Natural resources for which the
Federal or State agency may assert
trusteeship under CERCLA or for which
an Indian tribe have been or are likely
to have been adversely affected by the
discharge or release;
• • • • •
(0 ' • *
(4) If the Federal or State agency
acting as trustee or Indian tribe already
has a process similar to the
preassessment screen, and the
requirements of the preassessment
screen can be satisfied by that process.
the processes may be combined to avoid
duplication.
• • • • •
(g) Preassessment phase costs. (1) The
following categories of reasonable and
necessary costs may be incurred in the
preassessment phase of the damage
assessment
• • • • ^ •
(ii) Trustee or Indian tribe
identification and notification costs;
• • • • •
(2) The reasonable and necessary
costs for these categories shall be
limited to those costs incurred by the
authorized official for. and specifically
allocable to, site-specific efforts taken
during the preassessment phase for
assessment of damages to natural
resources for which the agency is acting
as trustee or for which the Indian tribe
my assert a claim. Such costs shall be
supported by appropriate records and
documentation and shall not reflect
regular activities performed by the
agency or Indian tribe in management of
the natural resource. Activities
undertaken as part of the preassessment
phase shall be taken in a manner that is
cost-effective, as that phrase is used in
this part.
9. It is proposed to amend S 11.24 by
revising (b)(l)(i) and (b)(2). and by
adding (b)(l)(v) to read as follows:
511.24 PreasMsament
Information on the site.
(I)**'
(i) Resulting from the discharge or
release were specifically identified as
an irreversible and irretrievable
commitment of natural resources in an
environmental Impact statement or
other comparable environmental
analysis, that the decision to grant the
permit or license authorizes such
commitment of natural resources, and
that the facility or project was otherwise
operating within the terms of its permit
or license, so long as. in the case of
damages to an Indian tribe occurring
pursuant to a Federal permit or license,
the issuance of that permit or license
was not inconsistent with the fiduciary
duty of the United States with respect to
such Indian tribe; or
• • • • •
(v) Resulting from the release or
threatened release of recycled oil from a
service station dealer acting as any
person described in section 107(a) (3) or
(4) of CERCLA if such recycled oil is not
mixed with any other hazardous
substance and is stored, treated.
transported or otherwise managed in
compliance with regulations or
standards promulgated pursuant to
section 3014 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act and other applicable authorities.
• • • • •
(2) An assessment under this part
shall not be continued for potential
injuries meeting one or more of the
criteria described in paragraph (b)(l) of
this section, which are exceptions to
liability provided in 'sections 107 (f). (i).
and (j) and 114(c) of CERCLA.
Subpart C— Assessment Plan Phase
10. It is proposed to amend 9 11-30 by
revising (c)(2) to read as follows:
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 74 / Friday. April 17. 1987 / Proposed Rules
12893
511.30 Assessment Plan-general
(c) Assessment Plan phase
costs. * * •
(2) The reasonable and necessary
costs for these categories shall be
limited to those costs incurred or
anticipated by the authorized official
for. and specifically allocable to. site
specific efforts taken in the development
of an Assessment Plan for a resource for
which the agency is acting as trustee, or
for which an Indian tribe may assert a
claim. Such costs shall be supported by
appropriate records and documentation,
and shall not reflect regular activities
performed by the agency or tribe in
management of the natural resource.
Activities undertaken as part of the
Assessment Plan phase shall be taken in
a manner that is cost-effective, as that
phrase is used in this part.
11. It is proposed to amend § 11.31 by
revising (a)(4) to read as follows:
§ 11.31 Assessment Plan—content
(a) General content and level of
detail.
(4) The Assessment Plan shall contain
procedures and schedules for sharing
data, split samples, and results of
analyses, when requested, with any
identified potentially responsible parties
and other Federal or State agencies .
acting as trustees or Indian tribes.
• • • • •
12. It is proposed to amend § 11.32 by
revising (a) introductory text (a)(l)(i).
(a)(l)(ii) introductory text. (a)(l)(ii](A)
introductory text (a)(l)(ii) (B). (C). (D).
and (E). (a)(l)(iii). (c). and (e) to read as
follows:
§11.32 Assessment Plan—development
(a) Pre-development requirements.
The authorized official shall fulfill the
following requirements before •
developing an Assessment Plan.
(1) Coordination, (i) If the authorized
official's responsibility is shared with
other Federal or State agencies acting as
trustees or Indian tribes as a result of
coexisting or contiguous natural
resources or concurrent Jurisdiction, the
authorized official shall ensure that all
other known affected Federal and State
agencies or Indian tribes are notified
that an Assessment Plan is being
developed. This notification shall
include the results of the Preassessment
Screen Determination.
(ii) Authorized officials from different
agencies or Indian tribes are encouraged
to cooperate and coordinate any
assessments that involve coexisting or
contiguous natural resources or
concurrent jurisdiction. They may
arrange to divide responsibility for
implementing the assessment in any
manner that is agreed to by all of the
affected Federal and State agencies
acting as trustees or Indian tribes with
the following conditions:
(A) A lead authorized official shall be
designated to administer the
assessment. The lead authorized official
shall act as coordinator and contact
regarding all aspects of the assessment
and shall act as final arbitrator of
disputes if consensus among the
authorized officials cannot be reached
regarding the development
implementation, or any other aspect of
the Assessment Plan. The lead
authorized official shall be designated
by mutual agreement of all the Federal
or State agencies acting as trustees or
Indian tribes who may assert claims. If
consensus cannot be reached as to the
designation of the lead authorized
official, the lead authorized official shall
be designated in accordance with
paragraphs (a)(l)(ii) (B). (C). (D). or (E)
of Lois section:
• • « « «
(B) When the natural resources being
assessed are located on lands or waters
subject to the administrative jurisdiction
of a Federal agency, a designated
official of the Federal agency shall act
as the lead authorized official.
(C) When the natural resources being
assessed are located on lands or waters
of an Indian tribe, the Indian tribe, or if
such resources are subject to a bust
restriction on alienation, any designated
official of the Indian tribe, shall act as
the lead authorized official, when acting
pursuant to section 126(d) of CERCLA.
(D) For all other natural resources for
which the State may assert trusteeship,
a designated official of the State agency
shall act as the lead authorized official.
• * « • .
(E) When there is a natural resource
claim against the Fund pursuant to
section lll(c)(l) of CERCLA, the lead
authorized official will be designated in
accordance with the natural resource
claims procedures, 40 CFR 308.20(b).
(iii) If there is a reasonable basis for
dividing the assessment the Federal or
State agencies acting as trustee or an
Indian tribe, acting pursuant to section
126(d) of CERCLA. may act
independently and pursue separate
assessments, actions or claims so long
as the claims do not overlap. In these
instances, the agencies shall coordinate
their efforts, particularly those
concerning the sharing of data and'the
development of the Assessment Plans.
• • • • •
(c) Public involvement in the
Assessment Plan. (1) The Assessment
Plan shall be made available for review
by any identified potentially responsible
parties, other Federal or State agencies
acting as trustees, other affected Federal
or State agencies or Indian tribes, and
any other interested members of the
public for a period of at least 30
calendar days, with reasonable
extensions granted as appropriate,
before the performance of any
methodologies contained therein.
(2) Any comments concerning the
Assessment Plan received from
identified potentially responsible
parties, other Federal or State agencies
acting as trustees, other affected Federal
or State agencies or Indian tribes, and
any other interested members of the
public, together with responses to those
comments, shall be included as part of
the Report of Assessment described in
5 11.90 of this part
• • * • •
(e) Plan modification. (1) The
Assessment Plan may be modified at
any stage of the assessment as new
information becomes available.
(2){i) Any modification to the
Assessment Plan that in the judgment of
the authorized official is significant shall
be made available for review by any
identified potentially responsible party.
any other affected Federal or State
agencies acting as trustees or Indian
tribes, and any other interested
members of the public for a period of at
least 30 calendar days, with reasonable
extensions granted as appropriate.
before tasks called for in the modified
plan are begun.
(ii) Any modification to the
Assessment Plan in the judgment of the
authorized official is not significant shall
be made available for review by any
identified potentially responsible party,
any other affected Federal or State
agencies acting as trustees cr Indian
tribes, and any other interested
members of the public, but the
implementation of such modification
need not be delayed as a result of such
review.
Subpart D— Type A Assessments
13. It is proposed to amend § 11.40 by
revising (c) to read as follows:
§11.40 Type A assessments
(c) Type A assessment costs. The
reasonable and necessary costs incurred
in conducting assessments under this
Subpart shall be limited to those costs
incurred or anticipated by the
authorized official for, and specially
allocable to, incident-specific efforts'
taken in the assessment of damages for
natural resources for which the agency
-------
128M
Federal Register / VoL 52, No. 74 / Friday, April 17. 1967 / Proposed Rules
is acting as frustee or for which an
Indian tribe may assert a claim. Such
costs shall be supported by appropriate
records and documentation, and shall
not reflect regular activities performed
by the agency or the Indian tribe in
management of the natural resource.
Activities undertaken as part of the
damage assessment shall be taken in a
manner that is cost-effective, as that
phrase is used in this Part
Subpart E—Type B Assessments
14. It is proposed to amend 9 11.60 by
revising (d)(2) to read as follows:
511-60 Type B i
-general.
(d) Type B assessment costs.
• * • * •
(2) The reasonable and necessary
costs for these categories shall be
limited to those costs incurred or
anticipated by the authorized official
for. and specifically allocable to. site
specific efforts taken in the assessment
of damages for a natural resource for
which the agency is acting as trustee, or
for which an Indian tribe may assert a
claim. Such costs shall be supported by
appropriate records and documentation,
and shall not reflect regular activities
performed by the agency or the Indian
tribe in management of the natural
resource. Activities undertaken as part
of the damage assessment phase shall
be taken in a manner that is cost-
effective, as that phrase is used in this
part.
15. It is proposed to amend § 11.71 by
revising (g) introductory text (gMl) and
by adding new paragraph (g){5) to read
as follows:
S 11.71
reductfc
quantmcafle
States with respect to such Indian tribe;
or
• • • • •
(5) Resulting from the release or
threatened release of recycled oil from a
service station dealer acting as any
person described in section 107(a)(3) or
(4) of CERCLA if such recycled oil is not
mixed with any other hazardous
substance and is stored, treated,
transported or otherwise managed in
compliance with regulations or
standards promulgated pursuant to
section 3014 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act and other the applicable authorities.
• • • • •
(16) It is proposed to amend {11.72 by
revising (e)(5) to read as follows:
Si 1.72 Quantificationphase baseline
service* determination.
• • • • •
(c) Historical data.
• • • • •
(5) Studies conducted or sponsored by
Federal or State agencies acting as
trustees for Indian tribes for the
resource in question;
• • • • •
17. It is proposed to amend S1142 by
removing (d)(2)pv)(B) and the letter
designation (d)(2)(ivKA) and by revising
(e)(l) and (2) to read as follows:
811.82 D
(g) Statutory exclusions. In
quantifying the effects of the injury, the
following statutory exclusions shall be
considered, as provided in section 107(1).
(i). and (j) and 114 (c) of CERCLA. that
exclude compensation for damages to
natural resources that were a result of:
(1) An irreversible and irretrievable
commitment of natural resources
identified in an environmental impact
statement or other comparable
environmental analysis, and the
decision to grant the permit or license
authorizes such a commitment and the
facility was otherwise operating within
the terms of its permit or license, so long
as. in the case of damages to an Indian
tribe occurring pursuant to a Federal
permit or license, the issuance of mat
license or permit was not inconsistent
with the fiduciary duty of the United
(e) Plan development. (1) In
developing the Restoration Methodology
Plan, the guidance provided in {11.81 of
this part shall be followed.
(2)(i) The Restoration Methodology
Plan shall be made available for review
by any identified potentially responsible
party, other Federal or State agencies
acting as trustees, other affected Federal
or State agencies or Indian tribes, and
any other interested members of the
public for a period of at least 30
calendar days, with reasonable
extensions granted as appropriate,
before the authorized official's final
decision on selection of the alternative.
(ii) Comments received from any
identified potentially responsible party.
other Federal or State agencies acting as
trustees, other affected Federal or Slate
agencies or Indian tribes, or any other
interested members of the public,
together with responses to those
comments shall be included as part of
the Report of Assessment, described in
{ 11.90 of this part
• • * • •
18. It is proposed to amend ftl.83 by
revising (b) to read as follows:
§11.83 Damage deteimlnation pnase-me
value methodologies.
• • • • •
(b) Use values. (1) For the purposes of
this part, use vanes are the value to the,
public of recreational or other public
uses of the resumue. as measured by
changes in consumer snrplas, any fees
or other payments collectable by the
government or Indian tribe for a private
parry's use of the natural resources, and
any economic rent accruing to a private
party because the government or Indian
tribe does not charge a fee or price for
the use of the resource.
(2) Estimation of option and existence
values shall be used only if the
authorized official determines that no
use values can be determined.
(3) In instances where the Federal or
State agency acting as trustee or Indian
tribe is the majority operator or
controller of a for- or not-for-profit
enterprise, and the injury to the natural
resource results in a loss to such an
enterprise, that portion of the lost net
income due the agency from this
enterprise resulting directly or indirectly
from the injury to the natural resource
may be included as a measure of
damages under this part
19. It is proposed to amend 9 1144 by
revising (i) to read as follows:
g 11.84 Damage determination phase—
Implementation guidance.
• • • • •
(i) Scope of the analysis. The
authorized official most determine the
scope of the analysis in order to
estimate a diminution of use values.
(2) In assessments where the scope of
analysis is Federal, only the diminution
of use values to the Nation as a whole
should be counted.
(3) In assessments where the scope of
analysis is at the State level, only the
diminution of use values to the State
should be counted.
(4) In assessments where die scope of
analysts is at the tribal level only the
diminution of use values to the tribe
should be counted.
Subpart F—Post Assessment Phase
20. It is proposed to revise { TL91 to
read as follows:
(a) Requirement and content At die
conclusion of the assessment the
authorized official shall present to the
potentially responsible party a demand
in writing for a sum certain, representing
the damages determined hi accordance
with the requirements and guidance of
S 11.40 or of 11140 of this part and
including the reasonable cost of the
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 74 / Friday, April 17. 1987 / Proposed Rules
12895
assessment, and as adjusted, if
necessary, by the guidance in §11.92(b)
of this Part, delivered in such a manner
as will establish the date of receipt. The
demand shall adequately identify the
Federal or State agency or Indian tribe
asserting the claim, the general location
and description of the injured resource.
identification of the type of discharge or
release determined to have resulted in
the injuries, and the damages sought
from that party.
(b) Report of Assessment. The
demand letter shall include the Report
of Assessment as an attachment.
(c) Rebuttable presumption. When
performed by a Federal or State official
in accordance with this part, the natural
resource damage assessment and the
resulting Damage Determination
supported by a complete administrative
record of the assessment including the
Report of Assessment as described in
§ 11.90 of this part shall have the force
and effect of a rebuttable presumption
on behalf of any Federal or State
claimant in any judicial or adjudicatory
administrative proceeding under
CERCLA. or section 311 of the CWA.
(d) Potentially responsible party
response. The authorized official should.
and as provided in section 113(g)(l) of
CERCLA. in some cases must, allow at
least 60 days from receipt of the demand
by the potentially responsible party.
with reasonable extensions granted as
appropriate, for the potentially
responsible party to acknowledge and
respond to the demand, prior to filing
suit
21. It is proposed to revise §11.92 to
read as follows:
§11.92 Po
uessment phase-
restoration account*
(a) Disposition of recoveries. (1) All
sums (damage claim and assessment
costs) recovered pursuant to section
107(f) of CERCLA or section 311(0(4)
and (5) of the CWA by the Federal
government acting as trustee shall be
retained by the trustee, without further
appropriation, in a separate account in
the United States Treasury.
(2) All sums (damage claim and
assessment costs) recovered pursuant to
section 107(f) of CERCLA. or section
311(f)(4) and (5) of the CWA by a State
government acting as trustee shall
either
(i) Be placed in a separate account in
the State treasury; or
(ii) Be placed by the responsible party
or parties in an interest bearing account
payable in trust to the State agency
acting as trustee.
(3) All sums (damage claim and
assessment costs) recovered pursuant to
section 107(0 of CERCLA or section
311(0(4) and (5) of the CWA by an
Indian tribe shall either
(i) Be placed in an account in the
tribal treasury; or
(ii) Be placed by the responsible party
or parties in an interest bearing account
payable in trust to the Indian tribe.
(b) Adjustments. (1) In establishing the
account pursuant to paragraph (a) of this
section, the calculation of the expected
present value of the damage amount
should be adjusted, as appropriate.
whenever monies are to be placed in a
non-interest bearing account. This
adjustment should correct for the
anticipated effects of inflation over the
time estimated to complete expenditures
for the restoration or replacement.
(2) In order to make the adjustment in
paragraph (b)(l) of this section, the
authorized official acting as trustee
should adjust the damage amount by the
rate payable on notes or bonds issued
by the United States Treasury with a
maturity date that approximates the
length of time estimated to complete
expenditures for the restoration or
replacement.
(c) Payments from the account.
Monies that constitute the damage claim
amount shall be paid out of the account
established pursuant to paragraph (a) of
this section only for those actions
described in the Restoration Plan
required by § 11.93 of this Part.
(d) Hazardous Substance Superfund
Claims. Claims against the Hazardous
Substance Superfund must be for costs
incurred as specified by the procedures
promulgated by EPA at 40 CFR Part 306.
22. It is proposed to amend § 11.93 by
revising (c) to read as follows:
§ 11.93 Part-assessment phase-
Restoration Plan.
• * • • •
(c) Modifications may be made to the
Restoration Plan as become necessary
as the restoration proceeds. Significant
modifications shall be made available
for review by any responsible party, any
affected Federal or State agencies acting
as trustees or Indian tribes, and any
other interested members of the public
for a period of at least 30 days, with
reasonable extensions granted as
appropriate before tasks called for in the
modified plan are begun.
• • • * •
[PR Doc. 87-8779 Filed 4-16-87; 8-45 am]
BILUNO CODE 4310-tO-M
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No; 9i / Wednesday May 13. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17991
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment.
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
enterprises to compete with foreign-
based enterprises in domestic or export
markets.
The Administrator of Veterans Affairs
has certified that this proposed
amended regulation, if promulgated, will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
as they are defined in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA). 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b). the proposed
amended regulation, therefore, is
exempt from the initial and final
regulatory flexibility analyses
requirements of §§ 603 and 604.
This certification can be made
because the proposed amended
regulation affects only individuals. It
will have no significant ecomomic
impact on small entities, i.e., small
businesses, small private and nonprofit
organizations and small governmental
jurisdictions.
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance number for the program
affected by this proposed amended
regulation is 64.120.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 21
Civil rights. Claims. Education. Grant
programs-education. Loan programs-
education, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Schools, Veterans,
Vocational education, Vocational
rehabilitation. ' •- _
Approved: January 15.1987.
Thomas K. Turnage,
Administrator. . .
Approved: March 0.1987. ' • —
A.Lukeman.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense.
PART 21—(AMENDED]
In 38 CFR Part 21. Vocational
Rehabilitation and Education. {21.5078
is proposed to be revised as follows:
§21.5076 Entitlement charge-
overpayment eases.
(a) Overpayment cases. The VA will
make a charge against an individual's
entitlement of an overpayment of
educational assistance allowance only
if:
(1) The overpayment is discharged in
bankruptcy; or
(2) The VA waives the overpayment
and does not recover it; or
(3) The overpayment is compromised.
(38 U.S.C. 1631)
(b) Debt discharged in bankruptcy or
is waived. If the overpayment is
discharged in bankruptcy or is waived
and is not recovered, the entitlement
charge will be at the appropriate rate for
the elapsed period covered by the
overpayment (exclusive of interest,
administrative costs of collection, court
costs and marshal fees). (38 U.S.C. 1631:
Pub. L 94-502)
(c) Overpayment is compromised. (1)
If the overpayment is compromised and
the compromise offer is less than the
amount of interest, administrative costs
of collection, court costs and marshal
fees, the charge against entitlement will
be at the appropriate rate for the
elapsed period covered by the
overpayment (exclusive of interest
administrative costs of collection, court
costs and marshal fees).
(2) If the overpayment is compromised
and compromise offer is equal to or
greater than the amount of interest.
administrative costs of collection, court
costs and marshal fees, the charge
against entitlement will be determined
by-
(i) Subtracting from the sum paid in
the compromise offer the amount
attributable to interest, administrative
costs of collection, court costs and
marshal fees.
(ii) Substracting the remaining amount
of the overpayment balance determined
in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section from
the amount of the original overpayment
(exclusive of interest, administrative
costs of collection, court costs and
marshal fees),
(i'ii) Dividing the result obtained in
paragraph (c)(2)(ir) of this section by the
amount of the original debt (exclusive of
interest administrative costs of
collection, court costs and marshal fees),
and " " '
(iv) Multiplying the percentage
obtained in-paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of this
section by the amount of the entitlement
otherwise chargeable for the period of
the original overpayment (38 U.S.C.
1631)
[FR Doc. 87-10710 Filed 5-12-87; 8:45 am]
BtLUNO CODE t
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-3199-7]
The National Priorities List-Listing
Policy for Federal Facilities
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION; Proposed policy.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA") is proposing a policy
relating to the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Contingency
Plan ("NCP"). which was promulgated
on July IB, 1982 pursuant to section 105
of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 ("CERCLA") and Executive
Order 12316, as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1986 (SARA).
CERCLA requires that the NCP
include a list of national priorities
among the known releases or threatened
releases of hazardous substances.
pollutants, and contaminants throughout
the United States, and that the list be
revised at least annually. The National
Priorities List (NPL). initially
promulgated as Appendix B of the NCP
on September 8.1983 (48 FR 40658).
constitutes this list and meets those
requirements.
This notice solicits comments on a
proposed policy for placing on the NPL
sites located on Federally-owned
facilities that are subject to the
corrective action authorities of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). These NPL sites may
encompass the entire Federal facility or
portions of it depending on the size and
characteristics of the facility.
DATE: Comments may be submitted on
or before June 12.1987.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed
to Stephen Lingle, Director, Hazardous
Site Evaluation Division (Attn: NPL
Staff). Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response (WH-548E). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401M
Street SW.. Washington, DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
C. Scott Parrish, Hazardous Site
Evaluation Division. Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response
(WH-548E). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401M Street. SW.,
Washington. DC 20460. Phone (800) 424-
9346 (or 382-3000 in the Washington,
DC, metropolitan area).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
L Introduction
U. Contents of This Proposed Policy
I. Introduction
Pursuant to section 105 of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980.42 U.S.C. sections 9601-9657
("CERCLA or the Act"), and Executive
Order 12316 (46 FR 42237. August 20,
1981), the Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA" or "the Agency")
promulgated the revised National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Contingenc;
Plan ("NCP"). 40 CFR Part 300. on July
-------
17992
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 92 / Wednesday. May 13. ,1987 / Proposed Rules
16,1982 (47 FR 31180). EPA promulgated
further revisions to the NCP on
September 16.1985 (50 FR 376Z4) and
November 20,1985 (50 FR 47912). These
amendments to the NCP implemented
responsibilities and authorities created
by CERCLA to respond to releases and
threatened releases of hazardous
substances, pollutants, and
contaminants.
Section 105(8)(A) of CERCLA requires
that the NCP include criteria for
determining priorities among releases or
threatened releases throughout the
United States for the purpose of taking
remedial or removal action. Removal
action involves cleanup or other actions
that are taken in response to releases or
threats of releases on a short-term or
temporary basis (CERCLA section
101(23)). Remedial action tends to be
long-term in nature and involves
response actions which are consistent
with a permanent remedy for a release
(CERCLA section 101(24)). The Agency
developed the Hazard Ranking System
(MRS) to implement section 105(8)(A).
The MRS was codified as Appendix A of
the NCP.
Section 105(8)(B) of CERCLA requires
that the statutory criteria described in
the MRS be used to prepare a list of
national priorities among the known
releases or threatened releases
throughout the United States. The list.
which is Appendix B of the NCP, is the
National Priorities List (NPL). Section
105(8)(B) also requires that the NPL be
revised at least annually. An initial NPL
of 406 sites was promulgated on
September 8.1983 (48 FR 40658). The
NPL has been amended several times
since then. Currently, there are 703 sites
on, and 248 sites proposed for, the NPL
Under section 300.68(a) of the NCP, a
site must be on the NPL if a remedial
action is to be financed by the
Hazardous Substances Superfund set up
under the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
(this supersedes the Hazardous
Response Trust Fund originally set up
under CERCLA). CERCLA section
lll(e)(3) prohibits the use of the Fund
for remedial actions at Federal facilities.
However, pursuant to section
300.66(e)(2) of the NCP. the Agency can
place Federal facility sites on the NPL
The Agency decided to place Federal
facility sites on the NPL in order to
inform the public about responses
undertaken at facilities (50 FR 47931,
November 20.1985). Currently. 48
Federal facility sites have been proposed
for the NPL
II. Contents of This Proposed Policy
Today's proposal would allow
including on the NPL Federal facility
sites that may be subject to the
corrective action authorities of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA).
When the initial NPL was
promulgated, the Agency announced
certain eligibility policies relating to
sites that might qualify for the NPL One
of these policies was that RCRA
"regulated units"—i.e., land disposal
units that received hazardous waste
after the effective date of the RCRA
land disposal regulations (48 FR 40662,
September 8,1983)—would not be
included on the NPL On April 10.1985
the Agency proposed a revision of that
policy based upon expanded RCRA
authorities enacted as part of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (50 FR 14117. April
10.1985).
On June 10.1986 (51 FR 21057). EPA
announced several components of a
final policy for placing non-Federal
RCRA-related sites on the NPL In
general, a listing of non-Federal sites
with releases that can be addressed
under the expanded RCRA Subtitle C
corrective action authorities will be
deferred. The Agency stated, however,
that certain sites subject to Subtitle C
corrective action requirements should
be listed if they have an MRS score of
28.50 or greater and meet at least one of
the following criteria: (1) Facilities
owned by persons who are bankrupt; (2)
facilities that have lost RCRA interim
status and for which there are
additional indications that the owner or
operator will be unwilling to undertake
corrective action; and (3) sites, analyzed
on a case-by-case basis, whose owners
or-operators have shown an
unwillingness to undertake corrective
action.
At that time. EPA also announced that
it would consider, at a later date.
whether this revised policy should apply
to Federal facilities (51 FR 21059. June
10.1986). Subsequently, the Agency has
analyzed the appropriateness of
deferring the listing of Federal facility
sites which may be subject to RCRA
corrective action. In its deliberations,
EPA considered the policy announced
on March 5.1966 (51 FR 7722)
concerning RCRA corrective action at
Federal facilities with RCRA operating
units. Specifically, the policy stated that:
(1) RCRA section 3004(u) subjects
Federal facilities to corrective action
requirements to the same extent as
privately owned or operated facilities
and (2) the definition of a Federal
facility boundary is equivalent to the
property-wide definition of facility at
privately owned or operated facilities.
The Agency has determined that the
vast majority of Federal facility sites
that could be placed on the NPL have
RCRA regulated units within the Federal
facility property boundary. Therefore,
strict application of the March 5.1986
boundary policy and the June 10.1988
deferred listing policy would result in
placing very few Federal facility sites on
the NPL The Agency believes that this
would be inconsistent with the spirit
and intent of Section 120 of SARA. The
Statute and its legislative history
indicate that Congress intended the
Agency to place Federal facility sites on
the NPL and to effect cleanup at those
sites. Section 120(a) provides that:
(a]ll guidelines, rules, regulations, and criteria
which are applicable to * ' * inclusion on
the National Priorities List * * * shall also
be applicable to facilities which are owned or
operated by a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the United States in the
same manner and to the extent as such
guidelines, rules, regulations, and criteria are
applicable to other facilities.
Section 120 of SARA also contains
requirements for assessing releases at
Federal facilities, placing them on the
NPL and effecting remedial actions at
those sites that qualify for the NPL In
the floor debates, Senator Robert T.
Stafford explained section 120 as
follows:
Second, the amendments require a
comprehensive nationwide effort to identify
and assess all Federal hazardous waste sites
that warrant attention * * *. The legislation
• • • requires that any Federal facility that
meets the criteria applied to private sites
listed on the national priorities list (NPL]
must be placed on the NPI Cong.
Rec. S. 14902 (daily ed., Oct 3,1986).
If the revised RCRA policy that is
applicable to non-Federal sites were
applied to Federal facility sites, the
purposes of section 120 would be
frustrated.
Given that Congress clearly
contemplated that Federal facility sites
would be placed on the NPL the Agency
interprets these provisons of section 120
to mean that the criteria to list Federal
facility sites should not be more
exclusionary than the criteria to list non-
Federal sites on the NPL Key elements
of the of the current policy for listing
non-Federal sites subject to RCRA
corrective action requirements include
whether the owner or operator has filed
bankruptcy or clearly demonstrated
unwillingness to comply with applicable
RCRA requirements or regulations.
Since bankruptcy proceedings are not •
applicable to Federal agencies and
unwillingess to comply with Federal
laws is an unlikely occurrence.
application of the non-Federal facilities
policy for listing RCRA sites would
result in listing very few Federal sites.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 92 / Wednesday, May 13. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17993
Thus, in order to treat Federal and non-
Federal sites equally, as required by
SARA section 120. the Agency believes
that the RCRA status of the site should
not be considered in the decision to
place a Federal facility site on the NPL
The Agency believes that placing
RCRA-related Federal sites on the NPL
will also serve the purpose originally
intended by section 300.66(e)(2) of the
NCP—to advise the public of the status
of Federal government cleanup efforts.
(50 FR 47931. November 20.1985). In
addition, listing on the NPL will help
other Federal agencies set priorities and
focus cleanup efforts on those sites
which present the most serious
problems.
The policy proposed today does not
restrict the use of either RCRA
corrective action or enforcement
authorities to achieve cleanup at Federal
facilities. EPA is in the process of
developing regulations for corrective
action under RCRA and for cleanup of
Superfund sites under the National
Contingency Plan. The cleanup goals
established in those regulations will be
consistent with each other, within the
limits of each statute, and it is EPA's
expectation that remedies selected and
implemented under CERCLA will
generally satisfy the RCRA corrective
action requirements, and vice versa.
EPA solicits comments on the
appropriateness of placing on the NPL
Federal facilities that may be subject to
RCRA corrective action authorities.
Comments should be submitted to
Stephen Lingle. Director. Hazardous Site
Evaluation Division (Attn. NPL Staff).
Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response (WH-548E) U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
Street. SW., Washington. DC 20460. not
later than June 12.1987.
Dated: May 6.1987.
J.W. McGraw.
Acting Assistant Administrator. Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
(FR Doc. 87-10910 Filed 5-12-87: 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6S60-50-M
40 CFR Part 440
[OW-FRL-3199-8]
Ore Mining and Dressing Point Source
Category; Gold Placer Mining; Effluent
Limitations Guidelines, Pretreatment
Standards and New Source
Performance Standards; Second
Notice of New Information; Request
for Comment and Extension of
Comment Period
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Extension of comment period.
SUMMARY: On March 24.1987 (52 FR
9414) EPA published a Notice of
Availability of New Information and
Request for Comment under the Clean
Water Act to limit effluent discharges to
waters of the United States from
facilities engaged in placer gold mining
operations (52 FR 9414). EPA is
extending the period for comment on the
proposed regulation from May 11.1987
to June 25.1987.
DATE: Comments on the Notice of
Availability of New Information for the
placer gold mining subcategory must be
submitted to EPA by June 25.1987.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to William
A. Telliard. Industrial Technology
Division (WH-552), Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington. DC 20460. Attention ITD
Docket Clerk. Proposed Placer Gold
Mining. The supporting information and
all comments on this proposal are
available Tor inspection and copying at
the EPA Public Information Reference
Unit in Washington. DC, Room 2404
(Rear) PM-213; at the EPA Library in
Seattle: at the EPA Alaska office in .
Anchorage; and at the Alaska
Department of Environmental
Conservation office in Fairbanks,
Alaska. The comments will be added to
the record as they are received. The
EPA Information Regulation (40 CFR
Part 2) provides that a reasonable fee
may be charged for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Willis E. Umholtz (202) 382-7191.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
March 24.1987 EPA published a Notice
of New Information which announced
the availability for public review and
comment of new technical and economic
data and reports which EPA will utilizr
in promulgating final effluent limitatioi
guidelines and standards for the placer
gold mining industry (52 FR 9414). The
notice stated that comments on the new
information were to be submitted on or
before May 8.1987.
The Agency has received numerous
requests from members of the placer
gold mining industry, representatives of
the State of Alaska, and others
interested in this proposed regulation
that additional comment time be granted
to allow them to comment fully and to
supply data to support their comments.
Given the remote and sometimes
inaccessible locations of many of those
who wish to comment on the issues
raised in the notice, the consequent
difficulties they face in submitting
comments, and the complexity of issues
raised by this rulemaking. EPA has
determined that it is necessary to extend
the comment period 45 days to June 25.
1987. This will allow the public adequate
time to review and comment on the
issues raised by the notice.
Dated: May 7.1987.
Lawrence |. fenson.
Assistant Administrator. Off ice of Water.
(FR Doc. 87-10911 Filed 5-12-87:8:45 am)
BILLING CODC 656O-SO-M
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MM Docket No. 87-26]
Concerning Alternatives to the
General Fairness Doctrine Obligations
of Broadcast Licensees
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed Rule: extension of
time for filing comments.
SUMMARY: The FCC gives notice that the
Commission granted a motion for
-------
Wednesday
April 22, 1987
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Parts 300 and 355
Extremely Hazardous Substances Ust and
Threshold Planning Quantities;
Emergency Planning and Release
Notification Requirements; Final Rule
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rule3 and Regulat.ons
13378
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 300 and 355
[FRL-3l73-«]
Extremely Hazardous Substances List
and Threshold Planning Quantities;
Emergency Planning and Release
Notification Requirements
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION; Final rule.
SUMMARY: Section 302 of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1988 (SARA), signed into law on
October 17.1988. required the
Administrator of EPA to publish a list of
extremely hazardous substances within
30 days. The Administrator was also
required to simultaneously publish an
interim final regulation establishing a
threshold planning quantity for each
substance on the list and initiate a
rulemaking to finalize these regulations.
The list and planning quantities trigger
emergency planning in States and local
communities under SARA. On
November 17.1988. EPA published an
Interim final rule codifying the
statutonly prescribed list of extremely
hazardous substances, the
corresponding threshold planning
quantities for those substances, and the
local and State reporting requirements
for facilities at which extremely
hazardous substances or other
"hazardous substances" are present. On
November 17. EPA also proposed
revisions to the list of extremely
hazardous substances. Today's
rulemaking revises the list of extremely
hazardous substances, the threshold
planning quantities, and the emergency
planning and release reporting
requirements based on public comments
received on the intenm final rule and
proposed revisions.
EFFEcnvt DATES: This rule becomes
effective on May 17.1987 for purposes of
facility planning notification under
section 302 and May 22.1987 for
purposes of emergency release
notification under section 384. Other
dates relevant to this rule Include the
following:
1. State emergency response
commissions are to be established by
Apnl 17.1987.
2. Facility notifications for emergency
planning are required by May 17.1987.
3. Slate commissions are to establish
emergency planning districts by July 17.
4. State commissions are to establish
local emergency planning committees by
August 17.1987.
5. Facility emergency release
notifications to the local emergency
planning committee begin on August 17.
1987 or on the date on which the
committee is formed if prior to that date.
8. Facility notifications to local
committees concerning facility
representatives are due by September
17.1987.
7. Emergency response plans should
be completed by the local emergency
planning committees by October 17.
1988.
ADDRESS: The record supporting this
rulemaking is contained in the
Superfund Docket located in Room
Lower Garage at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street SW,
Washington. OC 20460. The docket Is
available for inspection by appointment
only between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and
4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding federal holidays. The docket
phone number is (202) 382-3048. As
provided in 40 CFR Part 2, a reasonable
fee may be charged for copying services.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard A. Homer. Chemical Engineer.
Preparedness Staff. Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response. WH-
562A. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street. SW. Washington.
DC 20460. The Chemical Emergency
Preparedness Hotline, at 1-800/533-
0202. in Washington. DC at 1-202/479-
2449 can also be contacted for further
information.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are listed
in the following outline:
L Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
& Background
1. Superfund Amendments and
Raauthorization Act of 1886 (SARA)
2. Title 01
3. Emergency Planning and Notification
Requirements Under Title ID
4. Emergency Planning Program
n. Summary of Public Comments
QL Summary of Revisions to the Interim Final
Rule
IV. Responses to Major Public Comments
A. Emergency Planning
a Emergency Release Notifications
C Criteria Used to Identify Extremely
Hazardous Substances
O. List of Extremely Hazardous Substances
E. Determination of Levels of Concern
F. Threshold Planning Quantities
G. Reportable Quantities
H. Miscellaneous
V. Relationship to CERCLA
A. Relationship of Title III to the National
Contingency Plan
a Relationship of This Rule to CERCLA
section 103 Reporting Requirements
VI. Effective Dates
VU. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
VUL Supporting Information
L Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
This regulation is issued under Title
III of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1988. (Pub. L 99-
499). ("SARA" or "the Act"). Title III of
SARA is known as the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-know
Act of 1988.
B. Background
1. Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
On October 17.1988. the President
signed into law the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1988 ("SARA") which revises and
extends the authorities established
under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response. Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA").
Commonly known as "Superfund."
CERCLA provides authority for federal
cleanup of uncontrolled hazardous
waste sites and response to releases of
hazardous substances. Title in of SARA
establishes new authorities for
emergency planning and preparedness.
emergency release notification.
community right-to-know reporting, and
toxic chemical release reporting.
2. Title m
Title D7 of SARA, also known as the
"Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act of 1988". is intended
to encourage and support emergency
planning efforts at the State and local
levels and provide the public and local
governments with information
concerning potential chemical hazards
present in their communities. The
emergency planning requirements of this
Act recognize the need to establish and
maintain contingency plans for
responding to chemical accidents which
can inflict health and environmental
damage as well as cause significant
disruption within a community.
Title 01 is organized into three
subtitles. Subtitle A. which establishes
the framework for local emergency
planning, will be described in more
detail in the following section. Subtitle B
provides the mechanism for community
awareness with respect to hazardous
chemicals present in the locality. This
information is critical for effective local
contingency planning. Subtitle B
Includes requirements for the
submission of material safety data
sheets and emergency and hazardous
chemical Inventory forms to State and
local governments, and the submission
-------
ara egister / Vol.
^^^^^^^^^™^™^™
of toxic chemical release forms to the
States and the Agency. Subtitle C
contains general provisions concerning
trade secret protection, enforcement
citizen suits, and public availability of
information.
Today's rule revises the interim final
rule, published on November 17.1988.
(51 FR 41570). which set forth the basic
elements for initiation of local
emergency planning. The preamble to
that rule described the Title III
framework in more detail. Following is a
summary of the statutory provisions
directly related to today's final rule.
3. Emergency Planning and Notification
Requirements Under Title 01
Subtitle A of Title III is concerned
primarily with emergency planning
programs at the State and local levels.
Section 301 requires each State to
establish an emergency response
commission by April 17.1987. The State
commission is responsible for
establishing emergency planning
districts and appointing, supervising.
and coordinating local emergency
planning committees.
Section 303 governs the development
of comprehensive emergency response
plans by the local emergency planning
committees and provision of facility
information to the committee. The local
emergency planning committee is
responsible for completing an
emergency plan meeting the
requirements of section 303 by October
17.1988 and reviewing the plan at least
annually. Under section 303(d), facilities
subject to emergency planning must
designate a facility representative who
will participate m the local emergency
planning effort as a facility emergency
response coordinator. This designation
must be made by September 17.1987 or
30 days after establishment of the local
emergency planning committee.
whichever is earlier. Section 303(d) also
requires facilities to provide the
committee with information relevant to
development or implementation of the
local emergency imumue plan.
Section 302 reqaM the
Administrator oCflftio publish a list of
extremely hazard*c»«betances and
threshold planning quantities (TPQs) for
such substances within 30 days of
enactment of SARA. Any facility when
an extremely hazardous substance is
present in an amount in excess of the
threshold planning quantity is required
to notify the State commission by May
17.1987 or 60 days after the facility first
begins handling an extremely hazardous
substance in excess of its TPQ. Such
notification should be in writing and
specify the name and an accurate and
current locational address of the facility.
52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulation. 13379
Other facilities may also be designated
by the commission or the Governor. In
turn, the State emergency response
commission must notify EPA of such
facilities. The Agency encourages State
commissions to provide such notice by
August 17.1987 to the EPA Regional
Administrator for the standard Federal
Region in which the State is located. The
Agency requests that the notification
provide a list of the covered facilities
with their current and accurate
locational addresses organized by
emergency planning district, if
practicable.
The list of extremely hazardous
substances is defined in section
302(a)(2) as "the list of substances
published in November. 1985 by the
Administrator in Appendix A of the
Chemical Emergency Preparedness
Program Interim Guidance". This list
was established by EPA to identify
chemical substances which could cause
serious irreversible health effects from
accidental releases. Section 302(a)(3)
further required EPA to initiate a
rulemaking to revise the threshold
planning quantities.
Section 304 establishes requirements
for immediate reporting of certain
releases of hazardous substances to the
local planning committees and the State
emergency response commissions.
similar to the release reporting
provisions under section 103 of
CERCLA. Section 304 also requires
follow-up reports on the release, its
effects, and response actions taken. An
interim final rule, published on
November 17.1988 set forth the list of
extremely hazardous substances.
threshold planning quantities and
reporting requirements. A companion
rule requested comments on the interim
final rule and proposed deletions from
and additions to the list of extremely
hazardous substances. Today's rule
finalizes the list and associated planning
requirements based on public
comments.
4. Emergency Planning Program
After the enactment of Superfund
(1980). it became apparent that
emergency response, although vital to
the protection of public health and the
environment from accidental releases of
hazardous substances, was not enough
protection against the possibility of
releases of extremely hazardous
substances. For many chemicals. It is
not sufficient merely to plan for cleanup
of releases once they have occurred
because of the hazard the releases pose
to surrounding populations. Rather, it is
important to facilitate emergency
planning which can help prevent the
accident and enable timely and effective
emergency response in the event of a
hazardus release. To aid in such
planning, the Agency initiated the
voluntary Chemical Emergency
Preparedness Program (CEPP)—a part of
the Agency's Air Toxics Strategy for
addressing both continuing and
accidental releases of toxic substances
into the air environment. Under CEPP.
EPA developed the list of substances
referred to in section 302(a) (now known
as "extremely hazardous substances")
and guidance materials to help local
communities focus their planning efforts.
Title III of SARA mandates the type of
program advocated by the Agency's
CEPP. It encourages State and local
governments to establish the
infrastructure needed to facilitate
emergency planning and provides
technical support to these programs. It
also requires certain facilities to supply
the information on substances present at
the facility which is necessary for
contingency planning.
The extremely hazardous substances
list and its threshold planning quantities
are intended to help communities focus
on the substances and facilities of the
most immediate concern for emergency
planning and response. EPA strongly
emphasizes, however, that while the list
finalized today includes many of the
chemicals which may pose an
immediate hazard to a community upon
release, it is not to be considered a list
of all substances which are hazardous
enough to require community emergency
response planning. There are tens of
thousands of compounds and mixtures
in commerce in the United States, and in
specific circumstances, many of them
could be considered toxic or otherwise
dangerous. The list published today
represents only-a first step towards
development of an effective emergency
response planning effort at the
community level. Without a preliminary
list of th!« kind, it would be very difficult
for most communities to know where to
begin identification of potential
chemical hazards among the many
chemicals present in any community.
Similarly, the threshold planning
quantities are not absolute levels above
which the extremely hazardous
substances are dangerous and below
which they pose no threat at all. Rather.
the threshold planning quantities are
intended to provide a "fust cut" for
community emergency response
planners where these extremely
hazardous substances are present. After
identification of facilities at which
extremely hazardous substances are
present in quantities greater than the
threshold planning quantities, the
community will have the basis for
-------
13380 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
Further analysis of the potential danger
posed by these facilities. Also, they will
be able to identify other facilities posing
potential chemical risks to the
community and develop contingency
plans to protect the public from releases
of hazardous chemicals. Sections 311
and 312 of Title III provide a mechanism
through which a community will receive
material safety data sheets and other
information on extremely hazardous
substances, as well as many other
chemicals, from many facilities which
handle them. A community can then
assess and initiate planning activities, if
desirable, for quantities below the
threshold planning quantity and for
other substances of concern to them. A
proposed rule setting forth the
requirements for reporting under
sections 311 and 312 was published on
January 27.1987 (51 FR 2836).
In addition to the assistance provided
by the extremely hazardous substance
list and the threshold planning
quantities, community emergency
response planners will be further aided
by the National Response Team's
Hazardous Materials Emergency
Planning Guide. A separate notice of
availability of this document was
published in the Federal Register on
March 17.1987. (52 FR 8380.61) as
required under section 303(f) of Title ffl.
The planning guide will be
supplemented at a later date with
Technical Guidance to assist local
emergency planning committees in the
technical evaluation of potential
chemical hazards and the pnoritization
of sites. This technical document will
provide more detailed guidance on
identifying and assessing the hazards
associated with the accidental release of
hazardous substances on a site-specific
basis. In addtion to the toxicity of the
substance, such an assessment should
address site-specific considerations
such as the conditions of storage or use
of the substance (e.g. -rhmher under
temperature or prmsiasjH *• physical
properties of the subsMH»fe« physical
state (solid, liquid. gas**s4»tiiity.
dispersability. reactivttj£&»location
(e.g. distance to affected* populations).
and the quantity of the substance. The
Technical Guidance will address snch
considerations to assist local planners in
hazard ^identification and analysis
essential to effective emergency
response planning.
Following is a summary of comments
received by the Agency on the interim
final rule. EPA's responses to major
comments, and a description of
revisions to the rule.
II. Summary of the Public Comments
A total of 81 letters was received on
themterim final rule and proposed rule.
There were several comments on the
emergency planning program
infrastructure and notification
requirements, especially requests for
clarification of notification requirements
and exemptions. In particular.
clarifications were requested on
federally permitted releases, continuous
releases and the relationship of the Title
III reporting requirements to CERCLA
reporting requirements.
Other major comments focused on the
criteria used to identify chemicals for
inclusion in the list of extremely
hazardous substances, the need for
additional criteria to address chronic or
acute non-lethal health effects and
physical and chemical properties.
Many commenters suggested changes
to the extremely hazardous substance
list primarily deletions of specific
chemicals, and expressed support for
proposed deletions to the list. Other
commenters opposed the deletions on
the basis that the criteria for deletion
were too narrow. Several recommended
deletions of non-reactive, non-powdered
solids.
Other commenters questioned the
methodology used in setting threshold
planning quantities and/or suggested
changes to the threshold planning
quantities for specific chemicals.
Another topic of concern was the
percent mixture policy, with some
commenters opposing it »nj others
stating that it was not appropriate in all
cases.
In addition, a major issue was the
inconsistency between reportable
quantities (RQa) and threshold planning
quantities for a number of chemicals,
particularly where the reportable
quantities exceed threshold planning
quantities.
Other comments included *ncV of
funding for State and local programs.
use of the metric system, protection of
confidential business information, and
the content of an emergency response
plan.
m. Summary of Revisions to the Interim
Find Rub
Several changes from the interim final
rule should be noted First while the
interim final rule was placed in Part 300
of Tide 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulation, the final rule has been
placed in Part 355. Part 300 is the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). In the
intenm final rule, the Agency announced
its intention to evaluate the placement
of Title III rules. After consideration, the
Agency has decided to place all Title III
regulations in Subpart 335 et seq. since
some of Tide III is not specifically
germane to the NCP and the Agency
believes that all Tide III rules should
reside in one place in the Code of
Federal Regulations. For clarity, today's
rule republishes the list of extremely
hazardous substances and associated
regulations in its entirety.
This section described the significant
changes that have been made to the
intenm final rule, based upon public
comments on that rule and on the
proposed rule. The following summary is
organized according to the sections of
the rule.
Section 35SJO (formerly § 300.92}—
Definitions
The definition of "Commission" was
revised to indicate that the Governor of
a State will be the State emergency
response commission, if no commission
is designated, for all commission
responsibilities in addition to planning.
such as receipt of emergency release
notifications and community right-to-
know information and processing
requests from the public for information
under section 324. This change was
made to better accord with the statutory
language and to clarify, in response to
commenters' concern, the entity to be
notified after April 17.1987 of a release
under section 304 if no State commissior
has been established
A definition of transportation-related
release has been added in response to
comments requesting clarification of the
term.
Section 353.30 (formerly § 300.93)—
Emergency Planning
In response to commenters who asked
how the TPQ is to be calculated EPA
has added a definition of the phrase
"amount of any extremely hazardous
substance" to paragraph (a). Thus, to
determine whether the facility has
present an amount of an extremely
hazardous substance which equals or
exceeds the TPQ. the owner or operator
must determine the total amount of an
extremely hazardous substance present
at any one time at a facility, regardless
of location, number of containers or
method of storage. Additionally, the
amount of an extremely hazardous
substance present in mixtures or
solutions in excess of one (1) percent
must be included in the determination.
Section 355.40 (formerly § 300.94}—
Emergency Release Notification
In response to several comments with
respect to the exemption for on-site
releases. EPA has revised the
-------
Bra
vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22, 1987 / Rules and Regulations
13381
applicability of this section to parallel
the statutory exemption. The phrase
"results in exposure to persons solely
within the boundaries of the facility"
was substituted for "results in exposure
to persons outside the boundaries of the
facility". Thus, releases need not result
in actual exposure to persons off-site in
order to be subject to release reporting
requirements.
Several commenters requested that
"continuous" releases be added to the
exemptions listed under applicability to
the extent that such releases are exempt
from reporting under CERCLA. EPA
agrees, based on the language in section
304(a) which requires that releases
importable under that Section occur in a
manner which would require
notification under section 103(a) of
CERCLA. EPA has added this exemption
to paragraph (a) along with other similar
exemptions from section 103(a)
notification under CERCLA (e.g..
pesticide product releases under section
103(e)J. However, because "statistically
significant increases" from a continuous
release must be reported as an episodic
release under section 103(a) of CERCLA.
such releases must also be reported
under section 304(a). This has also been
clarified in today's rule.
EPA has also clarified the effective
date for emergency release notifications.
EPA agrees with commenters who
argued that the reporting provisions
should not come into effect on
November 17.1986 as stated in the
interim final rule, but rather when the
entity to which reports must be made is
established. Accordingly, section 304
notifications must be made to the
Commission beginning May 22.1987
since the State emergency response
commission is to be already established
by that date. After April 17.1987. the
Governor becomes the Commission until
a Commission is established and
notifications should be made to him/her.
Beginning August 17.1987. notifications
should also be made to the local
committees. If no low! emergency
planning committee !• established by
August 17.1987. locsJ notifications must
be made to the approfttate local
emergency resposM personnel In many
cases, facilities wffl sJnady be alerting
relevant local officials, such as fire
departments, to those releases.
As noted by a commenter, notification
is to be made to the "community"
emergency coordinator as stated in the
statute rather than the "local"
emergency coordinator as stated in the
interim final rule.
In response to comments, the
alternative reporting for CERCLA
hazardous substances which are not
extremely hazardous substances is
clarified to note its expiration after April
30.1988 and that the exception concerns
the immediate notice, not the follow-up
report. These changes better accord the
exception with the statutory language.
In addition. EPA responded to requests
from commenters by clarifying the
exception for transportation-related
releases in § 3S5.40(b)(4)(ii) (formerly
S 300.94(b)(4)(ii)) by specifying the
contents of the notice and further
defining "transportation-related release"
in accordance with the legislative
history of this provision.
Appendix A and B (formerly Appendix
D and Appendix E)—Ust of Extremely
Hazardous Substances and Threshold
Planning Quantities
The appendices republish the list set
out in the interim final rule with the
addition of four new chemicals and the
revised final threshold planning
quantities.
The Agency is adding to the list of
extremely hazardous substances four of
the five chemicals proposed for addition
in the proposed rule published on
November 17.1986. The other chemical.
urea.3-(3.4-dichlorophenyl)l.methoxy-l.
methyl-. CAS number 330-65-2. will not
be added to the list because of new data
that indicates that this chemical does
not meet the acute toxicity criteria. The
Agency has determined that this
chemical does not meet the present
criteria.
In the interim rule. 40 chemicals were
proposed for deletion from the list of
extremely hazardous substances. Based
upon public comment and upon
reconsideration of the statutory criteria
for revisions of the list. EPA has decided
not to delete these substances from the
list in this rulemaking. EPA agrees with
commenters who indicated that under
section 302(a)(4). chemicals should not
be deleted from the list if they can be
shown to have other health effects
resulting from a short-term exposure at
specified levels. The Agency does not
currently have available criteria for
determining such levels.
The Agency has also changed the way
in which threshold planning quantities
are applied to solids based on
commenters' concerns. Under today's
rule, the threshold planning quantity
listed for each solid-form substance
applies only if certain criteria an met
Otherwise the threshold planning
quantity is 10.000 pounds. Since solids
generally do not present an airborne
release hazard unless they are handled
in certain forms or are highly reactive.
only those forms or levels of reactivity
which can potentially result in an
airborne release apply to the threshold
planning quantity listed. Therefore, the
listed threshold planning quantity will
apply only to that fraction of the total
quantity of a solid with a particle size
less than 100 microns, that fraction of a
solid in solution, or that fraction of a
solid in molten form at any time. An
adjustment factor of 0.3 to account for
maximum potential volatility is also
applied to solids in molten form. The
total quantity in molten form must be
multiplied by 0.3 and then compared to
the listed threshold planning quantity to
determine if reporting is required for
that chemical. With respect to reactivity.
only solids with a National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) rating, or
those that meet the criteria for a rating
of 2.3. or 4 for reactivity, do not default
to a threshold planning quantity of
10.000 pounds. Solids on the list of
extremely hazardous substances in
Appendices A and B have two TPQ
values. The first applies to solids that
meet the form (i.e., <100 microns) or
reactivity criteria described above: the
second TPQ (10.000 pounds) are for
solids that don't meet the form or
reactivity criteria.
In addition, the Agency has made two
changes in threshold planning quantity
categories. The "any amount" category
has been eliminated and a new one-
pound category added for substances
considered to be of the highest potential
hazard. The two-pound category has
also been eliminated with two chemicals
reassigned to the one-pound category
and the others in this category
reassigned to a new ten-pound category.
These changes were made in response
to commenters' concerns over the
inconsistency between TPQ levels and
CERCLA RQ levels.
A number of chemicals have been
moved to different threshold planning
quantity categories in this rule based on
revised categories discussed above or
on new or reevaluated toxicity data.
Those chemicals whose threshold
planning quantities were reassigned are
noted in the list in Appendix A and B:
the reasons for the reassignments are
indicated in footnotes. Approximately 36
chemicals were moved to lower
categories while 12 were assigned higher
TPQ values. More details on these
reassignments can be found in the
technical support documents which are
available in the public docket.
IV.
to Major Public
A document summarizing the
comments and responses to all the
public comments is available in the
public docket to this final rule. The
major issues raised by the commenters
and the Agency's response to them are
described below.
-------
13382 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulation
A. Emergency Planning
1. Emergency Planning Under section
302
A number of comments focused on the
emergency planning requirements of
Title III. One commenter requested that
the rule be amended to allow existing
State and local laws the provide
substantially similar protection to
supercede the specific provisions of the
federal rule.
Section 321 of SARA discusses the
relationship of Tide 01 to other federal.
State, and local laws. This section
generally provides that nothing in Tide
III shall preempt any State or local law,
or affect any State of local law.
However, material safety data sheets, if
required under a law passed after
August 1. 1985. must be identical in
content and form to that required under
section 311. Accordingly, while Title m
does not supercede State or local laws,
EPA has no authority to waive the
requirements imposed under Title IIL
These requirements, including the
threshold planning quantities, are
intended to be minimum •tMndarHa.
However. EPA will work with States
which have developed reporting forma
and planning structures to determine the
most efficient approaches to coordinate
Title in requirements with existing State
or local structures, forms and
requirements where appropriate to
avoid duplication of effort
Several commenters feel that EPA
should require States to notify the
Agency when the State emergency
response commissions/local emergency
planning committees are established.
EPA should then publish mis
information in the Federal Register or
disseminate it in some way so that all
affected parties could have access to it
One commenter noted that covered
facilities must know to whom to report
in order to comply with the notification
requirements to Title QL
States are not required to provide
information on the establishment of the
State emergency
and local emergencyjjuning
committees to EPA. flower; the
Agency strongly enoHsagn States to
notify the public, esptduly potentially
affected facilities, and EPA as soon as
the State emergency response
commissions and local emergency
planning committees are established.
The Agency suggests that the facility
contact the Governor's office if it does
not have information on the commission.
EPA Regional Administrators are
writing to the Governors of each State
and Territory to inform them of Title III
requirements, to offer information and
technical assistance in the development
of the State and local planning structure
and to request that they notify EPA of
die establishment of the State
emergency response commission.
One commenter believes that EPA
should explain fully its expectations as
to the responsibilities of the State
emergency response commissions and
local emergency planning committees. In
response to this comment EPA notes
that Title ffl implementation is primarily
a State and local responsibility. EPA
does not intend to oversee the operation
of individual commissions and
committees. With respect to State
responsibilities under Title ID. EPA
recommends that States review the
appropriate sections of Title in when
establishing their State emergency
response commissions and local
emergency planning committees and
laying out the commission and
committee responsibilities regarding
planning and public availability. The
Agency recommends that the State
emergency response commission be as
broad-based as possible, including key
State agencies such as environmental
protection, emergency management
health, occupational safety and health.
labor and transportation, as well as
other public and private sector
representation as the State deems
appropriate. EPA's Regional Offices are
available to assist States in establishing
and implementing the planning structure
described in Section 301.
One commenter believes that the local
planning committees could impose
significant requirements on small
businesses. The commenter feels EPA
should clarify the information
requirements in the emergency planning
guidance and in the final rale.
With respect to the emergency
planning guidance, the National
Response Team's Hazardous Materials
Emergency Planning Guide (notice of
availability published on March 17.1087.
52 FR 8360) describes the information
requirements established under Title m
and how this information will be useful
in developing a local emergency plan.
The Agency is also clarifying the Title
m emergency planning and notification
requirements based upon public
comment. With respect to the issue of
burden on small businesses, the
Agency's small business analysis does
not show mat these emergency planning
requirements will cause a significant
burden to small facilities. Because small
facilities an likely to use or store fewer
extremely hazardous substances and
handle smaller amounts, the level of
planning required will be
commensurately smaller. In addition.
unreasonable burdens on small facilities
can be prevented because owners/
operators of subject facilities will be
represented on local emergency
planning committees.
Facilities subject to section 302 will
designate a facility emergency
coordinator to participate in the
planning process. Participation by the
facility in the planning process provides
an opportunity for the facility to present
concerns regarding the burden of
planning to the committee and to ensure
that committee requests for information
are necessary for planning. In particular.
small businesses may wish to encourage
special small business representation on
the local emergency planning committee
and also make their concerns known
through their emergency coordinators.
One commenter stated that an
extremely hazardous substance that
was not stored on site but produced in a
process such as an incinerator should be
exempt from both threshold planning
quantity calculation and exempt from
release reporting if the release is
covered by a Clean Air Act permit. EPA
agrees that if none of the material is
present on site and less than a TPQ is
present at any one time during the year.
then the extremely hazardous substance
need not be reported to the local
emergency planning committee. Further.
if the release is federally permitted
under section 101(10) of CERCLA. then
the release need not be reported under
section 304 of SARA.
Another commenter believes that
there should be an exemption for plants
over 5000 meters or some other distance
from a community. EPA disagrees. No
long distance exemption exists under
section 302. For further discussion on
plant distance from a community, see
section F.l.a. below.
B. Emergency Release Notifications
1. Recipients and Providers of Section
304 Notification
Two commenters questioned the
requirements under \ 309.94(b)(l) of the
interim final rule (now \ 355.40(b)(l))
that directs facilities to notify relevant
local and State emergency response
personnel following an emergency
release if there is no State commission
or local committee. One commenter
believed that this sentence should be
deleted as it exceeds EPA's authority.
Along the same lines, one commenter
expressed the concern that State
commissions and local committees must
be notified after a release, but in many
States these commissions and local
'committees are not yet established.
States are required to establish their
commissions by April 17.1967 and those
commissions must establish local
-------
u es an
ations
13383
committee! not later than 30 days after
the designation of emergency planning
districts or by August 17.1987,
whichever is earlier.
In order to alleviate confusion over
whom to notify prior to the dates upon
which the commission and committee
are to be established, EPA has revised
the effective date of the notification
requirements. As previously discussed,
under today's rule the release
notification requirements to the State
commission become effective on May
22,1987 and to local committees
beginning August 17.1987. If a
committee is in existence prior to that
date, notification should be made to it
as of the date of its establishment.
Section 301 of SARA provides that if
the State commission is not set up by
April 17,1987. the Governor must
operate as the State commission, and
thus notification must be made under
today's rule even if no commission is
established Where no commission is
established the notifications would be
made to the State Governor. Local
committees are required to be
established not later than 30 days after
the designation of emergency planning
districts or by August 17.1087,
whichever is earlier. If local committees
are not set up by August 17.
notifications must still be made, but
should be provided to local emergency
personnel such as local emergency
management offices or fire departments.
As indicated by the legislative history of
this provision. Congress intended that
emergency release notification
requirements become effective as of the
dates when the commissions and
committees are to be established EPA.
however, has delayed the effective date
of release notification to the State since
the list of extremely hazardous
substances and reporting requirements
have been under revision. Local and
State governments may make any
arrangements necessary for the receipt
of the release information when
commissions and "—•f<**Tff are not yet
established Further, diacuaaion of
effective dates casfeks) ftrwnti under
section VI of thia PMHDBB.
One commentar believes that for
transports tion-rnlsisd releases, the
emergency release notification
requirements should apply to the
operator, rather than the owner of the
facility. No changes were made to the
rule in this regard because section 304
allows either the owner or operator to
give notice after a release. Owners and
operators may make private
arrangements concerning which party is
to provide release notification: however.
under section 304 both owner and
operator are responsible if no
notification is provided
The same commenter requested the
Agency to define the term
"transportation-related release." The
Agency has defined this term for
purposes of the release notification
requirements in die revised final
regulation.
2. Scope of Section 304 Reporting
One commenter recommended that
EPA adopt under SARA the same policy
formulated under section 102 of
CERCLA to determine whether an RQ
has been reached The method used by
CERCLA does not require aggregation of
either releases from separate facilities
or releases of different hazardous
substances at the same facility. EPA
agrees that this policy should be equally
applicable to releases under section 304
due to similarity to section 103 of
CERCLA.
One commenter believes that the
section 304 emergency release
notification requirements should apply
to all releases that meet the notification
thresholds and that have the potential
for affecting anyone outside the facility
boundaries. As discussed to section in
above. EPA agrees that its codification
of the statutory exemption for on-site
releases, by requiring the release to
result in exposure to persons off-site.
could be interpreted to be broader than
the actual statutory language. In today's
rule. EPA has revised the regulations to
better accord with the statutory
language.
One commentar stated mat releases
into water or soil should also be covered
under the SARA section 304
requirements rather than Just air
release* which the commenter believed
was mdtoatad in the November 17. 1886
regulations. However, the interim final
rule did not indicate that the release
notification requirements wen only
applicable to air releases. Although the
original CEPP program was concerned
primarily with the dangers of air
releases (and the TPQs developed under
section 304). section 304 of Title DL like
section 103 of CERLCA. coven release*
into all media.
3. Types of Releases That An Exempt
From Section 304 Reporting
/. Main Categories of Exemption.
Several commenten asked for
clarification of the various exemptions
from section 304 reporting requirements.
The statute provides several exemptions
from notification. These are: (a)
"Federally permitted releases" as
(b) releases which only result in
exposure to persons within the facility
boundaries: (c) releases from a facility
which produces, uses, or stores no
hazardous chemicals: (d) "continuous
releases" as defined under CERCLA
section 103 (f): and (e) releases of a
FIFRA-registered pesticide, as denned
under CERCLA section 103(e).
It should be noted however, that
some releases occurring at a facility
which are not reportable under section
304 may still constitute reportable
releases under CERCLA section 103 and
must if so. be reported to the National
Response Center. Release reporting
under section 304 is in addition to
release notifiction under CERCLA
section 103. Thus, notice to the National
Response Center may be required even
if no local of State reporting is required
CERCLA section 103, for instance, does
not contain an on-site release
//. Federally Permitted Releases.
Seven commenten stated that "federally
permitted releases" should be exempted
from SARA section 304 release
Environmental Response. Compensation
and Liability Act of I960 section 101(10):
included mis exemption in | 300.94 (now
I 355.40). the emergency release
notification section of the regulation.
The exemption for "federally permitted
releases" is '^""Hm! to that under
section 103 of CERCLA. Section 101(10)
of CERCLA defines "federally permitted
releases" for purposes of section 103 of
CERCLA and release notification under
Title ffl and includes 11 types of specific
releases permitted under certain State
and federal programs. As EPA issues
clarifications of "federally permitted
release" under section 103 of CERCLA.
these clarifications will apply equally to
releases notifications under section 304
of SARA. The issuance of rules
clarifying the definition of "federally
permitted release." will be the subject of
a later rulemaking.
One commentar azLad whether the
"federally permitted release" exemption
applies fully to State permitted releases.
State permitted releases are exempted
only to the extent that the releases are
considered "federally permitted" under
section 101(10) of CERCLA.
UL Continuous Releases. Seven
commenten requested that a
clarification be made of the regulation
establishing an exemption from
reporting under sectiou 304 for any
"continuous release" of an extremely
hazardous snbenmce or CERCLA
hazardous sobetance. Several
commenten cited the Conference report
on the Superfund Amendments and
Reantborization Act which states
"releases which are continuous or
-------
13384
Federal Renter / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
frequently recurring and do not require
reporting under CERCLA are not
required to be reported" under section
304. (H.R. Rep. No. 963. 99th Cong. 2d
Sess. at 285 (1986))
Section 103(f) of CERCLA provides
relief from the reporting requirements of
section 103(a) for a release of a
hazardous substance that is continuous
and stable in quantity and and rate.
(Instead, continuous releases are subject
to annual reporting under section 103(0).
As discussed in section III above. EPA
agrees that this exemption from
immediate release notification should
apply to SARA section 304 to the same
extent that such releases are not subject
to reporting under CERCLA section
103(d) and clarifies the regulation today
to that effect. Thus, "continuous
releases" which require annual reporting
under section 103(f) of CERCLA rather
than immediate reporting under section
103(a) are not subject to reporting under
section 304 of SARA. Unlike CERCLA
section 103. however, there is no
provision for alternative annual
reporting under section 304. (Some
continuous releases will be subject to
annual reporting under section 313 of
SARA.) In addition, because
"statistically significant increases" from
a "continuous release" must be reported
as an episodic release under CERCLA
section 103(a). such releases must also
be reported under SARA section 304.
Any clarifications or regulations
mterpretating "continuous" or
"statistically significant increases"
releases under CERCLA section 103(f)
will also apply to SARA section 304.
One commenter noted that some
power plants without federal permits
may daily exceed RQ levels for some
extremely hazardous substances such as
SOj or SOs. The commenter desired a
clarification of the intent of EPA on this
matter. Since such substances are non-
CERCLA hazardous substances.
reporting is not necessary as pursuant to
CERCLA. In addition, such releases
need not be reported if they qualify as
"continuous" or "federally permitted
releases" under CERCLA as discussed
above. "Statistically SBBrtficant
increases" would be sabfect to section
304 reporting.
One commenter stated that a variance
procedure is needed in the section 304
requirement to exclude or otherwise
exempt upset conditions and baseline
conditions under normal operations.
EPA disagrees because upset releases
are episodic and precisely the type of
release intended to be reported under
Title III. "Baseline conditions" are
exempt only if "continuous" or
"federally permitted." The fact that a
release can be predicted from an upset
situation or periodically from normal
operations would exempt virtually all
releases from all facilities from ever
reporting, since most releases occur
from either normal operations or upset
conditions.
iv. Exclusion of Certain Types of
Waste and Facilities Under Section 304.
One commenter asked for an
interpretation of "release" that would
not include any disposal of hazardous
waste or solid waste, if disposal is
performed according to the permitting
and other relevant requirements of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) or the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA). or other applicable
federal or State law.
Disposal of hazardous substances at a
disposal facility in accordance with EPA
regulations is not subject to CERCLA
notification.
Regardless of the outcome of that
decision, it is important to note that
spills and accidents occurring during
disposal and outside of the approved
operation, that result in reportable
releases of extremely hazardous
substances or CERCLA hazardous
substances, must be reported to the
State emergency response commission
and local emergency planning
committee as well as to the National
Response Center. In addition. PCS
releases of an RQ or more from a TSCA-
approved facility (as opposed to
disposal into such a facility), must be
reported under section 304 (and to the
National Response Center).
The RCRA disposal issue is similar to
PCS disposal under TSCA. In a final rule
issued in April 1985. EPA determined
that where the disposal of wastes into
permitted or interim status facilities is
properly documented through the RCRA
manifest system and RCRA regulations
are followed notification under
CERCLA does not provide a significant
additional benefit as long as the facility
is in substantial compliance with all
applicable regulations and permit
conditions. However, spills and
accidents occurring during disposal that
result in releases of reportable
quantities of hazardous substances must
be reported to the National Response
Center under CERCLA J 103.50 PR
13461 (April 4.1985). EPA believes that
the same rationale applies to section
304. Thus, no notification of proper
disposal into such RCRA facilities is
required under today's rule.
Another commenter wanted to know
if mining and mineral extraction wastes
were exempt under section 304. There is
no such exclusion under section 304 and
the release notification requirements
apply if the wastes are CERCLA
hazardous substances or extremely
hazardous substances.
v. Releases from Facilities Not
Handling "Hazardous Chemicals"
Several commenters requested that
since certain chemicals at research
laboratories are exempt from the
definition of "hazardous chemicals" and
thus exempt from release notification
requirements under section 304. that this
exclusion be extended to section 302
planning requirements.
SARA defines "hazardous chemical"
under section 311. Under section 31l(e)
"any substance to the extent it is used in
a research laboratory or a hospital or
other medical facility under the direct
supervision of a technically qualified
individual" is excluded from the
definition of "hazardous chemical."
Section 304 of SARA also states that
releases of extremely hazardous
substances and CERCLA substances are
reportable under section 304 only when
from a facility where hazardous
chemicals are produced, used, or stored.
However, because the planning
requirements are not tied in any way to
"hazardous chemicals." the "hazardous
chemical" exclusion of section 304 does
not extend to section 302.
In addition, for emergency notification
purposes under section 304. if a release
of an extremely hazardous substance or
CERCLA substance exceeds the
reportable quantity and occurs on a
facility that produces, uses, or stores a
"hazardous chemical." the facility
owner or operator must notify the
required parties. Accordingly, the
research laboratory is exempt from
section 304 emergency notification only
if no hazardous chemicals are present at
the facility, other than those used at the
laboratory under the direct supervision
of a technically qualified individual.
vi. Other Exemptions from Section 304
Reporting. Section 304(a) applies to
releases which require notification
under section 103(a) of CERCLA or. for
substances which are not "hazardous
substances" under CERCLA. releases
which "occur in a manner which would
require notification under section
103(a)" of CERCLA. As indicated above.
"continuous" releases as defined under
section 103(f) do not require immediate
release reporting under section 103(a)
except for "statistically significant
increases." Because such releases do not
"occur in a manner" which requires
Immediate release reporting under
section 103(a) of CERCLA. they are also
not reportable under section 304 of
SARA.
In addition, there are other types of
releases which are not reportable under
section 103(a) of CERCLA. For instance.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regujations
EPA has been aaked whether the
application of pesticide products by an
agricultural producer constitutes a
reportable release under section 304.
The application of a registered pesticide
generally in accordance with its purpose
is exempt from section 103(a)
notification under section 103(e) of
CERCLA. Because such releases are not
reportable under section 103(a) of
CERCLA. they are also exempt from
release reporting under section 304(a) of
SARA, and EPA has clarified the release
reporting regulations to include this
exemption. Similarly, section 101(22) of
CERCLA excludes several types of
releases from the definition of "release"
and thus from release reporting under
CpCLA section 103(a). These releases.
which include emissions from engine
exhaust, certain nuclear material
releases, and the normal application of
fertilizer, are also excluded from release
notification under section 304 of SARA.
With respect to other exemptions, one
commenter requested that section 304 be
clarified to indicate whether the
CERCLA "petroleum exclusion" applies
to release reporting under Tide III. The
commenter felt that since "petroleum.
including erode oil or any fraction
thereof is exempt from reporting under
section 103 of CERCLA, it should also be
exempt from reporting under section 304
of SARA.
However, "petroleum" is exempted
generally from CERCLA responsibilities
since it is excluded from the definition
of a "hazardous substance" under
section 101(14) and "pollutant or
contaminant" under section 101(33) of
CERCLA. Because no such exclusion
exists under Title ID. if extremely
hazardous substances are present in
petroleum, those substances are subject
to applicable emergency planning and
release notification requirements under
Title IIL
One commenter felt that particulates
and other substances emitteH from
power plants should be exempt from
f 300.94 (now i 35&4B) asaergency
release notificatiejUHBtHmenta.
Such a release iftisBBBt from | 355.40
.
a. defined
tf CERCLA.
ander section
if it is "federally
under Section
"continuous" as ine aner sectio
103(f) of CERCLA. or cannaed within
the site. As mentioned before, the
Agency U currently developing
regulations defining "federally
permitted** and "continuous releases."
Such rules and Interpretations will also
apply to release notification under Title
III.
vii. Mixtures. With regard to facilities
which produce, use. or store mixtures.
one commenter stated that this kind of
facility should be exempt from section
302 notification requirements if the
extremely hazardous substance
component information is not available
on the MSDS provided by the
manufacturer. EPA disagrees. If the
facility which produces, uses, or stores
mixtures knows or reasonably should
know the components of the mixture.
the facility owner or operator must
notify under section 302 if the extremely
hazardous substance component is more
than one percent and more than the
TPQ. The facility owner or operator is
not under an obligation, however, to
inquire of the manufacturer the
components of the mixture. Section IV.
F.3 below discusses the one percent de
minimis limit of extremely hazardous
substances in mixtures for purposes of
determining quantities applicable to the
threshold planning quantities.
The same commenter believes that the
de minimis concept should also be
applied in the determination of
emergency release notification. EPA
disagrees, since the de minimis quantity
was set in place for threshold quantities
simply to make the calculation of the
total amount of extremely hazardous
substances on a facility more
straightforward for planning purposes.
The more dilute an extremely hazardous
substance is. the more difficult it is to
identify the substance in a mixture and
the less likely to be released in a large
quantity. For release reporting, however.
the "de minimis" is the RQ because the
extremely hazardous substance is
already in the environment potentially
doing harm. But whether or not the RQ
is exceeded depends on the amount of
the substance in the mixture, if known.
This is the CERCLA "mixture" rule. See
April 4.1985 RQ rule (50 PR 13463).
4. Section 304 Transportatioa Issues
One commenter asked how an
important carrier win know if he/she is
carrying an extremely hazardous
substance^ Pint EPA notes that the
definition of facility in Title m does not
cover transportation facilities with
respect to facility planning notification
and participation under section 302.
However, local communities should take
into account the local routes on which
extremely hazardous substances will be
transported in developing their
emergency response plans.
Second, the definition of facility does
cover some transportation facilities for
purposes of release notification under
section 304. However, because section
329 defines "facility" to include only
"motor vehicles, rolling stock, and
aircraft," vessels are not subject to
section 304. Third, with respect to the
degree of knowledge required, section
304 does not specify the degree of
knowledge required for release
reporting, or even that any knowledge is
required. However, because of the close
relationship between section 304 of
SARA-and section 103 of CERCLA. EPA
interprets section 304 to require the
same degree of knowledge as required
under CERCLA section 103. Neither
section 103 of CERCLA or section 304 of
SARA impose separate monitoring or
testing requirements on facility owners
and operators.
One commenter asked if the release
regulations apply differently to foreign
nag carriers as opposed to domestic
earners. As noted above, ships are not
covered under section 304.
One commenter requested
clarification of the responsibility of
transportation operators in the event of
a spill or release of extremely hazardous
substances or CERCLA substances.
Although owners/operators of
transportation facilities are not required
to notify State and local authorities with
regard to section 302 contingency
planning, they are required to report
releases under section 304.
With regard to stationary facilities.
Section 304 requires owners and
operators to report releases to the local
emergency planning committee and to
the State emergency response
commission. Owners and operators of
transportation facilities under section
304 are allowed to call the 911
emergency number in lieu of calling the
State commission and local committee.
or in the absence of a 911 number, the
operator. The rationale for this separate
reporting is that transportation
operators on the road may very well not
know the telephone numbers of the
relevant State and local entities. If the
transportation operator is in a
community which has a generic
emergency number rather than 911. the
generic number should be used instead
of 911. Note that if the release is of a
CERCLA hazardous substance, a call to
the National Response Center is also
required. Local committees should
consider training all personnel
responsible for receiving telephone
notice of such a release, so that proper
notification procedures will be
maintained.
One commenter aaked if section 304
release notification requirements apply
to pipelines, barges, and other vessels as
well as to other transportation facilities.
Section 327 of SARA states that Title III
does not apply to the transportation of
any substance or chemical, including
transportation by pipeline, except as
provided in section 304. Section 304
requires notification from facilities of
releases of extremely hazardous
-------
13386
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 /• Rules and Regulations
substances and CERCLA hazardous
substances. The word "facility" is
dePined in section 329 to mean
stationary items, which would include
pipelines. The definition also includes.
for purposes of section 304. motor
vehicles, rolling stock, and aircraft.
Because barges and other vessels are
not included in the definition of
"facility." they are not subject to section
304 reporting requirements.
Another commenter asked when and
where an air earner should report a
release. For instance, should he/she
report the release to the State where the
release occurred or wait until the airport
of destination to report? EPA believes
that since aircraft should always have
radio communication capabilities, the
report should be given to the Slate(s)
likely to be affected by the release as
soon as possible after release. Reporting
the release on amval at the destination
will not necessarily enable the provision
of timely emergency response to the
affected areas.
5. The Mechanics of Section 304
Reporting
One commenter stated that section
304 notification should go to the local
emergency planning committee only.
rather than to the local emergency
planning committee and the State
emergency response commission.
Section 304 requires notification to both
entities.
One commenter stated that section
304 release notification requirements
should apply to reporting to the National
Response Center under CERCLA section
103 as well as to State and local
authorities. Although many releases
subject to section 304 reporting
requirements are also subject to
reporting requirements under CERCLA
section 103. no reporting to the National
Response Center is currently required
for the 256 extremely hazardous
substances which are not "hazardous
substances" under CERCLA. EPA
intends to designate time 256 extremely
hazardous substancas) a* "hazardous
substances" under CERCLA section 102.
At that time, release*of inch substances
will also become reportable to the
National Response Center under
CERCLA section 103.
One commenter believes that the
telephone notification to the National
Response Center under CERCLA section
103 should suffice for the new
requirements under SARA section 304.
The commenter feels that the
requirement to call the State and local
authorities is too much of a burden
when added to the existing CERCLA-
required call to the National Response
Center. EPA disagrees. The basic
purpose behind the emergency planning
and notification requirements of Title III
is to protect the public in the event of
dangerous chemical releases through the
establishment of local and State
emergency response capability. Because
State and local participation for
effective and timely emergency response
is central to Title III. these entities must
be alerted to potentially dangerous
chemical releases. Thus, telephone
notification to the federal government
alone, through the National Response
Center, does not meet the intent of the
statute.
Three conunentera requested a
simplification in words or chart of the
various requirements for release
notification under section 103 of
CERCLA and section 304 of SARA.
CERCLA section 103 concerns reporting
requirements for releases of "hazardous
substances" as defined under section
101(14} of CERCLA. Under section 103 of
CERCLA. a release of a hazardous
substance in an amount equal to or in
excess of its RQ which is not otherwise
exempted under CERCLA. must be
reported to the National Response
Center. SARA section 304 provides a
similar reporting requirement for
releases of hazardous substances as
defined under section 304 as well as
releases which require notification
under CERCLA section 103. However.
reporting under section 304 must be
given by the owner or operator of a
facility to the community emergency
coordinator for the local emergency
planning committee and to the State
emergency planning commission rather
than the National Response Center
under CERCLA section 103.
With respect to transportation of a
substance subject to the requirements of
section 304 or storage incident to such
transportation, owners and operators
may call the 911 emergency number in
lieu of calling the State commission and
local committee, or in the absence of a
911 number, may call the operator. The
rationale for this separate reporting is
that transportation operators on the
road may very well not know the
telephone numbers of the relevant State
and local entities. If the transportation
operator is in a community which has a
generic emergency number rather than
911. the generic number should be used
instead of 911. Note that if the release is
of a CERCLA hazardous substance, a
call to the National Response Center is
also required.
Further. EPA intends to designate
under section 102 of CERCLA all
extremely hazardous substances which
are not already defined as "hazardous
substances" under section 101(14) of
CERCLA. The designation will include
all 256 extremely hazardous substances
that are not presently "hazardous
substances" under CERCLA. At that
time, any substance requiring local a..
State release reporting under section 304
of SARA will also require reporting to
the National Response Center under
section 103. In addition, the extremely
hazardous substances will continue to
trigger contingency planning
requirements in addition to release
reporting.
With regard to the contents of the
required notification under SARA
section 304 and CERCLA section 103.
the required contents of section 304
emergency notification is set out in
S 355.40 (formerly 8 300.94). Although
section 103(a) of CERCLA does not
specify the contents of release
notification, the information necessary
under section 103(a) for potential federal
response. e.g., type of substance and
nature. location, and effects of the
release, should not differ for any
practical purpose from the content of the
notice specified under section 304.
Section 304 also requires follow-up
written emergency notice to the State
emergency response commission and
the local emergency planning committee.
The content of this notice is set out in
i 355.40 (formerly } 300.94).
8. The Contents of Section 304 Notice?
Two commentera believe that the
CERCLA and Title III telephone
notification should include the same
basic information, such as whether the
incident is still ongoing, abatement
actions by whatever entities, cause and
injuries in the incident if known, amount
spilled, etc. The required contents of the
emergency notification was set out in
the interim final rule, and is republished
in today's rule. The Agency does not
believe that the notification specified in
Section 304 and today's rule should vary
from the CERCLA notification in any
significant way.
One commenter believes that the final
rule.should include guidance on how to
report information on "known or
anticipated. . . health risks" under
SARA section 304(b)(2)(F] (immediate
report) and 304(c)(2) (follow-up report).
At the same time, the commenter stated
that since general health information is
already given on a "material safety data
sheet" (MSDS) for the chemical, then an
indication that "severe adverse health
effects may be expected" should suffice.
EPA disagrees. The health information
contained in an MSDS is general and
will not be specific enough to be of use
to health professionals, especially if the
chemical name is confidential on the
MSDS.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Reflations
One commenter stated that the
requirement regarding the inclusion of
any known or anticipated health effects
associated with the release is a mistake
since anticipating health effects is
speculative at best and the release
report should stick to fact not
speculation.
EPA disagrees. The inclusion of this
requirement in the interim final rule, and
today's rule, is based on the contents of
the notice specified in section 304(b)(2)
of SARA.
Several commenters wrote to the
Agency regarding the written follow-up
emergency notice.
One commenter stated that the
written report should include when the
incident took place and the cause of the
accident, to be consistent with CERCLA
and RCRA. EPA believes that the
location of the release is always
essential for emergency response
purposes and should be identified in any
release notification under section 304.
One commenter believes that the
written notification requirements should
also include results of a facility's
inspection. The inspection specifies the
preventive measures to be applied to
prevent future releases. EPA agrees that
this may be an effective preventive tool
but has not made this information a
requirement for release reporting. State
and local governments may wish to
require such information. In addition, a
release prevention program under
CERCLA will require a releaser who has
more than a specified number of
releases of a certain hazardous
substance, or releases in certain
quantities above the RQ. to report in
writing to EPA and to the State the
specific steps that are being taken to
prevent reoccurrence of the release.
The same commenter felt that written
follow-up information should go not only
to the local planning committee but also
to the State commission and to the State
environmental agency. Section 304(c) of
SARA mandates that follow-up
notification go to the same entitles that
received the initial oral notification. Le-
the State commisste and the local
committee. State aavfaoamental
agencies may requcat the information. In
addition, in moat cam. environmental
agencies will be represented on the
commission and therefore the
information will be available to them.
C Criteria Used to Identify Extremely
Hazardous Substances
1. Toxicity Criteria
a. Narrowness of Criteria. Several
commenters suggested the need to
broaden the selection criteria to include
other health effects that may result from
short-term exposures. The commenters
contend that Congress intended the
Agency to take these other toxic effects
into account in developing a
comprehensive approach to emergency
planning.
The Agency agrees with the
commenters that the intent of Congress
is to include substances that cause both
short-term and long-term health effects
following short-term exposure. Under
the Chemical Emergency Preparedness
Program, it was the Agency's intent to
take into account all toxic effects to
humans that may be associated with
short-term exposure to chemicals.
However, a review of available data
indicated limited information on other
effects resulting from short-term
exposures to airborne substances. In
addition, generally accepted methods of
extrapolating data on health effects
resulting from multiple or long-term
exposure to indicate effects that may
result from short-term exposure are not
available. Comments were requested in
the proposed rule on how chronic and
other health effects from short-term
exposures could be incorporated into
criteria for the list The commenters had
no specific suggestions for such criteria.
In the future, the Agency intends to
consider the development of additional
toxicity criteria for acute non-lethal and
chronic effects due to short-term
exposure. In the meantime. EPA agrees
that substances cannot be deleted from
the extremely hazardous substances list
until the Agency can evaluate non-acute
toxic effects from short-term exposure to
these substances.
b. Oral and Dermal Toxicity Data.
Comments were received concerning the
Agency's inclusion of oral and dermal
lethality values in addition to inhalation
toxicity data to identify air toxicants as
opposed to relying only on inhalation
toxicity data. Some commenters
expressed support for the Agency's
position, while others suggested that the
use of such data is inappropriate or
should be modified. The Agency is using
acute lethality data from the oral.
dermal and inhalation routes in order to
identify chemicals with high inherent
toxicity. Consideration of inhalation
data only would lead to the omission of
many chemicals for which there may be '
no inhalation studies: if these chemicals
are highly toxic by oral or dermal
administration, the Agency believes
they may be potentially hazardous via
the inhalation route and should be so
identified. Other organizations such as
the European Economic Community and
the World Bank agree that these data
should be used in identifying acutely
toxic chemicals. Based on these reasons.
the Agency is retaining the use of oral
and dermal lethality values.
c. Use of LCu> and LDu> Data. In the
absence of median lethal concentration
or doses (LCx, or LD*,) data, lowest
lethal concentration or dose (LCLO or
LDu>) data were used to identify
extremely hazardous substances
Several commenters questioned the use
of such data. Other commenters
suggested that when such data are used.
they should be evaluated more
stnngently than LDM or LCto data and
lower criteria values should be
specified. Even with the amount of
animal acute lethality data that is
available, there are chemicals for which
there are no standard acute lethality test
data. LCto and LDu* values may be more
variable than those provided from
median lethality tests, but for the
purposes of screening large numbers of
chemicals, it is deemed necessary to
provide a second level screening tool in
preference to missing potentially toxic
chemicals because chemicals are not
adequately tested. Because there is no
quantitative basis for comparison of
LCto and LDu, values with LC*o or LDjo
values, it is not possible to develop
additional criteria levels for these
values. At present, for the purposes of
Identifying highly toxic chemicals, the
Agency will continue to treat LCu> and
LDu, data in the same manner as the
LCio and LDU data in the absence of the
'latter. Currently, approximately ten
percent of the total number of chemicals
on the list have been identified based on
LCu> or LDu, data.
d. Exposure Time. Several
commenters questioned the use of
inhalation toxicity data based on any
reported exposure times of up to eight
hours or with no reported exposure time.
Acute inhalation toxicity test results
depend upon the concentration of the
chemical in air and the duration of the
exposure periods. Because of this. LCw
and LCto values for a chemical may
vary depending upon how long the
animals were exposed to the substance.
The Agency chose to make maximum
use of available acute toxicity data to
screen for acutely toxic chemicals and.
therefore, chose to use LCu and LCu>
values with exposure periods up to eight
hours or with no reported exposure
period. The Agency believes that this
conservative approach, which might
identify more chemicals than would be
found using a specified period such as
four hours as a cut-off time, is in
accordance with the intent of Congress
to protect public health and safety. In
the absence of other data, and
considering the general relationship of
LCjo and LCto values, it is believed that
-------
13388
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulation
such substances represent potential
hazards as acutely toxic chemicals.
Additionally, there is no available
scientifically accepted method to adjust
data from varying exposure times to
obtain a normalized value. The Agency
is therefore not making such an
adjustment.
e. Use of Animal Data. Several
commenters were concerned with the
use of animal data to identify extremely
hazardous substances potentially
harmful to humans. They believed that
human data should be used in
preference to animal data when
available and that animal data should
be further evaluated to determine ita
applicability to humans. The Agency has
chosen to use data from the most
sensitive mammalian species because
present state-of-the-science does not
allow prediction of the species that ia
the appropriate surrogate for humans for
a given chemical. The human population
is very heterogeneous and. in fact
comprises many subpopulationt with
varying degrees of sensitivity to the
toxicity of a chemical. One of the main
principles supporting all animal toxicity
testing is that the biological activity of
chemicals as reflected in toxic effects in
animals can also lead to toxic effects in
humans. Ideally, all toxicity tests should
be conducted with an animal species/
strain which most accurately reflects the
toxic response in humans. There are no
data available, however, to indicate
which species most accurately reflects
the human response for every chemical
To obtain such data, extensive
laboratory work on a variety of species
would need to be conducted. Further.
only data on toxicity to humans could
venfy which is the appropriate speciea
for a given chemical. The Agency wil
retain the use of data from the moat
sensitive species tested to screen
chemicals. If data on humans are
available for specific chemicals, they
will be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis.
2. Physical/Chemical Properties
Several commentta suggested using
vapor pressure and ability to disperse as
criteria to limit the "«•«*«-• of high-
boiling point liquids and solids on the
list. Consequently,
. ,
remaining on the list would be those
with higher dispersion potential. One
commenter suggested the publishing of
more than one list of extremely '
hazardous substances baaed on
different release and dispersion
scenarios. Several commenters
suggested the evaluation of other
physical and chemical properties of
substances, such as flammability.
reactivity, and combustibility, as critena
for listing chemicals.
The list of extremely hazardous
substances, mandated by Congress, is
presently based on inherent acute
toxicity. Physical and chemical
properties of substances on the list are
considered in establishing the threshold
planning quantities (see below), but
these factors are not used as criteria for
listing because each chemical could be
handled at non-ambient conditions.
Because of very variable conditions, the
Agency believes it is appropriate to deal
with factors such as ability to disperse
and physical/chemical properties on a
site-specific basis. Local emergency
planning committees will consider these
factors at the community level when
assessing potential exposure of
vulnerable populations. EPA urges
communities to take all these factors
into account to identify other hazardous
substances with which they may be
concerned and to prioritize all such
substances in the community for
emergency planning.
The Agency does intend to evaluate
hazards other than toxicity as'identified
in section 302(a)(4) and to develop
appropriate critena based on these
physical/chemical properties, e.g..
flammability. for revising the list of
extremely hazardous substances in the
future. However. EPA has not
considered these additional properties
in the context of this rulemaking.
3. UseofRTECS
Several commentera were concerned
with the Agency's use of the National
Institute of Safety and Health's (N1OSH)
Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical
Substances (RTECS) Database. The
overall comments were that RTECS Is
neither intended for. nor is it capable of.
being used as a primary source of health
data and that the database is not peer-
reviewed. The present screening criteria
can be applied to any experimental
toxicity data on chemical substances.
The RTECS data base was used as the
principal source of toxicity data for
identifying acutely toxic chemicals
because it represents the most
comprehensive respository of acute
toxicity information available with basic
toxicity Information and other data on
approximately 87.000 chemicals. It is
widely accepted and used as a toxicity
data source by industry and regulatory
agencies alike. Although RTECS Itself is
not formally peer-reviewed, the data
presented are from scientific literature
which has been edited and in most
cases peer reviewed by the scientific
community before publicatioa The
Agency recognizes some limitations
associated with using this data base, but
for the purpose of screening acute
toxicity data. RTECS represents the
single best source of information since •'<•
is the most comprehensive data souro
available.
D List of Extremely Hazardous
Substances
I. Changes to the List in this Rule
a. Deletions. In the companion
proposal to the interim final rule
published on November 17,1968. the
Agency proposed the deletion of 40
chemicals which do not now meet the
acute lethality listing criteria. They no
longer meet the existing criteria because
new data have recently become
available, existing data have been
reevaluated. or errors occurred in the
RTECS data base. Several commenters
supported some or all of the proposed
changes: however, other commenters
challenged the deletion of these
chemicals before the Agency has
determined that they pose no other
health hazards as a result of a short-
term exposure.
The Agency has decided not to delete
any of the 40 chemicals proposed for
deletion at this time. When the list of
extremely hazardous substances was
developed in 1985 (as the list of acutely
toxic chemicals for the voluntary
Chemical Emergency Preparedness
Program) it was intended as an exampl
list. When the list became part of Title
III of SARA, the Administra tor of EPA
was given the authority to revise the list.
but only after various criteria were
considered. These criteria include the
toxicity. reactivity, volatility.
dispersibility. combustibility or
flammability of a substance. The section
302 definition of the term "toxicity"
includes any short- or long-term health
effect which may result from short-term
exposure. Based on this statutory
provision, the Agency believes that
substances cannot be deleted from the
list until EPA has taken into account the
other (i.e.. long-term) health effects
resulting from a short-term exposure to
the substances at specified levels. The
criteria for determining such levels are
not available. In the furore, the Agency
intends to address the development of
additional toxicity criteria for acute non-
lethal and chronic effects due to short-
term exposure. Until these criteria are
available and the forty chemicals in
question can be reassessed, these
chemicals have been assigned the TPQ
level of lowest concern, namely 10.000
pounds.
b. Additions. In the interim final rule.
the Agency proposed the addition of five
chemicals to the list and requested
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 13389
public comments on the proposed
additions. One comment was received
concerning urea. 3-(3.4-dichlorophenyl)-
1-methoxy-l-methyk The commenter
believed that the toxicity of this
chemical did not meet the criteria and
submitted unpublished toxicity data to
support its claim. The Agency has
reviewed the submitted data and finds
that the chemical does not meet the
present criteria. Therefore, the chemical
will not be added to the list. The
remaining four of these five chemicals
are added to the list in this rule.
c. Additional Suggested Changes. A
number of commenters recommended
the deletion of specific chemicals from
the list in addition to those in the interim
final rule. As discussed above, the
Agency has decided not to delete any
chemical until other health effects
resulting from short-term exposure have
been assessed. Further, such deletions
will be accomplished through
rulemaking. One commenter suggested
additions to the list The Agency will
take this request under consideration
and any additions will be proposed in
later rulemaking.
d. Radioactive Materials. Food.
Drugs, and Cosmetics. The Agency
requested comments on whether
radioactive materials and chemicals
used as food additives, drugs, and
cosmetics should be added to the list
Such chemicals were not considered for
the list if they were not listed in the 1977'
Toxic Substances Control Act Inventory.
Commenters expressed conflicting
opinions as to whether radioactive
materials and the chemicals used in
foods, drugs, and cosmetics should be
listed. After review of the comments, the
Agency has decided to maintain its
onginal policy with respect to these
chemicals and thus will not consider
these substances for addition to the list
at this time.
E. Determination of Levels of Concern
1. Use of IDLH Values
Two commenten supported the use of
the Immediately Danferoos Life and
Health Level (IDLH) •» developed by
NIOSH as the levriaf concern. A third
commenter supported the use of IDLH
only as an interim measure. Two
commenters suggested that if the IDLH
is used, then appropriate uncertainty
factors should be employed. Another
commenter suggested that the Agency
continue to identify more appropriate
alternatives.
The Agency recognizes that the IDLH
has some limitations as a measure for
protecting general populations. First, as
commenters pointed out the IDLH is
based upon the response of a healthy.
male worker-population and does not
take into account exposure of more
sensitive individuals such as the elderly.
pregnant women, children, or people
with various health problems. Second.
the IDLH is based upon a maximum 30
minute exposure period which may not
be realistic for accidental airborne
releases. Based on these considerations.
the Agency has identified the
development of more appropriate
chemical emergency exposure levels for
the general public as a priority.
However, at present, the IDLH value, or
an estimation of level of concern based
on acute toxicity data for substances
that do not have a published IDLH.
appears to be a suitable measure of
relative toxicity for use in the
methodology for establishing threshold
planning quantities (see discussion
under F).
2. Use of Acute Lethality Data
Two commenten addressed the use of
acute lethality data to determine levels
of concern. It is the Agency's policy to
make maximum use of available acute
toxicity data not only to identify
chemicals for the list but also to serve as
the basis for determining the levels of
concern. This approach enables the
Agency to develop levels of concern for
all the chemicals on the list and to
utilize this value as the toxicity ranking
factor in establishing the TPQs.
One commenter was concerned that
interchangeable use of LC and LD data
would result in similar threshold
planning quantities for substances with
differing potential for harm. As the
threshold planning quantities are not a
measure of absolute risk, but rather a
trigger for facility reporting, the Agency
will continue to use both LC and LD
data. Further, these data an not used
interchangeably, as factors are applied
in estimating level of concern to take
into account differences between LC
and LD data.
Three commenters expressed concern
over the use of LCto and LDu, data
when IDLH and LCw and LDw values
are not available to estimate levels of
concern. Specific comments addressed
the length of LCu> exposure time, the
need to adjust the threshold planning
quantities downward when LCu> and
LDu> are used, and the perceived
inappropriateness of using such data.
The Agency recognizes that these values
are often derived from studies that vary
in quality. However, the Agency has
chosen to continue using the LCM and
LDto values in order to calculate a level
of concern even when the data are
limited. Factors are applied in the
calculation to take into account the fact
that these values may be lower than
LCto and LDso values.
F. Threshold Planning Quantities
1. Methods Used to Establish Threshold
Planning Quantities
Under section 302. if the Agency did
not develop threshold planning
quantities for each of the 402 substances
on the list of extremely hazardous
substances within 30 days after the date
of enactment of Title III. then the
threshold planning quantity would
become two pounds. Interim final
threshold planning quantities were
published simultaneously with the
publication of the list on November 17.
1986. Any facility that has one or more
of the chemicals on the list of extremely
hazardous substances in quantities in
excess of the threshold planning
quantity must provide notification to the
State emergency response commission
by May 17.1967. Because of this, the
Agency believes that the two-pound
threshold planning quantity for all 402
substances would overwhelm local
emergency planning efforts and would
not take into account differences in
potential hazards posed by individual
substances.
The Agency considered four possible
approaches for development of
threshold planning quantities and
invited public comments on each of
them.
Approach 1. Specific Quantity
Prediction. Under this approach, the
Agency would have determined the
specific quantity of each chemical that.
if accidentally released in a specified
situation, would result in significant
acute health effects at a fixed distance
from the release site.
Approach 2. Dispersion/Toxicity
Ranking Method. Under this approach.
the Agency assigned chemicals to
threshold planning quantity categories
based on an index that accounts for the
toxicity and the potential to become
airborne of each chemical in an
accidental release. This approach is
based on relative ranking and the
assignment of each chemical to one of a
series of threshold planning quantity
categories, but does not give a measure
of absolute risk.
Approach 3. Toxicity Ranking
Method.
Under this approach, the Agency
would have assigned categones of
threshold planning quantities based
solely on a relative ranking of each
chemical's toxicity.
Approach 4. Two Pound Quantity for
All Chemicals. Under this option, the
default quantity mandated by Congress
-------
13390
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. Apnl 22. 1987 / Rule9 and Regulations
of two (2) pounds would have been
used.
a. Approach 2. After considerable
analysis, the Agency chose to develop
threshold planning quantities using
Approach 2 with modifications as
described below. Several commenters
supported the use of Approach 2.
although some did have a reservation
concerning exclusion of hazards other
than acute lethality. Some commenters
criticized the assumptions made, for
example that liquids should be assessed
at their boiling points. Some commenters
suggested that the threshold planning
quantities should reflect the ability of
the substance to be dispersed in air.
Several commenters felt that distance
and storage conditions should be
incorporated into the threshold planning
quantity.calculation.
Approach 2 provides a basis for
relative measures of concern rather than
absolute values, and the Agency
continues to believe that such measures
are appropriate for facility reporting for
emergency response planning. Under
Approach 2. the level of concern for
each chemical is used as an index of
toxicity. and physical state and
volatility are used to assess its ability to
become airborne. The two indices are
combined to produce a ranking factor.
Chemicals with a low-ranking factor
(highest concern), based on the
Agency's technical review, are assigned
a quantity of one pound (see discussion
in 2.b. below). It is believed that the one-
pound quantity represents a reasonable
lower limit for the most extremely
hazardous substances on the list.
Chemicals with the highest ranking
factors, indicating lower concern, were
assigned a threshold planning quantity
of 10.000 pounds. This ensures that any
facility handling bulk quantities of any
extremely hazardous substances would
be required to notify the State
commission. Between the limits of one
pound and 10.000 pounds, chemicals
were assigned to intermediate
categories of 10.100.880or 1.000 pounds
based on order of magnitude ranges in
the ranking factors. The selection of the
intermediate categories wm baaed on
standard industrial coBtateer sizes
between one and 10.000 pounds.
The Agency believes that limited
Slate and local resources should be
focused on those substances that
potentially will cause the greatest harm
should an accidental release occur. The
TPQs developed in Approach 2 meet the
objective such that substances that are
most likely to cause serious problems
(extremely toxic gases, solids likely to
be readily dispersed, or highly volatile
liquids) have lower TPQs than those
that might be toxic but are not likely to
be released to the air (non-reactive, non-
powdered solids).
With respect to commenters who
believe that other hazards should be
considered, criteria presently are not
established to assess hazards other than
acute lethality. However. EPA intends to
develop such criteria in the future for
listing additional chemicals as
extremely hazardous substances. When
such criteria are available, the Agency
will assess their appropriateness for
consideration in calculating threshold
planning quantities of chemicals which
meet this criteria.
In response to comments concerning
the assumptions made in calculating
threshold planning quantities, many of
these assumptions were designed to be
conservative. Liquids, for example, were
examined for the degree of volatilization
expected from a spill at both 25 *C and
at the chemical's boiling point. Since
many of the extremely hazardous
substances may be handled at
temperatures greater than ambient, an
assessment of the degree of
volatilization at an elevated temperature
is appropriate. Therefore, the Agency
chose to evaluate the degree of
volatilization expected at the liquid's
boiling point for ranking against gases
and powdered solids. Aetna! site
conditions associated with the liquid
that influence the degree of
volatilization (such as spill area and
temperature) should be addressed
during community planning efforts.
With respect to comments on the
volatilization model used by the Agency.
this model was compared to other
available models to calculate the vapor
generation rate from a liquid spill. Some
of these models include factors that
account for wind and cooling associated
with evaporation. Results from the
model used by the Agency were of the
same order of magnitude and within the
range predicted by the other models
tested. An order of magnitude change in
the ranking factor of a chemical is
required to change its threshold
planning quantity. Therefore, even
though the simple model used by the
Agency to estimate volatilization does
not account for wind or cooling effects
of evaporation, it is appropriate for
purposes of ranking the chemicals. The
Agency believes that Approach 2 does
account for the ability of an extremely
hazardous substance to disperse by
considering a substance's physical
properties. However, as discussed
below. Approach 2 has been modified to
better reflect the dispersibility of solids
by including particle size and whether
the solid might be handled in solution or
molten form for calculating the threshold
planning quantities. No modification has
been made to account for the actual
behavior of vapor or airborne particl.
because of the wide degree of variation
of site-specific conditions that could
affect airborne dispersion. The source
strength, meteorology and terrain must
also be considered with distance to
accurately account for the degree of
dispersion.
Finally. EPA disagrees with
commenters who felt that distance to
vulnerable populations and storage
conditions should be incorporated into
TPQ calculation. The inclusion of
distance to potential vulnerable
populations in the threshold planning
quantity calculation is inappropriate as
site conditions vary greatly. It is
therefore better to consider distance at
the planning stage at the community
level. A forthcoming technical guidance
document which will supplement the
NRT Hazardous Materials Planning
Guide, will provide information on how
this may be accomplished.
The Agency has decided that the total
amount of a chemical present at a
facility must be used for judging
whether a threshold planning quantity
has been exceeded, regardless of
distance between containers or the size
of containers. Storage conditions are
more appropriately addressed at the
planning stage and will also be
described in the aforementioned
technical guidance document.
b. Solids. Threshold planning
quantities for solids were originally
calculated under the assumption that
they could be completely dispersed if in
powdered form. Several commenters
noted that the threshold planning
quantities are not appropriate for non-
powdered, non-reactive solids since
they are not likely to become airborne.
They argued that even powdered
materials which may be dispersed as
aerosols will rapidly fall out unless the
particle size is very small and. thus, the
threshold planning quantity should be
set higher than 10.000 pounds for non-
powdered, non-reactive solids.
The Agency agrees that additional
factors should be considered in
establishing the threshold planning
quantities for solids since solids can
take many forms. Accordingly. EPA has
modified Approach 2. so that the
threshold planning quantity for each
solid now applies only if it is a powder
with a particle size less than 100
microns, or it is handled in solution or
molten form, or it has a National Fire
Protection Association rating of 2. 3 or 4
for reactivity. If the solid does not meet
these specific criteria, the threshold
-------
Federal Regurter / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
13391
planning quantity will default to 10 000
pounds, the highest TPQ level. The
Agency has not raised the highest TPQ
level above 10.000 pounds because it
believes that any chmical present in
this quantity or greater, which meets the
Agency's criteria for an extremely
hazardous substance, should be brought
to the attention of the State commission
and the local planning committee.
irrespective of the physical form of the
solid substance. This will enable
planning officials to evaluate such solids
and the facilities that handle them on a
case-by-case basis.
Accordingly, the TPQ calculation for a
solid applies only to the fraction of the
total quantity of solid with a particle
size less than 100 microns, or in molten
form, or in solution. In addition, for
solids in molten form, the amount
molten at any time is multiplied by an
adjustment factor of 0.3 to
conservatively account for the maximum
volatilization of the spilled molten
substance that is likely to take place.
Thus the quantity applicable to the
threshold planning quantity calculation
is the molten portion tines O3.
c. Other Approaches. Two
commenters discussed Approach l. One
iter considered that Approach 1
•— - —— • • — • »™«w^ •••••• ••j*|FBMtaAl A
was more appropriate than Approach 2
for calculating chemical-specific
threshold planning quantities, jhe
assumptions used in Approach invert.
numerous and could lead to'highly - -
variable results. It would be difficult to
choose the appropriate release scenario
for setting the threshold planning
quantity from among the many release
scenarios possible under Approach 1.
For these reasons the Agency still
considers Approach 2 to be the most
appropriate for calculating threshold
planning quantities.
No comments were received on
Approach 3. Commenters mtprnsead •
support for not allowing the threshold
planning quantity to default to two
pounds as proposed in Approach 4,
2. Suggested Reassignmaots to Different
Threshold Planning Quantities
a. Threshold Plaaottq Quantity
Adjustments. Ek*vea>oasBaMiUars
suggested that a lofalof eight specific
chemicals should haw* higher threshold
planning quantities, and four suggested
that twelve should have lower threshold
planning quantities. In addition one
commenter suggested that substances
used in foods, food additives, color
additives, drugs, cosmetics or say
substance used in personal family or
household products should be raised to
5.000 pounds, and another suggested
that two pounds for pesticides is too
low.
Two of the chemicals suggested for
reassignment to higher threshold
planning quantities are solids and would
be subject to the conditions for solids as
discussed above. The data used for
calculating threshold planning quantities
has been reviewed, and threshold
planning quantities wen recalculated as
appropriate. Threshold planning
quantities were reassigned based upon
new data received by EPA showing
different physical properties or toxicity
levels. The threshold planning quantity
was reduced for 36 substances based on
updated acute toxicity data. For the
same reason. 12 g*"""icsls nave higher
threshold planning quantities. These
reaasignments are noted in the list and
are discussed in the technical support
documents available in the public
docket.
Some factors mentioned by
commenters for consideration in
lowering the assigned threshold
planning quantities included vapor
pressure and toxicity, both of which are
included In the present calculation. In
addition, commenters suggested
reassignment based on reactivity. The
Agency has considered reactivity on an
individual basis. Several reactive
chemicals were assigned threshold
planning quantities lower than their
calculated values following individual
-review. Reactivity Is also considered In
determining whether the threshold
planning quantity for solids which are
notpowdered dissolved or liquefied
should become 10400 pounds. For
certain reactive solids, the threshold
planning quantity does not increase to
10.000 pounds even if the soHd is not in
powdered form.
b. Change in TPQ for Nickel
Carbonyi. Several conunentere
suggested that the "any quantity"
threshold planning quantity for nickel
carbonyi should not be used because of
the level of detectability and compliance
questions that may arise. Further, the
"any quantity" level gives a misleading
Impression of die actual hazard of the
substance as compared to other
extremely hazardous substances.
After review of the comments and
evaluation of additional information on
nickel carbonyi the Agency has decided
to assign nickel carbonyi to a newly
established one-pound TPQ category
along wim two other chemicals with
similar ranking. The Agency conttmes
to recognize the higher toxicfty of nickel
carbonyi and the two other chemicals aa
compared to aU other substances on the
list by placing them in the lowest TPQ
category established by tins rule.
Further, the assignment of nickel
carbonyi to the one-pound category is
further supported by taking into
consideration its relative instability in
air. The reassignment will also eliminate
any possible confusion with respecMr
compliance.
c. Relationship Between EPA's
Threshold Planning Quantities and
Other Similar Standards. One
commenter took Issue with the TPQ
values assigned to the chemicals.
suggesting that communities would
implicitly rank the chemical for hazard
potential solely on the basis of the TPQ
value and without regard to handling or
transport considerations. EPA intends
the TPQ values assigned to materials in
the rule to apply to potential
nonambient conditions as may occur at
fixed facilities. It should be noted that
during transportation, the assumption of
non-ambient conditions would not
frequently apply and that many
transported substances may meet
existing hazard class definitions of DOT
and therefore be currently subject to
existing regulations contained in Title 49
of the Code of Federal Regulations (49
CFR). All SARA section 302 substances
will be covered when listed under
section 103 of CERCLA. Further
elaboration of special considerations for
chemicals in transit is covered by
technical guidance documents published
by DOT.
Another commenter said that their
State system differed In the threshold
planning quantities set and suggests
EPA adopt their system. This State i
adopted storage thresholds of 56 gallons
of any liquid. 200 cubic feet of any gas.
and 500 pounds of any solid. These
State-adopted storage thresholds
provide virtually no distinction among.
chemicals for differences in either
toxicity or ability to become airborne.
Additionally, no facility would be
required to notify the State commission
or the local planning committee unless
the facility contained a minimum of
approximately 500 pounds of any
extremely hazardous substance. The
Agency believes that these threshold
quantities would not be sufficiently
conservative for many chemicals and
overly conservative for other chemicals.
Therefore, the Agency believes that the
threshold planning quantities published
today are more appropriate since they
take into account the relative toxicities
of the extremely hazardous substances
and their ability to become airborne. As
a result the TPQs range from one pound
to 10.000 pounds and trigger reporting in
s manner that is more consistent with
the potential hazards these chemicals
are likely to pose.
d Relationship Between RQ Values
and TPQ Value*. Several commenters
expressed concern that a number of
-------
13392 Federal Register / Vol.
substances on the extremely hazardous
substances list had RQ levels under
CERCLA that exceeded the TPQ values
and therefore emergency planning
would be required for quantities of
chemicals that would not require
notification under th« RQ reporting
rules. In the interim final rule, the
Agency acknowledged these
inconsistencies and agrees with
commenters who argued that the TPQ
should not be lower than the RQ for the
same substance.
In response to these concerns, the
Agency has taken several actions. First.
in a separate rulemaking under CERCLA
section 102. the Agency has already
proposed lowering the RQ values of
seven of these chemicals. Second, as
discussed elsewhere in this rule.
changes in the TPQ quantitative
categories and the reassignment of TPQ
values based on reevaluation of the
toxicity data has resulted in elimination
of inconsistencies for seven other
chemicals. Third, seven of the
substances are solids which have been
assigned TPQ values of 10.000 pounds
unless they meet special conditions
regarding physical form or chemical
properties. Solids in solution, in molten
form, of a particle size of 100 microns or
less, or of a highly reactive nature revert
to the lower TPQ values. Fourth, the
Agency is currently reviewing additional
information on five other chemicals and
plans to propose revisions of their RQ
values based on this new information.
Finally. EPA intends to resolve the two
remaining inconsistencies by adjusting
the RQs of the substances as part of a
proposed rule later this year. In that
rulemaking. EPA will designate the
remaining extremely hazardous
substances as CERCLA hazardous
substances under CERCLA Section 102
and revise the one pound statutory RQs
for the extremely hazardous substances.
3. Threshold Planning Quantities for
Mixtures. Solutions, or Formulations.
The interim final rule included a one
percent de minimis limit of the
extremely hazardous sobetances in
mixtures, solutions, or formulations for
purposes of determlnssMquentities
applicable to the threeMs) phoning
quantities.
A number of commenters supported
the idea of a percentage limit for
calculating threshold planning
quantities, and moat of these supported
the one percent mixture decision.
Certain commenters thought that the one
percent minimum level should be raised
or that specific test results should be
used or that the DOT methodology for
the applicable concentration for
reportable quantities be used. (50 FR
..... . j L '"""i- «•»« cummenier
suggested that the one percent level
employed by Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) for
carcinogens should be included.
The concentration of a chemical in a
mixture that is associated with a
potential hazard depends upon the type
of toxicity concern. The commenters. for
example, refer to OSHA's use of a level
of 0.1 percent as a concern cut-off level
for a carcinogen in a mixture. Regarding
the acute toxicity concerns of the *
extremely hazardous substances listed
in this rule, however. EPA believes that
tne release of an amount equal to the
threshold planning quantity of the
substance at concentrations of less than
one percent is not likely to give rise to a
concentration equal to the level of
concern off-site. Therefore, the Agency
believes that the one percent de minimis
rule is appropriate for purposes of
emergency planning.
Alloys, amalgams, or polymers are not
considered mixtures for the purpose of
this rule because unlike simple mixtures,
their properties are demonstrably
afferent from those of their components:
the reporting of alloys and amalgams is
not required unless they are specifically
listed. In evaluating whether to notify
for mixtures, facility owners or
operators should compare the
appropriate threshold planning quantity
with the actual amount of the extremely
hazardous substance present in the
mixture. For example. If the TPQ
threshold for a given chemical on the list
is 100 pounds and that chemical is 20
percent by weight of a mixture,
notification would be necessary if 500
pounds or more of that mixture is
present at a facility.
When considering potential hazards
specifically from airborne releases it is
unlikely, even assuming large releases
of a mixture, that concentrations of less
than one percent will generate severe
airborne exposure levels of the toxic
component off-site. Conversely, it is not
deemed to be a precedent to raise the
TPQ determination limit of any
extremely hazardous substance in a
mixture to a level greater than one
percent Therefore, the Agency has
decided to retain the one percent
minimum for the evaluation of all
mixtures, solutions, or formulations
containing extremely hazardous
substances for section 302 planning
purposes.
For emergency release notification.
there is no de minimis quantity under
either CERCLA section 103 or SARA
section 304. When determining if
notification is required for a release of
mixtures and solutions containing
ou« »«bstances or
u nces. the Agency
applies the weigh, percent calculation.
"'• 'llwtwied above for SARA
302 calculations. [The "mixn
^C^Sj^i-further
m SO FR 13483 (April 14.1985). where the
regulation for mixtures and solutions is
outlined in CERCLA rulemaking
pertaining to RQ release reporting.)
G. Reportable Quantities
Several commenters questioned the
reportable quantities set either under
the one pound level established under
section 304 of SARA or levels set under
SfCH°n 1(«°f CERCLA. The one pound
statutory RQs under SARA section 304
are for those substances not already
listed as CERCLA "hazardous
substances" under section 101(14) and
subject to notification requirements
under section 103. The extremely
hazardous substances which are not
CERCLA hazardous substances will be
designated under CERCLA section 102
as part of • rulemaking later this year at
which time the statutory RQs will also
be adjusted. Comments concerning RQs
f« CERCLA notification under section
103 will be considered and addressed in
the ongoing CERCLA rulemakings to
adjust RQs.
H. Miscellaneous
i. Trade Secret/Confidentiality Issues
Several commenters raised questions
and concerns regarding trade secret
information. With regard to section 304
notification and chemical identity of an
extremely hazardous substance, one
commenter wants to provide the same
information that he/she has provided on
the MSDS. However. EPA believes that
the actual chemical name must be given
along with the trade name in the section
304 release notification. This specific
chemical name will be of use to the
health professional while the trade
name may not be of such use. In any
case, section 304 emergency notification
is not subject to Title ill trade secret
protection.
One commenter indicated that EPA
should define a trade secret more
clearly and provide for the protection of
such secrets when they are necessary in
the contingency plan. EPA agrees. Trade
secret regulations regarding trade secret
claims and other confidentiality issues
will be issued by EPA in the future.
These regulations will provide that
specific chemical identity may be
claimed confidential at the time of the
contingency planning. The chemical
identity must be submitted to EPA along
with a substantiation explaining why
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 13383
the chemical identity ia trade secret.
These procedures will be more fully
explained in the future trade secret
regulations.
One commenter stated that
regulations are necessary for the
determination of the validity of the local
planning committee request for
information which a facility believes is
confidential before EPA issues a
compliance order. EPA believes that
questions concerning the validity of
local requests are largely to be handled
at die State and local level except for
claims of trade secrets concerning
specific chemical identity. Trade secrets
regulations will be issued later this year.
The Agency does not believe further
regulation is necessary in this area.
One commenter believes that the
guidance documents should discourage
the collection by localities of
confidential information and should
specify when confidential information is
justified Another commenter believes
that EPA should more carefully define
"emergency response plan" to exclude
confidential information given to the
local committee as background material.
Section 322 ia quite specific about what
information collected under Title ID can
be withheld as confidential Under Title
IIL only the specific chemical identity
can be withheld, in accordance with the
procedures set forth under section 322.
Because no confidentiality issues other
than those to be addressed in the
forthcoming section 322 regulations an
relevant under Tide m. EPA does not
believe further guidance is necessary at
this time.
ii. Enforcement
One commenter believes that EPA
should issue procedures for the issuance
of compliance orders. EPA agrees that
such procedures should be developed in
the future. The Agency will develop
such procedures either by regulation or
guidance and may adopt procedures for
the issuance of such orders that have
been developed under other
environmental lawe»~
One commentarsteied that although
he believes that nsjtfBcBtion to
emergency persons* of rafoasm mat
endanger the healaVef eonommity
residents Is naeeseaiy. EPA is net
authorized to penanxe the failure to
notify with civil end criminal penalties.
He also wrote that this requirement to
notify is currently accomplished on a
voluntary basis, as recommended by die
Chemical Manufacturer's Association.
With respect to EPA's authority to
assess penalties or seek criminal and
civil penalties for owners' or operators'
failure to notify under section 304. EPA
disagrees. Section 32S(b) provides for
civil, administrative and criminal
penalties for enforcement of emergency
notification requirements under section
304.
Another commenter felt that since
section 304 imposes penalties for failure
to "immediately" notify State and local
authorities of a release of an extremely
hazardous substance, it is Implicit that
this assumes "Immediately after the
releaser becomes aware" of the
existence of a release. EPA agrees that a
knowledge requirement is implicit under
section 304. However, if the facility
owner/operator should have known of
the release, then the fact that he or she
was unaware of the release will not
relieve the owner/operator from the
duty to provide release notification. EPA
believes no change is needed in the
regulatory language.
V. Relationship to CERCLA
A. Relationship of Title 111 to The
National Contingency Plan
Although Title m ia a free-standing
Title within SARA, it is closely related
to preparation and response activities
under CERCLA.
For that reason, the interim final rule
was placed in a new Subpart I within
the existing National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution ^*"***pffT>1ffy Plan
(NCP) (40 CFR 300). However, due to
differences In authority, trade secret
protection and key definitions, and
because of the need for simplicity and
accessibility for a wide range of users,
EPA has recodified the November 17.
1986 provisions. Today's final rule
republishes the emergency planning and
notification requirements, aa part of 40
CFR 355. All of the Title m provisions
will now be located apart from the NCP
in Parts 355 at seq. of Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations.
B. Relatioiwhip of Thit Rah to CERCLA
Section 108 Reporting Requirement*
Under section 103 of CERCLA. any
person in charge of a facility at which
there is a release of a hazardous
substance, as denned in CERCLA
section 101(14), equal to or in excess of
its reportabie quantity must report
immediately to the National Response
Center. The National Response Center
will then alert the appropriate federal
emergency response personnel of the
release. This notification includes
transportation incidents and releases
from vessels as well as fixed-facility
emergencies.
The notification to the State
emergency response commission under
section 302 Is not triggered by a release
incident but rather by the presence of
certain quantities of an extremely
hazardous substance at a facility. No
release or event of any kind is required
for a section 302 report. This notifSc**-""
is an initial action in a process tha
culminates in the development of
community emergency response plans.
Section 304 in contrast establishes
reporting requirements similar to
CERCLA section 103 release reporting.
However, instead of requiring
notification only to the National
Response Center for CERCLA
substances when certain quantities of
these chemicals are released, facilities
must under section 304 also notify State
and local emergency response officials
of these releases, and of releases of
extremely hazardous substances which
have not been designated as CERCLA
hazardous substances. Note that the
reporting requirements under section 304
are in addition to. not in replacement of.
notification to the National Response
Center under CERCLA section 103.
VL Effective Dates
As indicated in the opening section of
this preamble, this rule is effective on
May 17.1987 for purposes of facility
planning notification and 30 days after
publication for release notification
requirements. (Local release
notifications, however, do not need to
be made until August 17,1987 or when
the local committees are established
earlier.)
EPA established a May 17.1987
effective date for the facility planning
notifications under 1355.30. rather than
providing 30 days between publication
and effective data as required under
section 553(d) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA) because section
302 of SARA requires notification to be
made by May 17. The primary purpose
of the revised final ruleis to finalize the
list of substances and TPQs that trigger
the May 17 notification. In order for all
faculties affected by these requirements
to be certain of whether or not they must
provide the statutory notification by the
date on which such notification must be
made. EPA has made the effective date
of the rule coincident with the statutory
date, even if this rule is published less
than 30 days in advance of mat data, aa
would otherwise be required by section
553(d). EPA believes that the confusion
generated by a later effective date
constitutes "good cause" for suspension
of the 30 day requirement as provided
under section 553(d)(3) of the APA.
VTL Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analym
Executive Order 12291 requires each
federal agency to determine if a
-------
13394 Federal RegisterJJ^S^No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
regulation is a "major" rule as defined
by the order and to prepare and
consider a Regulatory Impact Analysis
(RIA) in connection with every major
rule. Under E.0.12291. a "major" rule is
one that is likely to result in (1) an
annual adverse (coat) effect in the
economy of SlOO million. (2) a major
increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries.
federal. State, or local government or
geographical regions, or (3) significant
adverse effects on competition.
employment investment productivity.
innovation, or the ability of United
States based enterprises in domestic or
export markets. The Agency has
decided that, although the changes
represented in this revised final rule are
minor relative to the interim final rule.
these two rules should be considered
together as a "major" rule for the
purposes of E.0.12291. This decision is
based on the fact that the interim final
and revised final are essentially a single
rulemaking effort under section 302(a)(3)
of SARA and that EPA was unable to
prepare a regulatory impact analysis for
the interim final rule, aa explained in
more detail below.
Today's rule ia a revision of the
interim final rule published November
17.1986. Because of the short time frame
for development of that rule (30 days
from enactment of SARA). EPA was
unable to conduct a regulatory analysis
pnor to publication of that final rule.
However, in the interim final rule, EPA
stated that such analysis would be
completed as part of the revised final
rule published today. Accordingly. EPA
has prepared an RIA to assess the
economic impact of the statutory and
regulatory requirements codified in the
interim final rule on the regulated
community (i.e.. facilities manufacturing.
processing, using or storing one or more
extremely hazardous substances in
excess of the threshold planning
quantity), as well aa State and local
government entities. The costs
summarized here en presented in detail
in the Regulatory Impact Analysis in
Support of RuJemaUag Under Sections
302. 303. and304oft6uSuperfund
Amendments and Rmmthorization Act
of 1986. This document is available in
the public docket for this rulemaking.
The revised final rule published today
has just minor revisions resulting in
small incremental costs from the interim
final rule and thus the RIA is applicable
to both rules.
The costs associated with the interim
final regulation result directly from the
requirements spelled out by Congress in
sections 302. 303. and 304 of SARA.
Congress explicitly mandated, among
other things, the setting up of State
emergency response commissions and
local emergency planning committees.
the development of emergency response
plans, the naming of facility
coordinators, and the reporting of
certain releases of extremely hazardous
substances. The regulatory option
chosen by EPA reduced to some extent
the statutory reporting burden on the
regulated community and the
administrative burden on State and
local governments by adopting many
threshold planning quantities above the
statutory default level of two pounds
and by clarifying the statutory
requirements.
For the chosen regulatory approach.
total regulated community costs
attributable to sections 302 and 303 are
expected to be primarily one-time costs.
because they deal with statute and rule
familiarization, and compliance
determination. Section 302 costs consist
of an initial notification to the State
emergency response commission, and
the development of tracking systems for
extremely hazardous substances. Most
of these types of costs are reasonably
expected to occur in the first year (1987)
that the statute requirements an in
effect Under section 303. facilities must
designate an emergency response
coordinator and engage in ongoing
activities related to emergency planning
and response. Under section 304.
facilities must report certain releases of
extremely hazardous substances to
various government entities.
A total of 5.8 million facilities will
need to become familiar with the
statutory and regulatory requirements
and make a compliance determination
because they may use or store chemicals
that are on the extremely hazardous
substances list. Of these. 1.5 million are
expected to have at least one extremely
hazardous substance in excess of the
statutory two pound threshold planning
quantity.
Costa for statute and rule
familiarization to facilities for sections
302 and 304 are expected to total S353
million in 1987. Section 302 baseline
costs (in the absence of EPA's revised
threshold planning quantities) are
estimated to be S375 million for
facilities, for a total cost of $728 million
in 1987 (1988 dollars).
Costs for emergency planning
activities (Section 303) by facilities are
expected to be incurred primarily in
1988 at a total of S418 million, assuming
that no planning of this type has
occurred. Therefore this is an upper
bound estimate for the particular
activities costed. Emergency release
notification costs (Section 304) are
estimated to be S81 million for facilities
in the first two years.
The Agency currently estimates that
by increasing the TPQs on most of the
extremely hazardous substances from
the statutory level of two pounds.
facilities will realize a reduction in
burden of S70 million from the statutory
requirements to the interim final rule
because those facilities with small
quantities of substances will not have to
notify authorities and participate in
emergency planning. The methodology
used for this analysis did not allow for a
detailed comparison to be made
between the interim final and revised
final rules. However, the minor revisions
made by today's final rule should result
in only small incremental costs from the
interim final rule.
EPA believes that the approach
adopted in the interim final rule and
revised final rule will benefit the
regulated community. State and local
governments, and the general publrc. By
raising the threshold planning quantities
over the two-pound statutory level for
each substance, the Agency has reduced
the reporting burden for the regulated
community and government entities
without significantly increasing the nsk
to the general public. The adored
approach will facility-raj" ,-gr-f *
priorities of potentei& jafrsi v•: ?r*,'
on the part of facii* ;u\?4& : -
emergency planning uum.v
priontization is an essentid. - ponent
of emergency response planning.
Government costs imposed by the
statutory requirements under the
emergency planning provisions of Title
III include costs bome by State
emergency response commissions and
local emergency planning committees.
This analysis does not attempt to
analyze the Section 301 cost of
establishing State emergency response
commissions and local emergency
planning committees. Instead, those
costs associated with the statutory
requirements for receipt of information
and planning are estimated even though
they do not appear in the final rule. For
local emergency planning committees.
the major costs, like those for facilities.
will occur in 1987 and 1988. The costs
for local planning committees include
statute and rule familiarization under
section 302 and the preparation of a
local emergency plan under section 303.
These costs for local emergency
planning committees total $80 million.
Major coats for State emergency
response commissions include the
receipt and distribution of facility
notifications, and the review of local
emergency plans. These costs estimated
for Slate commissions total SI a million
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Reml,tlnn,
in 1987 and 1988. Both the State and
local authorities will design data
systems for the storage of release
information under section 304. The
initial startup and ongoing costs for
receiving and storing data related to
emergency release notifications are
expected to be $27 million in 1987 and
1938 for both the State and local
authorities. Continuing costs for both
State and local governments include:
reviewing and storing information under
sections 302 and 304. and the updating
and review of emergency plans under
section 303. However, the Agency does
not have enough data or judgment to
estimate these ongoing costs for sections
302 and 303.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
requires that an analysis be performed
for all rules that are likely to have a
"significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities". EPA has
performed a preliminary small business
analysis. The small business definition
used for the analysis is any facility with
ten or less employees. Based on this
analysis. I hereby certify that this
regulation will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The reporting and notification
requirements contained in this rule have
been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980.44 U.S.C. 35501.
et seq. and have been assigned OMB
control number 2050-0046.
VIII. Supporting Information
List of Subjects 40 CFR Parts 300 and 358
Chemicals, hazardous substances,
extremely hazardous substances.
intergovernmental relations, community
right-to-know. Superfond Amendments
and Reauthorization Act air pollution
control, chemical •f'HtHt prevention,
chemical emergency preparedness,
threshold planning Quantity, reportable
quantity, community emergency
response plan, contingency planning.
reporting and recordkeeplng
requirements.
Dated- April 17.1887.
LM M. Thomas.
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
Preamble. Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
1. The title of Subchapter) of Title 40
is revised to read as follows:
SUBCHAPTER J-SUPERFUND,
EMERGENCY PLANNING, AND COMMUNITY
RIGHT-TO-KNOW PROGRAMS
PART 300-NATIONAL OIL AND
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN
2. The authority citation for Part 300 is
revised to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 105. Pub. L 98-510.94 StaL
2764.42 U.S.C 9505 and Sec. 311(c)(2). Pub. L
92-500. as emended. 88 Stal. BBS. 33 U.S.C
1321(c)(2): E.O.12316. 46 PR 42237 (August 20,
1981): E.0.11735. 38 FR 21243 (August 1973).
§§300.91-300,98 (Subpert I) [Removed]
3. Part 300 is amended by removing
Subpart 1 consisting of 88 300.91 through
300.95.
Appendices 0 and E (Removed)
4. Part 300 Appendices 0 and E are
removed.
5. Subchapter I of Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended by
adding a new Part 355 to read as
follows:
PART 355-EMEROENCY PLANNING
AND NOTIFICATION
Sw.
355.10 Purpose
355.20 Definitions
355.30 Emergency planning
355.40 Emergency release notification
355.50 Penalties
Appendix A—The List of Extremely
Hazardous Substances, and their Threshold
Planning Quantities (Alphabetical Order)
Appendix B—The List of Extremely
Hazardous Substances and their Threshold
Planning Quantities (CAS Number Order)
Authority: Sections 302. 303. 304.325. 328
and 329 of the Emergency Planning and
Community Rlght-to-Know Act of 1986. Pub.
L 90-199.100 Slat 1813.42 U.SC 111002.
11003.11004.11025.11028. and 11029 (1988).
1358.10
This regulation establishes the list of
extremely hazardous substances,
threshold planning quantities, and
facility notification responsibilities
necessary for the development and
implementation of State and local
emergency response plans.
I38&20
Act means the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986.
CERCLA means the Comprehensive
Emergency Response. Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980. as amended.
CERCLA Hazardous Substance means
a substance on the list defined in
Section 101(14) of CERCLA.
Note*—Listed CERCLA hazardous
substances appear In Table 302.4 of 40 CFR
Part 302.
Commission means the emergency
response commission, or the Governor if
there is no commission, for the Slat**'
which the facility is located.
Environment includes water, air
land and the interrelationship which
exists among and between water, air.
and land and all living things.
Extremely Hazardous Substance
means a substance listed in Appendices
A and B of this Part
Facility means all buildings,
equipment structures, and other
stationary items which are located on a
single site or on contiguous or adjacent
sites and which are owned or operated
by the same person (or by any person
which controls, is controlled by. or
under common control with, such
person). For purposes of emergency
release notification, the term includes
motor vehicles, rolling stock, and
aircraft
Hazardous Chemical means any
hazardous chemical as defined under
i 1910.1200(c) of Title 29 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, except that such
term does not include the following
substances:
(1) Aay food, food additive, color
additive, drug, or cosmetic regulated by
the Food and Drug Administration.
(2) Any substance present as a solid
in any manufactured item to the extent
exposure to the substance does not
occur under normal conditions of us<
(3) Any substance to the extent it i
used for personal family, or household
purposes, or is present in the same form
and concentration as a product
packaged for distribution and use by the
general public.
(4) Any substance to the extent it is
used in a research laboratory or a
hospital or other medical facility under
the direct supervision of a technically
qualified individual
(5) Any substance to the extent it is
used in routine agricultural operations
or is a fertilizer held for sale by a
retailer to the ultimate customer.
Mixture means a heterogenous
association of substances where the
various individual substances retain
their identities and can usually be
separated by mechanical means.
Includes solutions or compounds but
does not include alloys or amalgams.
Person means any individual, trust
firm, joint stock company, corporation
(including a government corporation).
partnership, association. State.
municipality, commission, political
subdivision of a State, or interstate
body.
Release means any spilling, leaking.
pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying.
discharging. Infecting, escaping.
-------
13396
FederaJ Register / Vol. 52. No. 77'/ Wednesday. Apnl 22. 1987 / Ru|M an. .-...--I.
leaching, dumping, or disposing into the
environment (including the
abandonment or discarding of barrels
containers, and other closed
receptacles) of any hazardous chemical.
extremely hazardous substance, or
CERCLA hazardous substance.
_/Jfj£frtoW» Quantity means, for any
CERCLA hazardous substance, the
reportable quantity established in Table
302.4 of 40 CFR Part 302. for such
substance, for any other substance, the
reportable quantity is one pound.
Threshold Planning Quantity means.
for a substance listed in Appendices A
and B. the quantity listed in the column
threshold planning quantity" for that
substance.
§3SSJO Emergencypfenning.
(a) Applicability. The requirements of
this section apply to any facility at
which there is present an amount of any
extremely hazardous substance equal to
or in excess of its threshold planning
quantity, or designated, after public
notice and opportunity for comment by
the Commission or the Governor for the
State in which the facility is located. For
purposes of this section, an "amount of
any extremely hazardous substance"
means the total amount of an extremely
hazardous substance present at any one
time at a facility at concentrations
greater than one percent by weight
regardless of location, number of
containers, or method of storage.
(b) Emergency planning notification.
The owner or operator of a facility
subject to this section shall provide
notification to the Commission that it is
a facility subject to the emergency
planning requirements of this Part Such
notification shall be provided: on or
before May 17.1987 or within sixty days
after a facility first becomes subject to
the requirements of this section.
whichever is later.
(c) Facility emergency coordinator.
The owner or operator of a facility
subject to this section shall designate a
facility representative who will
participate in the local esurgency
planning process as • facility emergency
response coordinate Tfce owner or
operator shall notify thai local
emergency planning oooBittM (or the
Governor if there is oa committee) of the
facility representative on or before
September 17.1987 or 30 days after
establishment of a local emergency
planning committee, whichever is
earlier.
(d) Provision of information. (1) The
owner or operator of a facility subject to
this section shall inform the local
emergency planning committee of any
changes occurring at the facility which
nay be relevant to emergency planning.
(2) Upon request of the local
emergency planning committee, the
owner or operator of a facility subject to
this section shall promptly provide to
the committee any information
necessary for development or
implementation of the local emergency
plan.
(e) Calculation of TPQs for solids and
mixtures. (1) If a container or storage
vessel holds a mixture or solution of an
extremely hazardous substance, then
the concentration of extremely
hazardous substance, in weight percent
(greater than 1%). shall be multiplied by
the mass (in pounds) in the vessel to
determine the actual quantity of
extremely hazardous substance therein.
(2)(i) Extremely hazardous substances
that are solids are subject to either of
two threshold planning quantities as
shown on Appendices A and B (i.e.. 500/
10.000 pounds). The lower quantity
applies only if the solid exists in
powdered form and has a particle size
less than 100 microns; or is handled in
solution or in molten form: or meets the
criteria for a National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) rating of 2. 3 or 4 for
reactivity. If the solid does not meet any
of these criteria, it is subject to the
upper (10.000 pound) threshold planning
quantity as shown in Appendices A and
B.
(ii) The 100 micron level may be
determined by multiplying the weight
percent of solid with a particle size less
than 100 microns in a particular
container by the quantity of solid in the
container.
(iii) The amount of solid In solution
may be determined by multiplying the
weight percent of solid in the solution in
a particular container by the quantity of
solution in the container.
(iv) The amount of solid in molten
form must be multipled by 0.3 to
determine whether the lower threshold
planning quantity is met
(Approved by the Office of Managenmt and
Budget oadar the control number 2080-0046)
§3S&40 Einef«eneyrstaMiMMMeMe
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. Apnl 22. 1987 / Ruie, and RegulatioH.
(ii) Any known or anticipated acute or
chronic health risks associated with the
release, and.
(lii) Where appropriate, advice
regarding medical attention necessary
for exposed individuals.
' (4) Exceptions, (i) Until Apnl 30.1988.
in lieu of the notice specified in
paragraph (b)(2) of this section, any
owner or operator of a facility subject to
this section from which there is a
release of a CERCLA hazardous
substance which is not an extremely
hazardous substance and has a
statutory reportable quantity may
provide the same notice required under
CERCLA section 103(a) to the local
emergency planning committee.
(ii) An owner or operator of a facility
from which there is a transportation-
related release may meet the
requirements of this section by
providing the information indicated in
paragraph (b)(2) to the 911 operator, or
in the absence of a 911 emergency
telephone number, to the operator. For
purposes of this paragraph, a
"transportation-related release" means
a release during transportation, or
storage incident to transportation if the
stored substance is moving under active
shipping papers and has not reached the
ultimate consignee.
(Approved by the Office of Management and
Budget under the control number 2090-0046)
83S5JO PtnattlML
(a) Civil penalties. Any person who
fails to comply with the requirements of
9 355.40 shall be subject to civil
penalties of up to $25.000 for each
violation in accordance with section
325(b)(l)oftheAct
(b) Civilpenalties for continuing
violations. Any person who fails to
comply with the requirements of
5 355.40 shall be subject to civil
penalties of up to $25.000 for each day
during which the violation continues
accordance with section 325(bH2) o
Act. In the case of a second or
subsequent violation, any such person
may be subject to civil penalties of up to
$75.000 for each day the violation
continues, in accordance with section
325(b)(2)oftheAct.
(c) Criminal penalties. Any person
who knowingly and willfully fails to
provide notice in accordance with
S 355.40 shall upon conviction, be fined
not more than $25.000 or impnsoned for
not more than two (2) years, or both (or.
in the case of a second or subsequent
conviction, shall be fined not more than
$50,000 or impnsoned for not more than
five (5) yean, or both) in accordance
with section 325(b)(4) of the Act
APPEND.X A.-THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOU) PLANNING OuANtmES
[Alphabetical Order]
CAS No.
75-86-5
1752-30-3
107-02-6
79-06-1
107-13-1
814-6S-6
111-69-3
116-06-3
309-00-2
107-18-6
107-11-9
20859-73-8
54-62-6
78-53-5
3734-97-2
7664-41-7
16919-58-7
300-62-9
62-53-3
88-05-1
7783-70-2
1397-94-0
86-88-4
1 tni_9O_9
1327-53-3
7784-34-1
7784-42-1
2642-71-9
86-50-0
1405-87-4
98-87-3
JW-lG—O
100-14-1
98-05-5
98-09-9
3615-21-2
-------
APPENO.X A.-TH6 UST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AMD THE.R THRESHOLD
[Alphabetical Oder]
CAS No.
•^— ^—
15271-41-7
534-07-6
4044-65-9
10294-34-5
7637-07-2
353-42-4
28772-56-7
7726-95-6
106-99-0
109-19-3
111-34-2
1308-19-0
2223-93-0
7778-44-1
8001-35-2
56-25-7
51-63-2
26419-73-6
1563-66-2
75-15-0
2244-16-6
57-74-9
470-90-6
7782-50-5
24934-91-6
999-61-5
1ft? 9fl_A
79-11-6
107-07-3
627-11-2
67-66-3
542-68-1
107-30-2
3691-35-6
1982-47-4
10025-73-7
7440-48-4
62207-76-6
10210-68-1
AJ AA a
117-52-2
5636-29-3
95-48-7
535-69-7
4170-30-3
123-73-9
508-68-3
506-78-6
675-14-9
66-61-9
108-91-8
633-03-4
17702-41-9
S08S-46-3
10311-64-9
19287-45-7
84-74-2
8023-53-8
111-44-4
Gwmealname
Bcycto(ZilJH«piane-2-CarDonrtnle. 5Oiloro4^(((Metnylainno)CarbonyOOxy)lmino)..
OS-<1 -alpha. 2-beta, 4-aipha. 5-alpha. 6E)X
Bis(ChloromethyO Ketone __
Brtoscanata ._
Soron Trichloride ....... ..... .. —
Boron Tnfluonde. _
Boron Tnfluonde Compound with Methyl Ether (1:1)
BrafmdJolorm
Bromine _ . ""'"
Butadiene ""
Butyl Isovalerate. °~ '
Butyl Vinyl Ether '"" """" —
Cadmium 0»da "" —
CadmRim Stearate " "™" "
Caloum Arsenate _. '
Canthartdln °*~
Carbaehol Chloride _
CaroamicACrt. Methyl-. o-<((2.4K*netnyl-l. 3Othiolaiv2-yl)Methy)ene)Ainjno)l-__Zl
Cartoon Oiauffide . ""
CMytfiPt _ ¥ii
Cniortenvmfoa^^... ... ..
Chiormeouat Chloride ._
CMoroacette Aod _. .
CniQfO^ffyi ChlBHBiborane ' " '
>butyl Phthalata
acniorooenzalkonum CMonde _.
Sfchkjroethyl Ether ,,..„..,,.,
Notes
e
V. 1
•V •
• «
e
e.e
d
d
e
1
e
• m
-
e
•.h
dl
d.h
e. d
e
e
e.h
0
•.h
«.h
a.e
e
• A
^
d
R«portaMt
quantity*
(pounds)
i
1.000
1ft
100
1
10
1.000
soon
10
i om
tort
lAfl
i aao
10
Threshold
planrang quanttty
(pounds)
— — — • -— ^-^— —
500/10.000
10/10.000
500/10.000
500
500
1.000
100/10.000
500
10.000
IOMM
100/10.000
1.000/10.000
500/10.000
500/10.000
KVWlfl /VM
100/10.000
iW/iO.OOO
10.000
500
in nftn
1 ftftft
1OA
100
500
100/10.000
10.000
1UU/1V.VAIU
con
i (Wi
tnooA
100
100
100/10.000
500/10.000
500
1/1flMfl
in nnn
100/10.000
10/10.000
10/10.000
10.000
100/10.000
§00/10000
1 flflO/ 1 A ATM
1 onn
1 fVM
*vyi/inrw>
1.000/10.000
1.000
1ftrt
lAfl/m fVM
10.000
10.000
innnn
cnn/inrvM
500
500
ion/inonn
100
10000
10000
10.000
-------
Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. Apnl 22. 1987 / Rule9 and Re8ulatiop<
APPENOU A.-THH UST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES A«O THE* THRESHOLD PLAN™* Ou-nnw-Condnu*"
[Alphabetical Oder]
CAS No.
149-74-6
62-73-7
141-66-2
1464-53-5
814-49-3
1642-54-
93-05-0
71-63-6
2238-07-
2524.^1 1_n
131-11-3
77-78-1
75-18-3
75-78-5
57-14-7
99-68-9
611 61 4
534*52-1
88-85-7
1420-07-1
117-84-0
78-34-2
646-084
B2-66-6
152-16-9
298-04-4
514-73-8
541-53-7
316-42-7
115-29-7
2778-04-3
72-20-8
106 03-8
2104 64 5
50-14-6
379-79-3
1622-32-8
10140-87-1
563-12-2
13194-48-4
538-07-8
371-82-0
75-21-8
107-15-3
151-56-4
2235-25-8
542-90-5
22224-92-8
122-14-5
115-90-2
4301-50-2
7782-41-4
640-19-7
144-49-0
359-06-8
51-21-8
944-22-9
50-00-0
107-16-4
23422-53-9
2540-82-1
17702-57-7
21548-32-4
Chemical name
1
1 Dtchtorvos
Dtcrotopho*.
Oiepoxybutane _.
Diethyl Chlorophospata "'
Diethylcarbamazine Citrate
Diethyi-p.phenyienediamine
Digitoxin «—•«••••——.—...
Diglyodyl Ether "!.™Z!ZZ.™ ""'
Digowfl__. -........._._„..._. miim __
Dimefox ——«—••-«.......«. •———••«
Dtmethoate.- __.... .__.._.„„.. _. —...-. ._.
Dimethyl Phoaphorochlondothioate
Dimethyl Phthalate "*" ~ '
Dimethyl SuHate —
Dimethyl Surhde
Dimethytdchtorosiiane
DirnemyH>-Phenylenedamine ™!™!L1"I.".Z""" "" — """"
Dirutrocresol
Dinoseo_ _„ ~ -
Dinoterto — — ~
Dioctyl Phthalate ——————-.
Dwxolane " "" ' — —
Diphosphoraiwde. Octamethy»- ' — '
Disuffoton ~ "
Dithiazanme Iodide- „ -...—.-..._.
Oithtobjuret ,...,
Emetine. Ohydrochlonde '"
EndosuNan ......... •••—...-
EPN ~ ———_—..
:rgoiamne Tanrata
fcinaneaunonyl Chtande. 2O*xo.
Emanot vzochlorc-. Acetate _
Ethopropho* _._
:thvtene Fhjnmhycfan. „._
EthvtMMOntto
:thytaM0tpto|i : __ -.-......- ..,.._.
•totiftmmmlmtHQ ^ ' '
ithyfeBMB^f P*tffffA«tf _ , "
rm'BHBllfiS'*'"
•inia5i| " —
nuoroacatfc Aod ... ...
•liiMoac4tyl Chloride..— ,uuu.
nuorouracd
'ormaldehyde
•ormaldehyde Cyanohydnn... „
onueianate HydrochkxxJe
ormottuon __._
O^^pvT&nAIA ___..„_— iirii»M»».«».<».«»«»«....>>,«i,,f— ..
•ostmetan .
Notes
.. e
e
e. h
. a.e
. C.9
. «. h
-
e. h
d
t
J
•»•
0
e. h
*
e
e.e
«.h
h
d 1
e.h
e
k
J
C. A
rt 1
e.h
«j>
_
e
—•————.
Reportable
quantity*
(pounds)
1
10
.
1
3.UW
1
1
1
10
1,000
1
5.000
1
1
1
«
1UU
1
1
1
1
1.000
1
1
1
10
1
1
1
C MM
1
1
1
1
10
100
1.UUU
1
1
Thresh,
planning quankty
| (pounds)
1.000
•1.000
100
500
500
100/10.000
10,000
100/10.000
1 rwi
IU/1U.UOO
w\
3OO
son/in mm
SOW
10.000
500
100
5OO
1.000
10/10.000
500/10.000
10/10.000
100/10.000
500/10.000
10.000
500
10.000
10/10,000
100
500
100/10.1
10/IO.OUu-
500/10.000
500/10,000
1.000
100/10.000
1.000/IOjQOO
500/10.000
ouu
1,UUO
1.000
1JQOQ
500
10
1.000
10.000
500
10,000
10.000
10/10.090
500
500
100/10,000
500
100/10409
tO/wjOOB
TO
SOD/wMMI
500
500
'rm/infltfO
100
lOO/MjOOO
500
-------
13400 Federal Register^M/ol.J2^No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
APPENDIX A.-TH6 LIST Of EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING QUANTITIES-Continued
[Alphabetical Order]
CAS No.
3878-19-1
110-00-9
13450-90-3
77-47-4
1335-87-1
4835-11-4
302-01-2
74-90-8
7647-01-0
7664-39-3
7722-84-1
7783-07-6
7783-06-*
123-31-9
53-66-1
10025-97-6
n*ni.unui
297-78-9
78-82-0
102-36-4
465-73-6
55-91-4
4098-71-9
106-23-6
625-55-6
119-38-0
78-97-7
21609-90-5
541-25-3
56-89-9
7580-67-6
109-77-3
12108-13-3
51-75-2
950-10-7
1600-27-7
7487-94-7
21908-53-2
108-67-8
10476-95-6
760-93-0
126-98-7
920-46-7
30874-80-7
10265-92-6
558-25-8
950-37-8
2032-65-7
18752-77-6
151-38-4
80-63-7
74-83-9
79-22-1
624-92-0
00" 34 4
824-83-9
556-61-6
74-93-1
3735-23-7
676-97-1
556-64-9
78-94-4
502-39-6
75-79-6
1129-*1-5
7786-34-7
Chemical name
Fubendazole
Furan
Gallium TneMomto
HexacMoronaphmatene
Hexarnethyleneojarrwie. N.N'-Oibutyt-
Hydrocyanc Aod . ....
Hydrogen Cntonde (Gas Only) —
Hydrogen Peroxide (Cone >52%)
Hydrogen Surfide
Hlrjrn T_*lnm
Indamatfttdn .
Indum TataeMnnte
iron, rwiuearaonyh.. .
Isocyanc Aod. 3.4^>chfcxophenyl
IcUpfUmnil nhanryMnata t[ 1
— _ „ — -
Ester _ . ..
laoprapyt Chlorofmnat* TT_ „,..„„„ ,„,„... r
laoprepyl Format*..
L^ptOphOt
Lff'.'J'.lllE
Und.il..... -
MahMUMrtiita
Manganese. Tncarbonyl Metturteydepentadtonyl ..,..,„ „,
Uffrurt. Acfftata
Moctunt CMomte
HI^I.UJH. Qxide
ktesitytana
MamaaylonrtriU
Wethactytoyioxyethyl lsocyan«e_
UathanMuManyl FluTm**
"if^tii|)UHUIf
"ifp^iu1 irt> ~
Uattiyl l^n^tff
Methyl lly^aiL_,
Methyl Isoeymta
Methyl laotrtocyanate >
Mothyl Marcaptan
Methyl Phenkapton ............_._ .
Methyl Phojphuim bichloride
Methyl vinyl Ketone _"„"
Methylmercunc Oicyanamde
Meihymtchioroa.iarw
Metotearo _
Mevmphoa
.
-
-
.................
Notes
1:
dh
a.e
e
d
e.1
e.1
e
I
1
a.e
a,e
e
e
e.h
e
e
b.e
e
e
e
e
e
c.e.
h
d
b.e
e.h
ae
e
e
e
e
a,e
e
e
h
e
e.h
e
e
e
h
e
e
d.h
e
f
b.e
e
b.e
e
e
e.h
e
ReportatXe
' quantity'
(pounds)
1
100
1
100
100
100
1.001
1
1
1
10
100
1
1
1.000
1.000
1
10
1
1
100
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10
Threshold
planning quantity
(pounds)
100/10.000
500
500/10.000
100
10.000
500
1.000
100
500
100
1.000
10
500
500/10.000
10.000
10.000
100
100/10.000
1.000
500/10.000
100/10.000
100
100
1.000
500
500
1.000
500/10.000
10
1.000/10.000
100
500/10.000
100
10
500
500/10.000
500/10.000
500/10.000
10.000
1.000
500
500
100
100
100/10.000
1.000
500/10.000
500/10.000
500/10.000
500/10.000
500
1.000
500
100
500
500
500
500
500
100
10.000
10
500/10000
500
100/10000
SCO
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
APPENDIX A.—THE UST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING QUANTITIES—Continued
CAS No.
315-18-4
5047-7
6923-22-4
2763-96-4
50540-2
7440424
13463-39-3
54-114
65-304
7697-37-2
10102-434
98-95-3
112240-7
10102-444
62-754
991-42-4
0
6546-1
20816-124
830-60-4
23135-224
78-71-7
2497474
10028-154
1910-42-5
2074-50-2
56-38-2
298404
12002434
19824-22-7
7841-7
2570-28-5
79-214
594-424
108-95-2
97-18-7
4418464
64404
58-384
898-284
5848-1
8248-4
2087-194
10945-5
28842-2
4104-14-7
94742-4
75-444
732-114
13171-214
7803-51-2
2703-13-1
50782494
2665-30-7
32S4434
2587404
7723-144
10025474
10026-134
1314-564
7719-12-2
84404
57-474
5744-7
124474
Chemical name
MencwtMt*
MonocrotophM
UuSQfngt _ ....
Mustard Gflt
U LJU <• rhnnul
Mtcctm*
Nitne Aod
Nitne Oadt „- - „-
^nQanontodvRi CoAnptaoi (Pin
"
l442-«47)
Qxvttn*, 3,3-ta(CMan)fntfiy'r'
O*V+ r-
Q^j±n^l
O—«^M^Mh_ftA^*iM^
PwttGfMn
Pantahorflnt ,
Py«anic AGflf
Ptwwt, 2^-TTitoba<4l6»Oichio
Phenol, 2.2'-
-------
13402 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulation,.
APPENDIX A.-TME UST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANN.NG QuANrmES-Contnued
(Alphabetical Order]
CAS No.
110-89-4
52B1-13-0
23505-41-1
10025-65-7
13454-96-1
10124-50-2
151-50-8
506-41-6
2831-37-1)
106-96-7
57-57-8
107-124
542-76-7
70-69-9
109-61-5
1331-17-5
75-56-9
75-55-8
2275-16-5
95-63-8
129-00-0
140-76-1
504-24-5
1124-33-0
53558-25-1
10049-07-7
14167-18-1
107-44-8
7783-00-8
7791-23-3
563-41-7
3037-72-7
128-56-3
7631-89-2
7784-46-5
26626-22-8
124-65-2
143-33-9
62-74-8
131-52-2
13410-O1-0
10102-18-8
10102-20-2
900-95-8
57-24-9
60-41-3
3689-24-5
3569-57-1
7446-09-5
7783-60-0
7446-11-9
7664-93-9
77-61-6
13494-60-9
7783-60-4
107-49-3
13071-79-9
78-00-2
ca-*> a* A
75-74-1
GAo_«.«_a
1314-32-5
10031-59-1
6533-73-9
7791-12-0
Chemical name
Pipendtne
Piprotal
Pinmifo3*cthyl ••.............•..••....•..••..••••.•.•••..........•••»..»...................„........
Platmous Chloride _ _ . . ..
Platinum Tetrachlonde "!.'"""."
Potassium Arsenite _
Potasswm Cyanide
PotassKim Silver Cyanide . _._
Propanjyi Bromide
Proprtactone. Beta- """""'"!""""
Propwnrtnle
PropamMle. 3-Chtoro- „ _
Promt Chtorofbrmate
Propytene Glycol. AIM Ether _
Propytone O)ode.-._... ...... „,„„„.„„-„ ,-,„..,
Pn H lylanam iii u .
Protnoftte. "».*«._..........„..„„ ....
Pyrone T™.™™....™...................^ .. «•....»..•..»...».«....«•..... i 11 ( i •.
Pyndin*. 244ethyt.S.Vinyl ,.,., , iri „
PyndbM, 4 • Ammo* -»-»...».«.......... H .„.
Dh^«M^*^
•*yHf¥«^l]| 1— „.„..„ tm * urn
Rhodium Trichloride
Salconune- _,,. ,.,-,
Sarln.. . . ._
Setoraum Oxychtorido _.. _ _
SemicarbaiirJe Hydroc,hH»liJe
Silane. (4-Ai«nobutyl)Otethoxymethy».
Sodium Artfvaqumone-1-Sulfonate _.
Sodium Arsenate .
Sodium Afionite ............. „„_.. __„ .
Sodium Aade (Na
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rule, and Regulat.cn.
'^^^•^^•^•^•••^^•••••i^B^^M^^^^i^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^_^_^_l__.I_Zi _ •^^gmuMUiia iO
APPENDIX A.-THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THE.R THRESHOLD PLANN.NG OuANTmES_ContlnUed
(Alphabetical Order]
CAS No.
•^•^— ^VH^M^__
2757-16-6
7446-16-6
2231-57-4
21564-17-0
39196-18-4
640-15-3
297-97-2
108-98-5
79-19-6
5344-82-1
614-78-8
7550-45-0
91-08-7
110-57-6
1031-47-8
24017-47-8
76-02-8
115-21-9
327-98-0
98-13-5
52-68-6
1558-25-4
27137-65-5
998-30-1
75-77-4
624-11-3
1066-45-1
639-58-7
555-77-1
2001-95-6
1314-62-1
108-05-4
3048 64 4
81-61-2
129-06-6
28347-13-9
56270-06-9
1314-64-7
•Only the si
Notes:
a Thachen
b This mat
c Thecateu
d Indicates
Chemical name
Thallous Matonate
Thallous Sulfate
Truocartazide
Thncyanic Aad. 2-(Beraothiazoiytmio)Memyl liter
TrNOfanox — _ _
Thfometon. — _. .
Thnnaan _...„
Thnphonol ..__ ,„..,.„
Thnsemicarbazide "" "" —
Thwurea, (2-Chloropnenyf).
Thtourea. (2-Methylpfunyn. ' ~~" —
Titaraum Tetrachlonde """ "
Toluene 2.4-Omocyanate .--....-.—. _ ___
Toluene 2.6-Diaocyanata "" •
Trar»1.4-Oichlorobutene ~ — "
Trtazotos _ -~ •— ™-
Tnchtoroaeety Chloride _ ~~"
Tnchtoroethylsilane -
Tnchtoronate. _ "
Tnchtoropnenytsilane . ..
Trichtorophon ._ -
TncMoro• "o • •»*!•«« » .> . ---. — M.. ......_... . ~L«I ffcjuwi/i joijmeni
Notes
c,e,
h
e
a.e
a.e
h
k
h
h
•.h
c.e
d.1
a.e
e.h
Reponabie
quantity*
(pounds)
1
100
1
1
100
1
100
100
100
100
1
1
100
100
1
1
1
100
1.000
5,000
100
100
Thres. .
planning quantity
(pounds)
— — — ^^^^^— _
100/10.000
100/10.000
1.000/10.000
10.000
100/10.000
10.000
500
500
100/10.000
100/10.000
500/10.000
100
500
100
500
500/10.000
500
500
500
500
500
10.000
100
500
500
1.000
100/10.000
500/10.000
100 |
1.000/1
100/10.000
1.000
10.000
500/10.000
100/10.000
100/10.000
100/10.000
500
owder. non-molten, non^ohitlon form.
L
e Statutory reportage
I The statutory 1
9 Newcherraosla
h HevwedTPQ
under SARA
caranogemaiy and/or other toaddty « completed.
StolataSaSn"^*" * «**^ ^ - * P"*-* ru*
SSiJlPLT*?1 »•«* «« but because of the* high production volume and recognized touoty are
("Other chemcais").
APPENDIX B.-THE UST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING QUANTITIES
[CAS Number Order)
CAS No.
0
50-00-0
50-O7-7
50-14-6
Organortxx*um Complex (PMN-82-147)
Formak^tiyde — —
Mitomycm C
ErgocaJoferol ^
— ............«_.^_ ,.T
Notes
e
d.1
d
c. e
Reportabie
quantity*
(pounds)
i
1.000
1
1
Threshold
planning quantity
(pounds)
10/10.000
500
500/10.0""
i nnn/m
-------
13404 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
8.—THE UST OF EXTREMELY HAZAAOOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING QUANTITIES—Continued
CCAS Number Oder)
CAS No.
51-21-8
51-75-2
51-83-2
52-68-6
53-66-1
54-11-5
54-62-6
55-91-4
56-25-7
56-38-2
56-72-4
57-14-7
57-24-9
57-47-6
57-57-8
57-64-7
57-74-9
56-38-8
58-69-9
59-88-1
60-34-4
60-41-3
60-51-5
62-38-4
62-53-3
62-73-7
'62-74-8
62-75-9
64-00-8
64-68-8
65-30-5
65-86-1
66-81-9
67-66-3
70-69-9
71-63-6
72-20-8
74-83-9
74-90-8
74-93-1
7S-I5-O
75-18-3
75-21-6
75-44-5
75-55-8
75-56-9
75-74-1
75-77-4
75-76-5
75-79-9
75-86-5
76-01-7
76-02-8
77-47-4
77-78-1
77-61 -8
78-00-2
76-34-2
78-63-5
78-71-7
78-62-O
78-94-4
78-97-7
79-OS-t
79>-T1-6
79-19-9
Chemical name
PHiorouracd ..— -.• _..
Mechloraihamine
Carbacnol CMondfl ..-- — . .— —
Tnchlcfopnon •-
Aminoptenn „
Pnratnvwt __
CoumnpAni „.„_.. ._ _....,.
Oinwltiylhydruma _.._._ _
Physojaamme
PracMtfaetona. Bat*. . ______
Phyaomqmma, Salieytata (i_i) t
Chlordana „ „
Phenoxarsina. 10,10- <>yyflL , _ mi _
Undana :
PnefiyinYdrazina, ^ydiutjttfpfilft
Methyl Hydnun*
Strychnina, SuHaM , ,
Phanyftnarcury Aeatata ..._ _ „ , „ . . ..... ....
Arulma
Dichlofvoa
Sodium FtuanuKMt*
Pneooi 3-(1-Methylethy1}-. Mettiylcarbairff , ,
Nicotffi* Sulfat*
OroUcAcirf .„
CvctotMHmidA
ChlcrqA^n...
PKJO-H)*lo«on« 4 AminA.
gg^""-
Metny* brornxJa
Hydrocyanic Aod „
Matfiyt Mofcoptan
Carbon OauWd*
Dimethyl Sulfida „„.__ „
Ethylana Oxida , _. „ , ,...,... ., ... .
Phoagan* .,.,
riuLi'.lHiiMin'iia
Propyiena Onto
TfltrametnylHHd
T LJ|» *^**3%TMr
H*KA. tllnrin hMiaiil^iaiia
Pfnutfiyl SuHMi^*^
Tabun>
TetraethyOead .. .
Metfcyi Vinyt Ketona _
1 aranartnla _ _.
Acrylammlm , „
Chlavancatic Ac<4
ThmflmicarnAnriA .,.. __._ _ ,., _ _ 1
Notes
• A
e. d
<4
9
-
d
d
a
d.1
d.l»
a. (>
a. •
d. 1
•• 9
c. •
1
1
a
I
I
c,a, 1
a. h
a.d
a
d. h
C. 9,
h
c.d
a.h
dk I
a
Reportaoie
quantity*
(pounds)
.
_
100
f
inn
ton
•
4
in
10
1
1
1
1
in
10
100
5000
10
10
1
5000
1.000
10
100
100
•t
too
10
1
5.000
1
100
Threshold
planning quantity
(pounds)
soo/innnn
in
in non
in mn
c/wwf n nnn
lOO/ iVUOO
1 JVVl
100/10000
100/10000
500
100/10000
1.000
500/10000
1 000/10000
i n/m/in nrin
snn
100/10000
enn/ioonn
500/10 000
1 000
1 000
10/10.000
1.000
500/10000
10/10 000
100/10000
10000
inn/in nnn
10000
100/10.000
500/10000
1 000
100
500
10.000
100
1:000
10
10000
10.000
too
1 DOB
500
' 500
1 000
10.000
500
100
500
10
100
500
500
500
1.000
10
1.000
i.orjovtoooo
100V TO 000
too/to ooo
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 13«3
APPENDIX B.—THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOUJ PLANNING QUANTITIES—Continued
[CAS Number Order]
CAS No.
79-21-0
79-22-1
80-63-7
81-81-2
82-66-6
84-74-2
84-80-0
86-50-0
86-68-4
87-86-5
88-05-1
88-65-7
91-08-7
93-05-0
95-48-7
95-63-6
97-18-7
98-05-6
98-07-7
98-09-9
98-13-5
98-18-6
96-67-3
98-95-3
99-98-9
100-14-1
100-44-7
102-36-3
yH»PhaCTylnnadU«n«ii»
BanzarM, 1.{CMareniBthy<)-4JMHp>, __ ..
laocvane Acid. 3.4-OidltomphBnyl Eater ,..„....„
PI Mil lylll unuta*
Prapai^jyl Hmmifta ,
But8tfww..._._.. .„..
AerelMi ... r. .
Chloraeihancl .. ,. m
AIMinww
Propionrtnla .. .. ...t. ,„.„ ___ ,
Aoymnitni* ,.. , t ii.
EthytenadlaniMW- --mre... _m.......
Formaktafiycta CyonehyiMn
AllylAlenMI ,.
CMemnrataktahyfia nir ,„.., u
Chlornmomyi UaBiyl g»ia>
Sflfnt
TEPP
Vinyl Acatata UonoiMr
Isoorooyt CMorofaMMM
Maartytana „.. ., , . . .
OS^^f^^BMkJflkM^M^ak.
pal^-.j *• -»•-— -r .- .—-.--„...—,— ^— „
• '"•nfli „ — _ ...
•""ITpfWl .. ,
H*^Jfi •^^^••^^•— r.. .....M«. imu..i.i.M._ni
Prop|P C"^"^?1 "*•(•, ... H...u « « , ^,
UAa^MMMyhl^ak
F»M»I ._
Tranft.1.*GkMami!utaM. . _„.,„,
Hip*vv>n>« ., — ,.r — llir ,.„ JM1 _ ,. . ,
BuMVhwtElhef.. . . ' , . ,
DicftkwoMtiyt EttM* ,„
A^4.«%«*«tai«J^
AoiparnnM . „„„.„., „....,
TncMoroethytsilsna ._.___ . . .. _ _,, _m rl.
Dimefox _.^_
EndosuHan ._
Fensutfotrtton
Ahlicart)
Dtocty* Phtfiaiate ~.™™~!™!!"!!!!!1"!~"!!ZI!!"~1".."~!II!II"!
IsopropylmethvlpyrazoM OuneUwtearbarnate _
fct — j. -.—
iXOT98
0
d. h
a
0
^
4. •
a. d
a
-------
1*1 »+*. , Vol. «. No. „ , Wedn..da, Apc|, „_ ^ / RulM ^
122-14-5
123-31-9
123-73-9
124-65-2
124-87-8
126-96-7
128-56-3
129-OO-0
129-06-6
131-11-0
131-52-2
140-29-4
140-76-1
141-66-2
143-33-9
149-74-6
151-50-6
151-56-4
287-92-3
297-78-9
297-97-2
298-00-0
296-02-2
296-04-4
300-62-9
302-01-2
309-OO-2
315-18-4
3*6-42-7
327-98-0
353-42-4
359-06-6
371-62-0
379-79-3
465-73-6
470-90-6
502-39-6
504-24-5
505-60-2
506-61-6
506-68-3
506-78-5
509-14-6
514-73-6
534-07-6
534-52-1
535-69-7
538-07-6
541-25-3
541-53-7
542-76-7
542-68-1
542-90-5
555-77-1
Fenitrottvon
Hydroqumone.,
CrotonaMahyde. (E)- ,
Sodium Cacodylate
Picrotofln
Methacrytonitnle _
Sodium Anthraqumone-1-Sulfonate.
Pyrene _
Warfann Sodium *
Dimethyl Phthalate
Sodium Pentachlorophenate
Benzyl Cyanide,
Pyndine. 2-Methy|.5-Vinyt.
Dicrotophes
Sodium Cyanide (Na(CN))".".."!.
FhJoroaoatB AcxJ
OKhloromethypnenylsilane
Methoxyetnylmercunc Acetate.."!
Potassium Cyanide
Ethyteneimtne.
Ophosphoramde. Octamethyv"!.
Cyclopentane....
Isobenzan
Thionazn.,
Parattwn44ethy1
Pnorafe—
Disulfoton
Ampnetamne
Hydrazme....
AWrm
MexacMtaata
Emetine. Dihydrochtonde.
TrtJillli-|«n«i ii •
ncniaranaio.
556-64-9
558-25-8
563-12-2
563-41-7
584-64-6
594-42-3
597-64-6
Fhjoroacetyl Chlonde-
Ethylene Ruorohydnn.
Enjotamine Tartrate...
CMorfemnnfi
Methyimercunc Dtcyanamide
Pyndine. 4^MTttno-
Mustard Gas..
Potasswm
Cyanogen Bromide'
Cyanogen Iodide
Tetranitromethane...
Drthiazaime Iodide..,
Dithiobwet,
Propionrtrlle. 3-Chtoro..
CMoromethyl Ether
Elhytthioeyanate..,
Tris<2-Chkxoethy1)Amine.
Methyl Isethiocyanata,
Methyl Trnoeyanate
Uethanesutfonyi Ruonde
Ethion
Serrucarb
Toluene 2.4-Diisocyanate....
Perehloromethytmercaptan
Tetraethytin
v -—
Reportatote
quantity*
(pounds)
"^—^«i^^i^^-
1
1
100
1
1
1
1
5,000
1
5.000
1
1
1
1
10
1
1
1
10
1
100
1
1
100
100
10
1.00
t
1
.1.000
1
1
1.000
1
10
1
1
10
1
1
1
100
1.000
to
I
100
100
1
1 ^^^^^
Threshold
Ptanmng quantity
(pounds)
™ ^^^^^~^^™— ^™^^w
500
500/10.000
1.000
100/10.000
500/10.000
500
10.000
1.000/10.000
100/10.000
10.000
100/10.000
500
500
100
100
10/10.000
1.000
500/10.000
100 .,
500
100
10.000 f
100/10.000
500
100/10.000
10
500
1.000
1.000
500/10.000
£00/10.000
1/10.000
500
1.000
10
10
500/10.000
100/10.000
500
500/10.000
500/10.000
500
500
500/10.000
1.000/10.000
500
500/10.000
10/10.000
10/10.000
100/10.000
500
10
100/10.000
1.000
100
10.000
100
500
10.000
1.000
1.000
f.OOO/f 0.000
300
500
100
-------
Federal Renter / Vol. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 22. 1987 / Rulea and Regulation, I.-U
APPENOIX B.-THE UST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THE.* THRESHOLD PLANNING OuANTmES-Contmued
CCAS Number Order]
CAS No.
614-78-8
624-83-9
624-92-0
625-55-8
627-11-2
630-60-4
633-03-4
639-58-7
640-15-3
640-19-7
6. 1 -Oxide
ttetofcarb
iadmium Oxide
Fhallic Oxide
Vanadium PemoxxJe
!inc Phosphide,
Irsenoua Owte ._,
Vopytene Glyool. AIM Ether.., ,
^ntuTiycn A... ,.,,..,
tacrtracn — „...„«.„
III III !•!•) i l|l|l|
>cetcm TMneeiiM iiimjue
Paraojutt.—
'ahnomvon. ,
Paraquat Methosiiifate
*henyisrfetrane
!PN
!admum Stearate
ithyfmercunc Phosphate ..
Jiglyodyl Ether
Caivone
Chemical name
~
........
__
. —
—.-.....-....„....._„.„.,., IIM
—._._._...._ ,
— — •— - ,._.__.__
_
•••••••••(••(•a... ............. .,...,
Notes
f
• .»
i
^ t)
b. •
d.h
e.h
e.h
e.h
e.h
e
d
a
b.e
A h
a.e
a.e
d
e
e.e
a. h
c.e
e
a. a
Reportable
quantity*
5.000
100
1
1 AMI
•t flfM
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10
1
1
«
1
Threshold
planning quantity
500/10,000
500
100
500
1.000
100/10.000
10.000
9VAJS 1U.UUO
500/10.000
1000O
100
inn
500
10/10.000
500
500
500
100
100/10.000
500/10.000
500
100
500
100/10.000
500/10.000
100/10.000
3UO
100/10.00
500/10.000
9UU/lU,lXJ(l
100/10.000
100/10.000
100/10,000
10.000
10
cnn
10.000
10.000
500
100
lU/IO.uOO
500
100/10.000
1.000/10.000
10/10.000
500/10.000
1.000/10.000
500/10.000
1A/1A /Wl
11AJS1U.UUU
1.000/10.000
1.000/10.000
10.000
-------
APPENDIX B.—THE UST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THEIR THRESHOLD PLANNING QUANTITIES—Continued
[CAS Number Order]
CAS Ma
2275-18-5
2497-07-6
2524-03-0
254O-62-1
2570-26-5
2567-90-6
2631-37-0
2636-26-2
2642-71-9
2665-30-7
2703-13-1
2757-18-8
2763-96-4
2776-04-3
3037-72-7
inH..,..,H...».M.».WH»»«»»«»»...»».»»».H.. »»».•».•.•»••••••••
^^n mil tyi «~. iwBf^ ^Ji i^»i IH^H^*W^^*M* ,»».•••»•••••••••.••••••••••••••—•••••••«••••««•••••••••.••«••»•••••••••••••••«•••••••••«
P*" tArinrvl iTUfm
PHncnttnmrtovw* Amri O ^f^mnfhwt-fi-/9-Mfll>>vltt1K)i EttWl EstBT _...„.»......... .......**«......
OyanOptKM ._ - 1 lm«nmn.........«..m,mrt
Aanphoa Ethyl . . —
RirMftfuwiftww A/~tf1 UAttrwL rLFttrwl n44-fMflttWtttHf>iPhnrrvti Pfttnr
Thaltous Matofiatn . L...............^...
M..«.*.»»wa
Stlant, (4-Anwiobuty1)DNjUio*yfnoTfiyt- •
D»WV.,OWW*». An>< Dbnottiri 4-tMutfwlituo) Phonvl Fstor ,, , ,
^tdfnnta 1-CNnmnmnvl Orlvl ,,,
flany^rtayolo 4 S-OlCftlOCO-Z-rrnnuOrOnWlf^)-
QirffMtMft
Mnttwl riMMifcuiiliMi
Cmtmalrtahurta ,,,,,,,,,,
m-M-Mvrf f T* TtiH-tfwif 4 Phlrwn A MnttivA-
DM*M*«| ---- ----- ,
ri^ViOl ^— ..... ****.. . • i ••
CouifuitBtnityt . -.—...-..... ••• — **-
MfMWWMtA«^W««l - - .............. .....
Nwfc^ - ._ ..,„-,
Cobalt ' — •— .....„„,-
C||M|r DimMtfi i • •
ThnDma fhiltiitfl • ••""
fcAfMTiay Ptilrvwl* --•-•!
C/M52%) »— ...«.....T... T
n^MAf^WWIlA i.-ift
Qi tonne .«.«..«••— ..............««»-T« — —
5otorvouo Acid .« O..........T- - -
1 llff~lrTM~UMl ^SfjffktA • •......•
""*•**'»'*" ****•**...«»«* .»•••. *•«•••••••>•.•.•*
Sutfuf Totrafluondw ...«.............»...».....»»...*..—»»
Tolliimiffi MflvflfliJ^tfiriA ......••...•.•...•.••.••••••••«••••••••••
Notes
i
ah
c. e.
g
e.h
e
e
•
•
e.e,
h
lh
•
e
•,•
•
•
••g
•
•
•
•
•
b,e
•
•
•
•
•
•
e.h
e
a.d
•.e
e.1
b.«
•
e
b.e
d
•
0.1
1
e.1
b.h
e.l
d
k
I
e
e
e
e. k
d
Reportage
quantity*
(pounos)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.000
1
1
1
1
1
1
100
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
100
1
1
1
1
100
1
100
1
1
1
1
1
100
1
1
1
1.000
1
1
100
100
1.000
1.000
1.000
1
1
1
1.000
10
10
10
100
1
1
1
5.000
Threshold
planning quantity
(pounds)
100/10.000
500
500
100
100/10.000
500
500/10.000
1.000
100/10.000
500
500
100/10.000
10.000
500/10.000
1.000
10.000
500
500
500/10.000
500
100/10.000
100/10.000
500
100/10.000
500/10.000
100
100/10.000
1.000
100/10.000
100/10.000
500
100/10.000
100/10.000
500/10.000
100/10.000
10/10.000
10.000
10.000
500
100
100/10.000
500/10.000
100
100
1.000/10.000
500
500
100
500
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
100
500
500/10.000
500
100
1.000/10.000
500
10
100
500
100
500
-------
Reportable
quantity*
(pounds)
Threshold
planning quanmy
(pounds)
Sodium Arsenite.
Mevinphoa
Thalloua Chloride ..I
Selenium Oxyehionde
Phosptvne
CarnphecfUor
......_..._...
Plantinoua Chloride
Chromic Chlonda. ________
Phoaphofua Oxychtonde
Indium Tatraehlond*
— • •••• i WMWMiMWI*WaBT •»•••....
Phoapnorua Pentachtoride
Ozone
Rhodium Trichloride.
Sodium Selenrte
Sodium TeWurtte
Nrtncdode
Nitrogen Otanto
Potasawm A/tanrte
_____
Ettianol. U-OtchJoro-. Acetate
Cobalt Carbon*
Methaimdophoa
Methacrotan Oiacetata
Pana Green
Thcaitonyl Metfiylcyclnnantaulanyl
Sodium Setonate
Gallwm TrtchkxWe
Platinum Tetrachioride
Nickel Cattonyt.
Iron. Pentacaroonyl
TeRunum
____
--------- | _____
toimanum CMoropladna
Oecaborane<14)
7784-42-1
7784-46-5
7786-34-7
7791-12-0
7791-23-3
7803-51-2
8001-35-2
8023-53-8
8065-48-3
10025-45-7
10025-73-7
10025-67-0
10025-97-5
10026-13-6
10028-15-6
10031-59-1
10049-07-7
10102-18-6
10102-20-2
10102-43-6
10102-44-0
10124-50-2
10140-67-1
10210-68-1
10265-92-6
10294-34-5
10311-64-6
10478-95-6
12002-03-6
12108-13-3
13071-79-6
13171-21-6
13194-48-4
13410-01-0
13450-90-3
13454-96-1
13463-39-3
13463-40-6
13494-60-9
14167-18-1
15271-41-7
16752-77-5
16919-58-7
17702-41-9
17702-57-7
19287-45-7
19624-22-7
20816-12-0
20830-75-5
20659-73-6
21546-32-4
21564-17-0
21609-90-5
21908-53-2
21923*23-9
22224-92-6
23135-22-0
23422-53-9
23505-41-1
24017-47-6
24934-91-6
26419-73-8
26628-22-8
28347-13_9
28772-S«.7
Formatanata HyonxMond*
Pirlmifua-Ethyl
Tnazofoa .
Chlotmep
TncMonXOichl
Xyrylene Oichlonde..
Bromadoione .._..
100
500/10.000
500
100/10.000
500
500
500/10.000
10.000
500
10.000
1/10.000
500
10.000
500
100
100/10.000
10,000
100/10.000
500/10.000
100
100
500/10.000
1.000
10/10.000
100/10.000
500
100/10.000
1.000
500/10.000
100
100
100
1.000
100/10.000
500/10.000
10.000
I1
100
500/10.000
500/10.000
500/10.000
500/10.000
10.000
500/10.000
100/10.000
100
500
10.000
10/10.000
500
500
10.000
500/10.000
500/10.000
500
10/10.000
100/10.000
500/10.000
1.000
500
500
100/10.000
500
500
100/10000
100/10000
-------
13410 Federa] Renter / Vot. 52. No. 77 / Wednesday. April 2Z 1987 / Rule9 and Regulations
APPENDIX B.-THE UST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND THE.R THPESHOU)
(CAS Number Oder]
CAS No.
30674-60-7
39196-18-4
50782-69-9
53558-25-1
58270-08-9
62207-76-5
CnemicaJname
Metnacrytoytoxyethyl Isocyanata.
Thtofanox.
PNwphonothioic ACK!. MetrtyK S^Biso"Metr^^
Zinc. Denlorott>rjmiriyW5((((Matr^^
Cobalt ((2^^1.2^tr«riadivtbia(NitriloiiiathwtMMMnBa/&n«<»)hMiaiaiq))(2.).
Only the statutory or final RO • shown. For more rrtormaoon. aaa 40 CFR TaMa 3014.
JOtOK
Notes
e.h
a. h
a
a
Reportable I Threshold
Ouanmy• planning Quantity
(pounds) | (pounds)
1
100
1
1
1
1
100
100/10.000
100
100/10.000
100/10.000
100/10.000
a Tha ehamical doea not meat acute tenacity criteria. Ita TPQ to aat at 10.000 oounda.
non^on
sK
Revned TPQ baaed on new or r«-evaJuatad toncrty data.
L ^2 feS""* * '*?l5lto!2l2!!* «* **• •« c"*"^ ** «» tachnicaJ IMW aa n propoaad rula.
k The TPO was ravnadaftar proposal dua to cateulabon arrer. »-«»~~« raw. .
^
|FR Doc. 87-8089 Hied 4-20-87; 11:24 am]
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 81 / Tuesday. April 28. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 15321
ENVIRONUEHTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 300 and 355
[FRL-31M-*!
Ejrtr
tardoua Subsfe
i List
and Threshold Planning Qi
Emergency Planning and Release
Notfflcation Requirements; Correction
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule: correction.
r. The Agency published two
Appendices to a final regulation at 52 FR
13378 (April 22,1987). This document
corrects an error in Appendix A to Part
355.
M10N CONTACT
Richard A. Homer at (202) 382-7945.
Dated: April M. 1967.
David Speights,
Prepeeednesi Staff
Accordingly, in FRL-3173-6 published
in Federal Register, April 22,1987, we
make the following correction to
Appendix A of Part 355. m the entry on
page 13402. for CAS No. 7864-93-9,
"Sulfur Acid" should read "Sulfuric
Add."
Please note that additional corrections
to this document are published
elsewhere hi the Corrections Section of
tUa issue of the Federal Register.
(FRDoe. «7-eMO Filed 4-27-47; 8:45 am]
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION (AMTRAK)
49 CPR Part 701
Freedom of Information Act; Schedule
of Fees and Otter Administrative
: National Railroad Passenger
Corporation (Amtrak or the
Corporation).
ACTION: Final nnV -
also
Freedom of Infomation Act (FOIA) to
iacoiporate fecentchangea to the Act
regaiding.thR establishment of fees
chmyidlor the search, review, and
duplieatiaa-of records in naponee to
FOIA requests. The rules follow the
guidejines.esUhkehed.by the Office of
anoTBudget and the
Depattnesf of Justice. In addition,
Amtrak propoaed.to amend its
regulations to reflect certain
administrative changes within the
Corporation. Amtrak is adopting the
proposed rule changes as final.
EFFECTIVE DATE May 25, 1987.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Freedom of Information Reform Act of
1988 (Pub. L 99-570) requires agencies
to amend their regulations of FOIA fees
in conformance with OMB guidelines on
uniform FOIA fees issued pursuant to
this act. The terms, definitions, and fee
schedules of this rule are fully
consistent with OMB's notice (52 FR
1992, January 16. 1967) and final
publication of fee schedule and
guidelines (52 FR 10012. March 27. 1987),
and guidelines issued by the Department
of Justice in its "New Fee, Waiver Policy
Guidance" issued on April 2, 1987. In
addition. NRPC amended its regulations
to reflect certain administrative changes
within the Corporation. NRPC is
adopting its proposed rule changes
published on pages 13066-68 In the
Federal Register since no comments
were received during the designated
comment period. Only minor technical
changes have been made in the final
rules from the proposed rules published
by NRPC
CR INFORMATION CQiiTAGTC
Medaris Oliveri. FOIA Officer. (202)
383-3991.
Uat of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 701
Freedom of Information.
49 CFR Part 701 is amended as
follows:
PART 701— (AMENDED)
1. The authority citation for Part 701 Is
revised to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C 552 M amended by
sections 1801-1804 of the Omnibui Anti-Drug
Abuse Act of 1986 (Pub. L 99-670) which
conttunt toe Picvuuui of huonnBtion Refonn
Act of HB8 and Sec. M6(iJ of the Rail
Passenger Service Act 45 U AC 948(8).
9701.2 [Amended]
2. In S 701.2, the definition of
"President" in paragraph (b) is revised
to read as follows: "President means the
President of the Corporation or his
delegee."
9701.3 (Amended)
3. In 8 701.3(a), remove the
expressions "the FOIA" and "the
Freedom of Information Act" and
substitute in its place the word "law."
4. 9 701.3, paragraph (b) is revised to
read ae follows: "(b) A requested record
of the Corporation may be withheld
from disclosure if it comes within one or
more of the exempttone In 8TU.S.C.
552(b) or is otherwise exempted by
law."
9 TOM (Amended]
5. In 9 701.4. paragraph (a)(4) is
revised to read as follows; "(4) The
request shall be addressed to the
Freedom of Information Officer,
National Railroad Passenger
Corporation, 400 North Capitol Street,
NW.. Washington, DC 2f 001."
6. In 9 701.4. paragrapi (c). remove the
expression "employee handling the
request" and substitute v\ its place the
expression "Freedom of information
Officer."
7. In 9 701.4. paragraph (d) is revised
to read as follows: "(d) The submission
of a FOIA request constitutes an
agreement by the requester to pay the
fees specified in 9 701.7 unless the
requester is entitled to a fee waiver or
specifies in the request a different
amount to which the Corporation agrees
in writing."
8. In 9 701.4. a new paragraph (e) is
added to read as follows: "(e) Searches
will be made for requested records in
order of receipt Bach so-called
'continuing request' will be treated as a
one-time request"
9. Section 701.7 is revised to read as
follows:
9701.7 Fee*.
(a) Cotegarie* of requestors. There are
four rnlpgnrigs of FOIA requesters:
commeroei DM requesters:
representatives of news media:
educational and noncommercial
scientific institutions; and all other
requesters. The time limits for
processing requests shall begin upon
receipt of a proper request by the
Freedom of Information Office which
reasonably describes the records sought
and which identifies the specific
category of the requester. The Freedom
of Information Refonn Act of 1986
prescribes specific levels of fees for
each of these categories.
(1) Commercial use requester. When
records are requested for commercial
use. the fee policy of NRPC is to levy full
allowable direct costs for search, review
for release, and duplication of records
sought Commercial users are not
entitled to two hours of free search time
nor 100 free pages of reproduction of
documents nor waiver or reduction of
fees baaed on an assertion that
disclosure would be m the public
interest Commercial use is ripfliwd aa
use that furthers the commercial, trade
or profit interests of the requester or
person on whose behalf the reqneat is
made. In determining whether a
requester falls within the comnerctel
use category. NRPC ahail fint look to
the use to whidra requester wtU pot the
documents requested. Where a
requester doea not explain the use or
where explanation is insufficient NRPC
may draw reasonable inferences from
-------
15322 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 81 / Tuesday. April 28. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
the requester's identity and charge fees
accordingly.
(2) Representatives of the news
media. When records are requested by
representatives of the news media, the
fee policy of NRPC is to levy
reproduction charges only, excluding
charges for the first 100 pages. The term
"representatives of the news media"
refers to any person actively gathering
news for an entity that is organized and
operated to publish or broadcast news
to the public. The term "news" means
information that is about current events
or that would be of current interest to
the public. Examples of news media
entities include television or radio
stations broadcasting to the public at
large, and publishers of periodicals (but
only in those instances where they can
qualify as disseminators of "news") who
make their products available for
purchase or subscription by the general
public. These examples are not intended
to be all-inclusive. Moreover, as
traditional methods of news delivery
evolve (e-g.. electronic dissemination of
newspapers through
telecommunications services), such
alternative media would be Included in
this category. "Freelance" journalists
may be regarded as working for a news
organization if they can demonstrate a
solid basis for expecting publication
through an organization, even though
not actually employed by that entity. To
be eligible Cor inclusion in this category.
requesters must meet the criteria
specified hi this section, and the request
must not be made for commercial use as
this term is defined under paragraph
(a)(l) of this section,
(3) Educational and noncommercial
scientific institution requesters. When
records are requested by an educational
or noncommercial scientific institution
whose purpose is scholarly or scientific
research, the fee policy of NRPC is to
levy reproduction charges only.
excluding charges for the first 100 pages.
Educational institution referes to a
preschool a public or private
elementary or seconderyschool. an
institution of graduate Hgher eduation,
an institntioB ot under ggsiiimte higher
education. aattestitnttsaJe* piefoooional
education and an InslHuHeu of
vocational education, which operates a
program or programs of scholarly
research. Noncommercial scientific
institution refers to an institution that is
not operated on. a-commercial basis as
defined under paragraph-(aHl) of this
section and.whkh is operated solely for
the purpoae of conducting scientific
research, thamsoita of which are not
intended to promote any particular
product or industry. To be eligible for
inclusion In this category, requesters
must show that the request is being
made under the auspices of a qualifying
institution and that the records are not
sought for commercial use or to further
an individual goal, but are sought in
furtherance of scholarly or scientific
research.
(4) All other requesters. For other
requesters who do not come under the
purview of paragraphs (a)(l) through
(a)(3) of this section, the fee policy of
NRPC is to levy full reasonable direct
cost of search for and duplication of
records sought, except that the first 100
pages of reproduction and the first two
hours of search time shall be furnished
without charge.
(b) Aggregating requests. A requester
may not file multiple requests at the
same time, each seeking portions of a
document or documents, in order to
avoid payment of fees. When NRPC
believes that a requester or. on rare
occasions, a group of requesters acting
in concert is attempting to break a
request down into a series or requests
for the purpose of evading the
assessment of fees. NRPC may
aggregate any such requests and charge
accordingly. Before aggregating requests
from more than one requester. NRPC
must have a concrete basis on which to
conclude that the requesters are acting
in concert and are acting specifically to
avoid payment of fees. In no case may
NRPC aggregate multiple requests on
unrelated subjects from one requester.
(c) Waiver or reduction of foes. (1)
NRPC may waive all fees or levy a
reduced fee when disclosure of the
information is deemed to be in the
public interest because it is likely to
contribute significantly to public
understanding of the operations or
activities of NRPC and is not primarily
in the commercial interest of the
requester.
(2) In determining whether disclosure
is in the public interest, the following
factors may be considered:
(i) The relation of the records to the
operations or activities of the NRPC;
(ii) The informative value of the
information to be disclosed;.
(iii) Any contnbutian to an,
understanding of the subject by the
general public likely to result from
disclosure;
(iv) The significance of that
contribution to thapublic understanding
of the subject:
(v) The nature of the requester's
personal interest if any, in the •
Information requested; and
(vi) Whether the disclosure weuld be
primarily in the requester's commercial
interest.
(3) In all cases, the burden shall be on
the requester to present evidence or
information in support of a request for a
waiver of fees.
(d) Advance payment. (1) When NRPC
estimates or determines that allowable
charges that a requester may be
required to pay are likely to exceed
S2SO. NRPC may require a requester to
make an advance payment of the entire
fee before continuing to process the
request
(2) When a requester has previously
failed to pay a fee in a timely fashion
(i.e.. within 30 days of the date of the
billing). NRPC may require the requester
to pay the full amount owed plus any
applicable interest as provided in
paragraph (h) and make an advance
payment of the full amount of the
estimated fee before the agency begins
to process a new request or a pending
request from that requester.
(3) When NRPC acts under paragraph
(d)(l) or (d)(2) of this section, the
administrative time limits prescribed In
subsection (a)(8) of the FOIA (La-10
working days from the receipt af4aittal-
requests and 20 working days front
receipt of appeals from initial denial
plus permissible extensions of ths*e -
time limits) will begin only after RJ»e
has received-fee payments under
paragraplr(d)tl}or (4X2) ef this.section.
(e) Pet schedule (IKMtuan/ searche.
for records. NRPC will efaacge $27 per
hour for the salary and firing* benefits, of
pereonnetconducting, the search. NRPC
may assess charges for time spent
searching, even if itfatiajto'tocate the - -
records or if records tocdad'are
determined to be exempt from
disclosure.
(2) Computer searches for records. For
each request NRPC will charge the
actual direct cost of providing this
service. This will include the cost of
operating the central processing unit
(CPU) for that portion of operating time
that is directly attributable to search for
records responsive to the request and
operator/programmer salary
apportionable to the search. NRPC may
assess charges for time spent searching,
even if it fails to locate the records or tf
records toasted are determined-to be
exempt from disclosure^
(3) Dupiioatfoa mater fflFFbr copies of
documents reproduced on e standard
office copying machine in sixes up to 8V4
x 14 inches, the charge* will be 125 per
. ^
(H) The fee for reproducing copies of.'
records over 8% a" 14 Inches or whose
physical characteristics do not permit
reproduction byroutine electrostatic
copying shall'be the direct cosfdf
-------
15412
Corrections
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains editorial corrections of previously
published Presrienttal. Rule. Proposed
Rule, and Notice documents and volumes
ol the Code of Federal Regulations.
These corrections are prepared by the
Office of the Federal Register. Agency
prepared corrections are issued as signed
documents and appear m the appropriate
document caagooes eliMrtwe in the
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 300 and 355
(FRL-3173-e)
Extreme* Hanrdou.Suk.ter
Notmcaflan Raqutramwitv
Correction
In rule document 87-9089'beginning on
page 13378 in the issue of Wednesday.
April 22.1987. make the following
corrections?
1. On page 13385. in the second
column, in the next to the last
paragraph, in the second line.
"important" should read "import".
PART 355—[CORRECTED]
Appendix A—(Corrected]
2. On page 13398. in Appendix A. in
the entry for CAS No. 62207-76-5, remove
the extra spaces after "Cobalt." and
"Ethanediylbie".- •-
3. On page 13401. in the entry for CAS
No.4418-66-0. the Chemical name should
read "Phenol.2,2f-Thiobis(4-Chloro-6-
Methyl)-".
Appendix B—{Corrected]
4. On page-134e5.-tarAppendix B. in
the entry for CAS No. 97-18-7. the
Chemical name should read
"Phenol.2.2'-Thiobis(4.6-dichloro)-".
5. On page 13410. in the entry for CAS
Federal Register
Veil 52. No 81
Tuesda>. April ZR. 1987
No. 62207-76-5. remove the extra spaces
after "CobalL".
For an Environmental Protection
Agency correction to this document, see
the Rules Section ol this issue.
•UMOCODE 1HS«tO
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 522
Imptantaflen or InJectaMe Doeage
Form Haw Antmal Drags Wot Subject
to CertMbaUen; Amttaein Sutfste
(Cawactatfl
2. In the third column, in § 522.56(a)
the third line, "or" should read "or*.
COM im-ot-o
Correction
In rust document 87-8115 appearing on
page 11816 in the issue of Monday. April
13.1987. make the foBowing corrections:
1. In the second column, under
SUPPISMENTAMY INFORMATION, in the
llth line. "colT was misspelled.
m
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
National Airspace Review
Enhancement Program: Advisory
Committee Meeting
Correction
In notice document 87-8113 appearing
on page 11905 in the issue of Monday.
April 13.1987. make the following
correction:
In the first column, under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, in the
fifth line, the telephone number should
read "(202) 267-3146".
BtLUNQ CODE 1S08-01-0
-------
-------
Wednesday
May 6, 1987
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 260 et at
Burning of. Hazardous Waste in Boilers
and Industrial Furnaces; Proposed Rule
-------
16982
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 260,261,264,265,266,
270, and 271
(FRL-3153-5)
Burning of Hazardous Waste In Boilers
and Industrial Furnaces
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule and request for
comment.
SUMMARY: Under this proposal, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
would expand controls on hazardous
waste combustion to regulate the
burning of hazardous waste fuels in
boilers and industrial furnaces.
Currently, only the burning of hazardous
waste in incinerators is subject to
regulation although burning hazardous
waste fuels in boilers and industnal
furnaces can pose similar hazards to
human health and the environment.
Boilers and industrial furnaces have
been exempt from regulation pending
Agency efforts to determine whether
regulations for burning in these devices
should differ from those for incineration
in light of the different scope of
practices and the different combustion
devices and wastes involved. The
Agency has completed those efforts and
today proposes to control emissions of
toxic organic compounds, toxic metals,
and hydrogen chloride from boilers and
industrial furnaces burning hazardous
waste. In addition, today's proposal
would subject owners and operators of
these devices to the general facility
standards applicable to hazardous
waste treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities. Further, today's proposal
would subject hazardous waste fuel
storage units at burner facilities to Part
264 permit standards. Burner storage
operations at existing facilities are
generally now subject only to interim
status standards under Part 265.
Finally, today's rule proposes action
on two petitions. Based on a petition by
Dow Chemical Corporation, the Agency
is proposing to classify halogen acid
furnaces as industnal furnaces under
§ 260.10. Based on a petition by the
American Iron and Steel Institute. EPA
is proposing to classify coke and coal tar
fuels produced by recycling coal tar
decanter sludge. EPA Hazardous Waste
No. K087, as products rather than solid
waste.
DATES: EPA will accept public
comments on this proposed rule until
July 6.1987. except that comments on
he proposal to regulate hazardous
waste fuel blending tanks will be
accepted until June 5.1987.
Public hearings are scheduled as
follows:
1. Chicago. May 27,1987.
2. San Francisco, May 28.1987.
3. Arlington. VA, June 5.1987.
Requests to present oral testimony
must be received by 10 days before each
public hearing.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed
rule should be sent to RCRA Docket
Section (WH-562). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street SW.,
Washington. DC 20460 [Attn: Docket No.
F-B7-BBFP-FFFFFJ. The public docket is
located in Rm. S-212 and is available for
viewing from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.. Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays.
The hearings will be held at the
following locations:
1. Holiday Inn—O'Hare. 5440 N. River
Road. Rosemont, Illinois 60018. May 27.
1987.
2. Holiday Inn—Fisherman's Wharf,
1300 Columbus Avenue, San Francisco.
California 94133. May 28.1987.
3. Sheraton-National Hotel. Columbia
Pike and Washington Blvd., Arlington,
VA 22204. June 5.1987.
The hearings will begin at 9 a.m. with
registration at 8:30 a.m. and will run
until 4:30 p.m. unless concluded earlier.
The meetings may be adjourned earlier
than the scheduled time if there are no
remaining comments. Anyone wishing to
make a statement at the hearing should
notify, in writing. Mr. William
Richardson. Public Participation Office,
Office of Solid Waste (WH-562).
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
Persons wishing to make oral
presentations must restrict them to 15
minutes and are encouraged to have
written copies of their complete
comments for inclusion in the official
record.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
RCRA HOTLINE, toll free, at (800)424-
9346 or at (202) 382-3000. Single copies -
of the proposed rule are available by
calling the RCRA Hotline. For technical
information, contact Dwight Hlustick,
Waste Combustion Section, Waste
Management Division. Office of Solid
Waste. WH-565A. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW.,
Washington. DC 20460. Telephone: (202)
382-7917.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preamble Outline
Part One: Background
I. Legal Authority
II. Overview of the Proposed Rule
III. Relationship of the Proposed Rule to
Other Rules
A May 19.1980. rules
B. January 4.1985. redefinition of solid
waste
C. November 29.1985. administrative
controls
D. TSCA waste PCB rules
E. Proposed rules for burners of off-
specification used oil fuels
IV. Need for Controls
A Boilers
B Industnal furnaces
1. Cement kilns.
2. Light-weight aggregate kilns.
3. Lime kilns.
4 Blast furnace systems.
5. Sulfur recovery furnaces.
C. Risks posed by improper burning
Part Two. Major Regulatory Approaches
I. Use of National Performance Standards
with Risk-based Options Versus Case-
by-Case Risk Assessment for AH
Facilities
II. Regulation of Burning for Either Energy
Recovery or Destruction
III. Regulation of Burning Solely for Materials
Recovery in An Industnal Furnace
Part Three. Discussion of Proposed Controls
I. Overview
II. Overview of EPA's Risk Assessment
A. Identification of reasonable, worst case
facilities
1. Flat terrain modeling.
2. Complex terrain modeling.
B. Reference air concentrations for
systemic toxicants
C. Risk from Carcinogens
D. Assumptions Used in the Risk
Assessment
UL Proposed Controls for Emissions of Toxic
Organic Compounds
A. Hazard posed by combustion of toxic
organic compounds
B. Basis for the DRE and CO performance
standards for toxic organic compounds
1 Results of emissions testing.
2. Overview of test program.
3. Interpretation of test results.
4. Basis for the DRE standard.
5. Basis for the CO standard.
C. Waiver of trial bum for boilers operated
under special operating requirements
1. A minimum of 50 percent of the fuel
fired to the boiler must be gas. oil. or
coal.
2. Boiler load must be at least 25 percent.
3. The" hazardous waste fuel, as fired.
must have a heating value of at least
8.000 Btu/lb.
4. The hazardous waste fuel must be
fired with an atomization firing system.
D. Start-up and shut-down operations
E. Waiver of trial bum and CO limits for
low nsk waste
IV. Proposed Controls for Emissions of Toxic
Metals
A. Hazard posed by combustion of metal-
bearing wastes
B. Basis for the metals standards
1. Overview.
2. Identification of metals of concern.
3. Basis for the standards.
4. Tier I—Tier 111 standards.
5. Tier IV standards.
6. Implementation of the metals controls.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
16983
C Impacts of the metals standards on the
regulated community
V Proposed Controls for Emissions of
Hydrogen Chloride
A. Hazard posed by combustion of highly-
chlorinated waste
B Basis for the standards
VI Nontechnical Requirements
VII Proposed Exemption of Small Quantity
On-site Burners
A. Scope
B Rationale
C. Basis for selecting quantity limits
1 Composition of hazardous waste
stream.
2. Toxicity of hazardous constituents.
3 Destruction efficiency.
4. Clustering and size of sources.
5 Dispersion
6 Assumptions regarding metals and
chlorine in waste fuels.
D Exemption of associated storage
VIII. Regulation of Combustion Residuals
A. Residuals from boilers
B Residuals from industrial furnaces
Part Four Interim Status Standards and
Permit Procedures
I. Interim Status Standards
A General facility standards
B Operating requirements
1 Metals and hydrogen chloride
standards.
2. Carbon monoxide limits.
C. Monitoring and inspections
D Waste analysis and closure
E. Prohibition on burning dioxm-containmg
wastes
F Exemption of small quantity on-site
burners
II. Permit Procedures
A Proposed 8 270 22. specific Part B
information
1 Boilers operated under special
conditions for conformance with organic
emission standard
2. Waiver of a trial burn to demonstrate
conformance with the metals emission
standard.
3. Waiver of a trial bum to demonstrate
conformance with the HCl emission
standard.
4 Data in lieu of a trial burn
B. Proposed i 270.65. Special forms of
permits
1. Permits for new boilers exempt from
trial burn requirements.
2 Permits for new boilers and industrial
furnaces subject to a trial bum
3 Permit procedures for interim status
facilities.
Part Five- Storage Standards. Halogen Acid
Furnaces, and Other Issues
I. Storage
A. Standards for storage tanks
B. Proposal to regulate hazardous waste
fuel blending tanks
II Proposed Designation of Halogen Acid
Furnaces as Industrial Furnaces
A Dow's petition
B Bases for classification as an industrial
furnace
1. HAFs are integral components of
manufacturing process
2. HAFs recover materials and energy.
3 HAFs meet industrial furnace criteria
C. Proposed designation
D. Regulations applicable to HAFs
HI Proposed Classification of Coke and By-
Product Coal Tar Containing Tar
Decanter Sludge (EPA Hazardous Waste
K087) as a Product
A AISI petition
B Process description
C Basis for proposed approval of the AISI
petition
IV Notice of Intent to Amend the Subpart O
Incinerator Standards
V Boilers. Industrial Furnaces, and
Incinerators are BOAT for HOCs
VI. Classification of Pickle Liquor
VII. Landfill Gas
Part Six: Administrative. Economic, and
Environmental Impacts, and List of Subjects
I State Authority
A. Applicability of rules in authorized
states
B Effect on state authorization
II Regulatory Impact Analysis
A. Purpose
B. Affected population
C. Cost analysis
1. Methodology
2. Results.
D Economic impacts
1 Methodology.
2 Screening analysis results.
3. Facility level analysis results.
E. Risk analysis
1. Methodology
2. Results.
F Regulatory flexibility analysis
1 Methodology.
2. Results.
G. Paperwork reduction act
III List of Subiects in 40 CFR Parts 260.261.
264. 265. 266. 270. and 271
Appendix A—Reference Air Concentrations
(RACs) for Threshold Constituents
Appendix B—Risk-Specific Doses for
Carcinogenic Constituents at 10"* Risk
Level
Appendix C—Example Tier I and Tier fl
Calculations
Today's preamble is organized into
six major parts. Part One contains
background information that
summarizes major provisions of the rule.
It also describes how today's rule fits
into the Agency's strategy for regulating
all burning of hazardous waste. Finally,
this part identifies the combustion units
that would be regulated—boilers and
industrial furnaces—and describes the
hazard that may be posed by the
uncontrolled burning of hazardous
waste.
Part Two discusses why the proposed
controls are based on national
performance standards rather than
entirely on case-by-case risk
assessments. This part also discusses
why the rules would apply to the
burning of hazardous waste in boilers or
industrial furnaces irrespective of the
heating value of the waste. Thus, these
rules would supercede the sham
recycling enforcement policy that
heretofore applied the hazardous waste
incinerator standards of Subpart O of
Parts 264 or 265 to the burning of low
heating value hazardous waste in
boilers or industnal furnaces. Under
today's rules, the incinerator standards
of Subpart O would never apply to
boilers and industrial furnaces. This part
also explains that today's rules would
apply to the burning of hazardous waste
in an industnal furnace solely for the
purpose of materials recovery, but also
explains when such burning is deemed
not to involve RCRA solid wastes.
Part Three discusses the proposed
controls on burning. It explains why
emissions of toxic organic compounds
are controlled with a 99.99 percent
destruction and removal efficiency
(ORE) performance standard coupled
with limits on flue gas carbon monoxide
(CO) levels. The ORE standard would
ensure destruction of organic
constituents in the hazardous waste fuel
and the CO limits would ensure the
device continuously operates at high
combustion efficiency and. thus, is not
likely to emit incompletely burned
organics at levels that pose significant
risk. This part also discusses the
proposed automatic waiver of a trial
burn for boilers operated under special
conditions. The special conditions were
developed to ensure that the boiler
continuously operates at high
combustion efficiency when burning
hazardous waste and. thus, achieves at
least a 99.99 percent ORE for
constituents in the feed, and has
minimal emission of incompletely
burned organic compounds. In addition.
this part discusses the proposed waiver
of a trial burn and the flue gas carbon
monoxide limits for boilers and
industnal furnaces demonstrated to
bum low risk waste. The demonstration
is based on projected reasonable, worst-
case emission rates absent those
controls, site-specific dispersion
modeling, and comparison of predicted
ground level concentrations of
pollutants to reference levels. Part Three
also discusses the basis for the proposed
limits on metals and hydrogen chloride
emissions, and the four-tiered approach
to implement those limits: Tier I—
demonstration of compliance with
metals and chlorine specification levels
in the hazardous waste itself, or in the
hazardous waste as fuel (i.e., after
blending); Tier II—demonstration that
the feed rate of metals and chlorine.
considering levels in the hazardous
waste, other fuels, and industrial
furnace feedstocks, does not exceed
prescribed limits: Tier Ill-
demonstration that prescribed emission
rates are not exceeded: and Tier IV—
-------
16984
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules'
demonstration that reference air
concentrations are not exceeded. An
owner or operator would be in
compliance by demonstrating
conforms nee with any of the tiers In
addition, this part discusses the
proposed exemption of small quantity
onsite burners and the regulation of
combustion residuals.
Part Four discusses proposed interim
status standards and permit standards
and procedures. In particular, this part
discusses how the CO limits and metals
and HC1 standards would apply during
interim status.
Part Five discusses subjecting existing
burner storage units currently in interim
status to the Part 264 permit standards
at the same time the boiler or industrial
furnace is permitted. On-site burners
who accumulate hazardous waste for
less than 90 days, however, will
continue to be subject to the special
requirements under § 262.34. This part
dlso discusses a proposal to designate
halogen acid furnaces as industrial
furnaces and attempts to distinguish
clearly between such furnaces and
incinerators burning halogenated
hazardous waste. In addition, this part
discusses a proposal to classify coke
and coal tar fuels produced by recycling
coal tar decanter sludge. EPA
Hazardous Waste No. KO87. as
products rather than solid (and
hazardous) waste because the recycling
does not significantly increase the levels
of toxic constituents in the materials.
Further. Part Five discusses the
Agency's intent to develop conforming
amendments to the incinerator
standards of Subpart O of Parts 264 and
265 to control metals emissions directly
and to ensure that incinerators
continuously operate at high combustion
efficiency to help minimize emissions of
incompletely burned organic
compounds. Finally, this part addresses
two unrelated issues: (1) A proposal to
clarify that the pickle liquor listing.
Hazardous Waste No. KO62. applies to
pickle liquor generated by plants in the
iron and steel industry, not just to plants
that actually produce iron and steel: and
(2) a proposal to amend an exemption
provided in the November 29,1985,
burning and blending final rule for gas
recovered from hazardous waste
landfills to extend the exemption to
include gas recovered from solid waste
landfills.
Part Six discusses how the rules
would operate immediately upon
promulgation, even in States authorized
to operate the hazardous waste
program. This part also discusses the
economic impacts the rule would have
on the regulated community. EPA notes
that any final rules would be codified
differently from today's proposal. The
Agency intends to codify these final
rules in a new subpart of Part 266.
Part One: Background
/. Legal Authority
These regulations are proposed under
the authority of Section 1006. 2002(a),
3001. 3004. 3005. and 3007 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act as amended by the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act of 1976, the Quiet Communities Act
of 1978. the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1980. and the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984.42 U.S.C. 6905,
6912(a). 6921, 6924. 6925. and 6927.
//. Overview of the Proposed Rule
EPA is proposing today to expand
controls on burning hazardous waste to
regulate burning in boilers and
industrial furnaces. These proposed
rules are similar to the Agency's
standards for owners and operators of
hazardous waste incinerators under
Parts 264 and 265. Owners and
operators of boilers and industrial
furnaces would be subject to the general
facility standards for hazardous waste
treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities, including requirements
concerning emergency procedures,
closure, and financial assurance. Permit
requirements would be similar to those
for incinerators1 in that controls would
limit the emission of toxic organic
compounds, toxic metals, and hydrogen
chloride. However, these rules would
differ from the controls for incinerators
in several important ways. In addition to
requiring a 99.99 percent destruction and
removal efficiency (DRE) of principal
organic hazardous constituents (POHCs)
in the hazardous waste feed, these rules
would attempt to minimize the emission
of incompletely burned organic
compounds by limiting the flue gas
concentration of carbon monoxide, thus
ensuring the device operates
continuously at high combustion
efficiency. These rules would also
provide direct control of metals
emissions, and would control metals
and hydrogen chloride emissions with
risk-based standards. In addition, trial
burns would be automatically waived
for boilers meeting special operating
requirements. Finally, to make the rules
as cost-effective as possible, we are
proposing discretionary alternative
1 The incinerator standards of Subpart 0.40 CFR
Part 264. control emissions of organic constituents
In the waste with a technology-based 99.99%
destruction and removal efficiency (DRE) standard.
and control particulate and hydrogen chloride
emissions with technology-based emission limits.
standards based on a common
principle—ground level concentrations
of pollutants emitted from the facility
must protect public health and the
environment. Thus, today's rules would
have optional requirements, some of
which require site specific risk
assessment.
These proposed rules would apply to
burning of hazardous waste in boilers
and industrial furnaces irrespective of
whether the waste has minimal energy
value. In addition, these rules would
also apply to the burning of hazardous
waste in an industrial furnace solely for
the purpose of materials recovery.
These rules would also apply to the
burning of hazardous waste in
nomndustrial as well as industrial
boilers. Thus, these rules would
supercede the November 29.1985.
Administrative Controls that require
owners and operators of nomndustrial
boilers burning hazardous waste fuel to
comply with the incinerator standards of
Subpart O of Parts 264 or 265.
In addition, these rules would exempt
on-site burners of small quantities of
hazardous waste on the basis that the
extremely small quantities of hazardous
waste involved are not likely to pose
significant risks.
Finally, today's proposal would
subject existing hazardous waste
storage facilities used by burners to
final permit standards. Currently,
existing storage operations (in existence
on May 29,1985) at burner facilities are
subject generally only to interim status
storage standards. On-site burners who
accumulate hazardous waste for less
than 90 days, however, will continue to
be subject to the special requirements
under § 262.34.
///. Relationship of the Proposed Rule to
Other Rules
A. May 19,1980, Rules
The initial hazardous waste
management facility standards
promulgated on May 19,1980. controlled
the burning of hazardous waste in
incinerators, but exempted the burning
of hazardous waste for the purpose of
energy recovery. EPA did not
promulgate controls for the burning of
hazardous waste for energy recovery in
boilers and other devices at that time
because the Agency had not
investigated the extent of the practice,
the risks that may be posed to human
health or the environment, or regulatory
alternatives. Since that time, EPA has
been considering what controls on the
burning of hazardous waste for energy
recovery may be needed. The Agency
accelerated those efforts when the
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 8. 1987 / Proposed Rules
16985
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 explicitly required
the Agency to address the issue.
Although the 1980 rules exempted the
burning of hazardous waste for energy
recovery, the storage and transportation
of certain hazardous wastes destined for
energy recovery were regulated prior to
recycling. The storage and
transportation of hazardous wastes that
were listed wastes or sludges were
regulated when the wastes were bumed
on-site or sent directly from the
generator to the burner. When these
wastes were sent to an intermediate
processor or blender, however, they
were considered to be recycled once
they were processed or blended and.
thus, exempt from further regulation.
Wastes that were hazardous solely
because they exhibited a characteristic
(and that were not a sludge) were totally
exempt from regulation when destined
to be burned for energy recovery.
To ensure that hazardous waste
typically destined for incineration
because of its low heating value was not
burned in a boiler or industrial furnace.
ostensibly for energy recovery but
actually to avoid the cost of
incineration, the Agency developed a
sham recycling policy in 1983 which was
of questionable effect. See 48 FR11157
(March 16,1983). That policy held that if
a hazardous waste having less that 5.000
to 8.000 Btu/lb heating value were
burned in a boiler or industrial furnace.
it was not burned for its fuel value but
rather to avoid the cost of incineration.
As discussed in Section II of Part Two.
that policy would be superceded by
today's proposed rule. Hazardous waste.
irrespective of its heating value, would
be subject to today's proposed rule
when burned in a boiler or industrial
furnace.
B January 4,1985. Redefinition of Solid
Waste
On January 4.1985. EPA promulgated
revisions to the definition of a solid
waste (50 FR 665) that established, in
Part 266. a Subpart D for "Hazardous
Waste Burned for Energy Recovery."
With one exception explained below.
that subpart did not change the
substantive controls established by the
1980 rules for hazardous waste fuels.
The rule made it clear that listed wastes
and sludges are subject to
transportation and storage controls prior
to burning and prior to processing or
blending to produce a waste-derived
fuel by a person who neither generated
the waste nor burns the fuel. Thus, a
generator could no longer engage in
minimal or incidental processing and
blending of a listed waste or sludge and
claim that he produced hazardous
waste-derived fuel exempt from
transportation and storage controls.
C. November 29.1985. Administrative
Controls
On November 29.1985. EPA
promulgated administrative controls for
marketers and burners of hazardous
waste fuels. See 50 FR 49164-49211. That
rule revised the controls on hazardous
waste fuels substantially as follows: (1)
The rule applied storage, transportation.
and certain administrative (paperwork)
controls to all hazardous wastes used as
fuels or used to produce a fuel, and to all
hazardous waste-derived fuels (i.e.,
wastes that were hazardous solely
because they exhibited a characteristic
were no longer exempt, and hazardous
waste-derived fuels produced by third-
party processors and blenders were no
longer exempt): and (2) the rule
prohibited the burning of hazardous
waste fuel in nonindustrial boilers,
unless the boiler complied with the
standards for hazardous waste
incinerators under Subpart O of Parts
264 and 265. Today's proposed rule
would change the November 29 rule by
establishing technical controls for
burners, by allowing nonindustrial
boilers to burn hazardous waste fuels
under those controls, and by eliminating
a paperwork requirement (one-time
notice from a burner to the marketer
certifying that the burner has notified
EPA of his activities and will burn the
hazardous waste fuel only in
unrestricted boilers)
D. TSCA Waste PCB Rules
EPA controls the disposal of wastes
containing PCBs (polychlorinated
biphenyls) under authority of the Toxic
Substances Control Act. Standards for
PCB disposal are promulgated at 40 CFR
Part 761 and apply to management
practices including incineration and
burning in boilers.
Although the Agency is in the process
of integrating the TSCA PCB disposal
rules with the RCRA hazardous waste
rules, that effort has not been
completed. Thus, today's rules do not
apply to waste PCBs. with one important
exception. If a waste PCB is also a
RCRA hazardous waste (e.g.. because it
exhibits a characteristic or because it is
mixed with a RCRA-listed hazardous
waste), any fuel that contains or is
derived from the waste would be subject
to today's rule as well as the TSCA PCB
rules. In practice, this means that the
permitting official would apply the more
stringent of the TSCA or RCRA rules.
E. Proposed Rules for Burners of Off-
Specification Used Oil Fuels
The Agency will in the future be
proposing management standards for
owners and operators of boilers and
industrial furnaces burning off-
specification used oil fuels. Any metals
and hydrogen chloride controls deemed
necessary for off-specification used oil
may be patterned after the rules
proposed here. If the Agency is
concerned about organic emissions from
the burning of certain off-specification
used oil fuels, the Agency may propose
to subject some used oil fuels to the
destruction and removal efficiency and
carbon monoxide standards'proposed
here for hazardous wastes. '
Today's rules would apply to used oil
only if the used oil is mixed with a
hazardous waste. Used oil that contains
more than 1000 ppm total halogens is
presumed to be mixed with hazardous
waste unless the presumption is
rebutted. See 50 FR 49164 (November 29.
1985).
IV. Need for Controls
Today's proposed rule would apply to
boilers and industrial furnaces that burn
hazardous waste.2 EPA has defined
boiler, industrial furnace, and
incinerator in 40 CFR 260.10. Under
those definitions, enclosed devices using
controlled flame combustion are
considered to be incinerators if they do
not meet the definition of a boiler and if
they are not designated as an industrial
furnace. Incinerators are regulated
under Subpart O of Parts 264 and 265
Boilers and industrial furnaces would be
regulated under today's rule.
In this section, we summarize
hazardous waste burning practices in
boilers and industrial furnaces and
describe the risks that can be posed by
improper burning.
A. Boilers
EPA defines a boiler in 260.10 as an
enclosed device using controlled flame
combustion and having the following
characteristics: (1) the combustion
chamber and primary energy recovery
section must be of integral design (e g..
facilities with waste heat recovery
boilers attached to incinerators are not
considered boilers): (2) thermal energy
recovery efficiency must be at least 60
percent: and (3) at least 75 percent of the
* As discussed in Section II of Pan Two of the
text, today's rule would apply to the burning of
hazardous wastes in boilers and industrial furnaces
irrespective of the heating value of the hazardous
waste. Thus, these rules would regulate burning in
these devices for energy recovery as well as for the
burning of low heating value wastes (i e . less than
5.000 Btu/lb) for the purpose of destruction
-------
16986
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6, 1987 / Proposed Rules
recovered energy must be "exported"
. 'i.e.. not used for internal uses like
Cheating of combustion air or fuel, or
ig combustion air fans or feedwater
,s).
.oday's rule would apply to all boilers
burning hazardous wastes: 3
nonmdustnal (residential, commercial.
and institutional), industrial, and utility
boilers. Currently, nomndustrial boilers
are prohibited from burning hazardous
wastes unless they are operated in
conformance with the incinerator
standards of Subpart O of Parts 264 or
265. See 50 FR 49192. EPA was
concerned about the special risks posed
by the uncontrolled burning of
hazardous waste in nonmdustrial
boilers given their typical location, size.
and operating practices. Given that
today's proposed rule would establish
standards designed to be protective
when hazardous waste is burned in any
boiler, the rule would eliminate the
distinction between nonmdustrial
boilers on the one hand and industrial
and utility boilers on the other. Once
today's rule is promulgated (and
effective), any nonmdustrial boilers
burning hazardous waste under Subpart
O of Parts 264 or 265 would be subject to
the Final standards for boilers.
Based on a mail questionnaire
survey,4'6 EPA believes that
—nroximately 900 boilers burn
•dous waste fuels. The boilers
in size from very small boilers
- a heat input capacity of less than 5
million (MM) Btu/hr to huge utility-class
boilers with a heat input capacity of
several thousand MM Btu/hr. The
hazardous wastes burned in boilers are
generally organic by-products from
chemical manufacturing and spent
solvents either generated on-site or by a
similar facility, and have heating values
ranging from 8.000 to 15,000 Btu/lb, with
average values of approximately 10.000
Btu/lb. Many, perhaps 25 percent, of the
boilers bum very small quantities of
hazardous waste—less than 50 gallons/
month. Some boilers, however, burn
hazardous waste as the sole fuel.
Typically, hazardous waste is burned
with fuel oil or natural gas and provides
less than 50 percent of the boiler's fuel
requirements. Less often, hazardous
wastes are cofired with pulverized coal.
stoker coal, or other fuels.
Based on available data and
information from industry
representatives, hazardous wastes
burned in boilers usually have low
metals and chlorine content. This is
' Except certain hazardous waste exempted by
'
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
16987
Kilns are operated counterflow with
solids flow counter-current to
combustion gases and traveling down -
the slight incline of the kiln (i.e.. raw
materials are fed-in to the upper end of
the kiln, fuel is fired at the lower end.
and the raw materials get progressively
hotter as they travel the length of the
kiln).
Combustion gases leaving the kiln
typically contain 6-30% of the feed
solids as dust, water vapor, up to 30%
COi. 10-1000 ppm CO, 10-2000 ppm SOj
and 100-1500 ppm NO,. The gases are
transported to pollution control
equipment by an induced draft fan.
Combustion in the kiln supplies heat at
the rate of about 3-6 million Btu per ton
of product by burning fossil fuel.
primarily coal. Coal ash and fly ash are
chemically similar to cement and remain
with the cement product (i.e.. fly ash is
removed from exhaust gases as
discussed below and is often returned to
the kiln).
Cement kilns are major sources of
participate emissions and are regulated
by EPA and the States. Kiln emissions
are controlled by multistage cyclones
and electrostatic precipitators (ESP) or
fabric filters. Kiln dust collected from
primary cyclones and ESPs are generally
recycled to the kiln feed.
Cement kilns are typically controlled
by controlling the fuel firing rate and
combustion air to maintain temperatures
between 2.250 to 2,700 "F for
cementation to clinker formation. Gas
residence time ranges from greater than
two seconds for dry process kilns to 10
seconds for wet process kilns.
There are approximately 275 cement
kilns operating in the United States
today, of which on the order of 20 to 30
are burning hazardous waste fuel. Given
that hazardous waste fuel is often
cofired with coal at a 50 percent firing
rate, and that the typical cement kiln
has a total heat input requirement of 160
million Btu/hr. EPA estimates that 30
million gallons of hazardous waste are
burned in cement kilns annually.
2. Light-weight aggregate kilns. Light-
weight aggregate (LWA) describes a
special use aggregate with a specific
gravity much less than sand and gravel.
which is used to produce insulation, and
nonstructural and lightweight structural
concrete. LWA is produced much like
cement, but the feedstocks are special
clays, pumice, scoria, shale, or slate.
The LWA kiln is configured much like
a cement kiln. The raw material is
crushed and introduced at the upper end
of a rotary kiln. In passing through the
kiln, the materials reach temperatures of
1.900 to 2.100 T. Heat is provided by a
burner at the lower kiln end where
clinker is discharged. Heat requirements
may range from 3 to 6 million Btu per
ton of thruput. Fuels include natural gas.
oil. and coal with a trend toward
increasing coal use
LWA kilns are also major sources of
particulate emissions and are equipped
with wet scrubbers, fabric filters, or
electrostatic precipitators (ESPs). Wet
scrubbers dominate the industry, with
fabric filters following.
There are some 30 LWA plants in 24
States, each with two or more kilns.
Approximately 25 LWA kilns are
burning 30 million gallons of hazardous
waste annually, usually as the sole fuel.
3. Lime kilns. Lime kilns calcine
limestone in direct-fired furnaces that
can be rotary kilns, fluidized bed kilns.
vertical shaft kilns or rotary hearth
kilns. Ninety percent of lime production
in the U.S., however, is produced from
limestone in horizontal rotary kilns
similar in configuration to cement kilns.
The calcination reaction is a
decomposition to calcium oxide and
CO> and occurs between 1,350 to 1.650
"F, with dolomitic limestones
decomposing at the lower temperatures.
Lime kilns operate at 1,800 to 2,300 *F
and require a heat rate of about 7
million Btu per ton of thruput. Coal
accounts for almost 70 percent of the
fuel used in lime production and natural
gas is used for some 23 percent of
production. Oil and other fuels comprise
the remaining percentage of fuel use.
Feedstocks are limestones with
varying amounts of dolomite
(magnesium carbonates) and other
compounds similar to those used in
cement manufacture. The limestones are
crushed and dried before feeding. Kiln
gases exit between 500 to 1.400 °F and
kiln emissions are controlled with fabric
filters. ESPs. Ventun scrubbers, and
gravel bed filters.
Although test burns with lime kilns
have demonstrated »hnt they can
effectively burn hazardous waste fuels.
EPA is not aware of any lime kilns
currently burning hazardous waste. EPA
believes, however, that there is
considerable interest within the industry
and that commercial hazardous waste
fuel burning operations may be initiated
in the near future.
4. Blastfurnace systems. A blast
furnace is a vertical shaft furnace that
uses carbon in the form of coke to
reduce iron oxide ores to iron in a
chemically-reducing atmosphere by the
action of carbon monoxide (CO). CO is
formed primarily by oxidizing carbon
(i.e.. coke) to CO with preheated air
(blast air).
Solid raw materials (ore, coke, flux)
are charged into the top of the blast
furnace and preheated air is "blasted"
through tuyeres near the bottom of the
furnace. Frequently, hydrocarbon
additives (gas. liquid, or solid] or oxygen
are also injected through the tuyeres
Present practice typically includes
injecting fuel oil through the tuyeres.
The gases exiting from the top of the
furnace (top gas) have high CO levels.
The top gas from the blast furnace is
generally cleaned of particulates by
cyclones and wet scrubbers and then
used as fuel primarily in air preheating
stoves and on-site boilers.
The stoves are vertical furnaces that
preheat the blast air by indirect heating
of the air conveying chambers in the
stoves to approximately 1.600 "F. The
stoves are equipped with burners
capable of efficiently utilizing blast
furnace top gas for fuel.
The boilers are conventional
stationary steam raising facilities which
are equipped with fuel burners that are
also capable of efficiently utilizing blast
furnace top gas for fuel.
The top gas is also typically used as
fuel in coke ovens, reheat furnaces, and
internal combustion engines. Some of
the top gas is also wasted by flaring.
EPA has received data on 18 blast
furnace system facilities operated by
seven companies that show that the
mean top gas utilization at these
facilities is as follows:
Blast Furnace Top Gas Utilization as
Fuel
Percent
Stoves 41.33
Boilers 52.20
Coke Ovens 2.03
Reheat Furnaces 1.16
1/C Engines 025
Venting or Flaring 3.03
Source Letter from Robert L Champbell. Campbell a
Pr>nr \stoc Inc. lo Ruben Hollowly EPA (line 2. 1986
Until recently, hazardous waste was
blended with fuel oil in about a 50/50
blend and used as a fuel injectant by the
LTV Steel Company. Before the
company stopped accepting hazardous
waste fuels in the spring of 1986.
approximately 25 million gallons of
hazardous wastes were burned annually
in five blast furnaces.1 Although EPA is
not aware of blast furnace systems
burning hazardous waste fuels at this
time, the Agency believes that blast
furnace systems can comply with the
requirements proposed today, and. thus.
safely burn hazardous waste fuels.8
7 EPA understands that the LTV Steel Company
chose not to comply with the hazardous waste fuel
storage standards that became effective on May 29.
1986. and thus terminated their hazardous waste
fuel activities.
1 Radian Corporation. Destruction and Removal
ofPOHCs in Iron Making Blast Furnaces. December
31.1985
-------
16988
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rulea
5. Sulfur recovery furnaces. Sulfur
recovery furnaces are used by sulfuric
acid plants to process spent (used]
sulfuric acid and other sulfur bearing
wastes. The spent acid is contaminated
with water, organics, inorganics, and
other materials from prior acid use.
In the sulfur recovery furnace, spent
acid, elemental sulfur, hydrogen sulfide.
and other sulfur-bearing wastes are
thermally decomposed at elevated
temperatures into sulfur dioxide (SOj),
carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide
(COz). and water vapor. SOj
concentrations are generally up to 14
volume percent and temperatures are
usually controlled to 2,000 *F in order to
reduce formation and emissions of
nitrogen oxides.
The furnace is generally a horizontal,
cylindrical, refractory-lined chamber
and the feed sulfur, spent acid and/or
other sulfur-bearing wastes are sprayed
into the furnace where they are
contacted with dried combustion air.
Waste feed rates are controlled to
achieve 8 to 14 percent SOi in furnace
exhaust gases. After cleaning, exhaust
gases are passed through converted
catalyst beds to recover the sulfur.
When large quantities of spent acid
comprise the feedstock, the reaction
with oxygen in air is endothermic and
supplementary fuel firing is required. A
conventional fuel burner system is
generally installed and combustion
control is typically based on reaction
temperature and excess oxygen. This
conventional burner system may be
used for firing combustible hazardous
wastes.
Sulfur recovery plants use emission
control devices to clean the gas stream
prior to entering the converted catalyst
beds to remove participates, metals, and
hydrogen chloride (HCl) to avoid
contaminating or plugging the catalyst
beds. Downstream of the converter
beds, the exit gases are controlled to
limit emissions of sulfur dioxide (SOi)
and acid mist. Preconverter controls can
be cyclones, scrubbers, electrostatic
precipitators, or gas dryers. Post-
converter controls can be: (1) For SOt
control, alkali absorption systems,
sodium sulfate to bisulfate scrubbers,
and ammonia scrubbers; and (2) for acid
mist control, electrostatic precipitators,
packed bed scrubbers, and molecular
sieves.
C. Risks Posed by Improper Burning
The burning of hazardous waste in
boilers and industrial furnaces can pose
the same risks as burning in
incinerators. Emissions of incompletely
bumed toxic organic constituents in the
waste, emissions of toxic metal
constituents in the waste, and emissions
of hydrochloric acid (HCl) resulting
from burning highly-chlorinated wastes
can pose significant risk to human
health. As discussed in Part Three of
this preamble, emissions of toxic organic
compounds from poorly-operated boilers
and industrial furnaces could result in
an increased lifetime cancer risk of 10'*
(i.e.. 1 in 10.000) to persons exposed to
the maximum annual average ground
level concentration. Similarly, emissions
of toxic metals from devices burning
metal bearing wastes without adequate
emission controls could pose risks at
those levels. Finally, emissions of
hydrogen chloride (HCl) from devices
burning highly-chlorinated wastes
without adequate emission controls (or
without sufficient removal by industrial
furnace process chemistry) could result
in ground level concentrations of HCl
that exceed reference air concentrations
considered to be acceptable targets for
regulatory purposes.
Part Two: Major Regulatory Approaches
We discuss in this part of the
preamble why we are proposing to base
permit requirements on national
performance standards with provision
for risk-based vanances, rather than
solely on site-specific risk assessments
for every facility. We also explain here
why the proposed rules would apply to
the burning of hazardous waste in
boilers and industrial furnaces
irrespective of the heating value of the
waste. This is significant because
current regulations subject the burning
of low heating value waste in boilers
and industrial furnaces to the standards
for incinerators in Subpart O of Parts
264 or 265.
/. Use of National Performance
Standards with Risk-Based Options
Versus Case-by-Case Risk Assessment
for All Facilities
Under today's proposed rule, permit
requirements for owners and operators
of boilers and industrial furnaces would
be established as necessary to ensure
conformance with national performance
standards for the destruction of organic
compounds and emissions of metals and
hydrogen chloride. The Agency has used
nsk assessments of reasonable, worst-
case scenarios to develop the standards
and to show that the standards are
protective (i.e., the metals and HCl
standards are entirely risk-based and
the technology-based ORE standard for
organic compounds has been shown by
nsk assessment to be protective in most
cases).
National performance standards, by
design, can be conservative and may
tend to overregulale many facilities.
Today's rule would also provide a
waiver of the national performance
standard based on site-specific risk
assessments. The destruction and
removal efficiency (ORE) and flue gas
carbon monoxide standards that control
emissions of organic compounds would
be waived for low risk waste. Under the
waiver, the owner or operator must
demonstrate by projecting emission
rates and dispersion modeling that,
absent controls, emissions of organic
compounds would not result in ground
level concentrations that pose adverse
health effects. The metals and hydrogen
chloride (HCl) emissions limits would
also be waived for owners and
operators that demonstrate by
dispersion modeling that reference air
concentrations for the metals and HCl
would not be exceeded. Finally, today's
proposal uses risk assessment to show
that the exemption of small quantity
burners is not likely to pose significant
risk.
Although the Agency proposes to rely
heavily on the use of risk assessment to
develop, support, and implement the
rule, we are not proposing to use case-
by-case risk assessments as the sole
basis to determine Permit requirements
for every facility for the reasons
discussed below.
National performance standards that
are based on the risk posed by
reasonable, worst-case scenarios (or
that are technology-based and shown to
be protective under reasonable, worst-
case scenarios) allow permitting
officials and the applicant to avoid the
cost and time required for emissions
testing requisite for a site-specific risk
assessment. The national performance
standards proposed today ensure the
cost-effective control of emissions by:
(1) Waiving emissions testing for organic
compounds, metals, and HCl for boilers
operating under special operating
requirements; (2) waiving emissions
testing for metals and HCl for boilers
and industrial furnaces burning waste
with metals and chlorine levels within
specification levels or waste with metals
and chlorine levels such that the mass
feed rate of metals and chlorine from all
fuels and industrial furnace feedstocks
will not result in an exceedance of the
metals or HCl emission limits, assuming
all metals are emitted (e.g., no emission
controls) and all chlorine is emitted as
HCl; and (3) exempting burners of small
quantities of waste from virtually ail
requirements. We estimate that small
quantity burners bum less than one
percent of the hazardous waste being
burned as fuel.
Using national performance standards
is also more cost-effective than site-
specific risk assessments to establish
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 8. 1987 / Proposed Rules
16989
permit conditions even when emissions
testing is required because it avoids the
added time and cost of dispersion
modeling and estimating health effects
from resulting exposures.
Not only do national performance
standards allow for cost-effective
variances and exemptions, but a site-
specific, risk-based permitting approach
to control organic emissions would be
impractical given the state-of-the-art of
human health and environmental effects
assessments and sampling and analysis
techniques for organic compounds that
may be emitted. We simply do not have
at this time the tools to characterize
fully the emissions from combustion
sources (e.g., incinerators, boilers.
automobiles) and the health and
environmental effects data to assess
their impacts. For example, we are able
today to estimate human health effects
for only about 150 of over 400
compounds identified in Appendix VIII
as toxic constituents of hazardous
waste. Further, the types of organic
compounds that can be synthesized in
an improperly-operated combustion
device are not limited to the Appendix
VIII list. Thus, the technology-based
ORE standard is needed to ensure a high
level of destruction that reasonable.
worst-case risk assessment has shown
to be protective."
In addition, even if the analytical and
health effects tools were in place to
consider the impacts of emissions from
all organic compounds, a risk
assessment that supported the use of a
lower ORE (e.g.. 99.9% or 99.95%) may
not be of value to the regulated
community. The 99.99% ORE standard
and the carbon monoxide limits
proposed today can be met readily.
These standards would ensure that
boilers and industrial furnaces operate
at high combustion efficiency, which is
an efficient, economical operating
practice for most devices.10 Further, to
ensure that a sufficient degree of
destruction is achieved above the bare-
bones 99% ORE. which is assumed for
the low risk waste exemption (see
Section III.D of Part Three), continuous
• We note thai the proposed waiver of the ORE
standard (and CO limits) for low nsk waste is only
applicable to wastes containing Appendix VIII
constituents for which the Agency has established
reference air concentrations (for threshold
compounds) or unit nsk estimates (for carcinogens)
Further, the waiver provision requires a
conservative estimate of health effects resulting
from emissions of products of Incomplete
combustion (PICs).
10 Those few boilers already operating with
sophisticated combustion controls may have to
operate at lower boiler (i.e, thermal) efficiency to
operate at the higher combustion efficiency required
by the proposed carbon monoxide limits Fuel cost
for these boilers may increase somewhat because of
these regulations.
monitoring of carbon monoxide and
oxygen would probably be required
(albeit the limits would not be as
stringent as those proposed today).
Thus, even if a risk assessment
approach were workable for all organic
wastes, it may not prove to be cost-
effective to the regulated community.
It should be noted that the proposed
site-specific, risk-based waivers for
metals. HCl, and low risk waste are
based on an emissions dispersion
analysis under several conservative
assumptions. The analysis does not
consider issues such as the following
that would result in a less conservative
analysis: (1) Current and future
population exposure; (2) less than
lifetime exposure to carcinogens: (3)
whether the site of maximum ground
level concentration is habitable: (4) total
cancer incidents resulting from
exposure: and (5) microenvironmental or
multimedia exposure (e.g. outdoor
versus indoor air). Addressing these
complex issues in the context of public
hearings would be difficult, expensive.
and time-consuming. Accordingly, the
"risk analyses" and the risk-based
standards described in today's proposed
rule are based on the following
conservative assumptions: (1) The point
of maximum annual average ground
level concentration of an emission is
used to access potential health impact
irrespective of whether a person resides
at that point of maximum exposure
today; (2) a 70 year lifetime exposure to
that maximum concentration11; and (3)
indoor air contains the equivalent
concentrations of pollutants as outdoor
air.
//. Regulation of Burning for Either
Energy Recovery or Destruction
Today's proposed rules would
regulate the burning of hazardous waste
in boilers and industrial furnaces
irrespective of the heating value of the
hazardous waste. This proposed rule
would, therefore, supersede the
Agency's current policy of regulating the
burning of low heating value wastes in
these devices as incineration, subject to
the applicable hazardous waste
incinerator standards of Subpart 0 of
Parts 284 or 265.
As discussed in Section in of Part
One. EPA's May 19.1980. rules regulate
the incineration of hazardous waste but
exempt the burning of hazardous waste
for energy recovery. To ensure that
hazardous waste typically destined for
incineration because of its low heating
value is not burned in a boiler or
industrial furnace, ostensibly for energy
recovery but actually to avoid the cost
of incineration, the Agency developed a
sham recycling policy. The policy was
published in the March 16.1983. Federal
Register and states that EPA considers
any hazardous waste that has less than
5.000 to 8.000 Btu/lb heating value, as
generated, to have minimal heating
value relative to commercial fuels. Thus.
when such low heating value waste is
burned in any enclosed device using
controlled flame combustion—including
boilers and industrial furnaces—it is
considered to be incinerated and the
device is subject to regulation under the
incinerator standards of Subpart 0 of
Parts 264 or 265. This is the case
irrespective of whether the low heating
value waste is mixed with higher
heating value waste or virgin fuels such
that the mixture has substantial heating
value (i.e.. greater than 5,000 to 8.000
Btu/lb).
Now that EPA is prepared to propose
controls for boilers and industrial
furnaces burning hazardous waste, we
believe these proposed controls should
apply irrespective of the purpose of such
burning. Normally, the purpose for
which a material is burned makes no
difference in environmental effect.
Accordingly, today's proposed rules are
designed to be protective irrespective of
the heating value of the hazardous
waste.
///. Regulation of Burning Solely for
Materials Recovery in an Industrial
Furnace
Today's rule also proposes to regulate
hazardous waste burned in industrial
furnaces for the sole purpose of material
recovery (i.e.. reclamation).12 This
requires the Agency to define more
precisely the circumstances when
secondary materials reclaimed in
industrial furnaces (i.e., burned in
industrial furnaces for the sole purpose
of material recovery) are solid and
hazardous wastes.
Under current regulations, hazardous
spent materials, listed sludges, and
listed by-products are hazardous wastes
when reclaimed. See § 261.2(c)(3). As
EPA has explained in a number of
Federal Register notices, however, these
materials may cease being solid wastes
at the point of burning for material
recovery in industrial furnaces
depending on the type of secondary
material involved. See 50 FR 630-1
1' Except thai the 3-mmute maximum average
ground level concentration is used to access health
effects from exposure to HCl.
» EPA has explained (SO FR 49167) that a
hazardous waste is subject to regulation when
burned in an industrial furnace for both energy
recovery and some other purpose, e g.. for materials
recovery The Issue here is that EPA is proposing to
regulate burning solely for materials recovery.
-------
16990
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
(January 4,1985) and 50 PR 49167
(November 29.1985). The reason for this
distinction is that regulation of the act of
burning in an industrial furnace could
lead, in some cases, to an impermissible
intrusion into the production process
and so be beyond EPA's authority under
RCRA. Id.
To date. EPA has indicated that
burning for material recovery of
secondary materials is "indigenous" to
the process in which the industrial
furnace is used and is beyond the
Agency's RCRA jurisdiction. Burning of
"non indigenous" wastes remains within
RCRA authority. Id.
EPA has suggested that indigenous
secondary materials are those generated
by the process in which the industrial
furnace is normally used, and also might
include secondary materials containing
the same types and concentrations of
Appendix VIII constituents as the raw
materials normally burned in the
industrial furnace. Id. EPA is proposing
in today's rules that only materials
generated by a process using the same
type of industrial furnace as that in
which burning occurs will be considered
to be indigenous, and so are outside the
Agency's authority when burned
(subject to one exception for secondary
matenals burned in secondary smelting
furnaces discussed below). Thus, by
way of example, if a primary lead
smelter were to burn a listed waste
generated by another smelting process
(for example, primary zinc), the material
would be considered to be indigenous to
smelting furnaces and hence not a solid
waste at the point of burning.
EPA is proposing this approach for
several reasons. First, deferring
regulation could create a regulatory
loophole whereby clearly nonindigenous
wastes are burned outside the RCRA
framework. Examples are listed '
electroplating wastes being burned in
smelting furnaces. These electroplating
wastes come from processes unrelated
to smelting, and may contain different
types of hazardous constituents (for
example, cyanides and hexavalent
chromium) or the same constituents at
higher concentrations than those
normally found in virgin materials
normally burned in the smelting furnace
(and so in many cases would not be
addressed or contemplated in Clean Air
Act regulations applicable to those
furnaces).
Second, establishing rules relating to
RCRA jurisdiction (i.e., defining "solid
waste") has proven to be a difficult task.
Therefore, where possible, EPA will
attempt to indicate jurisdictional limits
unambiguously. EPA believes that
limiting jurisdiction over this type of
burning to wastes generated by different
types of furnaces is a clear test. These
wastes will all be manifested to the
burning site, and so either the origin of
the waste will be known from the
manifest description, or at least the
manifest will state who the generator of
the waste is. and hence allow easy
identification of the origin of the waste.
A more sophisticated test, such as
requiring comparison of Appendix VIII
constituents in customary virgin
materials and in the waste to be burned,
appears to the Agency to be overly
cumbersome to administer. (As stated
below, however, the EPA is specifically
soliciting comment on this alternative.)
Finally. EPA believes that the types of
wastes that are nonindigenous under
this approach are those most likely to
pose environmental threats by virtue of'
being different from the type of material
normally burned in the industrial
furnace. The electroplating wastes
mentioned above are an example. For
the same reason, these wastes are the
ones most likely to be unrelated to
matenals normally bumed. and so the
least likely to raise jurisdictional issues
relating to interference with normal
production. ,
As noted earlier, a further requirement
of the jurisdictional test is needed for
secondary smelting furnaces. These
industnal furnaces bum not only waste
generated by other industrial furnaces,
but other types of wastes such as scrap
metal or battery plates as well. These
materials are indigenous to secondary
smelting processes: they are in fact the
principal feed material to secondary
smelting processes. The proposed rule
consequently indicates that secondary
smelting furnaces bum indigenous
materials not only when they burn
materials generated by smelting
furnaces, but also when they burn scrap
metal and (for secondary lead smelters)
battery plates.
EPA anticipates the impact of this
proposal to be minimal. This is because
the Agency is aware of very few types
of industrial furnaces that burn non-
indigenous hazardous wastes
exclusively for material recovery. For
example, kilns normally bum hazardous
wastes for a dual purpose, as do coke
ovens and blast furnaces. In fact, the
only type of furnaces we have identified
that engage in exclusive reclamation of
non-indigenous wastes are smelting
furnaces burning electroplating wastes,
a situation seemingly deserving of
regulatory control. However, the Agency
explicitly solicits comment on whether
there are other operations that involve
burning of hazardous waste solely for
material recovery in an industrial
furnace—including information on the
types and numbers of facilities.
quantities and types of wastes bumed.
and combustion and emission control
practices.
The Agency also solicits comment on
alternative jurisdictions! approaches
here. One alternative is to state that
matenals are indigenous only if
generated by the same type of process
as that in which the industrial furnace is
used (rather than the same type of
furnace). For example, a primary lead
smelter burning secondary materials
from pnmary lead smelting would not be
considered to be burning wastes: a
primary smelter burning secondary
materials from primary zinc production
could be considered to be burning
wastes. A second alternative would
involve comparing concentrations of
metal to be recovered and of Appendix
VIII constituents in the virgin material
feed and the secondary material feed to
an industrial furnace. We request
commenters addressing these
alternatives to present data showing
these types of comparisons. Another
possibility is to combine inquiry into the
waste with a test based on whether the
material being burned is being bought or
if the furnace operator is paid to burn it.
The following examples illustrate how
today's proposal would operate. (The
examples assume that wastes from
primary smelting can be Subtitle C
hazardous wastes.)
l. A primary lead smelter receives an
unlisted by-product from primary zinc
production which it smelts to recover
contained metal values.
The by-product is not a solid waste
either before or dunng burning. Unlisted
by-products are not solid wastes when
reclaimed.
2. A primary lead smelter burns a
metal bearing hazardous solvent as a
partial energy source.
The solvent is a hazardous waste and
the burning is within the Agency's
jurisdiction. This situation involves
burning wastes as fuel, not for exclusive
material recovery. Industrial furnaces
burning hazardous wastes solely or
partially for energy recovery are within
the Agency's RCRA jurisdiction. 50 FR
at 49171 (November 29.1985).
3. An incinerator (i.e.. an enclosed
device using controlled flame
combustion that is not a boiler and is
not designated as an industrial furnace
in § 260.10) bums an unlisted hazardous
by-product to recover contained metals.
The by-product is a hazardous waste
and the incinerator is subject to the
existing regulatory standards in subpart
O of Parts 264 and 265. Incinerators are
always deemed to incinerate and not to
recycle. 50 FR 625/3 (January 4.1985):
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
16991
§§ 261.2(b)(2). 264.340(a)(l). and
265.340(a)(l).
4. A primary lead smelter receives a
listed by-product from a different
primary lead smelter and resmelts it.
The listed by-product ceases to be a
waste when it is burned, but is a
hazardous waste up until that point
Thus, it must be manifested to the
smelter and must be stored in
accordance with RCRA standards
(including permit standards). The
resmelting activity is beyond the
Agency's RCRA jurisdiction. Since the
material, when burned, is not a
hazardous waste, the derived-from rule
(§ 261.3(c)(2)(i)j would not apply to the
residue from burning. 50 FR 49167 n.4
(November 29.1985).
5. A primary lead smelter receives a
listed waste from a nonsmelting process
for metals recovery and resmelts it.
The material is a hazardous waste
throughout burning as well as before
burning. The burning consequently is
controlled by today's proposed rules.
6. A primary lead smelter receives a
hazardous waste from another smelting
process which it burns in order to
destroy contained contaminants.
The material being burned is a
hazardous waste and the burning is
regulated as incineration under subpart
0 because the waste is being burned in
order to destroy it. §§ 264.340(a](2).
265.340(a)(2).
7. A primary lead smelter generates
an emission control dust which it
resmelts.
The emission control dust is not a
solid waste because such continuous in-
house activities are defined as closed
loop reclamation and are excluded from
the regulatory definition of solid waste.
§ 261.2(e)(l)(iii).
Part Three: Discussion of Proposed
Controls
l. Overview
Today's proposed rule would
establish national performance
standards to control stack emissions of
organic compounds, metals, and
hydrogen chloride (HC1) from boilers
and industrial furnaces burning
hazardous waste. The rule would also
apply to these facilities the general
standards applicable to all hazardous
waste treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities (e.g.. closure requirements.
financial requirements, preparedness
and prevention requirements).
Emissions of organic compounds
would be controlled by a percent
reduction standard for organic
constituents in the waste. A destruction
and removal efficiency (DRE) for
principal organic hazardous constituents
(POHCs) of 99.99% would be required
for all wastes except that a 99.9999%
DRE would be required for dioxin-
contaimng listed hazardous wastes.13
Organic emissions would also be
controlled by limiting flue gas carbon
monoxide levels to levels indicative of
high combustion efficiency to ensure
hazardous waste is not burned during
upset conditions. Although the DRE
performance standard is a percent
reduction standard and does not directly
limit the mass emission rate of unburned
constituents—the emission rate
increases as the feed rate increases— a
risk-assessment of reasonable, worst-
case scenarios shows that the standard
would be protective in virtually all of
the scenarios of which EPA is aware.14
The trial burn to demonstrate
destruction and removal efficiency
(DRE) would be waived for boilers
operating under special operating
requirements designed to ensure that the
boiler achieves a minimum DRE of
99.99%.1B In addition, both the trial burn
and the carbon monoxide flue gas limits
would be waived for low risk waste.
Under this waiver, the applicant must
demonstrate that, absent these controls.
emissions from the facility would not
pose significant risk to public health.
Emissions of the metals arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, and lead and of
hydrogen chloride (HCI) would be
controlled by a risk-based, four-tiered
standard. Tiers Mil are national
standards back-calculated from
reference air concentrations (RACs)
using dispersion modeling of reasonable.
worst-case facilities. (We have
developed hypothetical model boilers
and industrial furnaces of each type
known or thought likely to burn
hazardous waste and conducted
dispersion modeling of scenarios
considered to be reasonable worst-case
relative to ambient air impacts.) Tier I is
a hazardous waste specification for
metals and chlorine levels. The
concentration limits apply to the waste
either before or after blending with
other wastes or fuels (i.e.. the limits can
be met by blending). The limits are
conservatively established assuming the
device burns the hazardous waste (or
blended waste) as the sole fuel, and that
all metals in the waste are emitted and
that all chlorine is emitted as HCI. The
Tier II standards limit the total feed
19 The following wastes are luted in 40 CRF
26131 because they contain chlorinated dioxins and
furani- EPA Hazardous Waste Noa. F020. FOZ1.
F022. F023. F020. and F027
14 EPA will provide guidance to the permit wntter
to identify situations where the national
performance standards may not be fully protective
" Boilers burning dioxin-contaimng listed wastes
are not eligible for the tnal bum waiver
rates of metals and chlorine to the
device, considering metals and chlorine
levels and feed rates of the hazardous
waste, other fuel, and industrial furnace
feedstock. Thus, the Tier II standards
allow a waste exceeding the Tier I
metals or chlorine limits to be cofired
with relatively clean fuels provided that
total metals or chlorine emissions do not
exceed the Tier in risk-based emission
limits. Like the Tier I limits, the Tier II
limits assume that all metals and
chlorine are emitted (i.e.. no credit is
provided for emissions control
equipment). The Tier ID standards are
emission limits for metals and HCI for
which conformance is demonstrated by
emissions testing. Tier IV allows
emissions exceeding the Tier III limits
based on site-specific dispersion
modeling that demonstrates that
emissions from the facility will not
result in exceedances of reference air
concentrations (RACs) established for
lead and HCI. or an aggregate
incremental risk to the maximum
exposed individual (MEI) of 10" * (i.e.. 1
in 100.000) for the carcinogenic metals
arsenic, cadmium, and chromium.
Finally, boilers and industrial
furnaces burning small quantities of
waste relative to the fuel requirements
of the device would be exempt from
virtually all requirements given that the
risk posed by such burning would be
insignificant
//. Overview of EPA's Risk Assessment
The Agency has used risk assessment
to: (1) Show that, absent controls,
emissions of organic compounds, certain
metals, and hydrogen chloride (HCI) can
pose serious health effects; (2) show that
the 99.99% destruction or removal
efficiency (DRE) standard would be
protective in virtually all scenarios of
which the Agency is aware; and (3)
establish risk-based emission limits for
metals and HCI. The risk assessment
methodology is discussed in detail in the
background document supporting this
proposed rule—Background Information
Document for the Development of
Regulations to Control the Burning of
Hazardous Waste in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces, Volume III: Risk
Assessment. Engineering-Sciences,
February 1987.'• The methodology is
summarized below for the convenience
of the reader.
The general approach involved
identifying a reasonable, worst-case
facility with respect to potential ambient
air impacts for a boiler and each type of
'• The background document is available from
the National Technical Information Service.
Springfield. VA. Order No PB 8? 173845
-------
16992
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
industrial furnace known or believed
likely to burn hazardous waste (e.g.,
cement kiln, light-weight aggregate kiln.
blast furnace). The identified facilities
are considered to produce reasonable,
worst-case ground level concentrations
of pollutants when burning hazardous
waste. To show that, absent regulatory
controls, serious health effects could be
posed by burning hazardous waste and
to show that a 99.99% ORE standard is
protective, we estimated emissions from
the reasonable, worst-case facilities and
used dispersion modeling l7 to predict
ground level concentrations. For
threshold (noncarcinogenic) compounds.
we then compared predicted ground
level concentrations to reference air
concentrations (RACs). For carcinogenic
compounds, we estimated the aggregate
risk to a person residing for a lifetime at
the point of maximum annual average
ground level concentration. To develop
emission limits for lead and HC1, we
back- calculated from the RACs using
the dispersion factors (i.e., ug/ms per
g/s emissions) for the reasonable, worst-
case facilities. Emission limits for the
carcinogenic metals arsenic, cadmium.
and chromium are established by an
equation that relates the emission of
each metal to the emission
corresponding to an incremental risk of
10"'. The emission corresponding to an
incremental risk of 10"* is established
by back- calculating from the risk-
specific dose (RSD) at a 10~9 nsk level
for each metal using the dispersion
factors for the reasonable, worst-case
facilities. The equation sums the ratios
for all three metals and requires that the
sum not exceed 1.0.
We describe below how we identified
reasonable, worst-case facilities, how
we developed the RACs, how we are
addressing the risk posed by
carcinogens, and the assumptions used
in the risk assessment.
A. Identification of Reasonable. Worst-
Case Facilities
In developing reasonable, worst-case
facilities, we considered: (1) Actual
boilers according to information
obtained from our mail survey: (2) eight
hypothetical model boilers ranging in
size from 0.4 MM Btu/hr to 400 MM Btu/
hr. (3) hypothetical model industrial
furnaces for each type of furnace known
or considered most likely to burn
hazardous waste; (4) the impact of flat
versus complex terrain on ambient
ground level concentrations IS; and (5)
the impact of tip downwash for devices
with short stacks (e.g.. small boilers.
asphalt plants, sulfur recovery plants).
1. Flat terrain modeling. To identify
reasonable, worst-case facilities of each
type being considered in flat terrain we
identified the boiler site representing the
95th percentile worst meteorological
situation with respect to potential
ambient air impacts. This site was
identified assuming that a given stack
with fixed release properties (i.e..
factors that affect effective stack height
such as stack height and stack gas flow
rate and temperature) was located at
each of the 114 facility sites identified
by the mail questionnaire survey. Each
site was then modeled using ISCLT and
the site having the 95th percentile worst
dispersion factor (ug/m8 round level
concentration per 1 g/s emission rate)
was selected as the reasonable, worst-
case site.
The reasonable, worst-case facility of
each type under consideration was then
identified by: (1) for boilers, modeling
the actual boiler and the model boiler
with the greatest potential for adverse
ambient impacts (considering capacity
and stack height) at the reasonable,
worst-case site (using ISCLT) and
identifying which boiler had the greatest
potential adverse impact on ground
level concentrations of pollutants: and
(2) for industrial furnaces, locating each
model furnace at the reasonable, worst-
case site. Devices with short stacks
where tip downwash could cause high
ground level concentrations close to the
stack were modeled assuming that a
relatively large building was located
adjacent to the stack.
>T The ISCLT (Industrial Source Complex. Long
Term) model was used to predict maximum annual
average ground level concentrations for flat terrain.
The ISCST model was used lo predict maximum 3-
minute concentrations for HCI in flat terrain In
addition, the OAQPS Guideline Models LONGZ and
SHORTZ were used for complex modeling for the
selected worst-case sites in complex terrain to
predict maximum annual average and maximum 3-
mmute concentrations Maximum quarterly average
concentrations for lead were computed from the
maximum annual average concentrations by
multiplying by a factor of 1.6. which represents a
typical ratio of maximum quarterly to maximum
annual average concentrations.
'• We note that we have established the Tier Mil
standards for metals and HCI for two topographic
regimes: flat and complex terrain. EPA has defined
an intermediate terrain, however, that is
noncomplex and nonflat (i.e.. rolling). EPA has
recommended dispersion models to address such
terrain. Unless the plume from a source drops to
ground level a short distance from the slack
because of. for example, tip downwash. maximum
ground level concentrations would be expected lo
increase as a given source were moved from flat
terrain lo nonflat. noncomplex terrain and. finally.
to complex terrain. Given that the flat terrain
standards proposed today may not be protective for
nonflat. noncomplex terrain (and that flat terrain
standards would apply to facilities not located in
complex terrain). EPA is considering developing
standards for the final rule for the third type of
terrain: nonflat. noncomplex. EPA specifically
requests comments on this issue.
Devices that had approximately the
same potential ambient air impacts were
then grouped together in categories. One
set of categories is based on maximum
annual average concentrations, and
another set is based on maximum 3-
minute concentrations (for HCI). The
Tier I-III metals and HCI standards
discussed below were then established
for each category. The device type
within each category that posed the
greatest potential adverse air impacts
was used to establish the limits for that
category.
2. Complex terrain modeling. Of the
114 sites identified in the mail
questionnaire survey, we determined
that 68 were located in areas where the
surrounding terrain within 20 kilometers
of the stack exceeded the stack height.
and were, therefore, considered to be in
complex terrain. (Ground level
concentrations can be much higher in
complex terrain than in flat terrain
because receptors can be elevated by
the terrain to levels closer to the
centerline of the stack emissions plume.)
Thus, standards for facilities in complex
terrain were developed to address the
hazard posed to receptors elevated by
terrain.
To identify reasonable, worst-case
facilities in complex terrain, we ranked
the 114 boiler facilities by potential to
cause high ground level concentrations
(irrespective of topography or
meteorological conditions) by using an
index that considered facility capacity
(MM Btu/hr heat input) and stack
height. We then identified the seven
boiler sites with the greatest potential
for high ambient concentrations that
were also located in complex terrain
(i.e.. terrain within 20 kilometers of the
stack exceeded the stack height). At
each of these seven sites, we used the
LONGZ and SHORTZ models to predict
maximum annual average and maximum
3-mmute concentrations to model: (1)
The actual boiler located at the site; (2)
the model boiler with the greatest
potential for adverse ambient impacts-
(considering capacity and stack height);
and (3) each model furnace.
The reasonable, worst-case facility for
each type of device was then identified
as the site associated with the highest
ground level concentrations.
As with the flat terrain analysis.
devices having approximately the same
potential ambient air impacts were
grouped together in categories. One set
of categories was developed for
maximum annual average
concentrations and another set for
maximum 3-minute concentrations. Tier
I-III standards were developed for each
category and the device within each
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
16993
category that posed the greatest
potential adverse air impacts was used
to establish the limits for that category.
We estimate that approximately 15-20
percent of the facilities burning
hazardous wastes are located in terrain
which will require that the facilities
meet the complex terrain limits.
B. Reference Air Concentrations for
Systemic Toxicants
For toxic substances not known to
display carcinogenic properties, there
appears to be an identifiable exposure
threshold below which adverse health
effects usually do not occur.
Noncarcinogenic effects are manifested
when these pollutants are present in
concentrations great enough to
overcome the homeostatic.
compensating, and adaptive
mechanisms of the organism. Thus.
protection against the adverse health
effects of a toxicant is likely to be
achieved by preventing exposure levels
from exceeding the threshold dose, or
the "reference air concentration."
Reference air concentrations (RACs)
have been derived from oral RfDs for
those threshold compounds listed in
Appendix VIII of 40 CFR Part 261 for
which the Agency has adequate health
effects data (see Appendix A of this
preamble). These oral-based RACs are
subject to change, and RACs for
additional compounds are likely to be
developed in the near future given that
the Agency has recently established an
internal workgroup (the Inhalation RfD
Workgroup) to develop inhalation
reference doses for use in Agency
programs. That workgroup is expected
to develop a methodology and
inhalation references doses for a
number of chemicals by late 1987. In the
interest of time, the Agency has decided
to propose the oral-based RACs for
purposes of today's rule rather than to
wait until the internal workgroup
completes its efforts.
The Agency's reasoning for proposing
RAC's derived from oral RfDs is as
follows:
1. EPA has developed verified RfDs
and is committed to establishing RfDs
for all constituents of Agency interest.
The verification process is conducted by
an EPA workgroup, and the conclusions
and reasoning for these decisions are
publicly available.
2. The verification process assures
that the critical study is of appropriate
length and quality to derive a health
limit for long-term, life-term protection.
3. RfDs are based on the best
available information that meet
minimum scientific criteria and may
come from experimental animal studies
or human studies.
4. RfDs are designed to give long-term -
protection for all members of the
population, including persons uniquely
at risk, such as pregnant women.
growing children, and older men and
women.
5. RfDs are designated by the Agency
as being of high, medium, or low
confidence depending on the quality of
the information and the amount of the
supporting data. The criteria for the
confidence rating is discussed in the RfD
decision.
The Agency used the following
strategy to derive the inhalation
exposure limits proposed today:
1. Where a verified oral RfD has been
based on an inhalation study, the
inhalation exposure limit will be
calculated directly from the study.
2. Where a verified oral RfD has been
based on an oral study, we will use a
conversion factor of 1 for route-to-route
extrapolation in deriving an inhalation
limit.
3. Where there exists appropriate EPA
health documents, such as the Health
Effects Assessments (HEAs) and the
Health Effects and Environmental
Profiles (HEEPs). containing relevant
inhalation toxicity data, the data will be
used in deriving an inhalation exposure
limit. Other agency health documents
(e.g., NIOSH's criteria documents) will
also be considered.
4. If RfDs or other toxicity data from
agency health documents are not
available, then other sources of toxicity
information will be considered. The
calculation will be in accordance with
the RfD methodology.
The Agency recognizes the limitations
of route-to-route conversions used to
derive the RACs and is in the process of
examining confounding factors affecting
the conversion such as: (a) the
appropriateness of extrapolating when a
portal of entry is the critical target
organ: (b) first pass effects: and (c)
effect of route upon dosimetry. The
Agency, through its Inhalation RfD
Workgroup, is developing reference
dose values for inhalation exposure, and
many are expected to be available this
year. The Agency will use the available
inhalation RfDs when this rule is
promulgated. If. however, the workgroup
develops inhalation reference doses
prior to promulgation of today's rule that
are substantially different from the
RAC's proposed today and if the revised
inhalation reference dose could be
expected to have a significant adverse
impact on the regulated community, the
Agency will take public comment on the
revised RACs after notice in the Federal
Register.
As previously stated, the RACs are
derived from oral Reference Doses
(RfDs) for the compounds. An oral RfD
is an estimate of a daily exposure (via
ingestion) for the human population that
is likely to be without an appreciable
risk of deleterious effects even if
exposure occurs daily during a
lifetime.19 The RfD for a specific
chemical is calculated by dividing the
experimentally-determined no-
observed-adverse-effect-level by the
appropriate uncertainty factor(s).
The Agency is proposing to use the
following equation to convert oral RFDs
to RACs:
RAC (mg/m1)
RfD (mg/kg-bw/
day) x body
weighty, correction
factor x apportionment
factor
m* air breathed/day
where:
• RfD is the oral reference dose
• Body weight is assumed to be 70 kg for an
adult male
• Volume of air breathed by an adult male is
assumed to be 20 m'/day
• Correction factor for route-to-route
extrapolation (going from the oral route
to the inhalation route) IB 1.0
• Factor to apportion the RfD to the intake
resulting from direct inhalation of the
compound emitted from the source is 0.25
(i.e., an individual is assumed to be
exposed to 75% of the RfD from the
combination of other sources).
In today's proposed rule, the RACs
are used to determine if adverse health
effects are likely to result from exposure
to stack emissions by comparing
maximum annual average ground level
concentrations of a pollutant to the
pollutant's RAC. If the RAC is not
exceeded, adverse health effects are not
anticipated. The Agency, however, is
also concerned about the impacts of
short-term (less than 24-hour) exposures.
The ground level concentration of an
emitted pollutant can be an order of
magnitude greater during a 1-minute or
15-minute period of exposure than the
maximum annual average exposure.
This is because, during the annual
exposure, the periods of exposure to
high concentrations are balanced by
periods of exposure to low
concentrations as wind speed and
direction varies. Thus, maximum annual
average concentrations are always
" Current scientific understanding, however.
does not consider this demarcation to be rigid For
brief periods and for small excursions above the
RfD. adverse effects are unlikely in most of the
population On the other hand, several
circumstances can be cited in which particularly
sensitive members of the population suffer adverse
responses at levels well below the RfD. See 51 PR
1627 (January 14.1988)
-------
16994
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
much lower than short-term exposure
concentrations. On the other hand, the
short-term exposure RAC is also
generally much higher than the life-time
exposure RAC. Nonetheless, in some
cases, short-term exposure may pose a
greater health threat than annual
exposure. Unfortunately, the use of RfDs
limits the development of short-term
acute exposure limits since no
acceptable methodology exists for the
denvation of less than life-time
exposures from RfDs.™ However.
despite this limitation, we are proposing
a short-term (i.e.. 3-minute) RAC for HC1
of 150 mg/m3 based on limited data
documenting a no-observed-effect-level
in animals exposed to HCl via
inhalation.21 We do anticipate.
however, that short-term RACs for other
compounds will be developed by the
Agency.
C. Risk From Carcinogens
EPA policy suggests that no threshold
dose can be demonstrated
experimentally for carcinogens. This
leads to the assumption that an
exposure theoretically would represent
some finite level of risk for carcinogens.
' EPA's Carcinogen Assessment Group
(CAC) has estimated the carcinogenic
potency for humans exposed to low
dose levels of carcinogens (both known
and suspected human carcinogens). The
potency factors have been used to
estimate the unit risk of carcinogenic
constituents on Appendix VIU. The unit
risk is the incremental risk to an
individual exposed fora life-time to
ambient air containing one microgram of
the compound per cubic meter of air. We
have used the available unit risk values
to calculate risk-specific doses (RSDs)
for an incremental risk of 10" * (i.e.. 1 in
100,000). See Appendix B of this
preamble.
For purposes of this regulation, the
Agency is proposing that an incremental
lifetime risk to the most exposed
individual (MEI) of 1X10^(1 in 100.000)
is a reasonable risk. Accordingly, the
risk based standards proposed today
ensure that the incremental risk from
direct inhalation of carcinogenic stack
emissions does not exceed 1 xlO~*. The
risks from the individual carcinogens
are summed to develop an aggregate
MEI risk. Thus, the aggregate risk to the
MEI is calculated by predicting the
maximum annual average ground level
concentration for each carcinogenic
emission, calculating the ratio of that
concentration to the RSD (See Appendix
B). and summing the ratios for all
carcinogenic compounds. The sum
cannot exceed 1 in order for the risk not
to exceed IX10-*."
We are proposing that a 1 XlO"4
lifetime incremental risk level is
reasonable for this regulation because
the MEI risk posed by coal and oil-fired
boilers is generally in the range of
1X10'5.83
The Agency specifically requests
comment on whether aggregate
population nsk or cancer incidence (Le..
cancer incidents/year) should also be
considered in developing the national
emission limits and in the site-specific
risk assessments under the various
waivers proposed. Thus, both the risk to
the MEI and increased cancer incidence
could be considered. This approach
could be more conservative than
considering only MEI risk because, even
if the "acceptable" MEI risk level were
not exceeded, large population centers
may be exposed to emissions such that
the increased cancer incidence could be
significant. An incremental cancer
incidence in the range of 0.1 to 0.5
cancers per year could be considered
significant. Based on public comment
and further thought on how to
implement this dual approach (Le..
considering both MEI nsk and cancer
incidence), the final rule could
incorporate both approaches.
Alternatively. EPA may provide
guidance to the permit writer on when
and how to consider cancer incidence
on a case-by-case basis under authority
of Section 3005(c) of HSWA.
"> Memo from Clara Chow thru Reva Rubenstein.
Characterization and Assessment Division. EPA to
Robert Holloway. Wane Management Division.
EPA. entitled "Use of RfDs Versus TLVs for Health
Criteria." January 13.1987.
11 Memo from Characterization and Assessment
Division to Waste Management Division. October 2.
1988. interpreting results from Kinch. V.H- Drabke
P (1982). Asaessmq Hit Biological Effects of
Hydrogen Chloride, Z. Gesamte Hyt, Ihra.
Crenzgeb 28:107-109.
11 We note that the ground level concentrations
of interest are the o/jf-tite concentration*. The risk
posed by emissions on-srte are more appropriately
addressed as an occupational hazard by the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Thus the Tier IV and low nsk waste risk
assessments are baaed on off-site ambient
concentrations. EPA specifically requests
comments, however, on whether on-slle
concentrations should be considered for facilities
where people reside on-slte (e g. military bases.
college* and universities). (The Tier 1-111 standards'
are conservatively based on dispersion modeling
that did not consider whether the maximum
concentrations were located on-site or off-site.) We
note further that the MEI concentration used for this
regulation is more correctly the potential MEI
concentration m that it represents the maximum
annual average ground level concentration
Irrespective of whether a person actually resides at
trrat location*
" Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
EPA. Cool and O>1 CaaibatUoa Sutfy Summary
and Result*. September 1988 Draft Report.
D. Assumptions Used in the Risk
Assessment
A number of assumptions, some
conservative and others
nonconservative, have been used in the
risk assessment to simplify the analysis
or to address issues where definitive
data do not exist.
Conservative assumptions include the
following:
• Individuals reside at the point of
maximum annual average and maximum
short-term ground level concentration
(for HCl). Further, the risk estimates for
carcinogens assume the individual
resides at the point of maximum annual
average concentration for a 70 year
lifetime.
• Indoor air contains the same levels
of pollutants as outdoor air.
• For noncarcinogenic health
determinations, background exposure
already amounts to 75% of the RfD. This
includes other routes of exposure
including ingestion and dermal. Thus.
the boiler or industrial furnace is only
allowed to contribute 25% of the RfD via
direct inhalation. The only exception is
lead where the allowed contnbution is
10% of the NAAQS. We are allowing a
lower contribution for lead because
ambient lead levels in urban areas
already represent a substantial portion
(e.g.. one third or more) of the lead
NAAQS. In addition, the Agency is
particularly concerned about the health
risks from lead in light of health effects
data available since the NAAQS was
established. The Agency is currently
reviewing the lead NAAQS to determine
if it should be lowered.
Note.—We have not attempted to quantify
indirect exposure through the food chain.
mgestton of water contaminated by
deposition, and dermal exposure because the
methodology has noi yet been developed and
approved for use in assessing risk from
combustion sources. We note, however, that
allowing the source to contribute only 25% of
the RfD accounts for indirect exposure by
assuming a person is exposed to 75% of the
RfD from other sources and other exposure
pathways. (The Agency has developed such a
methodology for application to waste
combustion sources and the Agency's
Science Advisory Board has reviewed this
methodology. Assuming Agency-wide
procedures are developed, a more detailed
analysis may be applied to boilers and
furnaces burning hazardous wastes)
• Risks are considered both for
pollutants that are known human
carcinogens and those that are known
animal carcinogens and therefore, are
suspected human carcinogens.
Nonconservanve assumptions include
the following:
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6, 1987 / Proposed Rules
16995
• Although emissions are complex
mixtures, additive effects of threshold
compounds and interactive effects of
threshold or carcinogenic compounds
have not been considered given the lack
of information.
Note.—Additive effects of carcinogenic
compounds are considered by summing the
risks for all carcinogens to estimate the
aggregate risk to the most exposed individual
fMEl)
• Ecological effects (i.e.. effects on
plants and animals) have not been
considered given the lack of
information. Adverse effects on plants
and animals may occur at doses lower
than the levels that cause adverse
effects in humans. (The Agency is also
developing procedures and requesting
Science Advisory Board review to
consider ecological effects resulting
from emissions from waste combustion
facilities.)
///. Proposed Controls for Emissions of
Toxic Organic Compounds
A. Hazard Posed by Combustion of
Toxic Organic Compounds
The burning of hazardous waste
containing toxic organic compounds
(i.e.. organic compounds listed in
Appendix VIII of 40 CFR Part 261) under
poor combustion conditions can result in
substantial emissions of the original
compounds which were not burned and
compounds that result from the partial
but incomplete combustion of
constituents in the waste. The quantity
of toxic organic compounds emitted
depends on the concentration of the
compounds in the waste, the waste
firing rate (i.e.. the percentage of total
boiler or industrial furnace fuel provided
by the hazardous waste), and the
combustion conditions under which the
waste is burned. The risk posed by the
emissions depends on the toxicity of the
compounds emitted, and the ambient
levels to which persons are exposed.
Hypothetical risk assessments show
that under poor combustion conditions
that achieve only 99 percent or 99.9
percent destruction efficiency of organic
compounds, risks to the maximum
exposed individual from unbumed
carcinogenic organics found in
hazardous waste can result in increased
lifetime cancer risks of 10~4.24
*• Engineering-Science. Background Document for
the Development of Regulations To Control the
Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces Volume III. February 1987
B. Basis for the ORE and CO
Performance Standards for Toxic
Organic Compounds
The Agency is proposing to control
the emission of toxic organic compounds
from boilers and industrial furnaces
burning hazardous waste with two
performance standards. A 99.99 percent
destruction and removal efficiency
(ORE) standard for principal organic
hazardous constituents (POHCs) in the
waste feed would ensure that
constituents in the waste would not be
emitted at levels that could pose
significant risk in virtually all scenarios
of which the Agency is aware.88 In
addition, flue gas carbon monoxide (CO)
levels would be limited to ensure the
device operates continuously at high
combustion efficiency. Thus, when
burning hazardous waste, these devices
cannot operate under upset conditions.
which could lead to significant
emissions of products of incomplete
combustion (PICs). typically evidenced
by smoke emissions. The basis for these
standards is discussed below.
1. Results of Emissions Testing. The
Agency conducted field tests on 11 full-
scale industrial boilers and 12 industrial
furnaces. The test results indicate that:
• Boilers and industrial furnaces can
be operated to achieve 99.99 percent
ORE of POHCs considered difficult to
destroy— carbon tetrachloride,
chlorobenzene. trichloroethylene. and
tetrachloroethylene.
• Boilers cofiring hazardous waste
fuels with fossil fuels where the
hazardous waste provides less than 50
percent of the boiler's fuel requirements
can achieve 99.99 percent DRE of
POHCs under a wide range of operating
conditions (e.g.. load changes, waste
feed rate changes, excess air rate
changes).
• When boilers and industrial
furnaces are operated at high
combustion efficiency, as evidenced by
flue gas carbon monoxide (CO) levels of
less than 100 ppm. DREs exceed 99.99
percent. Although the tests showed this
relationship between CO and DRE. there
was no direct correlation between CO
(an indicator of combustion efficiency)
and ORE. Devices clearly operating
under poor combustion conditions, as
evidenced, for example, by smoke
emissions, still achieved 99.99 percent
DRE. It appears that POHCs are
immediately destroyed in the flame
zone.
• Emissions of products of incomplete
combustion (PICs) (i.e.. quantitated
Appendix VIII pollutants that are not
" Except that a 99 9999% DRE would be required
for dioxin-contaimng listed waste.
POHCs) generally ranged from 0.5 to 5
times POHC emission rates.
• Emissions of PICs appeared
generally to increase as combustion
efficiency decreased as evidenced by
increased flue gas CO levels.
• Emission of total unburned
hydrocarbons (i.e.. quantified Appendix
VIII pollutants as well as unburned
POHCs and other unburned organic
compounds) clearly increase as
combustion efficiency decreases as
evidenced by an increase in flue gas CO
levels.
2. Overview of test program. The
boiler testing program had two primary
purposes: (1) To determine if boilurs
operated under steady-state conditions
to achieve maximum combustion
efficiency could achieve 99.99 percent
destruction and removal efficiency
(DRE) of principal organic hazardous
constituents (POHCs) in the waste: and
(2) to determine how changes in
operating conditions (e.g.. waste firing
rates, boiler load, excess flue gas
oxygen levels) would affect the boiler's
ability to achieve 99.99 percent DRE of
POHCs—so-called nonsteady-state
testing.
To meet the first objective (steady-
state testing). EPA tested ten boilers
that represented a wide variety of boiler
types and sizes and that burned a
variety of hazardous wastes and
auxiliary fuels. The boilers ranged in
type and size from a small 8 million Btu/
hr fire tube boiler to a 250 million Btu/hr
water tube boiler. The hazardous wastes
burned ranged from methanol and
toluene wastes with a 18.500 Btu/lb
heating value similar to that of No. 6 fuel
oil (and which was spiked with
chlorinated organics for test purposes)
to a methyl acetate waste with a heating
value of less than half that of No. 6 fuel
oil (and which also was spiked with
chlorinated organics for test purposes).
Waste firing rates ranged from 100
percent of the boiler's fuel requirements
(for a waste having a heating value of
9.000 Btu/lb and containing 43 percent
chlorine, by weight) to less than 10
percent of the boiler's fuel requirements
on a heat input basis. Boiler auxiliary
fuels (if any) were natural gas. No. B fuel
oil. pulverized coal, and waste wood.
EPA conducted nonsteady-state
testing on three boilers, one of which
was also tested under steady-state
conditions. One boiler was a 140 million
Btu/hr capacity water tube boiler that
could coflre hazardous waste with either
natural gas or No. 6 fuel oil. This boiler
was coflred with a methyl methacrylate
distillation bottom with a heating value
of about 11.500 Btu/lb that was spiked
with carbon tetrachloride and
-------
16996 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 67 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
monochlorobenzene in concentrations
ranging from 0.4 to 4.5 percent. The
second boiler was a 450 million Btu/hr
capacity water tube bailer also designed
to cofire hazardous waste with natural
gas. This boiler typically operated at a
capacity of 250 million Btu/hr and was
cofired with liquid organic heavy ends
from a butanol/propanol production
unit. The waste had a heating value of
about 12,800 Btu/lb and was spiked with
up to 16 percent carbon tetrachloride,
monochlorobenzene. and
trichlorobenzene. The third boiler was a
170 million Btu/hr capacity water tube.
stoker fired boiler designed to handle an
aqueous sludge for disposal (i.e.,
incineration or destruction). The
aqueous sludge had virtually no heating
value and was fired with pressure-
atomized guns into the combustion zone
just above the coal grate at rates of 12 to
20% of the volume of total boiler feed
(i.e.. sludge plus coal fuel). The sludge
was spiked with 5 to 10%
trichloroethylene or trichlorobenzene as
tracer compounds to determine
destruction and removal efficiencies.
More than 100 individual stack
emission tests were conducted to
determine the effect on ORE and
emissions of products of incomplete
combustion (PlCs) of: (1) Burning
hazardous waste under conditions of
high and low boiler loads, high and low
excess air rates, high and low waste
firing rates (up to about 50 percent of the
boiler's fuel requirements), and during
soot blowing: (2) burning hazardous
waste while boiler load, excess air rates.
and waste firing rates were changed:
and (3] start-up of waste firing
operations.
The following industrial furnaces
were tested: five cement production
kilns, both dry and wet process types:
two asphalt aggregate kilns: two light-
weight aggregate production kilns, a
lime production kiln; and a pig iron blast
furnace. The results of these tests should
be indicative of the ability of industrial
furnaces to bum hazardous wastes
efficiently.26 The hazardous wastes
" The only other mduitnal furnaces known to
bum hazardous waste as fuel (or to have been
tested at (ull scale) are sulfur recovery furnaces and
halogen acid furnaces Although EPA has not
conducted emissions testing of a sulfur recovery
furnace and has tested only one type of halogen
acid furnace U hydrogen chloride production
furnace), the Agency believes Mich furnace* should
be able to comply with the standards proposed
today and. thus, could safely bum hazardous waste.
The Agency, however, specifically requests
information on sulfur recovery furnaces, halogen
acid furnaces, and other industrial furnaces that
bum hazardous waste, including the types and
quantities of wastes burned. The Agency also
requests comments on whether the proposed
standards would be protective {or industrial
burned in these industrial furnaces
dunng the tests ranged from used oil
spiked with several thousand ppm of
chlorinated solvents to hazardous waste
mixtures containing halogenated and
nonhalogenated solvent recovery
distillation bottoms and spent solvents
from manufacturing processes (e.g.,
paint manufacturing) where chlorine
levels ranged from 1 to 5 percent. The
heating value of the waste fuels ranged
from 10.000 to 18.000 Btu/lb and the
hazardous waste firing rate ranged from
100 percent for the asphalt aggregate
kilns, light-weight aggregate kilns, and
lime kiln to about 5 percent of the heat
input to the blast furnace.
EPA did not conduct nonsteady-state
testing of industrial furnaces to
determine the range of operating
conditions under which they could be
expected to achieve 99.99 percent DRE
Given that there are five different
categories of industrial furnaces that are
burning (or have burned) hazardous
waste and that some categories have
substantially different types of devices
(e.g., wet versus dry process cement
kilns, drum mix versus batch mix
asphalt operations), EPA believes that
the cost of nonsteady-state testing for
each type of industrial furnace would be
prohibitive. Moreover, the primary
purpose for the boiler nonsteady-state
testing was to determine if operating
conditions could be specified such that
the device could be assumed to be
achieving 99.99 percent DRE without the
need for a trial burn to demonstrate
DRE. Based on the boiler testing. EPA is
proposing an automatic waiver of the
trial burn for owners and operators who
operate the boiler under special
operating requirements. The basis for
that approach is discussed in Section
III.C below. EPA believes that this
approach may allow many of the 900
boilers burning hazardous waste to
avoid the expense of conducting trial
burns. Given that EPA believes that
there may be only about 50 industrial
furnaces burning hazardous waste and
given the cost of testing five to seven or
more industrial furnaces operated under
nonsleady-state conditions. EPA does
not believe that such a testing program
for industrial furnaces would be cost-
effective. Thus, as discussed below. EPA
is proposing that owners and operators
of all industrial furnaces, as well as
those boilers not operated under the
proposed special conditions, conduct
trial bums to demonstrate conformance
with the DRE standard.
3 Interpretation of test results. The
boilers tested under nonsteady-state
conditions achieved 99.99 percent DRE
of POHCs under nearly all operating
conditions tested. It would not be
appropriate, however, to assume that
any boiler burning any hazardous waste
fuel under any waste firing and boiler
operating conditions will achieve 99.99
percent DRE. Although the nonsleady-
state tests varied a number of
parameters over a wide range, some
parameters could not be tested at the
three test sites and other parameters
could not be tested over their full range.
As examples, hazardous waste was not
fired with nonfossil fuels like waste
wood, the maximum waste firing rate
tested was 56 percent on a heat input
basis, the boilers were not operated at
loads below about 25 percent, and
excess oxygen levels in the flue gas did
not exceed 10 percent. Parameters such
as these can affect boiler combustion
efficiency and, thus, destruction of toxic
organic constituents in the hazardous
waste and emissions of incompletely
burned organics. (See discussion below.)
Although most of the appropriate
parameters were tested at the
"extremes" during one or more of the 11
steady-state tests discussed above, the
boilers were operated during these tests
under constant conditions in an attempt
to achieve peak combustion efficiency.
Thus, we do not know how narrow the
envelope of operating conditions may be
to ensure peak combustion efficiency
and 99.99 percent DRE for a boiler
already operating at the "extremes"
(e.g., burning hazardous waste with a
heating value of 1.000-8.000 Btu/lb as
primary fuel: burning 100 percent
hazardous waste with a heating value of
less than 9.000 Btu/lb: or operating at a
very low load). .
4. Basis for the DRE standard EPA is
proposing a 9959 percent DRE
performance standard for POHCs *'
because it is protective, it can be readily
achieved by boilers and industrial
furnaces as discussed above, and It
would ensure that the Agency's controls
are consistent for all combustion
devices—boilers, industrial furnaces.
and incinerators— that pose similar
risks.
Hypothetical risk assessments have
shown that a 99.99 percent DRE
standard for POHCs is protective in
virtually every scenario of which the
furnaces not explicitly identified m proposed
Si 288.34-4 (b) and (c).
** Except that, as required for mcmerefora. a
99.99 percent DRE would be required for the dioxin-
contaming wastes- EPA Hazardous Wastes FQ20.
FQZl, FD22. F023. F028. and POZ7 See i ZM 3O(aNZ|
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52^ No. 87" / Wednesday.. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
16997
Agency is aware.28 Increased lifetime
cancer risks to the maximum exposed
individual would generally be 10 or less.
Threshold (i.e.. noncarcmogenic) organic
compounds as well would not be
expected in hazardous waste burned in
these devices at levels that could pose a
health hazdrd under the 99.99 percent
ORE standard.
It should be noted, however, that the
ORE standard does not directly control
the mass emission rate (e.g.. pounds per
hour) of unburned POHC. Although
there could be hypothetical situations
where risks from POHCs could be
significant under a 99.99 percent ORE
standard (e g., boilers or industrial
furnaces located in urban areas burning
high volumes of waste with high
concentrations of highly potent
carcinogenic organics), the Agency is
not aware of any such situations. (See
Section I of Part Two of this preamble.)
If. however, during the permit process, it
appears that high risk scenarios exist.
permit officials can use the omnibus
provision of Section 3005(c) of HSWA to
develop permit requirements, as
necessary, to protect human health and
the environment (e.g., by requiring a
99.9999 percent ORE. by limiting the feed
rate of particularly toxic compounds, or
by setting a mass emission rate).
EPA specifically requests comments
on using surrogate compounds in lieu of
POHCs (actual constituents in the
waste) to demonstrate DRE during a
trial burn. To be useful as universal
surrogates, such compounds must be
more difficult to destroy than any
principal organic constituent in the
waste. Thus, the surrogates should have
a low heat of combustion (e.g.. carbon
tetrachloride). the conventional index
for predicting incinerability. In addition.
in light, of work conducted by the
University of Dayton Research
Institute.29 the surrogates should also
have a high gas phase thermal stability
under low oxygen conditions (e.g.,
monochlorobenzene, tnchloroethylene).
Further, the surrogates need not be
limited to toxic compounds listing in
Appendix VIII of Part 261. Other
compounds, notably SFS. appear to have
very high thermal stability and may be
useful as a universal surrogate.30 To be
*" Engineering Science Background Informal tan
Document for the Development of Regulations to
Control the Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers
ami Industrial Furances Volume III. January 1987
" Or Barry Dellmger. Michael D. Graham, and
Dubra A Tiney. University of Dayton. Research
Institute. "Predicting Emissions from the Thermal
Processing of Hazardous Wastes". Hazardous
Waste and Hazardous Materials. Volume 3.
Number 3.1988
30 Or Philip H. Taylor and Dr |ohn Chadboume.
"SK as a Surrogate for Measuring Hazardous
Wrfsie Incinerator Performance", submitted for
conservative, it appears appropriate to
select several compounds as
surrogates—one or two compounds that
have low heat of combustion, and one or
two compounds that have high thermal
stability. Such compounds could be used
as a universal mixture of surrogates, or
"POHC soup". EPA specifically requests
comments on this approach to simplify
and standardize DRE testing.
5. Basis for the CO standard. EPA is
proposing to limit flue gas carbon
monoxide (CO) levels to ensure that
boilers and industrial furnaces are
operated at high combustion efficiency
when burning hazardous waste. Thus,
emissions of incompletely burned
organic compounds are expected to be
minimized to levels that would not pose
significant risk.
a. PIC Emissions. EPA evaluated
emissions of products of incomplete
combustion (PICs) by quantifying
emissions of priority pollutants that
were not constituents in the waste (and
evaluated as POHCs). PIC emission
rates varied from about 0.1 to over 100
times POHC emission rates, but
generally ranged from 0.5 to 5 times
POHC emission rates. Semivolatile PIC
emissions were nearly always
insignificant compared to the levels of
volatile PICs. Thus, large molecular
weight (senuvolatile) compounds
apparently were not being synthesized.
(We note, however, that laboratory
studies have shown that single
chlorinated organic compounds can
produce several chlorinated PICs. These
PICs were not limited to simple
fragments of the parent POHC but
included higher order chlorinated
organics.)
Typical chlorinated PICs found during
the full scale boiler testing included
chloroform, trichloroethane.
tetrachloroethylene. dichloromethane.
chloromethane, and carbon
tetrachloride. In addition, two
nonchlorinated PICs were nearly always
found—benzene and toluene.
EPA also evaluated dioxin emissions
from boilers cofired with hazardous
waste fuel. Emission of chlorinated
dioxins and chlorinated furans, their
tetra. penta. hexa. hepta and octa
homologs. as well as the highly toxic
isomer. 2.3.73-TCDD were quantified
during steady-state testing of five
boilers.3 > Four of the boilers were oil
publication to (ournal of Air Pollution Control
Association. March 1987.
11 Acurex Corporation. Dioxin Emissions [ram
Industrial Boilers Burning Hazardous Materials.
April 1905.
gas. or pulverized coal boilers typical of
those that burn hazardous waste fuels.
These boilers ranged in capacity from
100 to 340 MM Btu/hr and fired
hazardous waste generally at rates of 20
to 47 percent of total heat input.
Emissions of total PCDD
(polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins)
ranged from less than 0.08 to 1.1
nanograms/cubic meter of flue gas
(0.0048—0.068 ppt) 3a and emissions of
total PCDF (polychlorinated dibenzo-
furan) ranged from 0.14 to 5.5
nanograms/cubic meter (0.0084-0.33
ppt). The highly toxic isomer. 2.3.7.8-
TCDD, was found in the emission from
only one boiler and at a level equal to
the detection limit of 0.002 nanograms/
cubic meter.
The fifth test boiler was a 100 MM
Btu/hr wood-fired stoker boiler. The
boiler cofired creosote sludge at a 40
percent heat input firing rate with wood
chips, bark, and sawdust. As is typical
of batch-feed wood-fired stokers, large
and frequent fluctuations in excess air
and carbon monoxide emissions were
indicative of erratic combustion
conditions. Emissions of total PCDD
were 76 nanograms/cubic meter of flue
gas (4.56 ppt). PCDF emissions were not
determined. Emissions of 2.3.7,8-TCDD
were not detected at a detection limit of
0.002 nanograms/cubic meter (0.00014
ppt).
We note that there is a substantial
degree of uncertainty associated with
quantifying the emission of unburned
organics. The test results can over or
underestimate the emission of unbumed
organics attributed to burning hazardous
waste fuels. Hazardous wastes were
cofired with fossil fuels during most of
the test burns. Any fossil fuel PIC was
included as a PFC generated by the
hazardous waste. Fossil fuel combustion
is known typically to generate the PICs
benzene and toluene and. if the fossii
fuel contains chlorine (e.g., coal), many
of the hazardous waste chlorinated PICs
listed above could also be generated by
the fossil fuel. In addition, some of the
organic compounds identified during
EPA's testing as PICs may. in fact, result
from contamination from sampling train
absorbent, laboratory solvents, or from
such sources as freon leaks from a
refrigerator used to store samples prior
to analysis.
PIC emissions could also be
underestimated because only those
organic compounds listed as toxic
constituents of hazardous waste in
Appendix VIII of Part 261 were
quantified and designated as PICs.
Although GC/MS analysis was used to
" ppt parts per trillion.
-------
16998 Federal Register / VoL 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
quantify about 100 of these compounds.
many other unburned organic
compounds were undoubtedly emitted
Some of these compounds are
undoubtedly toxic even though they are
not listed in Appendix VIII.
Although additional.research is
needed to understand combustion
reactions where organic constituents in
hazardous waste are first "destroyed"
and where intermediate products of
combustion are formed until ultimately.
and ideally, all hydrocarbons are
converted to carbon dioxide and water.
the available data lead the Agency to
conclude: (1) the risk posed by PIC
emissions is probably not significant
when combustion devices achieve 99.99
percent ORE of POHCs even though they
may operate at less than maximum
combustion efficiency; and (2)
nonetheless, given the uncertainties as
to the types and quantities of PICs that
may be emitted when a combustion
device is not operated at high
combustion efficiency, it is prudent to
provide controls that ensure that boilers
and industrial furnaces are operated at
high combustion efficiency when
burning hazardous waste. Both of these
points are discussed below.
b. Risk from PIC emissions. As
discussed above, test data indicate that
PICs are generally emitted at rates of
from 0.5 to 5 times the rate of POHCs.
Given that the preponderance of the
PICs were relatively low molecular
weight, volatile compounds even when
the POHCs were high molecular weight.
semivolatile compounds, and, given that
the carcinogenic PICs have potencies
similar to the POHCs. As discussed
above, the increased lifetime cancer risk
from unburned POHC emissions at a
99.99 percent ORE is on the order of 10"'
or less. Thus, PICs emitted at a rate of
0.5 to 5 times POHC rates would
increase risks by less than half an order
of magnitude—to ICT'or less.
Although some dioxms (e.g., 2,3.7.8-
TCDD) are orders of magnitude more
potent than the other PICs (and POHCs)
identified during the testing program, the
emission of dioxms and furans were
found to be virtually insignificant.
Emission rates for all dioxin and furan
homologs were converted to 2,3,7.8-
TCDD emissions equivalents to estimate
the increased lifetime cancer risk to the
maximum exposed individual under
reasonable, worst case scenarios. The
nsk from dioxin and furan emissions
appears on the order of 10"'.
c. Use of CO limits to ensure high
combustion conditions. Generally
accepted combustion theory holds that
low CO (carbon monoxide) flue gas
levels are indicative of a boiler,
industrial furnace, or incinerator
operating at high combustion efficiency.
Operating at high combustion efficiency
conditions helps ensure minimum
emissions of unburned (or incompletely
burned) organics.33 In the first stage of
combustion of hazardous waste fuel, the
POHCs are immediately thermally
decomposed in the flame to form other.
usually smaller, compounds termed PICs
(products of incomplete combustion). In
this first stage of combustion, these PICs
are also rapidly decomposed to form
CO.
The second stage of combustion
involves the oxidation of CO to COj
(carbon dioxide). The CO to COj step is
the slowest (rate controlling) step in the
combustion process because CO is
considered to be more thermally stable
(difficult to oxidize) than other
intermediate products of combustion of
hazardous waste constituents. Since fuel
is continuously being fired, both
combustion stages are occurring
simultaneously
Using this view of waste combustion.
the "destruction" of a POHC. and
perhaps even the destruction of PICs. is
independent of flue gas CO levels. Thus.
CO flue gas levels cannot be correlated
to ORE for POHCs and may not
correlate well with PIC destruction. (As
discussed above, test data show no
correlation between CO and ORE, a
slight apparent correlation between CO
and chlorinated PICs. and a fair
correlation between CO and total
unburned hydrocarbons.) Low CO is an
indicator of the status of the CO to CO,
conversion process, the last, rate-
limiting oxidation process. Since
oxidation of CO to COs occurs after
destruction of the POHC and its (other)
intermediates (PICs). the absence of CO
is a useful indication of POHC and PIC
destruction. The presence of high levels
of CO in the flue gas is a useful
indication of inefficient combustion and,
at some level of elevated CO flue gas
concentration, an indication of failure of
the PIC and POHC destruction process.
We believe it is necessary to limit CO
levels to levels indicative of high
combustion efficiency because we do
not know the precise CO level that is
indicative of significant failure of the
PIC and POHC destruction process. In
fact, that critical CO level may be
dependent on site-specific and event-
specific factors (e.g. fuel type, fuel mix.
air to fuel ratios, rate and extent of
change of these and other factors that
affect combustion efficiency). We
believe limiting CO levels is also
reasonable because: (1) it is a widely
practiced approach to monitoring
combustion efficiency—many boilers
and industrial furnaces are already
equipped with flue gas oxygen
monitors 34 and some are equipped with
CO monitors; (2) although the
annualized cost of oxygen and CO
monitoring is estimated to be $20.000
(see Section II of Part Six), the monitors
may in part pay for themselves in fuel
savings resulting from operating the
boiler or industrial furnace closer to
maximum combustion efficiency; and (3)
well designed and operated boilers and
industrial furnaces can easily be
operated in conformance with the
proposed CO limits.
d. Proposed CO limits. The Agency is
proposing the following limits on flue
gas carbon monoxide (CO) levels,
corrected to a 7 percent flue gas oxygen
content.
" Given thai CO 11 a gross indicator of
combustion performance, limiting CO may not
absolutely minimize PIC emissions This is because
PICs can result from small pockets within the
combustion zone where adequate time, temperature
and turbulence have not been provided to oxidize
completely the combustion products of the POHCs
Available data, however, indicate that PIC
emissions do not pose significant nsk when
combustion devices are operated at high
combustion efficiency. EPA is conducting additional
Held and pilot scale testing to address this issue
CO farms
II > 100 ppm average lor
any 60 minute period
(rolling average)
M >500 ppm average tor
any 10 minute period
Consequence ol eiceedmg
limn
waste teed snuiofl withm 10
minute*
immeduie waste feed shutoH
Both limits would apply. Test burn
data and discussions with owners and
operators of boilers and industrial
furnaces indicate that these CO limits
are readily achievable.35
»• Oxygen momtonng'would be required in
conjunction with CO monitoring to adjust CO levels
to a common excess air rate indicated by excess
oxygen content in the fine gas Correcting CO levels
to a common flue gas oxygen content avoids the
problem of having (otherwise) high CO levels
diluted by large quantities of excess air This issue
is discussed further in the next section of the text
•• We note, however, that boilers that are well-
operated (and typically equipped with CO monitors)
may operate at CO levels of 150 to 250 ppm to
maximize boiler efficiency To optimize boiler
efficiency (i e.. minimize the fuel required to
generate 1.000 Ibs of steam), boilers are operated
under slightly fuel-rich conditions The energy lost
from the relatively high stack gas CO levels is more
than offset by the energy thai would be required to
heal ambient air fed to the combustion zone to
increase fuel burnout (i e. CO combustion, and
combustion of carbon in coal and oil ash) Thus, lo
meet the proposed CO standards, some well-
operated, finely-tuned boilers may have to opera IK
at a lower boiler efficiency to operate at the high
combustion efficiency required by the proposed CO
limits EPA believes that few boilers burning
hazardous waste are currently equipped with CO
monitors and would be required to operate under
less thermally efficient conditions under this
proposal Nonetheless, the Agency specifically
requests comments on this issue
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
^^^^^^^^^^•^•^•^^•'^^••^^^^•^^••^•^^•^••^••••••^^••••^^••i^—^-^^
16999
The 100 ppm limit is indicative of
steady-state (i.e.. normal), efficient
combustion conditions. The higher limit
of 500 ppm and the time weighted
average for both limits are provided to
accommodate the CO spikes that
inevitably occur when hazardous waste
fuel firing starts or when, for example.
there is a load change on an industrial
boiler. Test burn data and discussions
with owners and operators indicate that
the proposed limits and duration of
exceedences will enable owners and
operators to bring combustion
conditions back to maximum efficiency
after normal, routine "upsets" caused by
initiating waste firing, load changes, etc.
Given that CO is a sensitive indicator
of overall combustion conditions and
may be a conservative indicator of
POHC and PIC destruction, we are
proposing time-weighted averages of
exceedences rather than fixed limits.
Fixed limits that do not acknowledge
inevitable CO spikes and that do not
give owners and operators time to
retune combustion conditions could
actually result in greater emission of
incompletely burned organics. This is
because each time hazardous waste
firing is interrupted. CO will spike and
emission of incompletely burned
organics may increase. Thus, any
controls on CO must stnke a balance
between the organic emissions that
result from .an overly-stringent CO limit
that requires frequent waste feed
interruptions versus the emissions that
result from less stringent controls that
acknowledge inevitable CO spikes.
We are proposing that the CO limits
be based on a flue gas oxygen content of
7 percent. It is necessary to correct CO
levels for flue gas oxygen content
because (otherwise) high CO flue gas
concentrations could be diluted by high
rates of excess air. Although a boiler or
industrial furnace may be operating
under conditions that result in poor
combustion efficiency and a high CO
mass emission rate per unit of time. CO
flue gas concentrations could be diluted
to levels that meet the proposed limits if
the dev.ce were operated at high excess
air rates (which in itself could reduce
combustion efficiency and increase the
CO mass emission rate96).
We are proposing that CO be
corrected to a flue gas oxygen content of
7 percent because we believe that the
majority of boilers and industrial
furnaces require flue gas oxygen levels
of about 7 percent when burning
hazardous waste at high combustion
'• High excess air rales can decrease combustion
efficiency by "quenching" the flame with cooler
ambient air resulting in lower combustion zone
temperatures and. ultimately, an unstable flame
efficiency. We are aware, however, that
optimum flue gas oxygen levels may
range from 3 percent to 10 percent for
these devices. Further, the optimum
oxygen level to achieve high combustion
efficiency for a given device will vary
depending on factors such as fuel mix
and boiler load. Although large
combustion devices generally have
optimum oxygen requirements on the
low end of the range and smaller units
on the upper end of the range, we
believe that a level of 7 percent is
reasonable given that it is in the middle
of the range and that the majority of
devices burning hazardous waste fuels
have moderate heat input capacities
(e.g.. 20-150 MM Btu/hr).
We should note that, for the smaller
devices with optimum oxygen
requirements greater than 7 percent, as
the gap widens between their optimum
oxygen level and the 7 percent oxygen
level selected for correcting CO levels,
the CO limits effectively become more
stringent. Even though these smaller
devices may be operating at optimum
excess air levels (i.e.. at greater than 7
percent excess oxygen levels) and
achieving high combustion efficiency
and minimum CO levels, the proposed
correction factor of 7 percent oxygen in
effect presumes they should be
operating at a lower excess air level
Thus, this approach presumes their CO
levels have been diluted and requires a
correction to the lower excess oxygen
rate. For purposes of determining
compliance with the proposed CO limits.
their actual CO levels would be
increased to those that would result
from the "optimum" excess oxygen level
of 7 percent.
Larger devices with optimum oxygen
levels lower than 7 percent would not be
adversely affected, since correcting to 7
percent oxygen would lower their
measured CO levels.
EPA specifically requests comments
on whether the proposed approach for
limiting CO levels is appropriate.
including the proposed limits, averaging
times, and the requirement to correct
CO levels to 7 percent flue gas oxygen
levels. We also specifically request
comment on whether a limit is needed
on the number of CO spikes per unit of
time in addition to the proposed time-
weighted average limits. A device could
be operating during an extended period
of frequent combustion upsets without
necessarily exceeding the proposed
time-weighted averages. Comments are
requested on this option, including on
appropriate CO trigger spike level (e.g..
300 ppm) and an appropriate limit on the
frequency (e.g., no more than 10 spikes
per 15 minutes). Comments should
include supporting documentation or
data for any of the above issues.
EPA is specifically requesting
comments on the appropriateness of
these CO limits for cement kilns.
Recently, it has come to the Agency's
attention that cement kirns may have a
problem meeting the proposed CO
limits. Apparently, trace organic
materials in the feedstock are burned-off
as the feedstock move* through the kiln
from the feed end to the hot end where
fuels are fired. The burning of these
trace organic materials apparently
causes cement kilns to have a high
baseline CO emission rate (e.g., 200-350
ppm) that is unrelated to the combustion
of fuels in the hot end of the kiln.
Therefore. EPA is requesting comments
on: (1) Whether a different set of CO
limits should be implemented for these
devices (e g., the proposed limits
superimposed on a baseline CO
emission rate): or (2) whether another
monitoring method (e.g., nitrogen
oxides) should be used for these
devices. Commenters should document
their positions keeping in mind that the
Agency's goal is to provide for
continuous monitoring of combustion
efficiency to minimize PIC emissions
from the burning of hazardous wastes.
EPA is proposing that if the 100 ppm
time-weighted average limit is exceeded.
the hazardous waste feed must be
shutoff within 10 minutes. This allows
the operator time to effect a controlled
waste shutoff and to switch to another
fuel. If, however, the 500 ppm tune-
weighted average limit is exceeded, we
are proposing that the hazardous waste
feed be shutoff immediately given that
the device is in a major upset condition
and is not operating anywhere close to
high combustion efficiency.31 Further.
we are proposing that the hazardous
waste feed cannot be restarted after a
required shutoff until the operator
demonstrates that the device can
operate at maximum combustion
efficiency for a reasonable period of
time. Thus, we are proposing that
hazardous waste firing cannot resume
until the device is operated without
exceeding a time-weighted average CO
level of 100 ppm for an averaging period
of not less than 10 minutes nor more
than 60 minutes. We are proposing the
GO minute maximum averaging time
" EPA specifically requests comments on
whether a controlled waste feed shntoff (e-g.. over a
2-mmute period) would be more appropriate than an
immediate shutoff requirement when the 500 ppm
limit is exceeded A controlled shutoff may result m
lower emissions of unbumed organic compounds by
allowing the operator to replace gradually the
hazardous waste with other fuels, thus reducing
"shock" to the combustion process.
-------
17000 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
period given that it is the basic CO
performance standard indicating high
combustion efficiency. If an operator
can retune his boiler quickly, however.
we do not believe he should have to
wait the 60 minutes required under the
basic CO standard to demonstrate that
his CO levels do not exceed 100 ppm on
average. Given that shorter averaging
periods are actually more stringent
because the operator has less time to
offset CO levels greater than 100 ppm
with levels lower than 100 ppm, we
believe that shorter periods should be
allowed. A10 minute minimum
averaging period is proposed because it
is short enough to allow operators to
resume burning hazardous waste
quickly once they retune combustion
controls and long enough to demonstrate
that low CO levels can be maintained.
We are proposing that, if the CO
limits are exceeded an aggregate of 10
times in a calendar month, the owner or
operator must cease burning hazardous
waste and notify the Regional
Administrator in writing within 5
calendar days. In addition, the owner or
operator may not resume burning
hazardous waste unless and until
written permission is received from the
Regional Administrator. Depending on •
the circumstances, the Regional
Administrator may modify the permit
requirements (or place special
conditions on interim status operations)
to ensure that the device can be
operated within the CO limits or to
minimize the risks from emissions of
incompletely burned organics if the
device continues to exceed the limits.
Those special conditions could include
limits on waste firing rates and the types
of waste that may be burned to ensure
that the CO standard can be met. EPA
specifically requests comments on this
approach.
Finally, EPA is proposing to apply the
CO (and ORE) requirements for blast
furnace systems burning hazardous
waste only to the stoves and boilers
burning the blast furnace off-gas. These
devices use approximately 93 percent of
the off-gas generated (see Part One,
Section IV.B.4 of this preamble). The
remaining off-gas is burned in
miscellaneous devices such as coke
ovens, reheat furnaces, flares, etc. EPA
is proposing not to limit CO (and ORE)
from these burners since they burn such
a small percentage of the off-gas. EPA
specifically requests comments on
whether this approach is appropriate.
C. Waiver of Trial Bums for Boilers
Operated Under Special Operating
Requirements
The DRE performance standard would
be implemented for boilers and
industrial furnaces very much as it is
currently implemented for incinerators
under Subpart O of Part 264. with one
major exception for certain boilers, as
discussed below. Industrial furnaces
and boilers not operated under certain
special conditions would demonstrate
by conducting a trial burn that they can
achieve the required DRE (99.9999
percent for dioxin-contaming wastes
and 99.99 percent for all other wastes)
for specific organic compounds
identified in the hazardous waste feed.
As a result of the nonsteady-state
boiler testing discussed above. EPA
believes that boilers operated under the
special operating requirements
discussed below will maintain a hot.
stable, primarily fossil fuel flame
conducive to maintaining high
combustion efficiency, and resulting in
maximum destruction of organic
constituents in the hazardous waste
fuel. EPA believes that these boilers will
achieve at least a 99.99 percent DRE of
organic constituents in the waste, and.
therefore, a trial burn to demonstrate
DRE is not necessary. Thus. EPA is
proposing to waive automatically the
requirement to conduct a trial burn to
demonstrate DRE for boilers operated
under the special operating
requirements.38
Although the steady-state boiler tests'
indicate that boilers operating outside of
the envelope of the special operating
requirements identified below can also
be operated to achieve maximum
combustion efficiency and at least 99.99
percent DRE. the less the boiler operates
as a primarily fossil fuel burner the
greater the uncertainty that a hot. stable.
and efficient flame can be maintained
continuously. Thus, case-by-case trial
burns would be required for those
boilers (and all industrial furnaces) to
determine that set of operating
conditions necessary to ensure 99.99
percent DRE.
The special operating requirements
requisite to an automatic waiver of a
trial burn to demonstrate DRE require
that: (1) The boiler must burn at least 50
percent of the fossil fuels oil. gas, or
" Emissions testing for boilers operating under
Ihe special operating requirements would be
avoided entirely If the hazardous waste meets Ihe
proposed specification levels for certain metals and
chlorine, as discussed in Sections HI and IV of Part
Three of the preamble. We note that even when
emissions testing would no) be required under
today's proposed rule, a permit under Ihe normal
permitting procedures (e g. Part A and Part B permit
applications, opportunity for public hearings) would
still be required See Section I.A.2 of Part Four of
Ihe preamble for an explanation.
coal: (2) the boiler must be operated at a
load of at least 25 percent of its rated
capacity; (3) the hazardous waste fuel
must have a heating value of at least
8.000 Btu/lb: and (4) the hazardous
waste fuel must be fired with an
atomization firing system. In addition to
these special conditions for the waiver
of a trial burn, these boilers, like other
boilers and all industrial furnaces.
would be subject to the carbon
monoxide flue gas limits (implemented
by continuous monitoring of CO and
oxygen) discussed above, and could not
burn hazardous waste during boiler
start-up or shut-down operations. The
basis for these requirements is
discussed below.
1. A minimum of 50 percent of the fuel
fired to the boiler must be gas. oil or
coal. Cofiring with fossil fuels (or fuels
derived from fossil fuels) as the primary
fuel is required to ensure a hot. stable
flame conducive to destruction of
organic constituents in the waste. Other
fuels (e.g., wood waste) may not provide
hot, stable combustion zone conditions.
A minimum fossil fuel firing of 50
percent, on a total heat input or volume
input basis, whichever results in the
greater volume of fossil fuel, would be
required to ensure a hot. stable flame.
We are proposing a minimum 50 percent
fossil fuel burning requirement because
nearly all of the nonsteady-state boiler
tests were conducted with hazardous
waste cofired with oil or gas at less than
a 50 percent firing rate. We specifically
request comments and any relevant
supporting data on whether the
proposed 50 percent minimum firing rate
is appropriate.
2. Boiler load must be at least 25
'percent. We are proposing to limit boiler
load when burning hazardous waste fuel
to 25 percent of the boiler's rated heat
input capacity because the combustion
flame can be cooler and less stable at
very low load factors. At low loads.
higher excess air rates are used to
improve fuel/air mixing. The increased
excess air rates, however, can also cool
the flame zone and even make the flame
unstable (e.g.. as a candle flame flickers
in a breeze). These conditions can result
in reduced combustion efficiency and
destruction of organic constituents in
the waste. Finally, EPA's nonsteady-
state boiler tests were conducted at
boiler loads of greater than 25 percent.
We specifically request comment and
supporting documentation on whether
the minimum 25 percent limit on boiler
load is appropriate.
3. The hazardous waste fuel, as fired.
must have a heating value of at least
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17001
'8.000 Btu/lb. We are proposing the
minimum heating value of 8.000 Btu/Ib
because: (1) It represents the lower
range of heating values of fossil fuels; (2)
hazardous waste with a lower heating
value is not generally burned in
boilers -19; and (3) few boilers burning
hazardous waste with a lower heating
value have been field-tested to
determine if they can achieve 99.99
percent ORE and low CO emissions.
This heating value limit is imposed on
the waste on an as-fired basis.40 Thus,
hazardous waste with low heating value
may be mixed with other wastes or fuels
to meet the 8.000 Btu/lb limit for the
mixture. We are allowing mixing to meet
this heating value limit even though
heretofore mixing was not allowed to
increase heating value to avoid sham
recycling because our concern here is
how the material will burn in a
regulated and controlled device. Our
concern with heating value previously
has been to prevent the sham recycling
of wastes with de mimmis heating value
by burning in unregulated boilers and
industrial furnaces to avoid the cost of
incineration.
Although our survey data 4I and
discussions with industry
representatives48 indicate that
hazardous waste fuels are typically
cofired through separate firing nozzles
rather than blended with fossil fuels
(except when burned in de mimmis
quantities), some hazardous waste fuels
may be blended with fuel oil so that the
blend is the boiler's sole fuel. In those
cases where hazardous waste with a
heating value of less than 8.000 Btu/lb is
blended with fuel oil or other fossil fuel
and where the blend is the boiler's sole
fuel, the owner or operator must show
by calculation that, after considering the
quantity of fossil fuel required to raise
the heating value of the waste/fuel
mixture to 8.000 Btu/lb. the remaining
volume of fossil fuel provides a
" As discussed in Section II of Part Two of the
preamble. EPA has heretofore considered the
burning of hazardous waste with an as-generated
healing i.ilue at less Ihdn 5.000-8.000 Blu/lb in
boilers or -nduslridl furnaces to be sham recycling
subiect to regulation as incineration
40 We are aware that hazardous waste with a
healing value less than 8.000 Blu/hr is sometimes
cofired in the same burner (i e.. firing nozzle) as
fossil fuel Although the waste Is not physically
blended before firing, the waste is blended with the
fossil (or other) fuel in the flame envelope from the
burner We specifically request comment on
whether such mixing with high heating value fuels
after firing meets the objectives of the minimum
waste healing value requirement, and how an
dllowance for such mixing could be structured in
implemenlable and enforceable regulatory language
4' WESTAT. Final Report for the Survey of
Waste a$ Fuel Track II. November 1985.
0 Keystone Center Workshop. February 11.1985.
Meetings with the Council of Industrial Boiler
Owners on December 5.1985 and Octobers. 1488
minimum of 50 percent of the boiler's
heat input (or volume input whichever
results in the greater volume input). This
will ensure that the boiler meets both
the waste heating value special
condition and the fossil fuel firing
special condition. Thus, this prevents a
situation, albeit remote, where a 45/55
percent, waste/fossil fuel blend is fired
as the sole fuel where the blend has
heating value of just greater than 8,000
Btu/lb because of the very low heating
value of the waste. We want to preclude
this situation because such a low
heating value mixture may not burn with
the hot, stable flame that the fossil fuel
firing condition is intended to provide.
We specifically request comment on
whether the proposed minimum 8.000
Btu/lb heating value is appropriate.
4. The hazardous waste fuel must be
fired with an Atomization firing system.
Only liquid wastes fired with an air or
steam atomizer, a mechanical atomizer,
or a rotary cup atomizer are eligible for
the automatic trial bum waiver.
Hazardous wastes that are solids, or
liquids fired with a lance (i.e.,
essentially a pipe that fires a stream of
liquid rather than small droplets into the
combustion zone) are not eligible.
An organic compound must be
vaporized and mixed with air before
combustion can occur. The quicker the
waste and its constituents are vaporized
and the more completely the volatilized
compounds are mixed with air, the more
rapid and efficient the combustion and
destruction of organic constituents.
Firing systems that atomize liquid
wastes to form small droplets increase
the rate of vaporization by providing a
larger surface area per volume of waste
to absorb heat from the flame.
We are proposing to allow the use of
virtually all atomization systems
commonly used to fire hazardous waste.
We are. however, for some types of
atomizers, proposing to restrict the
viscosity and maximum size of solids for
the as-fired hazardous waste to ensure
that the appropriate droplet size is
achieved43 and to minimize plugging of
the firing nozzle. The acceptable
atomization systems and restrictions on
waste viscosity and maximum size of
solids are proposed as follows:
41 The maximum viscosity is limited to ensure
that resulting droplets will not be loo large for
optimum volatilization. Minimum viscosity is also
limited to ensure that the droplet size is not too
small—to ensure that a "fog" is not formed which
could slow the rale of volatilization and. thus.
combustion by reducing the radiant heat absorption
of the droplets within the "fog."
TABLE 1.—VISCOSITY AND PARTICLE
SIZE LIMITS FOR ATOMIZATION SYS-
TEMS
Atomization
systems
High pressure air
or steam
atomization
(> 30 psig).
Low pressure air
atomization.
Mechanical
atomization.
Rotary cup
atomization.
Waste
viscosity limits
(SSU)>
150 to 5,000
200 to 1.500
<150
175 to 300
'Max,
mum
size of
solids
(mesh)
200
200
200
100
1SSU: Seconds, Saybolt Universal.
a. Air or steam atomization. Air or
steam atomization systems use air or
steam to break up the fuel into small
droplets. Under ordinary operations,
high pressure steam or air provided at 30
to 150 psig produces much smaller
droplets than other atomization systems.
Because of the cost of providing high
pressure air and where steam is not
readily available, low pressure (1-5
psig) burners are sometimes used. Low
pressure air atomization burners cannot
effectively handle the wide range of
viscosities that the high pressure
systems can handle.
b. Mechanical atomization.
Mechanical atomizers break up the fuel
into small droplets by forcing it through
a small, fixed orifice. A strong cyclonic
or whirling velocity is imparted to the
fuel before it is released through the
orifice. Combustion air is provided
around the periphery of the conical
spray of fuel. The combination of
combustion air introduced tangentially
into the burner and the action of the
swirling fuel produces effective
atomization.
The size of the droplets produced by
mechanical atomization is a function
principally of the fuel viscosity and the
fuel pressure at the atomizing nozzle.
Because of the dependence of the
droplet size on viscosity, mechanical
atomizers are not applicable above
viscosities of about 150 SSU. The
pressure required to produce a droplet
size conducive to optimum combustion
efficiency depends on the volatility of
the fuel. Highly volatile materials can
volatilize rapidly even from larger
droplets and, thus, can be fired at
pressures of 75 to 150 psig. Less volatile
fuels may require an atomization
pressure of about 1,000 psig to form
-------
17D02
Federal Register / VoL 52, N&-87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
droplets small enough to rapidly
volatilize.
Given that fuel pressure is an
important factor in determining droplet
size, we believe it would be prudent to
place requirements on minimum fuel
pressure.44 Optimum fuel pressure to
produce an optimum droplet size,
however, is a function of fuel volatility
and fuel/air mixing. Thus, it is not
practicable to propose specific limits on
minimum fuel pressure. Rather, we are
proposing that the boiler owner or
operator be required to maintain fuel
pressure within the atomization system
design range considering the viscosity
and volatility of the waste fuel, the fuel/
air mixing system, and other appropriate
parameters. Although this approach
would entrust the atomization system
manufacturer or designer (e.g.. if
designed and fabricated on-site) with
determining an acceptable fuel pressure
considering the specifics of the situation.
we believe it is an acceptable approach.
If fuel pressure is not maintained at
appropriate levels to ensure small
droplet size and optimum combustion
efficiency or, if for any other reason the
boiler does not achieve maximum
combustion efficiency, the boiler will
not be able to meet the combustion
efficiency performance standard—the
CO flue gas limits discussed above.46
Finally, to minimize erosion and
plugging of the firing nozzle, we are
proposing to limit the maximum particle
size of solids in the as-fired waste to 200
mesh.
c. Rotary cup atomization. The rotary
cup atomizer uses centrifugal force to
break up the fuel into droplets. It
consists of an open cup mounted on a
hollow shaft. The fuel is pumped at low
pressure through the hollow shaft to the
cup which is rotating at several
•• Mechanical atomizers are susceptible lo
erosion of the orifices in the firing nozzle. Erosion
can increase the size of the orifice resulting in
decreased fuel pressure and increased droplet size
Limits on minimum fuel pressure, thus, would
ensure thai droplet size remains optimized during
the course of operations by either increasing fuel
pressure as the nozzle erodes and. more likely
replacing an eroded firing nozzle.
45 As a matter of fact, it could be argued that any
requirements other than the combustion efficiency
performance standard (i.e. the CO limits) are
unnecessary given that ORE is maximized and
emission of incompletely burned organics are
generally minimized at high combustion efficiency
EPA is proposing additional controls because we
believe It is prudent lo be conservative given that
trial bums are automatically waived for boilers
meeting these conditions and that the Agency has
never before used flue gas CO as the sole test of
combustion efficiency and adequacy of destruction
of organic constituents in a waste Further, the
special conditions do not pose • significant burden
on the regulated community, in that industry
representatives have indicated that they agree that
limiting CO to ensure high combustion efficiency is
redsonable
thousand revolutions per minute. A thin
film of the fuel is centrifugally torn from
the tip of the cup. As centrifugal force
drives the fuel off the cup. combustion
air is admitted in a rotation counter to
the direction of the cup. This counter
motion of the air breaks up the conical
sheets of fuel into droplets and provides
turbulence for mixing the droplets with
air.
Rotary cup atomizers are typically
used on smaller boilers (e.g.. less than 30
MM Btu/hr heat input) because the
maximum capacity of the largest unit is
1.400 pounds of fuel per hour. In
addition, rotary cup atomizers are not
often installed on new boilers because it
is difficult to achieve optimum fuel/air
mixing over a wide range of fuel flow
rates. Rotary cup atomizers are used
because they are relatively inexpensive.
they can handle fuels with viscosities
ranging from 170 to 300 SSU. and they
are relatively insensitive to solid
impurities in the fuel and can handle
wastes with solids that can pass through
a 100 mesh screen.
Droplet size is related primarily to the
viscosity and flow rate of the waste and
rotational speed of the cup. Resulting
combustion efficiency is related to
volatility of the waste and fuel/air
mixing. Although it is impracticable to
control these variables in a regulatory
context manufacturers and boiler
owners and operators have ample
experience with rotary cup atomizers to
design units that achieve efficient
combustion. Thus, we are proposing to
require that owners and operators
demonstrate that the as-fired waste has
a viscosity and volatility within the
design parameters of the firing system
and limit waste flow rates consistent
with the design parameters of the firing
system. As discussed above, relative to
mechanical atomization systems, if. in
fact, the device does not produce droplet
sizes and fuel/air ratios conducive to
maintaining high combustion efficiency,
the boiler will not be able to meet the
combustion efficiency performance
standard implemented by limiting flue
gas CO levels.
D. Start-Up and Shut-Down Operations
Combustion devices do not burn fuels
efficiently during start-up or shut-down
operations, as evidenced by smoke
emissions and high flue gas CO levels.
Thus, we are proposing to prohibit the
burning of hazardous waste fuels at
these times.46 (We note that EPA's
incinerator regulations at 40 CFR 264
and 40 CFR 285 also prohibit the burning
of hazardous waste during start-up and
shut down operations.) Boilers operated
under the special conditions for the
automatic waiver of a trial bum as well
as all other boilers and all industrial
furnaces would be subject to this
prohibition.
We are proposing to allow hazardous
waste firing once the boiler reaches
steady-state combustion conditions and
is achieving maximum combustion
efficiency. We believe the requirements
proposed for when a boiler may resume
hazardous waste firing after a required
waste shutoff because of a CO
exceedance should also apply here. See
Section III.B.S.d of this part of the
preamble. Thus, hazardous waste firing
could begin after start-up once the
operator demonstrates that the boiler is
operating without exceeding a time-
weighted average CO level of 100 ppm
for either 10 minutes or 60 minutes.
With respect to shut-down operations,
boilers operated under the special
conditions for the automatic waiver of
the trial burn could not burn hazardous
waste when boiler load is less than 25
percent of the boiler's rated heat input
capacity. Shut-down conditions for
boilers conducting trial burns would be
determined individually. Thus, those
boilers would be allowed to fire
hazardous waste fuel at loads of less
than 25 percent if they demonstrate
during the trial burn that they can meet
the DRE performance standard and the
CO limits when operating at low loads.
£ Waiver of Trial Burn and CO Limits
for Low Risk Waste
A number of hazardous wastes may
pose a risk of 107* or less to human
health even if burned under poor
combustion conditions—wastes
containing only relatively low toxicity
organic compounds like toluene.
chloromethane. phthalates. benzene.
methylene chloride, formaldehyde.
trichloroethene. 1.1,1-trichloroethane.
tnchlorophenol. or vinylchlonde. and
wastes containing relatively moderate
toxicity organic compounds burned at
low firing rates. In either case, such
wastes may pose insignificant health
risk absent the organic emissions
controls and. thus, should be exempt
from those controls.
To address this issue. EPA is
proposing a site-specific, risk-based
41 Except that small quantity burners may bum
hazardous waste during start-up and shut-down
because- (1) they bum extremely small quantities of
waste (i e.. less than 1 percent of fuel requirements)
and. thus, the nsk posed by PIC emissions resulting
from burning the hazardous waste would be
relatively small compared lo the nsk posed by PIC
emissions resulting from the primary fuel and (2) a
prohibition on such burning would be impractical
for small quantity burners given that they typically
mix their hazardous waste with their primary fuel
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules 17003
waiver of the destruction and removal
efficiency (DRE) standard, the trial burn.
and the flue gas CO limits. Under the
waiver, an owner or operator must
develop a reasonable, worst-case
estimate of emissions of organic
compounds and use dispersion modeling
to predict maximum annual average
ground level concentrations. Procedures
for conducting the risk assessment will
be provided in a guidance manual for
permit writers entitled "Guidelines for
Permit Writers: Permitting Hazardous
Waste Combustion Facilities Using Risk
Assessment." That guidance manual is
referred to as the Risk Assessment
Guideline or RAG. Those procedures are
discussed below. For threshold
compounds, the predicted
concentrations must be compared to
reference air concentrations identified in
the RAG. For carcinogenic compounds,
the predicted concentrations must be
used to estimate the increased risk
resulting from a lifetime exposure to the
maximum annual average ground level
concentration. The incremental risk
cannot exceed an aggregate risk to the
MEI from all carcinogenic compounds of
10~9. Risk-specific doses (RSDs)
corresponding to a 10"'risk are
provided in Appendix B to this preamble
and will be included in the RAG.
To be eligible for the waiver. EPA
must have identified in the RAG either a
reference air concentration (RAC) (for
threshold compounds) or a risk-specific
doses (RSD) (for carcinogenic
compounds) for every organic compound
listed in Appendix VIII of 40 CFR Part
261 that is a constituent of the waste.
Clearly, without adequate health effects
data for a compound, a risk assessment
cannot be conducted. Unfortunately,
EPA currently has data adequate for
establishing RACs and RSDs for only
about 150 of the over 400 compounds on
Appendix VIII. A number of wastes
should nonetheless be eligible for the
waiver because health effects data are
available for many of the more common
constituents. As additional data become
available and the Agency establishes
RACs or RSOs for additional compounds
(or changes RACs or RSOs already
established), the RAG will be revised to
incorporate the information. Given that
the RAG is incorporated by reference in
today's proposed rule, any revisions will
be noticed in the Federal Register as
required by § 270.6(b).
The requirements for estimating
emissions, dispersion modeling, and
evaluating health effects are discussed
below. These requirements will be
discussed in detail in the RAG.
1. Estimating emissions. To estimate
reasonable, worst-case emissions of
combined constituents in the waste, the
owner or operator must: (l) Identify
every Appendix VIII organic constituent
that could reasonably be expected to be
found in the waste; (2) assume a
reasonable, worst-case DRE (destruction
and removal efficiency) for each
constituent of 99%. and (3) assume a
reasonable, worst-case emission rate of
PICs (products of incomplete
combustion] using a PIC/POHC
emissions ratio of 5 to 1 (i.e., 5 grams of
PICs are emitted per gram of unburned
POHC at 99% DRE). For purposes of this
waiver, a POHC is any Appendix VIII
constituent found in the waste at
detectable levels using analytical
procedures specified by "Test Methods
for Evaluating Solid Waste. Physical/
Chemical Methods", EPA Publication
SW-646 (See § 260.11).
A DRE of 99% is considered very
conservative given that we never
measured a DRE of less than 99.9%
dunng the nonsteady-state testing of
three boilers that were intentionally
operated during upset conditions as
evidenced by high CO and smoke
emissions. A DRE of just less than 99.9%
(but greater than 99%) was recorded
during one of the 11 other steady-state
boiler tests. That situation, however, is
considered both atypical and suspect
because: (1) the boiler burned waste
wood mixed with creosote sludge on a
grate: and (2) the DRE calculation is
suspect because there is reason to
believe that some POHC may have been
a constituent of the waste wood (which
was not analyzed) as well as the sludge.
A PIC to POHC ratio of 5 also appears
to be conservative given that the ratio
was generally 0.5 to 5. Although higher
ratios were recorded, there is reason to
doubt many of the higher values. See
discussion in Section III.B.5.
2. Dispersion modeling. Dispersion
modeling of emissions is to be
conducted in conformance with
"Guideline on Air Quality Models
(Revised)," EPA Publication Number
450/2-7B-027R. July 1986. The guideline
is available from the National Technical
Information Service, Springfield,
Virginia (Order No. PB 86-245248).41
Although the guideline is not a
"cookbook" approach to conducting
41 EPA specifically request! comments on
whether the Guideline models are appropriate for
predicting dispersion of organic compounds, metals.
and HCI emitted from boiler and industrial furnace
stacks to establish the national standards proposed
today and to conduct case-by-case dispersion
modeling to develop alternate, site-specific
standards
dispersion modeling, EPA, the States,
and the regulated community have used
the guideline for a number of years to
select dispersion models to determine
compliance with a number of Clean Air
Act standards (e.g.. paniculate and lend
National Ambient Air Quality
Standards, regulations for the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD)). Owners and operators seeking a
waiver under this provision must submit
a dispersion modeling plan with Part B
of their permit application. The Director
will determine if the proposed plan is in
conformance with the Guideline and
may require alternative or
supplementary modeling.
Owners and operators of interim
status facilities seeking a waiver under
this provision, however, must submit
with Part B of their permit application
the results of their dispersion modeling
Further, the Part B application must be
submitted six months after promulgation
of the final rule (which would be six
months before the effective date of the
flue gas CO limits for interim status
facilities). In effect, submission of Part B
of the permit application seeking this
waiver is required in lieu of compliance
with the CO limits. The schedule for
submission of the Part B with the results
of dispersion modeling based on the
above schedule will allow the Director
six months to review the application for
adequacy and reasonableness prior to
the CO monitoring requirements coming
into effect. This schedule is intended to
assure that only those facilities that are
qualified for the waiver will seek it and
to discern those facilities merely trying
to avoid CO monitoring requirements.
3. Evaluation of health effects. For
compounds associated with
noncarcmogenic health risks, the
predicted ground level concentration
must be less than the RACs identified in
the RAG. If the RAG identifies RACs for
both short-term and annual exposures
(e.g.. HCI), predicted ground level
concentrations must be lower than
either RAC.
For carcinogenic compounds, the
predicted maximum annual average
ground level concentration and the risk-
specific doses (RSDs) provided by the
RAG must be used to estimate the
increased lifetime risk from each
carcinogenic organic constituent in the
waste. In addition, a reasonable, worst-
case estimate of risk posed by PICs must
be developed by assuming all PICs are
carcinogens with a unit risk of 6.9X10" *
-------
17004
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
This corresponds to a risk-specific dose
of 1 ug/ms at a 1 x 10" * level of risk.
That level for the PIC unit risk
represents the weighted average unit
risk of all chlorinated PICs identified
during those nonsteady-state field tests
where the boilers were intentionally
operated under upset conditions.48
Given that EPA policy considers the
risk from carcinogens to be additive, the
risk from all the carcinogenic POHCs
must be summed along with the cancer
risk from PICs. The risks from
carcinogenic organic emissions would
not be considered significant if the
aggregate risk did not exceed 1X10~*
(i.e.. 1 in 100,000). This means that risks
on the order of 10"s would be allowed.
EPA believes that this level of risk is
reasonable for this purpose given the
conservatism of the analysis and the
comparable risk likely to be posed by
burning only fossil fuels.49'50
IV. Proposed Controls for Emissions of
Toxic Metals
A. Hazard Posed by Combustion of
Metal-Bearing Wastes
In Appendix VIII of 40 CFR Part 261.
the Agency has identified 12 metals that.
if present in a solid waste, might be the
basis for determining that the waste is a
listed hazardous waste: antimony.
arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium.
chromium, lead, mercury, nickel
selenium, silver, and thallium. Five of
these metals (or their compounds] are
known or suspected human
carcinogens—arsenic, beryllium.
cadmium, chromium, and nickel.
Hazardous wastes used as fuel in
boilers and industrial furnaces can have
high metal levels relative to those found
in No 6 fuel oil as shown in the table
below Metal-bearing wastes typically
burned as fuel (usually in industrial
furnaces) include spent nonhalogenated
degreasing solvents used for metals
cleaning and spent halogenated
degreasing solvents mixed with spent
oils or other high heating value organic
liquid wastes Metals emissions from
burning these wastes are not currently
controlled for boilers and the types of
industrial furnaces that burn hazardous
wastes and can result in increased
lifetime cancer risks of 1X10"* (i.e.. 1 in
10.000)
41 Engineering-Science. Background Document for
the Development of Regulations to Contra/ the
Burning of Hazoraous Wastes in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces. Volume HI. February 1987
»«• 10 Radian Corporation. Summary of Trace
Emissions from and Recommendations of Risk
Assessment Methodologies for Coal and Oil
Canhustion Sources |uly 1988
TABLE 2.—COMPARISON OF METALS
LEVELS IN HAZARDOUS WASTE
FUELS AND No. 6 FUEL OIL
Metal
Arsenic
Cadmium..
Chromi-
um
Lead
Beryllium ..
Banum
Mercury...
Fuel oil (ppm)
Mean
0.36
1.2
0.4
3.5
008
24
1.3
0.006
Worst
5
2
10
10
0.38
73
3.2
10
Hazardous
waste fuel
(ppm)
50th
per-
centile
<0.5
<0.5
<5.0
8
<2
<5
<005
90th
per-
centile
18
10
300
572
25
251
Source: Engineering-Science. Background
Document for the Development of Regulations
to Control the Burning of Hazardous Wastes
m Boilers and Industrial Furnaces, Volume III.
February 1987.
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA
has established emission standards for
beryllium and mercury for certain
categories of sources (40 CFR Part 61).
and has recently promulgated standards
(for particular emissions) to control
arsenic emissions from certain
categories of sources (51FR 27956
(August 4.1986)). These emission
standards were developed considering
the quantities and types of metal
emissions, current control practices, the
risks posed by current practices, and the
economic impacts on the industry of
reducing emissions. Therefore, these
emissions standards are not necessarily
protective when applied to boilers or
industrial furnaces burning hazardous
waste fuel.
In addition to these metals emissions
standards under the CAA. EPA has
established National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for lead
and particulates. These ambient.
standards are implemented by the
States under the State Implementation
Plan (SIP) program, end control major
sources of lead and particulate
emissions. Lead emission standards
have not been established under the
SIPs for any boilers and the EPA is
unaware of any lead standard for
industrial furnaces that burn hazardous
waste fuel.
Particulate emission standards,
however, established under the SIPs in
conformance with the particulate
NAAQS, or by EPA as New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS). do
apply to some boilers and virtually all
industrial furnaces burning hazardous
waste. The particulate standards limit
metals emissions generally to the extent
state-of-the-art particulate control
technology will allow—high efficiency
electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) or
fabric filters are usually required to
meet the standards. These particulate
standards may not. however, adequately
control metals emissions from burning
hazardous waste fuels in boilers and
industrial furnaces for a number of
reasons: (1) the standards do not apply
to gas and oil-fired boilers that
represent a large number of hazardous
waste fuel burners; (2) smaller coal-fired
boilers are not subject to NSPS
standards and may not be required
under the SIPs to be equipped with ESPs
or fabric filters; (3) large volumes of
hazardous waste fuel are burned by
light-weight aggregate kilns that are
equipped with low pressure wet
scrubbers that may not be highly
efficient at collecting particules in the
<1 micron range, the size range
containing the bulk of the metals; and
(4) the risks posed by metals emissions
from these boilers and industrial
furnaces that are equipped with ESPs,
fabric filters, and wet scrubbers can
increase substantially when hazardous
•waste fuel is burned given that the
levels of some metals, particularly
chromium and lead, can be much higher
in hazardous waste than in coal as
shown in the table below:
Metal
Arsenic
Lead
Nickel
Bitum
(
Aver-
age
20.3
0.91
20.5
NA
16.9
NA
0.21
inouscoal
ppm)
Range
0 02-357
0.02-100
0.5-70
0.7-220
1.5-7300
NA
<0 01-3.3
Hazar
waste
(PP
50th
per*
centile
<0.5
<0.5
<50
8
<2
<5
<0.05
dous
ifuel
mj
90th
per-
centile
18
10
300
572
25
251
<1.0
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 67 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules 17005
2i Bae*9">una Document lor toe Development of Regulations to
Hazardous Wastes in Balers and Industnal Furnaces. Volume III.
fl««™/ fr Sl5^?)ratlon>&/mms/y of Trace ***** and Recommendatmns of
MA^5^"""I1 Methodologies tor Coal and Oil Combustion Sources. July 1986
IN«=Not available
B. Basis for the Metals Standards
1. Overview. EPA is proposing to
control emissions of particular metals
found to pose a significant health hazard
by establishing a four-tiered regulation.
Each tier is a standard that is protective
on its own—a demonstration of
compliance with any tier is sufficient.
Tiers I-III are nsk-based national
standards that are back-calculated from
a reference air concentration for lead
and the 10~5 risk-specific dose for
arsenic, cadmium, and chromium, using
dispersion factors (i.e., fig/m3 per g/s of
emission) for reasonable, worst-case
facilities. Tier I is a specification
establishing maximum allowable metals
levels for the hazardous waste or the
hazardous waste as-fired (i.e., after
blending). Tier II provides limits on the
feed rate of metals to the device taking
into account metals levels in the
hazardous waste, other fuel, and
industrial furnace feedstocks. Tier HI •
provides emission limits for individual
metals expressed as Ib of metal per
million Btu of heat input to the device.
The Tier I and II limits are identical to
the Tier III limits, but they are applied
somewhat differently. The Tier I
specification levels are expressed as Ib
of metal per million Btu of waste heating
value. The Tier II feed rate limits are
expressed as Ib if metal per million Btu
of total heat input to the device.
Given that the Tier I-III standards are
national standards based on reasonable,
worst-case facilities, in some instances
they may be more stringent than
necessary to protect human health and
the environment.51 Thus, to add
" We note, again, thai the Tier I-III standards
may not be fully protective in unusual scenanos
(e g. situations where lip downwash. complex
topography, or highly unusual meteorological
conditions affect ambient levels greater than
considered in the reasonable, worst-case scenarios)
We will provide outdance to permit writers to
enable them to identify these situations and apply
appropriate controls under authonty of HSWA
Section 3005(c) Moreover, given that the Tier I-III
standards add substantial complexity to an already
complex rule and that the permit writers must
ensure in each situation (bui particularly in complex
terrain situations) that the Tier I-III standards are
appropriate (i e. that the site being permuted does
not have highly unusual topographic, meleorologic.
or stack release properties (including severe lip
downwash)). EPA specifically requests comments
on whether (1) for complex terrain situations, site-
specific dispersion modeling should be required in
all cases in lieu of the Tier I-III standards, and (2)
site-specific dispersion modeling should be required
in all cases for all terrain types in lieu of the Tier I-
III standards
flexibility to the regulations while still
ensuring protection of human health and
the environment, we are proposing as
Tier IV the use of site-specific
dispersion modeling to show that lead
emissions from the facility will not
result in an exceedance of the lead
reference air concentration (RAG), and
that emissions of arsenic, cadmium, and
chromium will not result in an
incremental lifetime cancer nsk greater
than lx«rs.
2. Identification of metals of concern.
The Agency's risk assessment indicates
that the following metals are likely to be
found in hazardous waste fuels at levels
that could pose adverse health effects:
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and lead.
Nickel, if present in its suspected human
carcinogenic forms—nickel carbonyl
and nickel subsulfide—could also pose
significant health risk. However, we
believe that burning in boilers and
industrial furnaces under the conditions
required for compliance with these rules
(a highly oxidizing environment) will not
provide the proper conditions (reducing
environment) to create these
compounds. Thus, nickel is not being
included in these proposed standards
(see also 51 FR 34135 (September 25.
1986)). The EPA is continuing to study
other nickel compounds with respect to
carcinogenic potency and will propose
controls for these nickel compounds if
data indicate that standards are
necessary. EPA specifically requests
emissions data on the presence or
absence of nickel carbonyl and nickel
subsulfide from boilers and industrial
furnaces burning hazardous waste.
The risk assessment used reasonable,
worst-case assumptions for emission
rates, dispersion of emissions, exposure,
and health effects. From reference air
concentrations (RACs) for
noncarcinogenic metals and 10~s risk-
specific doses (RSDs) for carcinogenic
metals, we back-calculated emission
rates for several reasonable, worst-case
facilities (a light-weight aggregate kiln
facility, boiler facility, and cement kiln
facility). See Section II for a description
of these facilities and our exposure
assumptions. We then back-calculated
further to identify concentration levels
of concern in the hazardous waste
assuming the devices bumed 100%
hazardous waste with a heating value of
8.000 Btu/lb. The boilers were assumed
to have no emissions control equipment,
the light-weight aggregate kiln was
assumed to be equipped with a low
pressure wet scrubber, and the cement
kiln was assumed to be equipped with
an ESP.
Although the Agency does not believe
that hazardous wastes are likely to
contain levels of the other metals-
antimony, beryllium, mercury, selenium.
silver, and thallium—at levels that could
pose adverse health effects, a particular
waste may in fact contain those metals
at levels of concern. To enable the
permit writer to determine if these
metals may be present at levels that
pose significant risk, facility owners and
operators would be required to provide
with Part B of their permit applications
an analysis for these metals if they
could reasonably be expected to be
constituents of the waste. EPA will
provide guidance to permitting officials
to enable them to conduct risk
screenings to determine if these metals
may pose a hazard. If so. more detailed
emissions and dispersion modeling will
be conducted under authority of the
omnibus provision of section 3005(c) of
HSWA. If necessary, appropriate
controls on those metals will be
included in the permit.
A number of conservative health
effects assumptions were used in the
risk assessment. These same
assumptions have been used to develop
the Tier I-III standards and the Tier IV
RACs for noncarcinogens. In addition to
the assumptions discussed in Section II,
we made the following assumptions for
chromium and lead.
We assumed that chromium is emitted
in its most potent carcinogenic form.
hexavalent chromium. We believe this
assumption is conservative, but
reasonable for the purpose of
determining whether chromium
emissions could pose significant risk.
Chromium is likely to be emitted in
either the highly carcinogenic.
hexavalent state or in the relatively
nontoxic trivalent state. (The data
available to EPA at this time are
inadequate to classify the trivalent
chromium compounds as to their
carcmogenicity.) Although the
hexavalent state could be expected to
result from combustion because it
represents the more oxidized state.
some investigators speculate that most
of the chromium is likely to be emitted
in the trivalent state given that the
hexavalent state is highly reactive and
thus likely to be reduced to the tnvalent
state. Although preliminary
investigations indicate that 99 percent of
chromium emissions from fossil fuel.
municipal waste, and sewage sludge
combustion sources may be in the
trivalent state, the Agency is not now
-------
17006
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday, May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
able to conclude that hexavalent
chromium emissions from hazardous
waste combustion facilities also
represent only 1% of total chromium
emissions. This is because of the
possibility that hexavalent chromium
may be a constituent of hazardous
waste and may be emitted without
changing valence. Until EPA completes
on-going studies on the risk posed by
chromium emissions from hazardous
waste combustion sources, the Agency
proposes to assume chromium is emitted
in the hexavalent state for purposes of
this rule. Emission controls, however.
under Tier III and Tier IV options, which
are based on actual emission testing, are
to be based on hexavalent chromium if
the emissions testing is capable of
reliably determining whether the
chromium exists in the hexavalent state.
Otherwise, the Tier III and IV standards
shall be applied to the total chromium
emission. (Of course, the Tier I and II
standards apply to the total chromium
present in the waste.)
As additional data become available
on the health effects of chromium
emissions from combustion sources, the
Agency will consider what, if any,
amendments would be appropriate to
the rule proposed today. The Agency
specifically requests emissions data
documenting the presence or absence of
hexavalent chrome from boilers and
industrial furnaces burning hazardous
waste.
To consider the health effects from
lead emissions, we adjusted the lead
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) by a factor of one-tenth to
account for background ambient levels.
Thus, although the lead NAAQS is 1.5
fig/m3, the lead RAG for purposes of
this regulation is 0.15 ng/m3.52 (As
discussed in Section 11. the RACs for the
other threshold compounds were based
on 25 percent of the RfDs to account for
other routes of exposure and exposure
from other sources (e.g.. background air
levels).)
Finally, the risk-specific doses (RSDs)
for the carcinogens were based on the
unit risk estimates developed by EPA's
Cancer Assessment Group and
assuming an incremental lifetime cancer
risk of IX10"s.
3. Basis for the standards. Rather than
establishing risk-based standards, the
Agency considered limiting metals
emissions to the levels that could be
emitted from burning No. 6 fuel oil.
Hazardous waste fuel is often cofired
with fuel oil in boilers without emission
control equipment. Virtually all
hazardous waste fuels currently burned
are organic liquids (derived from
petroleum) and are typically comprised
of spent organic solvents, distilled
bottoms from solvent recovery, and by-
products from organic chemicals
manufacturing. Thus, hazardous waste
fuels typically displace fuel oils and
they are stored, pumped, and fired very
much like fuel oils.
There are a number of problems,
however, with this approach. Hazardous
waste is also cofired with, or in lieu of.
coal and gas. In particular, most
industrial furnaces that bum hazardous
waste would otherwise be burning
pulverized coal. The question then is
whether the hazardous waste metal
controls should be based on coal or oil.
If it is to be based on coal, we must
address the following issues: (1) should
the comparison be to the mean, 95th
percentile, or highest levels found in
coal: and (2) should the coal burning
device be assumed to be controlled with
an ESP, a wet scrubber, or uncontrolled.
Another problem with basing the
metals limits on levels that could be
emitted from burning either fuel oil or
coal is that, if 95th percentile or worst-
case metals levels in the fuel oil or coal
are used, nsk levels could be
significant—on the order of 1 X10~* (i.e.,
1 in 10.000). (The health risks from
burning oil or coal with mean levels of
metals, however, would generally not
result in significant health risk even
under reasonable, worst-case
scenarios.)
Because of these problems with
basing metals limits for hazardous
waste on levels resulting from the
burning of fuel oil or coal, the Agency is
proposing standards that are entirely
risk-based.
4. Tier I-Tier III standards. The Tier
I-Tier III standards are national
standards back-calculated from a RAG
for lead, and from 10~5 RSDs for arsenic.
cadmium and chromium 63 using
dispersion factors for reasonable, worst-
case facilities. Given that the effects on
ambient air concentration were different
for each type of device (e.g.. reasonable.
worst-case boiler facility, cement kiln
facility, lightweight aggregate kiln
facility), we grouped the various devices
into categories. See detailed discussion
in Section II. There are two groups of
categories, one for flat terrain and one
for those devices in complex terrain.
Each category has its own set of Tier I-
III standards. The categories were
" This level represents a quarterly average For
the purposes of this regulation, an adiusled annual
average of 0 094 jig/m" is being used See footnote
17
" The Tier l-lll standards for arsenic, cadmium.
and chromium are actually expressed as equations
that ensure that the aggregate nsk to the MEI from
all three metals does not exceed 1X10'•.
selected based on similar health risk
effects for the devices, i.e.. impact on
ambient air concentrations.
The flat terrain group of Tier I-III
standards consists of three categories.
Category 1 applies to sulfur recovery
furnaces, asphalt kilns, halogen acid
furnaces, and blast furnaces. Limits in
this category are based on sulfur
recovery furnaces since, for this
category, this device has the greatest
effect on ambient air concentrations.
Category 2 consists of light-weight
aggregate kilns, lime kilns, and boilers.
In this case, light-weight aggregate kilns
are the basis for the limits for this
category.
Category 3 consists of the wet and dry
process cement kilns. These devices
have the least effect on ambient air
concentrations based on the ISCLT air
dispersion modeling. Dry cement kilns
are the basis for the limits in this
category.
The limits for those devices in
complex terrain are more stringent than
if the devices are located in flat terrain.
In addition, the categories for complex
terrain are different from those for flat
terrain in that there are four categories
for complex terrain instead of three.
The Tier I-III levels for Category 1 in
complex terrain apply only to blast
furnaces. Emissions from these devices
have the greatest impact in complex
terrain. However, these devices should
easily meet the Tier III requirements due
to the type of process and air pollution
controls required by existing air
pollution regulations.
Category 2 for complex terrain
consists only of sulfur recovery
furnaces. Limits for these devices are
about two times higher than for
Category 1.
Category 3 for complex terrain
consists of the majority of devices. This
category includes asphalt kilns, light-
weight aggregate kilns, lime kilns.
halogen acid furnaces, and boilers. The
Tier I-III limits are based on asphalt
kilns since this device has the greatest
impact on annual ambient air
concentrations for this category.
Category 4 for complex terrain
consists of cement kilns. These devices
have the smallest effect on ground level
concentrations, as was the case for flat
'terrain. Limits are based on dry process
cement kilns.
All the limitations for Tiers I-III in
complex and flat terrain are based on
one device per site. If there is more than
one device on a site, the limits for the
largest device would have to be
apportioned among all devices based on
the thermal capacity of each device.
However, permit conditions established
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
under Tier IV would consider all devices
on the site (i.e.. by multiple source
dispersion modeling) in determining
site-specific standards.
In addition, we note that the proposed
Tier I-III standards may tend to
over-regulate some of the devices in each
category. For example. Category 3 for
complex terrain tends to overregulate all
devices except asphalt kilns. This
includes lime kilns, light-weight
aggregate kilns, halogen acid furnaces,
and boilers. The amount of
overregulation is not very large, but if
owners of such devices wish, they can
comply with the site-specific, risk-based
Tier IV standard which is. in effect, a
waiver of the Tier I-III standards.
The Tier I standards are metals
specification levels that apply to the
hazardous waste on an as-fired basis
(i.e., the levels apply to the waste
directly or after any blending with other
waste or fuel). The specification levels
are expressed as Ib of metal per million
Btu of hazardous waste heating value
and are equivalent to the values
contained in the Tier III (and Tier II)
standards. The Tier I specification levels
are back-calculated from Tier III
emission limits assuming the device
burns 100% waste and all metal
constituents are emitted.
The Tier I standards for lead would be
a fixed limit (for each category). See
proposed § 266.34-4(b)(l). The limits for
the carcinogens arsenic, cadmium, and
chromium, however, are not fixed, but
rather are inter-related. The limits for
each carcinogen depend on the levels of
the others present. This is because the
standards limit the aggregate (i.e..
summed) risk to the MEI to 1X 10~5.
Thus, a waste with a high concentration
of one carcinogen must have relatively
low concentrations of the other
carcinogens so that the aggregate risk
does not exceed (he limit.
To demonstrate compliance with the
Tier I standard, the owner or operator
would simply analyze the waste. For
lead, the waste would be in compliance
if the ledd level is no greater than that
specified for the appropriate device
category For arsenic, cadmium, and
chromium, the owner or operator would
be required to use the Tier III equation
for the appropriate category and show
that the equation is satisfied (i.e.. that
the aggregate risk does not exceed
1X10'*). The Tier I (and Tier II) limits
are numerically equivalent to the Tier III
limits. Only the units are different. See
Appendix C for example calculations to
apply the Tier I (and Tier II) standard.
The Tier II standards are metals feed
rate limits expressed as Ib of metal per
million Btu of total heat input to the
device. Feed rate limits would be
established for arsenic, cadmium.
chromium, and lead for all categories of
devices. See proposed § 266.34-4(b)(2).
The feed rate limits are implemented by
an equation that computes the feed rate
of each metal (in Ibs/MM Btu)
considering the metals levels and feed
rates of other fuels and industrial
furnace feedstocks. Compliance with
Tier II is demonstrated by analysis of
the hazardous waste, other fuels, and
industrial furnace feedstocks for metals.
documentation of feed rates, and a
showing that the total metals feed rate
does not exceed the Tier III metals
emission limits. (Owners and operators
would sample nonwaste feed materials
only for the same metals found m the
hazardous waste feed.) Thus, the Tier II
standards are conservative in that it is
assumed that all metals in all feed
materials are emitted.
The Tier III standards are emission
limits expressed as Ib of metal per
million Btu of total heat input to the
device. The emission limits are back-
calculated from the lead RAC and the
10~*RSDs for arsenic, cadmium, and
chromium using dispersion factors for
the worst-case facility in each category.
Compliance with Tier til is
demonstrated by emissions testing.
5. Tier IV standards. The Tier IV
standards require site-specific
dispersion modeling that predicts that
metals emissions will not result in an
exceedance of the lead RAC and an
aggregate risk (from arsenic, cadmium,
and chromium) to the MEI of 1 xlO~*.
The RAC for lead (and other
noncarcinogenic compounds) and the
RSDs for the carcinogens will be
identified in the Risk Assessment
Guideline (RAC).*4 The RSDs are based
on the unit nsk estimates provided by
EPA's Cancer Assessment Group and an
aggregate increased lifetime risk to an
individual exposed to the maximum
annual average ground level
concentration of 1 x 10'* (1 in 100,000).
See proposed § 266.34-4(b)(4). This is
the same basis on which the Tier I-III
standards were developed.
As discussed in Section III D.
dispersion modeling is to be conducted
in conformance with EPA's Guideline on
Air Quality Models. In addition, stack
heights used to determine dispersion
factors shall not exceed Good
Engineering Practice as defined in 40
CFR Part 51.
EPA specifically requests comments
on how many facilities are likely to elect
to comply with the Tier IV standard (for
•• Risk Assessment Guideline is the short title for
"Guideline for Permit Writers Permitting Hazardous
Waste Combustion Facilities Using Risk
Assessment" (To be developed)
metals or HC1) and. if the Tier IV
standard were not available, the
changes to equipment and operations
that would be required to comply with
the Tier I III standards.
6. implementation of the metals
controls. The Tier I limits would be
implemented by permit conditions that
limit concentrations of the regulated
metals in the waste, and waste fuel
rates, and that specify waste sampling
and analysis procedures. We are
proposing that the concentration limits
(as well as the limits developed under
Tiers II-IV) represent maximum limits
that can never be exceeded. We
considered whether the limits should
represent average values (e.g., hourly.
daily, weekly, monthly, or even yearly
averages). An argument could be made
that a yearly average would be
appropriate because the health effects
data used to support the standards are
based on maximum annual average
exposures (except for HC1 where a 3-
minute maximum exposure drives the
health risk). We believe, however, that
allowing averaging would complicate
operator recordkeeping and EPA
inspection and enforcement activities.
We specifically request comment on
whether and how averaging should be
allowed for compliance with the metals
(and HC1) standards.
The Tier II standard would be
implemented by permit conditions that
limit concentrations and feed rates of
the regulated metals in the waste, fuels.
and industrial furnace feedstocks.
Permit conditions would also specify
sampling and analysis procedures for all
feed materials.
The Tier III standard would be
implemented By emission testing and
permit conditions that: (1) Establish
emission limits for each metal (including
carcinogenic metals); (2) specify
operating and maintenance
requirements for any emission control
equipment; (3) specify operating
requirements for the system, as
necessary, that relate to metals .
emissions rates (e.g., chlorine content of
the waste); (4) limit concentrations of
the regulated metals in the waste and
limit waste feed rates; and (5) specify
waste sampling and analysis
procedures.
C. Impacts of the Metals Standards on
the Regulated Community
Regulatory impacts and an analysis of
the cost-effectiveness of the proposed
rules are discussed in detail in Section
11 of Part Six. This section presents
information on the ability of owners and
operators to comply with the proposed
metals controls.
-------
17008
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday, May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
Based on conversations with owners
and operators of industrial boilers and
our analyses of hazardous waste fuels, it
appears that industrial boilers can
readily meet these proposed standards
even though oil and gas fired industrial
boilers are not equipped with emissions
control devices. Industrial boilers
typically burn waste generated onsite
and the facilities that burn the largest
volumes of wastes are organic
chemicals manufacturing plants. These
facilities burn relatively large quantities
of organic liquid by-products that
generally do not contain high levels of
metals.
On the other hand, industrial
furnaces, principally cement and light-
weight aggregate kilns, accept huge
volumes (e.g.. 5 to 20 million gallons per
year per facility] of hazardous waste
generated off-site. These wastes are
typically comprised of spent organic
solvents and organic solvent recovery
distillation bottoms. Many of the metals
of concern to EPA do not interfere with
the production of quality cement clinker
or light-weight aggregate even at
concentrations of several hundred or
several thousand ppm. as evidenced by
waste fuel specifications developed by
industrial furnace operators. (Industrial
furnace operators frequently obtain their
hazardous waste fuels through a broker
responsible for collecting hazardous
waste from generators and blending the
wastes to meet the operator's
specifications.)
Although industrial furnaces typically
burn hazardous waste fuels with very
high metals levels, they are virtually
always equipped with paniculate
emissions control devices because of the
large quantities of particulates
generated by processing the feedstocks
(e.g.. limestone in cement kilns, clay or
shale in light-weight aggregate kilns).
Not incidentally, these industrial
furnaces are subject to Federal and/or
State regulations for paniculate
emissions. Given that industrial
furnaces are already equipped with
paniculate collection equipment and
given that these devices can achieve
substantial removal of metals as well
(see Table 3). industrial furnaces in
general, and cement kilns in particular.
are expected to be able to meet the
proposed metals standards readily.
Cement kilns are equipped with
electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) or
fabric filters (FFs) that are expected to
remove 98 to 99% of metals from stack
gases.
Most light-weight aggregate kilns may
not be able to bum hazardous waste
fuels with high metals levels because
they are typically equipped with low
pressure wet scrubbers to control
paniculate emissions. Based on
conversations with industry
representatives, several light-weight
aggregate kilns, however, are equipped
with high pressure, relatively efficient
venturi scrubbers with estimated metals
collection efficiencies comparable to
ESPs. Owners and operators would have
a number of options if current collection
efficiencies would not be adequate to
meet the standards: (1) increase the
pressure drop across the device to
increase its collection efficiency; (2)
blend wastes with very high metals
levels with wastes with lower metals
levels, and (3) stop accepting those
particular wastes with extremely high
metals levels.
TABLE 3. ESTIMATED METALS COLLECTION EFFICIENCES OF VARIOUS CONTROL DEVICES
Metal
Lead
ESP-
(per-
cent)
98
99
98
98
FF"
(per-
cent)
99
99
99
99
Venturi
scrubber
(per-
cent)
98
98
98
97
Spray
tower
(per-
cent)
50
93
93
50
• Electrostatic precipitator.
" Fabric filter.
Source: Engineering-Science, Background Information Document for the Development of
Regulations to Control the Burning of Hazardous Wastes in Boilers and Industrial Furnaces,
Volume 111. February 1987.
V. Proposed Controls for Emissions of
Hydrogen Chloride
A. Hazard Posed by Combustion of
Highly-Chlorinated Waste
Highly-chlorinated wastes from the
manufacturing of organic chemicals and
highly-chlorinated spent solvents and
solvent recovery distillation bottoms are
routinely used as fuels in industrial
furnaces and some specially-designed
boilers. Chlorine in hazardous waste
fuel produces hydrochloric acid (HCI)
upon combustion which can have
beneficial effects on industrial furnace
process chemistry " or can allow for
efficient recovery of HCI from
combustion gases from specially
designed boilers.*6 Some industrial
boiler operators are also investigating
whether the cofiring of hazardous waste
fuels containing on the order of 3%
chlorine with oil and natural gas in
standard boilers will cause accelerated
corrosion of boiler parts.
" Chlonne-beanng materials are sometimes
charged to cement kilns to neutralize the highly
alkaline conditions in the kiln. Hazardous waste
fuel containing 3 to 5% chlorine has thus been used
for the dual purpose of providing heat and chlorine
for the neutralization reactions. Hazardous waste
fuels with similar chlorine levels have also been
fired in blast furnaces for both their heating value
and the beneficial effect of the chlorine (the chlonne
is believed to improve the flow of the blast furnace
charge down through the furnace by minimizing
charge "hangups.")
•• Dow Chemical Company uses modified boilers
for the dual purpose of recovering energy and
producing HCI (by scrubbing combustion gases)
from highly-chlorinated process streams (e.g.. 45%
chlonne).
The burning of highly-chlorinated ,
hazardous waste fuel can pose a serious •
health hazard if the resulting HCI is not
controlled by reacting with industrial
furnace feedstocks, recovered for use as
a by-product, or otherwise removed with
flue gas cleaning equipment (e.g.. wet
scrubbers). Risk assessment using the
reasonable, worst-case facilities
discussed previously indicates that
hazardous waste chlorine levels as low
as 530 ppm could pose exceedances of
the HCI reference air concentrations
(RACs) (where the device burned 100%
hazardous waste with a low heating
value and all chlorine in the waste was
emitted as HClh The RAG for annual
exposure to HCI u 15 jig/m'and is
based on the threshold of respiratory
effects. Background levels were
considered to be insignificant given that
there are not many large sources of HCI
(as compared to sulfur oxides) and the
pollutant generally should not be •
transported over long distances in the
lower atmosphere. The RAC for 3-
minute exposures is 150 pg/m3. Both
RACs will be identified in the Risk
Assessment Guideline (RAG).
We note that there is the remote
possibility that a chlorinated waste may
not have sufficient available hydrogen
(i.e.. from other hydrocarbon compounds
or water vapor) to react with all of the
chlorine in the waste. In this case, there
is the potential for emission of free
chlorine which has toxic properties.
Although this issue could be addressed
by the permit writer under the omnibus
-------
authority of HSWA section 3005(c). we
specifically request comment on the
extent to which this phenomenon may
occur and whether explicit standards for
emissions of free chlorine should be
provided.
B. Basis for the Standards
EPA is proposing to regulate HC1
under the same risk-based regulatory
structure proposed for metals and for
the same reasons. As with the metals.
there are two groups of standards: one
for complex terrain, and the other for
flat terrain. Each group is broken up into
categories based on the effect of
ambient air concentration from each
device. The limits for HC1 are based on
short term modeling for the 150 pg/m'.
3-minute RAC level since short-term
exposure rather than annual exposure is
the limiting factor.
The HC1 limits in Hat terrain consist of
four categories. The first category
consists of sulfur recovery furnaces and
halogen acid furnaces. Category 2
consists of blast furnaces and asphalt
plants (limits based on blast furnaces).
Category 3 consists of light-weight
aggregate kilns, boilers, and lime kilns.
The limits for Category 3 are based on
light-weight aggregate kilns since this is
the worst case for this category. Finally,
Category 4 consists of the cement kilns.
The HC1 limits for complex terrain
consist of three categories. The first is
blast furnaces. Category 2 consists of
the majority of devices, and includes
sulfur recovery furnaces, light-weight
aggregate kilns, asphalt kilns, halogen
acid furnaces, and lime kilns. Sulfur
recovery furnaces are the basis of limits
for this category. Category 3 consists of
the cement kilns.
There is also a Tier IV standard for all
devices (see proposed 266.34-4(c)(l-4))
which allows site-specific dispersion
modeling to demonstrate that HC1
emissions do not exceed the RACs.
Although the equation for computing the
allowable chlorine concentration in
hazardous waste under the Tier II
standards is somewhat different from
the Tier II approach proposed for
metals, the principle is the same. The
feed rate of chlorine from hazardous
waste, other fuels, and industrial
furnace feedstock (for Tiers I and II) is
back-calculated from the Tier III
emission limits.
We note that the Tier IV standard
requires compliance with both the
maximum annual average and the
maximum 3-minute RACs. whereas the
Tier I-III standards are based solely on
the 3-minute RAC. This is because the 3-
minute RAC is more stringent in the
modeling used to support the Tier I-III
standards, but cannot be assumed to be
more stringent under the Tier IV
standard that requires site-specific
modeling.
We also note that there are no Tier I
or Tier II standards for halogen acid
furnaces since these devices, by
definition, burn wastes with very high
halogen levels. Halogen acid furnaces
would, therefore, comply with Tier III or
Tier IV standards.
VI. Nontechnical Requirements
In addition to the technical stack
emission standards discussed above.
EPA is also proposing to apply the
nontechnical standards applicable to
other hazardous waste treatment.
storage, and disposal facilities to boilers
and industrial furnaces burning
hazardous waste. These nontechnical
standards address the potential hazards
from spills, fires, explosives, and
unintended egress: require compliance
with the manifest system to complete
the cradle to grave tracking system:
ensure that hazardous wastes (and
hazardous residues) are removed from
the site upon closure; and ensure that
the owners and operators are financially
capable of complying with the
standards.
The nontechnical standards that
would apply under today's rule to
boilers and industrial furnaces burning
hazardous waste are identical to those
that currently apply to hazardous waste
incineration facilities. The Part 264
permit standards applicable to
incinerators would apply to permitted
boilers and industrial furnaces and the
Part 265 standards applicable to
incinerators would apply to boilers and
industnal furnaces in interim status.
Those standards are prescribed in
proposed S 266.34-1 (c) for permitted
facilities and § 266.35-1 (d) for interim
status facilities.
VII. Proposed Exemption of Small
Quantity On-Site Burners
Section 3004(q)(2)(B) of RCRA
provides EPA with explicit authority to
exempt from regulation facilities which
burn de minimis quantities of their own
hazardous wastes. The Administrator is
to ensure that such waste fuels are
burned in devices designed and
operated in a manner sufficient to
ensure adequate destruction and
removal to protect human health and the
environment. The Agency has carefully
evaluated the risks posed by small
quantity burning, and concluded that a
conditional exemption for small quantity
burners should be allowed because an
exemption can be structured to exempt
facilities whose practices pose
insignificant risk. The scope of the
exemption, rationale for the exemption.
and a brief description of the methods
used to develop eligibility conditions are
discussed below.
A.Scope
Burner eligibility for the exemption
will be determined by two principal
factors: device size and the quantity of
"waste burned per month. The Agency is
proposing to set different volume cut-
offs for different device sizes. See
proposed § 266.34-1 (b). These volumes
were calculated using a series of
conservative assumptions about device
location, waste composition, and
destruction efficiency of organic
constituents. These volumes, if burned.
are expected to pose insignificant health
risks. While the Agency recognizes that
calculations based on less conservative
assumptions would result in much larger
volume estimates, EPA believes that the
variation within burning practices
justifies the use of the selected
assumptions—especially since eligible
burners will be exempt from all of the
permitting standards otherwise
applicable to waste-as-fuel activities.
The only requirements that would apply
to such small quantity burners are that
they notify EPA within 30 days of final
promulgation of this rule that they are
burning small quantities of hazardous
waste and that they keep records to
demonstrate conformance with the
quantity and firing rate limits.
With two exceptions discussed below,
any device regulated by these standards
burning hazardous waste fuel at a rate
lower than the applicable volume cut-off
is eligible for the de minimis burner
exemption from permitting standards.
This exemption is intended to apply to
any boiler, including residential,
institutional, commercial, industnal and
utility boilers. The exemption also
applies to all blast furnaces, asphalt
kilns, lime kilns, sulfur recovery
furnaces, light-weight aggregate kilns.
and cement kilns burning hazardous
wastes.87 The Agency has performed
conservative evaluations of the potential
risks posed by these small quantity
burners, and has determined that no
regulatory controls (other than
notification and recordkeeping
requirements and a limit on the
maximum firing rate) are necessary to
ensure protection of human health and
the environment.
For the most part, the exemption
would be limited to the types of
•' Olher Industrial furnaces are not eligible for
the exemption because they were not included in
the nik assessment developed to support this
provision We specifically request Information on
the burning of small quantities of hazardous waste
in other industnal furnaces.
-------
17010
Federal Register / Vol. 52. Ne»^7 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Propoaed Rules
situations described in the statutory
provisions. Thus, only burners who burn
hazardous waste fuels they generate on-
site would be eligible for the
exemption.58 Although wastes
generated off-site may not pose greater
risks when burned'than those generated
on-site, as a practical matter, burners
accepting waste from off-site are not
likely to be able to meet the de minimis
quantity limits. In addition, facilities
which burn de minimis quantities of
hazardous wastes must notify EPA that
they are burning hazardous wastes and
maintain records of the waste quantities
burned. Also, in order to ensure that
large quantities of wastes are not
burned within a short period of time that
could result in lower destruction
efficiencies than assumed in the
analysis (e.g.. lower than 99%). exempt
burning would be conditioned on a limit
on the waste burning rate. Hazardous
wastes could not be fired at greater than
1 percent of the boiler finng rate at any
point in tune. Thus, the rule would
require that burners keep records to
document that they are not exceeding
the 1 percent firing rate limit.
Boilers and furnaces burning
hazardous waste fuels containing or
denved from any of the following acute
hazardous wastes are not eligible for the
exemption: EPA Hazardous Waste Nos.
F020. F021. F022. F023. F026. and F027.
Given the toxicity of these wastes, EPA
does not believe it is appropriate to
exempt them from regulation.
Hazardous waste fuels containing or
derived from these acutely hazardous
wastes must be burned at a 99.9999
percent destruction and removal
efficiency (ORE) under today's proposed
rules. We cannot expect boilers and
furnaces to achieve that level of ORE
when operating outside of the Agency's
regulatory system.
Finally, there are limits on the number
of sources allowed under this exemption
due to the limitations of the risk analysis
as discussed below. In addition, no more
than one type of device may burn waste
under this exemption at a given site.
** Boilers and furnaces that bum their own
hazardous waste fuels as well as hazardous waste
fuels generated by small quantity generators and
exempt from regulation under 40 CFR 281.5 are
eligible for the proposed small quantity burner
exemption because such small quantity generator
hazardous waste fuels are exempt from these
proposed rules Those exempt small quantity
generator hazardous waste fuels must, however, be
counted in the small quantify burner volume
determination because the volume limits are nsk-
based When larger volumes of hazardous waste
fuels are burned outside of today's proposed
controls, the nsk could be significant irrespective of
the source of generation of the waste.
B. Rationale
The Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA)
developed in support of this rule ••
indicates that a large number of devices.
especially boilers, burn very small
quantities of hazardous waste fuel—
approximately 25 percent of all burners
(250 devices) bum less than 50 gallons
per month. The RIA concludes that it
would not b'e cost-effective for these
devices to comply with the proposed
controls since alternative management
practices would be less expensive. The
RIA also concludes that the risks posed
by these devices are insignificant. Thus,
the proposed small quantity exemption
is designed to avoid disturbance of a
common waste recycling practice which
the Agency recognizes as protective of
human health and the environment.
C. Basis for Selecting Quantity Limits
A detailed description of the
methodology used to calculate volume
cut-offs for the exemption is available
for public review and comment.60 A
summary of the methodology is
presented here for the reader's
convenience.
EPA evaluated the risks posed by
emissions of organic compounds, metals,
and hydrogen chloride, the parameters
controlled in the substantive regulations.
The analysis demonstrates that the risks
posed by organic emissions from waste-
as-fuel activities are overwhelmingly
dominated by the risks posed by
carcinogenic (as opposed to
noncarcinogenic) waste constituents.
Accordingly, the initial evaluation
performed in support of the de minimis
exemption focused exclusively on
carcinogenic risks, on the assumption
that controls ensuring insignificant risks
from organic carcinogens will ensure
protection against non-carcinogenic
releases. This assumption was
confirmed by evaluating the potential
risks from metals and hydrogen chloride
which could result when those
quantities of waste indicated by the risk
analysis for organic carcinogens were
burned.
The risks from burning small
quantities of hazardous waste in boilers
are determined primarily by the
following factors:
• Composition of the waste stream
being burned;
•• Industrial Economics Incorporated. Regulatory
Analysis for Waste at Fuel Technical Standards.
October 1988 and addendum. January 1987.
•° Versar Inc. Analysis for Calculating a De
Minimis Risk Exemption for Burning Small
Quantities of Wastes in Boilers and Industrial
Furnaces. January 1987.
• Toxicity and concentration of
hazardous constituents in the waste
stream;
• Destruction efficiency achieved by
the device;
• Local meteorology, which
determines the amount of dispersion of
stack emissions;
• Clustering and size of sources, i.e..
number of boilers at a specific location.
• The type of device in which the
waste is being burned.
The values of these parameters can
and do vary widely. Therefore, in order
to perform the risk analysis, the Agency
duplicated a hypothetical situation
which would be considered a
reasonable, worst-case scenario. This
methodology was used to calculate the
volume cutoffs for the various boiler
sizes which would result in less than a 1
in 100,000 risk of cancer to an individual
residing for 70 years at the ground level
point of maximum exposure to
reasonable, worst-case stack emissions.
Separate calculations were made for
each of the device sizes evaluated,
resulting in differing quantity limits for
each device size. The rationale for the
assumptions used in the nsk analysis is
discussed below.
1. Composition of hazardous waste
stream. Composition data on hazardous
waste-derived fuels is scarce.
Information gathered by the mail
questionnaire survey and other industry
contacts indicates that most of the
matenals burned are organic solvents
that are usually classified as hazardous
based on ignitability plus toxicity. In
addition, analysis of past tests and
ongoing studies indicate that the burning
of most hazardous wastes may show
risks which are-very similar to the risks
of burning fossil fuels. The actual
concentrations of carcinogens in wastes
burned by 21 facilities during tPA's field
testing program for boilers and
industrial furnaces ranged from zero to
17 percent with an average of
approximately 4 percent. For the
purposes of this risk assessment, the
waste streams were assumed to contain
50 percent carcinogenic compounds.
2. Toxicity of hazardous constituents.
In addition to assuming that the waste
stream contained 50 percent
carcinogenic compounds, we assumed
that the carcinogens had a potency
equivalent to a Q* (slope of the dose
response relationship) of 1. This potency
is comparable to the potency of PCBs,
DDT. chlordane. and toxaphene.
Further, the assumed potency of the
carcinogenic compounds is 15 times
greater than the average potency of the
carcinogens found in the wastes at the
21 field test facilities.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17011
3. Destruction efficiency. The burner
destruction efficiency determines the
quantity of unburned hazardous wastes
which will be emitted from the stack.
Assumed values for boiler and furnace
performance were selected based upon
a review of test data generated in
support of this rule and based on the
professional judgment of Agency staff
familiar with the destruction and
removal efficiencies (ORE) typically
achieved by boilers. It was assumed
that, in the worst-case, boilers and
furnaces would only achieve 99 percent
ORE of organic constituents. This
represents a very poorly performing
combustion device. In fact, as explained
previously, most boilers and furnaces
can be expected to achieve 99.99 percent
ORE of organic waste constituents even
when operated under less than optimal
conditions.
In addition to the incomplete
combustion of the organic hazardous
waste constituents (POHCs), there are
also products of incomplete combustion
(PICs) present in the emissions from
burning hazardous wastes (and any
other fuel). These PICs can make a
significant contribution with respect to
the risks from a source. A PIC to POHC
ratio of 5.0 was selected for the nsk
analysis based on a review of test data
for the unsteady state tests discussed
previously. The carcinogenic potency
assumed for PICs is the same as that
assumed for the incompletely burned
hazardous waste or POHCs (Q
Star=1.0). This is considered a very
conservative assumption.
4. Clustering and size of sources. The
size of the sources and the number of
emission points which exist at a location
have a major impact on ambient air
concentrations of the various
constituents from stack emissions. The
Agency's mail questionnaire survey of
boilers burning hazardous wastes shows
that more than two-thirds of the boilers
are located on sites which have more
than one boiler burning hazardous
wastes. Therefore, for the purposes of
this analysis, a site was assumed to
have two boilers. In addition, for the
reasonable, worst-case scenario, it was
assumed that there would be two
facilities adjacent to each other. Finally,
to simplify the modeling analysis, the
conservative assumption was made that
all four boilers were emitting at a single
point. This conservatism was further
reinforced by the assumption that the
sources were simultaneously burning
hazardous wastes. Various sizes of
boilers were modeled using typical
physical characteristics (e.g., stack
height, flue gas rates and temperatures).
The descriptions of the devices modeled
are provided in the support document
for this provision: Versar Inc.. Analysis
for Calculating De Minimi's Risk
Exemption for Burning Small Quantities
of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and-
Industrial Furnaces. January 1987. As a
result of this limitation in the risk
analysis, the number of boilers burning
hazardous wastes under the small
quantity burner exception is limited to
two per site. The quantity limit for each
would apply according to its size (i.e.,
one boiler could not burn the quantity
allocated to both). The EPA requests
comments on whether this limitation is
reasonable and, if not, what method of
apportionment should be used for sites
with more than two boilers burning
hazardous wastes under this exemption.
For the industrial furnaces a similar
analysis was made to determine the
clustering of furnaces at a location. As a
result of this review, it was determined
that the following worst case clustering
would be used:
Blast Furnaces—2
Asphalt Kilns—1
Sulfur Recovery Furnaces—4
Ught Weight Aggregate Kilns—3
Lime Kilns—2
Wet Cement Plants—3
Dry Cement Plants—3
As a result of this analysis, the
number of furnaces burning hazardous
waste under this exemption is limited to
that on the above list. In addition, only
one type of device may burn hazardous
wastes under this exemption. This is
because the risk analysis supporting the
exemption did not take into account
mixed categories or types of devices at a
site. As with boilers, the EPA requests
comments on whether this limitation is
reasonable and. if not, what method of
apportionment should be used for sites
with more furnaces burning hazardous
wastes under this exemption than is
allowed on the above list.
5. Dispersion. For purposes of the
reasonable, worst-case analysis. EPA
assumed that the devices were located
in areas of complex terrain, and used
appropriate dispersion models (the same
used to develop the Tier I-III values for
complex terrain) to evaluate pollutant
dispersion. The assumption of complex
terrain is generally conservative since it
is the situation generally leading to the
least dispersion.61
11 We note that the devices were also modeled
assuming they were located in flat terrain. In some
cases, the flat terrain modeling resulted in poorer
dispersion than the complex terrain modeling
because of unusual meteorologic or stack lip
downwash conditions. The modeling that resulted
in the poorer dispersion was used to establish these
quantity limits.
6. Assumptions regarding metals and
chlorine in waste fuels. A similar
reasonable, worst case analysis was
performed to evaluate the potential risks
posed by emissions of toxic metals
(including carcinogens) and hydrogen
chloride from de minimi's burners. As a
result, it was determined that, at the
volume cut-offs specified by the
exemption, metals emissions caused by
cofinng of hazardous wastes containing
metals at the 90th percentile level (see
Table 1) would not pose a significant
risk. The analysis also considered
hydrogen chloride emissions and
assumed a chlorine content of 50
percent in the hazardous waste fuel. The
chlorine content in actual hazardous
wastes seldom exceeds 3 percent:
however, the highest chlonne content
measured in a hazardous waste fuel
fired in a boiler of which EPA is aware
was 43 percent. Predicted ground level
concentrations of HC1 also did not
exceed the reference air concentrations
D. Exemption of Associated Storage
Hazardous waste fuel storage
practices prior to burning vary from site
to site. Many facilities burning relatively
large quantities of hazardous waste
fuels hold the fuels in a storage system
and then pump the waste fuels through a
dedicated line into the combustion zone
of the boiler. Other facilities mix
hazardous waste fuels with other fuels
(typically virgin fuel oil) in a storage/
mixing tank prior to burning the blended
material. These tanks are not feasibly
emptied of hazardous waste every 90
days and so are in most cases ineligible
for the generator accumulation
provisions in § 262.34.
Under the rule being proposed today.
facilities storing unmixed hazardous
waste fuels would be responsible for
complying with all applicable standards
for the storage of the hazardous waste
fuel. Owners and operators that are
eligible for the small quantity burner
exemption and who mix toxic hazardous
waste fuels with other fuels would,
however, be exempt from the storage
standards after such mixing. The basis
for this exemption is discussed below.
The Agency is proposing an
exemption for storage of such storage/
mixing tanks (for small quantity
burners) in order for the de minimi's
exemption in Section 3004(q)(2)(B) to
have practical application. Congress
evidently envisioned a class of facilities
capable of burning small amounts of
hazardous wastes safely absent
regulation, and viewed such burning as
a superior means of managing these
small amounts of waste. Furthermore.
assuming that de minimis quantity
-------
17012
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
waste storage is conducted safely, the
Agency assumes that Congress also
envisioned exemption of the storage
since permitting storage would
discourage safe on-site burning just as
much as regulating the burning itself.
We believe that storage of de minimi's
amounts of hazardous wastes mixed
with virgin fuels would pose no
significant incremental risks over
storage of virgin fuels. The monthly
volumes of hazardous waste fuel
covered by the de minimis exemption,
for example, represent less than 0.1
percent of the fuel flow rate through
these tanks. Under these circumstances,
we think the statutory exemption can
reasonably be read to encompass this
limited class of storage practices as
well.
We note further that the Agency is
studying systematically other situations
where hazardous waste containing
mixtures may not be appropriately
subject to regulation, and intends to
issue comprehensive rules addressing
the issue genetically. It appears to us
justifiable to address the question for
the limited class of burning facilities in
advance of other types of situations
because Congress has singled out small
quantity burning facilities for exemption
where appropriate. We note further that
to the extent these de minimis waste-
virgin fuel tanks are underground
storage tanks (as defined in section
9001(1)). they would be subject to
regulation under Subtitle I because they
contain petroleum.
VIII. Regulation of Combustion
Residuals
Residuals generated by the
combustion of hazardous waste in
boilers and individual furnaces include
bottom -ash. fly ash (collected
particulates), scrubber water and blast
furnace slag. As discussed below,
although most residuals are exempt from
regulation, some are subject to
regulation either by virtue of the
"derived-from" rule of § 261.3(c)(2) (i.e.,
residues generated by the treatment of
listed hazardous waste remain
hazardous waste until delisted) or
because they exhibit a characteristic of
hazardous waste identified in Subpart C
of Part 261.
We are not proposing today to revise
the regulation of combustion residuals.
We are. however, proposing an
interpretation of how residuals would be
regulated when generated by industrial
furnaces involving extraction.
beneficiation. and processing of ores
and minerals (and cement kilns). The
following discussion summarizes the
current situation and the basis for the
proposed interpretation.
A. Residuals from Boilers
Residuals generated primarily by the
combustion of fossil fuels are not RCRA
hazardous waste. See 5 261.4(b)(4). As
discussed at 50 FR 49190 (November 29.
1985), the Agency has interpreted this
exclusion to apply to boilers cofiring
hazardous waste with fossil fuel as
follows: (1) residuals are exempt if the
hazardous waste is cofired with coal
and the coal provides at least 50% of the
boiler's fuel requirement on a volume or
heat input basis, whichever results in
the larger volume of coal: and (2)
residuals are not exempt if the
hazardous waste is cofired with oil or
gas. or with coal where the coal
provides less than 50% of the boiler's
fuel requirements. The Agency has
taken this approach because when
hazardous waste is cofired with large
volumes of coal any contaminants from
the hazardous waste would be largely
diluted by coal ash. This may not be the
case with oil or gas combustion given
low volumes of ash generally produced
by combustion of these fuels.
Residuals that are not exempt are
hazardous waste if the hazardous waste
burned contains (or is derived from) a
listed hazardous waste, or if the residual
exhibits a characteristic of hazardous
waste. If the residual is hazardous by
virtue of the "derived-from" rule, an
owner or operator can petition the
Administrator under provisions of
§ 260.20 to demonstrate that the residual
no longer meets the criteria for listing
and should be "delisted."
After considering the limited data
available on the carryover of
constituents from the hazardous waste
to the residuals,63 the Agency is not
proposing to change the interpretation
discussed above. The Agency, however,
specifically requests data on the organic
constituents of boiler residuals
attributable to burning hazardous waste.
B. Residuals from industrial furnaces
The residuals from most industrial
furnaces involved in burning hazardous
waste are not RCRA hazardous waste.
Residuals from blast furnaces, primary
smelting furnaces, light-weight aggregate
kilns, and lime kilns are exempt under
the exemption provided by S 261.4(b)(7)
for solid waste generated by the
beneficiation and processing of ores and
minerals. Cement kiln dust waste is
exempt under 5 261.4(b)(8).
These regulatory provisions
implement RCRA section
•* Accurex Corp. Engineering Assessment
Reports. Hazardous Waste Cofmnq in Industrial
Boilers. August 1984. Accurex Corp. Hazardous
Waste Cofmng in Industrial Boiler* Under
Nonsteady Operating Conditions. August 1986.
3001(b)(3){A)(iiH»u)- These provisions
exclude from Subtitle C regulation
wastes from certain processes, namely
from the extraction, beneficiation. and
processing of ores and minerals, and
from cement kilns. In evaluating the
burning processes that are encompassed
by the exclusion, the natural focus of
inquiry is on the materials processed in
the industrial furnace: are they ores or
minerals (e.g.. limestone, shale)? If not
what are the percentages of other
materials (i.e.. nonores or nonminerals
such as solid or hazardous wastes)
burned, and are they sufficient to
indicate that the furnace is essentially
engaged in a different type of process?
Put another way, the ultimate question
is whether the industrial furnace is
engaged in a process whose wastes are
excluded from regulation, and the
question is answered by examining the
types and proportions of materials
actually being processed.
Under this logic, the Agency views
these statutory provisions as applying in
the following ways when an industrial
furnace processing an ore or mineral or
generating cement kiln dust waste also
bums a hazardous waste. First, if the
device is burning the hazardous waste
solely for energy recovery, the Agency
in all cases considers the residues to be
from processing an ore or mineral (or to
be cement kiln dust waste) and hence
excluded. This is because the hazardous
waste fuels are not being processed
directly, in the sense of contributing any
material values to the product being
produced by the device. Consequently,
the device is processing an ore or
mineral (or producing cement) and thus
generating an excluded waste. In this
regard, we note that Congress in section
3004(q) indicatedspecifically that the
new RCRA waste-as-fuel provisions do
not affect regulatory determinations
under section 3001(b)(3). See also 50 FR
49190 n. 89 (Nov. 29.1985) noting that
these residues remain excluded.
When one of these devices burns a
hazardous waste for material recovery,
the analysis differs somewhat. This is
because the wastes are actually being
processed. At some point, therefore, the
device would no longer be considered to
be processing an ore or mineral if the
greater volume of material feed is a
hazardous waste (or other secondary
material). Thus, if a majority of material
feed processed in a device is not an ore
or mineral (for cement kilns, limestone
or shale), then resulting residues are not
deemed to be from processing an ore or
mineral (e.g.. a cement kiln dust waste).
An example would be a smelting
furnace which bums secondary
materials (rather than ore concentrate)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6, 1987 / Proposed Rules
17013
as the majority of its feedstock. In fact.
EPA has consistently taken the position
that wastes from secondary smelting do
not qualify for the exclusion. See 50 FR
40293 (October 1985).
Finally, we caution that these
principles do not apply when a device
burns wastes to destroy them, or where
destruction is a dominant purpose of
burning. Such a device would not be
performing the type of process indicated
in section 3001(b)(3). but would really be
incinerating wastes. (Cf. existing
§ 264.340(a)(2) which states that
industrial furnaces and boilers burning
hazardous wastes to destroy them
operate as incinerators and are subject
to the same standards.) For example, if a
cement kiln were to burn hazardous
waste fuels in quantities greatly in
excess of those needed to fire the kiln.
the device could not be deemed to be
functioning to produce cement but to
destroy hazardous waste, and residues
would not be excluded. If a blast
furnace or aggregate kiln were to burn
large volumes of hazardous waste which
did not contribute to the production of
iron or aggregate, residues from burning
would not be excluded. Relevant factors
in making the determination include the
revenues derived from burning wastes
(either solid or hazardous) versus
producing a product, the types and
range of wastes burned in the device
and what they contribute to the process.
and the purpose for which the device is
held out to the public.
The Agency solicits comment on these
interpretations. If commenters disagree
with any point, they are requested to
describe particular situations that they
believe the Agency's reading fails to
accommodate. EPA notes as well that
alternative readings of section 3001(b)(3)
are possible. One could argue, for
example, that Congress contemplated a
temporary exclusion for wastes whose
character was determined by the
processing of an ore or mineral. To the
extent an industrial furnace processed
wastes along with ores or minerals and
these processed wastes determined the
character of the resulting waste
residues, one thus could maintain that
Congress did not intend to exclude the
residual wastes. The Agency indeed has
expressed this position with regard to
wastes from utility boilers cofinng oil or
gas and hazardous wastes (50 FR 49190
and n. 87-89 (Nov. 29.1985) citing 1981
correspondence between the Director of
the Office of Solid Waste and the Utility
Solid Waste Activities Group), where
we reasoned that resulting fly ash would
reflect the nonfossil fuel component
burned in the boiler. Applied to an
industrial furnace, if furnace residues
exhibited a hazardous waste
characteristic when processing non-ore
or mineral feed, but did not when
processing only ores and minerals, those
residues could be considered to be non-
exempt hazardous wastes. Although this
reading may reflect the literal statutory
language less well than the one given
above, we solicit comment on this
possible approach. Commenters
likewise are requested to describe
particular situations whenever possible.
Part FOUR Interim Status Standards and
Permit Procedures
This part describes the procedures for
issuing permits for facilities that operate
in conformance with the proposed
controls discussed in Part Three. This
part also describes standards that
would apply to existing facilities until
they are closed or a permit is issued.
/. Interim Status Standards
Interim status standards apply to
owners and operators of boilers and
industrial furnaces burning hazardous
waste on or before the effective date of
these standards. Such boilers or
industrial furnaces are referred to as
being "in existence." A boiler or
industrial furnace is also considered to
be in existence if it is under construction
that would enable it to burn hazardous
waste on or before the effective date of
these standards. A facility has
commenced construction if it meets the
conditions provided by paragraphs (1)
and (2) of the definition of "Existing
hazardous waste management (HWM)
facility" in 40 CFR 260.10 and 270.2.
Those conditions require that all permits
necessary to begin physical construction
be obtained, and that either continuous
physical construction be underway or
that the owner or operator be under
contractual obligations for physical
construction that cannot be cancelled or
modified without substantial loss. We
also note that, if the facility already has
other units which have interim status.
§ 270.70(c)(2) allows addition of new
treatment processes (e.g.. a boiler
existing at a storage facility) where
necessary to comply with new Federal
regulations. Under existing rules.
however, such changes shall not amount
to reconstruction of the facility. See
§ 270.70(e). EPA is proposing to amend
the rules to state that this reconstruction
ban does not apply to situations where
changes in interim status are needed to
comply with new Federal rules. EPA.
thus, intends that the reconstruction ban
not apply where boilers and industrial
furnaces operate at existing interim
status facilities.
Interim status standards apply to
existing facilities until they are closed
under the provisions of those standards
or until a permit is issued.
EPA is proposing to apply the
following standards to boilers and
industrial fumaced burning hazardous
waste during interim status: (1) General
(nontechnical) facility standards; (2)
operating requirements, including metals
and hydrogen chloride standards and
carbon monoxide limits; (3) monitoring
and inspection requirements; (4) waste
analysis and closure requirements; and
(5) prohibition on burning dioxin-
containing waste. The basis for these
provisions is discussed below.
A. General Facility Standards
EPA is proposing to apply the existing
nontechnical interim status standards
applicable to hazardous waste
incinerators and other storage.
treatment, and disposal facilities to
boilers and industrial furnaces. Those
standards are necessary to ensure that
general facility operations are
conducted in a safe manner by
technically and financially competent
owners and operators. The standards
are codified in Subparts A. B, C. D. E. G,
and H of Part 265 and address •
nontechnical aspects of safe operations
such as facility security: inspections;
personnel training: emergency
equipment plans, and procedures; use of
the manifest system: closure; and
financial responsibility requirements.
The standards in those subparts
relevant to combustion devices are
incorporated by reference in today's
proposed rule in $ 266.35-l(d).
B. Operating Requirements
EPA is proposing that two substantive
standards apply .during interim status:
(1) metals and hydrogen chloride
controls: and (2) Due gas carbon
monoxide limits. The basis for these
requirements is discussed below.
1. Metals and hydrogen chloride
standards. To minimize the effects of
metals and hydrogen chloride emissions
on affected populations, these proposed
regulations would require facilities '
under interim status to meet the
standards set forth in § 26&34-4(3) (b)
and (c). The facility may meet any one
of the Tier I-UI standards. But the
facility must meet the chosen standard
within 12 months of final promulgation
of this rule. (The Agency believes that it
is reasonable to allow 12 months for
compliance with the metals and
hydrogen chloride (and CO) standards
given that significant physical
modification (e.g., improvements to
emissions control devices) may be
required.) In addition, the owner or
operator of a facility may apply for risk-
-------
17014
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
based standards under Tier IV.
However, if a permit applicant chooses
this route, he must submit his Part B
application along with the risk
assessment for his site-specific
standards within 6 months of final
promulgation of this rule. The approach
required for the risk assessment is
discussed elsewhere in today's proposal
and will be included in the Risk
Assessment Guideline. Site specific air
dispersion modeling will be required for
the Tier IV standard as well as
emissions testing, where applicable (i.e..
to obtain credit for air pollution control
equipment).
The owner or operator must conduct
sampling and analysis as necessary and,
under Tier IV, emissions testing to show
that he is meeting the metals and HCI
standards, and maintain such records so
as to show his compliance with the
standards until a permit is issued.
2. Carbon monoxide limits. To ensure
that boilers and industrial furnaces
burning hazardous waste during interim
status operate at high combustion
efficiency, we are proposing to require
compliance with flue gas carbon
monoxide (CO) limits and to prohibit
burning hazardous waste during start-up
and shut-down. The rationale and basis
for these requirements has been
discussed in section II.B of Part Three of
this preamble. The CO limits applicable
to permitted facilities would also apply
to interim status facilities within 12
months of promulgation of this rule.
Thus, continuous monitoring of CO and
oxygen flue gas levels would be
required. We believe that limiting CO
levels will, in most cases, ensure that
the device is achieving 99.99 percent
destruction efficiency and is minimizing
emissions of incompletely burned
hydrocarbons. A 12-month effective date
is provided to enable the owner and
operator to install and shake-down the
CO monitoring/recording equipment.
We are also proposing optional
standards for boilers that would be
permitted without a trial bum. These
standards are discussed in section II-C
of Part Three of this preamble and
would be codified in proposed § 266.34-
6(b)(4) of the permit standards and
proposed § 266.35-3(c) of the interim
status standards. Not only would boilers
operated under these special conditions
be permitted without a trial bum to
demonstrate conformance with the ORE
standard." but permit officials could
63 No emissions testing would be required if the
metals and chlorine waste specification levels or
calculated allowable feed rates were not exceeded.
See proposed i i 286 34-6(c) (2) and (3) and 2S&34-
6|d) (2) and (3)
consider the fact that such boilers are
already operating virtually in
compliance with these permit standards
in setting priorities for permitting
interim status facilities. To determine
whether boilers are operating in
conformance with the optional
standards, permit officials can request
written certifications from boiler owners
and operators submitting Part A permit
applications.
The Agency considered whether
boilers for which emissions tes'.ing
would not be required under the permit
standards could be deemed
automatically to have a permit without
complying with the formal permit
procedures (e.g., submission of Part A
and Part B permit applications;
opportunity for public hearings). Boiler
owners and operators could avoid
emissions testing under today's
proposed rules by: (1) Complying with
the special operating conditions to
ensure conformance with the
performance standards for the control of
organic emissions; and (2) complying
with the metals and chlorine waste
specification levels or calculated mass
feed rate limits to ensure compliance
with the metals and chlorine
performance standards. Given that such
boilers are already in compliance with
the technical permit standards, they
would be in "interim status" in name
only. If the Agency could be sure that
such owners and operators were, in fact
complying with the standards, the
formal permitting process would be
unnecessary and such facilities could be
considered automatically to have a
permit.
Although the special operating
conditions-proposed today in lieu of
organic emissions testing have not been
developed to make them completely
self-implementing, we believe they could
be. Unfortunately, however, the Agency
does not believe that RCRA provides the
statutory authority to waive formal
permitting procedures for facilities that
would be subject to substantive
controls. The Agency interprets RCRA
as unambiguously requiring formal
permitting of regulated treatment.
storage, and disposal facilities. Permits
could be waived only when a facility is
unconditionally exempt from regulation
or exempt with minimal substantive
conditions. Corrective action for
releases of hazardous constituents from
solid waste management units is tied
directly to the permitting process as
well. Thus, we believe that boilers
operating under the proposed standards
in lieu of emissions testing require
formal permitting because they must
comply with substantive controls. (On
the other hand, we believe that the
proposed conditional exemption for
burners of small quantities of hazardous
wastes meets the test of minimal
substantive controls—and moreover is
directly sanctioned by statute. Thus, we
believe that an exemption from the
permit procedures for small quantity
burners is consistent with the intent of
HSWA.)
C. Monitoring and Inspections
Like permitted facilities, facilities in
interim status would be required to
install, operate, and maintain, within 12
months of this rule's promulgation,
continuous flue gas monitors for carbon
monoxide (CO) and oxygen in
accordance with Guideline for
Continuous Monitoring of Carbon
Monoxide at Hazardous Waste
Incinerators. Appendix D. PES, January
1987 (Draft Report).
In addition, we are proposing to
require other monitonng and inspections
virtually identical to that required for
interim status incinerators under
§ 265.347. Existing instruments that
relate to combustion and emission
control would have to be monitored at
least every 15 minutes and appropriate •
corrections to maintain steady-state
combustion conditions and emission
control would have to be made
immediately. Instruments that relate to
combustion and emission control would
normally include those measuring
hazardous waste feed rate, feed rate of
other fuels, feed rate of industrial
furnace feedstocks, hazardous waste
firing system pressure, scrubber water
flow rate and pH, electrostatic
precipitator spark rate, and fabric filter
pressure drop.
The boiler or Industrial furnace and
associated equipment (pumps, valves,
pipes, etc.) would also have to be
subjected to thorough visual inspection
at least daily when hazardous waste is
burned, for leaks, spills, fugitive
emissions, and signs of tampering. It
should be noted that some of these
associated devices would be
"equipment in VHAP (volatile
hazardous air pollutant) service" within
the meaning of EPA's recent proposal to
control air emissions at certain RCRA
facilities. 52 FR 3748 (Feb. 5.1987). and
would be controlled by the standards
proposed in that rule.
Finally, the emergency hazardous
waste feed cutoff system and associated
alarms would have to be tested at least
weekly when hazardous waste is bumed
to verify operability, unless the owner or
operator has written documentation that
weekly inspections will unduly restrict
or upset operations and that less
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday.- May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules 17015
frequent inspections will be adequate.
At a minimum, however, operational
testing would be required at least
monthly.
D. Wast» Analysis and Closure
In adi' i to the general waste
analysis,. nuirements of § 265.13 and
the general closure requirements of
§§ 265.111-265.115. all of which would
be incorporated in these standards by
reference, we are proposing additional
requirements specific to burning
hazardous waste in boilers and
industrial furnaces. These specific
requirements are similar to those
required for incinerators operating
under interim status, See §§265.341 and
265.351.
Owners or operators of boilers and
industrial furnaces burning hazardous
waste would have to analyze the waste
sufficiently to determine the type of
pollutants that might be emitted. At a
minimum, the analyses must determine
the concentrations of organic and
inorganic compounds (including metals)
identified in Appendix VIII that may
reasonably be expected to be in the
waste, and chlorine in the waste, on an
as-fired basis (i.e., either in the waste or
after any blending with other wastes or
fuels), unless the owner or operator has
written, documented data that show that
the element is not present. Analyses of
these elements would be required either
because their emissions would be
controlled under the proposed standards
or because the permit writer could use
the authority of HSWA Section 3005(c)
to control emissions as necessary to
protect public health and the
environment In addition, the heating
value of the waste must be determined
to enable the owner and operator to
consider how completely the material
may burn considering the waste firing
rate, firing system, waste/air mixing.
combustion gas temperatures, and
retention time at those temperatures.
Finally, the owner or operator would be
required to analyze sufficiently any
hazardous waste he has not previously
burned in his boiler or industrial furnace
to enable him to establish steady-state
(normal) operating conditions and to
comply with the stack gas carbon
monoxide (CO) and metals and HC1
standards provided by proposed
§ 266.35-3.
With respect to closure, the owner or
operator would be required to remove
all hazardous waste and hazardous
waste residues (including, but not
limited to, ash, scrubber water, and
scrubber sludges) from the boiler or
industrial furnace site.
E. Prohibition on Burning Dioxin-
Containing Wastes
Hazardous waste containing or
derived from any of the following
dioxin-containing wastes could not be
bumed in a boiler or industrial furnace
operating under interim status: EPA
Hazardous Waste Nos. F020, F021, F022.
F023, F026. and F027. Burning these
dioxin-containing wastes dunng interim
status is prohibited because boilers and
industrial furnaces could not be
assumed to achieve the 99.9999 percent
ORE (Destruction and Removal
Efficiency) required for these wastes to
protect human health adequately under
the permit standards. The prohibition on
burning dioxin-containing wastes would
be codified in proposed § 266.35-l(c),
and the requirement for permitted
facilities to demonstrate 99.9999 percent
DRE for these wastes would be codified
in proposed § 268.34-4(a)(l)(iii).
F. Exemption of Small Quantity On-Site
Burners
The burning of extremely small
quantities of hazardous waste (e.g., 7
gallons per month for small boilers and
up to 300 gallons per month for large
boilers) absent regulatory control (i.e.,
assuming poor combustion conditions)
poses negligible risks. See discussion in
Section V of Part Three of this preamble.
Therefore, a conditional exemption for
burners of small quantities of hazardous
waste generated on-site would be
codified in proposed § 266.35-1 (b)(l)
(interim status standards), and § 266.34-
l(b)(permit standards). The exemption
would be conditioned as follows: (1) The
wastes must be generated on-site: (2) the
total quantity of waste burned in a
calendar month as a function of boiler
size and the quantity bumed at any
point in time must not exceed 1% of
boiler feed on a heat or volume input
basis; and (3) the waste must not
contain or be derived from dioxin-
containing wastes.
//. Permit Procedures
Boilers and industrial furnaces
burning hazardous waste would be
subject to the permit procedures of Part
270 for hazardous waste treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities. In
particular, existing facilities would be
required to submit Part A of the permit
application containing the information
identified in existing § 270.13 within six
months of the effective date of final
rules promulgated subsequent to today's
proposal. When requested by permit
officials, owners and operators of
interim status facilities must submit Part
B of the permit application. General
information on the contents of Part B of
the application is provided in existing
§ 270.14. Specific information for Part B
of the application for boilers and
industrial furnaces is provided in
proposed § 270.22. In addition.
information on the special types of
permits for boilers and industrial
furnaces and trial bum procedures is
provided in proposed § 270.65.
New facilities would be required to
submit Part A and Part B of the permit
application at least 180 days before
physical construction is expected to
commence. See existing § 270.1(b).
Proposed § 5 270.22 and 270.65 are
patterned after the permit procedures
for hazardous waste incinerators in
§§ 270.19 and 270.62. The proposed
sections are discussed below.
A. Proposed § 270.22: Specific Part B
Information
Proposed § 270.22 provides specific
information requirements for Part B of
the permit application. Paragraph (a)
requires a trial bum to demonstrate
conformance with the performance
standards, unless the documentation to
support the waiver of a trial burn
required in proposed paragraph (c) is
provided. Paragraph (b) requires owners
and operators required to conduct a trial
burn to submit a bum plan or the results
of a trial burn in accordance with
proposed § 270.65.
Paragraph (c) requires documentation
to support a waiver of a trial burn under
the following exemptions:
1. Boilers operated under the special
conditions for conformance with the
organic emission standard. When
seeking the exemption for a trial bum to
demonstrate that the boiler is in
conformance with the organic emission
standard in proposed § 266.34-4(a), the
owner or operator must submit
documentation that the boiler operates
in conformance with the special
conditions provided by proposed
§ 266.34-6(b)(4).
2. Waiver of a trial bum to
demonstrate conformance with the
metals emission standard. When
seeking the exemption for emissions
testing to demonstrate conformance
with the metals emissions performance
standards in proposed § 266.34-4(b), the
owner or operator must either (a)
Document by analysis that the
hazardous waste itself or, as fired, (i.e.,
after any blending with other wastes or
fuels) does not contain metals at levels
higher than allowed in the Tier I metals
specification in proposed § 266.34-
4(b)(l); or (b) document by analysis of
the hazardous waste, other fuels, and
industrial furnace feedstocks and by
records of operating procedures (for
-------
17016
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No, S3 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
existing facilities) or by planned
operating procedures (for new facilities)
that the metals concentrations in the
waste will not exceed the Tier II levels
allowed by the equations in proposed
§ 266.34-4(b)(2), considering the metals
levels in the hazardous waste itself or,
as fired, other fuels, and industrial
furnace feedstocks, and the feed rate of
the hazardous waste, other fuels, and
industrial furnace feedstocks.
If neither the Tier I nor Tier II
standards are met for a metal, emission
testing to demonstrate conformance
with the metals performance standards
is required for all metals.
3. Waiver of a trial burn to
demonstrate conformance with the HCl
emission standard. When seeking the
exemption for emissions testing to
demonstrate conformance with the
hydrogen chlonde (HCI) emissions
performance standard in proposed
§ 266.34-4(c), the owner or operator
must either (a) Document by analysis
that the chlorine content of the
hazardous waste itself, or as fired, does
not exceed the Tier I level allowed in
the chlorine specification in proposed
§ 266.34-4(c)(l); or (b) document by
analysis of the hazardous waste, other
fuels, and industrial furnace feedstocks
and by records of operating procedures
(for existing facilities) or by planned
operating procedures (for new facilities)
that the allowable Tier II chlorine
concentration in the waste computed by
the equation in proposed § 266.34-4(c)(2)
will not be exceeded, considering the
chlonne level in the hazardous waste, as
fired, other fuels, and industrial furnace
feedstocks, the heating value of the
hazardous waste and other fuels, and
the feed rate of the hazardous waste,
other fuels, and industrial furnace
feedstock's.
4. Data in lieu of a trial burn. The
owner or operator of a boiler or
industrial furnace may seek an
exemption from the trial burn by
providing information from trial or
operational burns of similar boilers or
industrial furnaces burning similar
waste under similar conditions. The
Director shall approve a permit
application without a trial burn if he
finds that the hazardous wastes are
sufficiently similar, the devices are
sufficiently similar, and the data from
other trial burns are adequate to specify
(under proposed § 266.34-6) operating
conditions that will ensure conformance
with the performance standards in
proposed § 266.34-4.
The information requirements to
support this exemption are patterned
after the existing requirements for
hazardous waste incinerators submitting
data in lieu of a trial bum. See existing
§ 270.19(c). The requirements for boilers
and industrial furnaces would, however,
require information on the metals and
chlonne levels of materials feed to the
devices, and design and operational
information on metals and HCl flue gas
control equipment to ensure
conformance with the proposed metals
and HCl emission standards.
B. Proposed § 270.65: Special Forms of
Permits
Proposed § 270.65 establishes special
forms of permits for new boilers that
will be operated under the special
conditions for waiver of the trial burn
and for all other new boilers and new
industrial furnaces where a trial burn is
required. This section also establishes
trial burn procedures. Finally, this
section discusses special procedures for
permitting existing facilities. These
provisions are discussed below.
1. Permits for new boilers exempt
from the trial burn requirements.
Owners and operators of boilers are
exempt from the requirement to conduct
a trial bum provided that the boiler
operates as follows: (a) the boiler must
operate in conformance with the special
conditions provided by proposed
§ 266.34-6(b)(4) to ensure conformance
with the performance standard for
organic emissions; and (b) the boiler
must burn hazardous waste that either
meets the Tier I metals and chlorine
specification levels of proposed
§§ 266.34-4 (b)(l) and (c)(l) or meets the
Tier II limits provided by proposed
§§ 266.34-4 (b)(2) and (c)(2). These
requirements in aggregate are termed
"Special Operating Requirements."
Proposed § 270.65(b) establishes the
following permits for boilers operated
under the Special Operating
Requirements: Predemonstration,
Demonstration, and Final Permits. A
Predemonstration Permit would cover
the period beginning with initial
introduction of hazardous waste into the
boiler and extend for the minimum time
required, not to exceed a duration of 720
hours operating time •* when hazardous
waste is burned to bring the boiler to a
point of operation readiness to conduct
a demonstration that the boiler can
operate under the Special Operating
Requirements. In practice, the primary
purpose of this period is to determine
whether the hazardous waste firing
system and boiler combustion controls
can be operated to achieve flue gas
carbon monoxide levels that meet the
limits in proposed 5 268.34-4(a)(2) and
•• This is the same period of lime allowed for
start-up and shake-down of hazardous waste
incinerators under existing { Z70.82(a) prior to
conducting a trial bum.
that are incorporated by reference in
proposed § 266.34-6(b)(4)(v). During this
period, the boiler must be operated in
conformance with the Standard
Operating Requirements. The Director
may extend the period of the
Predemonstration Permit once for up to
720 additional hours when good cause
for the extension is demonstrated by the
applicant. Any such extension would be
handled as a minor modification of
permits under existing 5 270.42.
The Demonstration Permit covers the
period immediately after completion of
the predemonstration period and
extends only for the minimum time
sufficient to allow sample analysis, data
computation, and submission of the
results by the applicant demonstrating
conformance with the Standard
Operating Requirements. During this
period, the boiler must be operated in
conformance with the Standard
Operating Requirements. The
Demonstration Permit is an extension of
the Predemonstration Permit and
constitutes a minor modification of
permits under existing § 270.42.
After successful completion of the
demonstration period, the boiler
operates under a Final Permit in
conformance with the Standard
Operating Requirements. In the Final
Permit, the Director will specify changes
to the limitations, as appropriate, on the
metals and chlorine content, heating
value, and feed rates of the hazardous
waste, other fuels, and industrial
furnace feedstocks, and requirements
for the operation and maintenance of
emission control equipment necessary to
ensure compliance with the Standard
Operating Requirements. The Final
Permit is an extension and modification
to the demonstration permit and
constitutes a minor modification of
permits under existing 8 270.42.
2. Permits for new boilers and
industrial furnaces subject to a trial
burn. Proposed S 270.65(c) establishes
the following permits for new boilers
and industrial furnaces required to
conduct a trial bum: Pretrial Bum
Permit, Trial Burn Permit. Post-Trial
Burn Permit, and Final Permit. A Pretrial
Bum Permit would cover the period
beginning with Initial introduction of
hazardous waste into the boiler or
industrial furnace and extend for the
minimum time required, not to exceed a
duration of 720 hours operating time
when hazardous waste is burned, to
bring the device to a point of operation
readiness to conduct a trial burn. The
Director may extend duration of this
operational period once, for up to 720
additional hours, at the request of the
applicant when good cause is shown.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 67 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17017
Applicants must submit a statement
with Part B of the permit application
that suggests the conditions necessary
to operate in conformance with the
performance standards of proposed
§ 266.34-4. This statement should
include, at a minimum, restrictions on
hazardous waste constituents including
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, and
chlorine, hazardous waste heating value
and feed rates, and the operating
parameters identified in proposed
§ 266.34-6. The Director will review this
statement and other relevant
information and use his engmeenng
judgment to specify requirements for
this period sufficient to meet the
performance standards of § 266.34-4. A
Trial Burn Permit covers the period
during the conduct of the trial burn. For
the duration of the trial burn, the
Director must establish conditions in the
permit for the purposes of determining
feasibility of compliance with the
performance standards of proposed
§ 266.34—4 and of determining adequate
operating conditions under proposed
§ 266.34-6. The procedures for
developing and conducting a trial burn
program already in place for hazardous
waste incinerators in $ 270.62(b) were
used as a guide to develop proposed
§ 270.65[c)(2). The applicant must
propose a trial burn plan with Part B of
the application that includes: (1)
Comprehensive analysis of each
hazardous waste, as Tired: (2) a detailed
engineering description of the boiler or
industrial furnace: (3) a detailed
description of sampling and monitoring
procedures; (4) a detailed test schedule
for each hazardous waste for which a
trial burn is planned: (5) a detailed test
protocol: (6) a description of. and
planned operating conditions for. any
emission control equipment that will be
used: (7) procedures for rapidly stopping
the hazardous waste feed and
controlling emissions in the event of an
equipment malfunction: and (8) such
other information as the Director
reasonably finds necessary to determine
whether to approve the trial burn plan.
The Director will review the tnal burn
plan and may require the applicant to
supplement this information, if
necessary.
Based on the hazardous waste
analysis data in the trial burn plan, the
Director will specify as trial Principal
Organic Hazardous Constituents
(POHCs) those constituents for which
destruction and removal efficiencies
must be calculated during the trial burn.
The trial POHCs will be specified by the
Director based on his estimate of the
difficulty of destruction of constituents
in the waste, their concentration or mass
in the waste, and for wastes listed in
Subpart D of Part 261. the constituents
identified in Appendix VII of that part
as the basis for listing.
The Director shall approve a trial burn
plan if he finds that the trial burn is
likely to determine whether the device
can meet the performance standards of
proposed § 266.34-4. the trial burn itself
will not present an imminent health
hazard, the trial burn will help him to
determine operating requirements to be
specified under proposed § 266.34-6. and
the operating requirements necessary to
ensure conformance with the
performance standards cannot
reasonably be developed through other
means.
The Director shall extend and modify
the Pretrial Burn Permit as necessary to
accommodate the approved trial burn
plan. The permit modification shall
proceed as a minor modification
according to existing § 270.42.
During each approved trial burn (or as
soon after the burn as is practicable).
the applicant must make the following
determinations: (1) A quantitative
analysis of the trial POHCs and arsenic.
cadmium, chromium, lead, and chlorine
in the hazardous waste; (2) a
quantitative analysis of the exhaust gas
for the concentration and mass
emissions of the trial POHCs; (3) for
hazardous waste that is off-specification
for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, or
chlorine, either a quantitative analysis
of the hazardous waste, other fuels, and
industrial furnace feedstocks sufficient
to demonstrate that the level of the off-
specification element in the hazardous
waste does not exceed the Tier II limits
provided by proposed §§ 266.34-4 (b)(2)
or (c)(2). or a quantitative analysis of the
exhaust gas for the concentration and
mass emission of the regulated metals
and HC1, and a computation showing
conformance with the Tier III emissions
standards in proposed §§ 266.34-4 (b)(3)
and (c)(3) or. site-specific dispersion
modeling in conformance with the Tier
IV procedures provided by proposed
§§ 270.22 (d) and (e): (4) a quantitative
analysis of the scrubber water (if any),
ash residues, and other residues, for the
purpose of estimating the fate of the trial
POHCs and any metal or chlorine for
which emissions testing was used to
demonstrate conformance with the
emission standards: (5) a computation of
destruction and removal efficiency; (6)
an identification of sources of fugitive
emissions and their means of control; (7)
a continuous measurement of carbon
monoxide and oxygen in the exhaust
gas: and (8) such other information as
the Director may specify as necessary to
develop the operating conditions
required by proposed § 26R.34-6 to
ensure compliance with the performance
standards in proposed § 266.34-4.
The applicant must submit to the
Director a certification that the
approved trial burn program has been
carried out and must submit results of
the determinations identified above
within 90 days of completion of the trial
burn, or later if approved by the
Director. All data collected during any
trial burn must be submitted to the
Director following completion of the
trial burn. All submissions must be
certified on behalf of the applicant by
the signature of the person authorized to
sign a permit application or a report
under § 270.11.
Until the Final Permit based on the
trial burn results can be developed, the
Director will use his engineering
judgment to extend and modify as
necessary the Trial Burn Permit to
ensure compliance with the performance
standards of proposed § 266.34-4. The
development of the Post-Trial Burn
permit shall proceed as a minor
modification according to existing
§ 270 42. The duration of the Post-Trial
Burn Permit will be only for the
minimum period sufficient to allow
analysis, data computation, and
submission of the trial burn results by
the applicant, and review of the trial
burn results and modification of the
permit by the Director to develop the
Final Permit that reflects the trial burn
results. The modification of the Post-
Trial Burn Permit to develop the Final
Permit shall also proceed as a minor
modification under existing § 270.42.
3. Permit procedures for interim status
facilities. Applicants owning or
operating existing boilers or industrial
furnaces would be permitted under
proposed § 270.65(d). Applicants owning
or operating interim status boilers that
are or will be operating under the
Special Operating Requirements 65 for
which the trial burn is waived must
submit with Part B of the permit
application documentation that the
boiler is operated in accordance with
the Special Operating Requirements.
The statement must include, at a
minimum, the operating record
documenting continuous measurement
of carbon monoxide and oxygen in the
exhaust gas. Further, if the hazardous
waste is off-specification for metals or
chlorine, the statement must also
include limitations, as appropriate, on
the metals and chlorine content, heating
value, and feed rates of the hazardous
•• Boilers operated in conformance with proposed
55 Z66.3«(b)|4). 2B6.34-»(b) (1) or |2|. and
S!26634-4{c)(1)or(2)
-------
17018
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
waste, other fuels, and industrial
furnace feedstocks to demonstrate
conformance with the proposed Tier II
standards provided by §§ 266.34-4 (b)(2)
and (c)(2).
Applicants owning or operating
industrial or boiler furnaces that will be
permitted with a trial burn must prepare
and submit a trial burn plan and perform
a trial bum as discussed above relative
to new facilities.
Part Five: Storage Standards. Halogen
Acid Furnaces, and Other Issues
/. Storage Standards
A. Standards for Storage Tanks
Under the Administrative Controls for
hazardous waste burners and blenders
promulgated on November 29.1985. and
codified in Subpart D of Part 266. EPA
subjected existing burner storage
facilities, newly regulated by that rule.
only to the interim status standards of
Part 265. See § 266.35(c)(2). The permit
standards of Part 264 were not applied
to these storage facilities to avoid two-
stage permitting given that today's
proposed rules for permitting boiler and
industrial furnace facilities was under
development at that time. The Agency
wanted to avoid requiring a boiler or
industrial furnace owner or operator to
get a permit for this hazardous waste
fuel storage facility and to soon
thereafter get another permit (under a
promulgation of today's rule) for
operation of his boiler or industrial
furndce.
Today's rule would, therefore, subject
such existing burner storage facilities to
the permit standards of Part 264.
B. Proposal To Regulate Hazardous
Waste Fuel Blending Tanks
EPA recently issued a clarifying
notice indicating that the Agency
interpreted existing regulations as
requiring hazardous waste fuel blending
tanks to be covered by RCRA storage
standards. We have decided, however.
that the rules could be drafted to make
this point more clearly and so have
included more precise language in
today's proposed regulation. The reason
for regulating blending tanks is the same
as that underlying the present rules:
blending tanks pose the same risks as
other hazardous waste storage tanks,
posing no types of special consideration
that might warrant different regulatory
standards. It also makes no sense for
EPA to regulate hazardous waste fuels
cradle-to-grave but not to regulate fuel
blending tanks. Such a regulatory gap
has no foundation in environmental
policy and invites abuse through
facilities evading regulation by claiming
that their only activities are fuel
blending and consequently that no
RCRA storage standards (and attendant
permitting standards] apply to them. We
are thus proposing to amend the
hazardous waste fuel regulations to
state explicitly that fuel blending tanks
are subject to RCRA storage standards.
The comment period on this part of
today's proposal is 30 days.
We note that since these rules would
regulate all hazardous wastes being
burned in boilers and industrial
furnaces, there no longer would be any
need for the hazardous waste fuel
marketer classification in the current
rules. Such intermediaries would
continue to be regulated as hazardous
waste storage facilities and be
responsible for complying with
applicable administrative requirements
such as manifest and recordkeepmg
responsibilities.
//. Proposed Designation of Halogen
Acid Furnaces as Industrial Furnaces
The DOW Chemical Company (DOW)
filed a rulemaking petition with EPA on
March 31,1986, in accordance with the
provisions of 40 CFR 260.20 requesting
EPA to designate their halogen acid
furnaces (HAFs) as industrial furnaces.
EPA is today proposing to grant the
petition by classifying as industrial
furnaces those HAFs that meet the
criteria discussed below.
A. DOW's Petition
We understand from the petition and
subsequent communication with
DOW •• that DOW operates about 27
HAFs that are Tire-tube boilers modified
to produce hydrogen chloride (HC1) from
chlorine-bearing secondary streams by
scrubbing HC1 from combustion gases.
The secondary waste streams typically
have a chlorine content of 20 to 70
percent and an as-fired heating value of
approximately 9.000 Btu/lb. Thus, the
secondary streams are highly
chlorinated and have substantial
heating value.67 The HAFs are located
on the site of DOW's chemical
manufacturing operations and the
secondary materials burned are
generated on-site.
Approximately half of the HAFs
produce and export steam and meet
EPA's definition of a boiler under
§ 260.10. Those HAFs that meet the
definition of a boiler would be regulated
as boilers. The remaining HAFs.
although modified Tire-tube boilers, do
not generate steam and do not meet
EPA's definition of a boiler. EPA is
proposing to classify the nonboiler
HAFs as industrial furnaces for the
reasons discussed below.
B. Bases for Classification as an
Industrial Furnace
EPA has defined an industrial furnace
at S 260.10 as any of the specifically-
designated enclosed devices that are
integral components of a manufacturing
process and that use controlled flame
devices to accomplish recovery of
materials or energy. Eleven types of
devices have been designated as
industrial furnaces to date. The
definition also provides criteria for
adding devices to the list.
EPA believes that DOW's nonboiler
HAFs 68 are integral components of a
manufacturing process and that they
meet two of the criteria for designation
as an industrial furnace.
1. HAFs are integral components of a
manufacturing process. Industrial
furnaces normally process raw
materials, and. thus, there is no question
that they are integral components of a
manufacturing process. For the reasons
presented below, EPA believes that
DOW's HAFs are also integral
components of a manufacturing process
even though they process secondary
streams: (1) The HAFs are located on
the site of the manufacturing process
(i.e.. production of organic chemicals)
and the only secondary streams they
process are generated by that
manufacturing process: (2) the HC1
produced is a bonafide product because
it has a HC1 contentof 6-20 percent ••:
and (3) the HC1 product is used on-site
in the manufacturing process.
2. HAFs recover materials and energy.
EPA believes that DOW's HAFs recover
materials and energy. Production of HC1
(i.e., a 6-20 percent HC1 concentrate
solution) from the combustion of
chlorine-bearing secondary materials
constitutes materials recovery in the
context of designation as an industrial
furnace. We note, however, that for the
purposes of determining the
applicability of RCRA regulations to the
process, the secondary streams should
" Utter from Byron Gary. DOW. to Marcia E.
Williams, EPA. dated July B. 1988. letter from Marcia
E Williams. EPA. to Byron Gary. DOW. dated
August 28.1988
•' EPA considers wastes with more than 5.000-
B.OOO Btu/lb heating value to have substantial
heating value and may be legitimately burned for
energy recovery in boilers and industrial furnaces
See Section VI of Part Two of this preamble.
•• For the remainder of this discussion, the term
HAF refers to the nonboiler HAFs.
•• The HCI content of the effluent from wet
scrubbers used to control HCI emissions from the
incineration of chlonne-beanng waste is normally
on the order of 1 percent or less Such low HCI
content scrubber water is not considered a bona
fide product for purposes of designation as an
industrial furnace even if the scrubber water is
beneficially used in a manner that specifically
relates to its HCI content.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17019
be more precisely considered to be used
as an ingredient in the production of the
HC1 product. The implication of this
issue is discussed later in this section.
The HAFs also accomplish energy
recovery in the context of determining
the applicability of RCRA regulations.
The secondary materials are burned
partially for energy recovery because
substantial, usable heat energy is
released by the materials during
combustion. The materials typically
have an as-fired heating value of
approximately 9.000 Btu/lb. and the heat
released results in the thermal
degradation of chlorinated organic
compounds to form HC1. Although
energy recovery in a boiler under EPA's
definitions is characterized by the
recovery and export of energy, energy
recovery in an industrial furnace need
not involve such recovery and export of
energy. Rather, the test for energy
recovery in industrial furnaces is based
on the burning of materials with
substantial heating value (i.e.. greater
than 5.000 Btu/lb) in a manner that
results m the release of substantial
usable heat energy. See 50 FR 49171-
49174 (November 29.1985).
3. HAFs meet industrial furnace
criteria. EPA has established criteria in
§ 260.10 for designating additional
devices as industrial furnaces. Devices
can be designated as industrial furnaces
on the basis of one or more of the
criteria. EPA believes that DOWs HAFs
meet two of the criteria as described
above (see a and b) and. thus, is
proposing to classify them as industrial
furnaces.
DOWs HAFs appear to be designed
and used primarily to accomplish the
recovery of material products. The
HAFs are specially designed and
operated fire-tube boilers (that are not
operated to produce steam). Their
design features enable them to accept
highly-chlorinated feedstocks without
unacceptable corrosion and to maximize
HC1 production and recovery. DOW has
patents on its HAFs as evidence that the
HAFs are specially designed and differ
from typical incinerators.
The HAFs can also be considered to
burn secondary materials as ingredients
in an industrial process to make a
material product. As discussed above.
chlorine-bearing secondary streams
from chemical manufacturing operations
are burned on-site to produce an HC1
product for use in the manufacturing
operation.
C. Proposed Designation
EPA is proposing to add a new
category of industrial furnaces to read
as follows: Halogen Acid Furnaces for
the production of acid from halogenated
secondary materials generated at
chemical production facilities where the
furnace is located on-site and the acid
product has a halogen acid content of at
least 6 percent.
The designation limits the
classification to those devices used on-
site by a chemical production facility to
process its halogenated secondary
streams and where the acid product
contains at least 6 percent halogen acid
to distinguish clearly between industrial
furnaces used to produce bonafide acid
product and incinerators, either off- or
on-site. used to destroy halogenated
waste and equipped with halogen
emissions removal devices. Such
emission control devices, such as spray
towers and venturi scrubbers, produce
halogen acid-bearing scrubber water.
The halogen acid content of such
scrubber water, however, would be
substantially less that the 6 percent
proposed minimum achieved by
specially designed and operated acid
production operations. Thus, such
halogenated waste incinerators
equipped with wet scrubbers could not
meet the proposed definition for the
HAFs even if the halogen acid-bearing
scrubber water were claimed to be a
product
EPA specifically requests comments
on whether the proposed definition of
Halogen Acid Furnaces is: (1) Restrictive
enough to distinguish clearly between
furnaces used for bonafide acid
production and incinerators equipped
with conventional wet scrubbers for
acid gas emissions control; and (2) not
so restrictive as to preclude bona fide
acid production operations from being
classified as industrial furnaces.
EPA also requests information on the
burning in HAFs of wastes to produce
halogen acids other than HC1 (e.g., HBr),
including whether the proposed HAF
definition is appropriate for those
devices and whether the proposed
controls would adequately protect
public health and the environment
D. Regulations Applicable to HAFs
HAFs burn halogenated secondary
materials for the production of halogen
acids. Thus, the secondary materials are
used as an ingredient in an industrial
process and would not be a solid waste
under the provisions of 8 261.2(e)(l)(i)
unless: (1) The materials were also
burned partially for energy recovery
(see 5 26l.2(e)(2)(ii)): or EPA determines
the secondary streams are inherently
waste-like and adds the secondary
streams to the list of inherently waste-
like materials under § 261.2(d) that are
solid wastes when recycled in any
manner.
As discussed above, DOWs
secondary streams are burned partially
for energy recovery because the
materials have substantial as-fired
healing value (9.000 Btu/lb) and
substantial, useful energy is released by
the combustion of the materials. The
energy is used to produce halogen acid
from halogenated hydrocarbons.
Therefore. DOWs HAFs would be
subject to today's proposed rules for
industrial furnaces.
In addition. EPA considers DOWs
secondary streams to be inherently
waste-like and subject to listing under
§ 261.2(d] as a material that is a solid
waste when recycled in any manner or
certainly in the manner utilized by
DOW. Listed wastes burned in DOWs
HAFs include EPA Hazardous Waste
Nos. F002. F024. K016. K017. and K020.
These wastes not only are typically
disposed of. but contain high
concentrations of Appendix VIII
constituents not normally found in raw
materials used in acid production. EPA
is. however, not proposing today to list
DOWs secondary streams as inherently
waste-like under § 261.2(d). Given that
the materials are burned partially for
energy recovery, the materials are solid
waste, and because they are listed or
identified under Part 261 as hazardous
waste, DOWs HAFs would be subject
to today's proposed rules for industrial
furnaces. Thus, there is no need to
undertake a designation under § 261.2(d)
at this time.
///. Proposed Classification of Coke and
By-Product Coal Tar Containing Tar
Decanter Sludge (EPA Hazardous
Waste K087) as a Product
A. AISI Petition
The American Iron and Steel Institute
(AISI) has petitioned the EPA with
respect to the practice of recycling tar
decanter sludge by the following means:
1. Applying the sludge to coal prior to
or just after charging the coal into the
coke oven and:
2. Combining the sludge with coal tar
prior to its being sold.
The coke and the coal tar are often
used as fuel and so are presently
classified as solid wastes and hazardous
wastes since they are fuels produced or
otherwise containing hazardous waste—
EPA Hazardous Waste No. K087. tar
decanter sludge. See S 261.2(c)(2)(i)(B).
These hazardous waste fuels presently
are exempt from regulation
§ 261.6(a)(2)(vii] and 50 FR 49170-171
(Nov. 29.1985). The AISI has requested
that EPA not classify such coke or coal
tar as solid wastes. AISI submits that
recycling the decanter sludge does not
-------
17020
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. *7 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
significantly affect the concentration of
toxic metal and organic constituents of
the coke or coal tar. EPA has indicated
that waste-derived fuels could be
classified as products under such
circumstances, "since the more waste-
derived fuels from a process are like
products from the same process
produced by virgin materials, the less
likely EPA is to classify the waste-
derived fuel as a waste." 50 FR 49169
(Nov. 29.1985). To support its request.
the A1SI has submitted data on the
metals and organic constituents in coke.
coal tar. and tar decanter sludge both
with and without sludge recycling.
B Process Description
Coke used for making iron is
manufactured through the destructive
distillation of coal in ovens. A typical
oven holds approximately 13 tons of
coal which is heated to a temperature of
about 2000 "F. Generally 20 to 100 ovens
are located adjacent to each other in a
"coke oven battery." The destructive
distillation or "coking" process takes
about 15-18 hours. During that time
period, about 20-35 percent of the coal is
converted to coke oven gas (COG)
consisting of water vapor, tar, light oils,
heavy hydrocarbons, and other chemical
compounds. The COG is collected from
the top of the coke oven and, in most
cases, sent to the by-product plant via
the coke battery main. The COG is then
cleaned by removing wastes and by-
products prior to being burned, generally
in the coke oven under-fmng system. As
a first step in the COG cleaning process,
the coal tars, consisting of heavy
hydrocarbons, are condensed from the
gas. In addition, most of the participates
that escape from the ovens is collected
in the tar. These participates are
believed to consist principally of coal
fines. The particulates or solids are then
removed from the tar in the tar decanter.
The coal tar is then burned as fuel or
sold for use in various products such as
roofing cement. The sludge has been
listed as EPA Hazardous Waste No.
K087 and is either disposed of or
recycled either by mixing with the coal
prior to being charged to the coke oven
or mixing directly with the coal tar after
physical processing (grinding) prior to
sale
Approximately 8-12 gallons 70 of tar
is produced per ton of coke. In addition,
approximately one pound of tar
decanter sludge is produced for every 40
pounds of tar produced.
C. Basis for Proposed Approval of the
AISI Petition
The AISI has submitted data on
metals and organic chemical analysis
for the coke, coal tar. and tar decanter
sludge for four plants.71 Specifically, the
data included analyses for the following
constituents:
Metals Organic Constituents
Arsenic Anthracene and
Pheiunthrene
Cadmium Benzo(a)anthracene
and Chiynene
Chromium Benzo(a)pyrene
Mercury Fluoranlhene
Pyrene
Napthalene
Phenol
The results of 34 samples were
submitted by AISI. The Agency
reviewed these results and determined
the following:
1. The recycle of the tar decanter
sludge by application to the coal charge
does not appear to have a significant
effect on the chemical make-up of coke.
2. The organic chemical make-up of
the tar decanter sludge does not appear
to be significantly different from the
coal tar.
3. The concentration of one metal.
lead, in the sludge appears to be slightly
higher than in the coal tar. The increase
does not appear to be statistically
significant, however, due to the high
variability of the concentration values.
Based on the above and the fact that
there is such a small quantity of sludge
relative to the quality of coke and coal
tar produced by the coking process, EPA
believes that sludge recycling as
described here does not significantly
affect the concentration of toxic metals
and organic constituents in coal tar or
coke. Furthermore, coke, coal tar. and
the decanter tank tar sludge arise from a
single process, are similar materials, and
contain the same contaminants.
Therefore. EPA is proposing that these
materials be classified as products, not
wastes. We note that only the waste-
derived fuels would be excluded from
jurisdiction; the decanter tank tar sludge
would remain a regulated hazardous
waste prior to combining with coke or
coal tar. See 50 FR 49171 (Nov. 29.1985).
IV. Notice of Intent to Amend the
Subpart O Incinerator Standards
Today's proposed rules for boilers and
industnal furnaces burning hazardous
waste would be more comprehensive
than the current Subpart O standards
for hazardous waste incinerators. First.
the proposed CO limits would ensure
that devices continuously operate at
high combustion efficiencies when
burning hazardous waste. Thus, this
would help ensure the devices achieve
high destructive efficiencies of organic
compounds with minimal PIC (products
of incomplete combustion) emissions
over the life of the permit. CO limits for
incinerators, however, are currently
based on levels achieved during the trial
burn. Given that field tests demonstrate
that boilers can achieve 99.99% ORE
during upset condition as evidenced by
high CO levels and smoke emissions,
incinerator CO limits may be set at
levels that in some cases represent
upset conditions. Incinerators operated
at elevated CO levels may emit higher
levels of PICs than they would if
operated at levels representative of high
combustion efficiency. Thus, EPA
intends to propose to amend the Subpart
O standards to prescribe CO limits
applicable during the life of the permit
and to require that conformance with
the limits be demonstrated during the
trial burn.
Second, today's rule proposes risk-
based metals emissions limits. Metals
emissions from incinerators are
currently controlled with a technology-
based and outdated particulate standard
developed for municipal solid waste
combustors.72 That standard, 0.08
grains/standard cubic foot, may not. in
certain situations, be fully protective
with respect to metals emissions.
Therefore, the Agency is considering
whether additional particulate controls
or controls on individual metals are
needed to make the standards fully
protective.
Finally, today's rule also proposes a
risk-based emission limit for HC1. HCI
emissions from incinerators are
controlled with a technology-based
standard that limits HCI emissions to 4
Ib/hr unless the emissions are controlled
with a device having at least a 99% HCI
removal efficiency. That standard may
over-regulate some situations (e.g., large
incinerators with tall stacks) and under-
regulate others. Therefore, the Agency is
considering whether a risk based
standard should be developed for
incinerators to ensure that fully
protective and cost-effective controls
are applied.
The Agency plans to propose
amendments to the Subpart O standards
as necessary in Fall 1987. The final rule
50 The Making. Shaping, and Treating of Steel.
Win Edition. Association of Iron and Steel
Fngmeers 1883
1' Correspondence from E.F Young. ]r. AISI. to
Steven E. Silverman. Esq.. EPA. dated |uly 25.1886:
correspondence from Earl F Young. |r_ AISI. to
Dwight Hluslick. EPA. dated December 2.1886
11 The Agency is currently evaluating the risk
posed by emissions of metals, unbumed organic*
(including dioxins). and acid gases (e.g, HCI) from
municipal waste combustors (MWCs) and is
reviewing applicable regulatory and nomegulatory
approaches.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17021
is scheduled to be promulgated in Spring
1988.
In the interim, until the amendments
are promulgated and effective, permit
. officials will be encouraged to use the
omnibus provision of section 3005(c) of
HSWA to prescribe permit conditions as
necessary to protect human health and
the environment.
V. Boilers, Industrial Furnaces, and
Incinerators are BOAT for HOCs
The Agency notes that it recently
proposed to establish incineration in
accordance with sections 264.343 and
265.343 as Best Demonstrated Available
Technology (BOAT) for certain
hazardous wastes containing
Halogenated Organic Compounds
(HOC) at concentrations exceeding 1000
ppm. See 51 FR 44726 (December 11,
1986). EPA believes that burning HOC
wastes in boilers and industrial furnaces
pursuant to permit or interim status
standards (or burning in small quantity
burning devices) would be equally
effective and also should constitute
BDAT for these wastes. Accordingly.
should the Agency adopt the standards
proposed today (or comparable
standards), the Agency would amend
proposed § 268.42(a)(2) (51 FR 44740) to
indicate that HOCs must be burned in
incinerators, boilers, or industrial
furnaces.
VI. Classification of Pickle Liquor
Although not related directly to
today's proposal, the Agency is
proposing one additional action today. It
involves the scope of the listing of
Hazardous Waste K062. This listing
applies to pickle liquor from steel
finishing operations at facilities within
the iron and steel industry (SIC Codes
331 and 332). When EPA first
promulgated this amendment in May
1986, the Agency erroneously described
the scope of the listing as applying to
plants that actually produce iron and
steel. 51 FR 19320 (May 28.1986). This
error was inadvertent and obviously
unintended given that EPA had never
proposed such a change, no commenter
ever suggested such a change, and, in
the relevant preambles, the Agency
repeatedly described its action as
applying to all plants in the iron and
steel industry (50 FR 38966/1. 36967/1,
36967/2 (Sept. 20.1985) and 51 FR 19320/
2.19321/1 (May 28.1986)). In addition, if
the listing was to apply only to facilities
actually producing iron and steel, then
the listing would be narrower than a
parallel exclusion from listing of sludge
generated from treatment of "spent
pickle liquor from the iron and steel
industry (SIC Codes 331 and 332)"
(§ 261.2(c)(2)(ii))—a facial contradiction
since one cannot exclude more than one
has listed.
For these reasons, EPA corrected the
error by means of a technical correction
(51 FR 33612 (Sept 22.1986]). One
person questioned this change arguing
that it was in fact substantive
rulemaking requiring prior notice and
comment. Although we think this
petition is without merit for the reasons
given above, to avoid further dispute we
will propose the change. Until this
proposal is finalized, the scope of the
listing is as stated in the correction
notice, namely pickle liquor generated
by plants in the iron and steel industry
(SIC Codes 331 and 332).
VII. Landfill Gas
In the November 29.1985, final rules,
we indicated that gas recovered from
hazardous waste landfills was not
presently regulated under the waste as
fuel rules. 50 FR 49171. EPA took this
action in order to study further the
extent to which these might be
jurisdictional limits on the Agency's
RCRA authority. Id. We are proposing to
amend this language slightly by
indicating that it applies as well to gas
recovered from solid waste landfills. See
proposed § 266.30(a). This allows for the
possibility of the gas itself exhibiting a
characteristic of hazardous waste. We
are continuing to consider the
jurisdictional issued, including the
implications of section 124(b) of the
recent Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
(which addresses the regulatory status
of methane recovered from any type of
landfill).
The Agency also solicits comment on
whether the hydrocarbon phase of the
condensate removed from recovered gas
should also be exempt when burned as
fuel. There do not appear to be
jurisdictional issues for this material: the
hydrocarbon phase appears to be
classified as solid and hazardous waste
by the SARA provision cited above, as
well as by existing EPA rules (as a
hazardous secondary material burned
for energy recovery). EPA is not
precluded, however, from promulgating
an exemption if regulation is
unnecessary to protect human health
and the environment, and would
consider doing so if shown that the
hydrocarbon phase is chemically similar
to normal fossil fuels, or if burning and
storage of the hydrocarbon phase
otherwise poses insufficient hazard to
warrant regulation. Commenters should
address these points explicitly, and
provide supporting data.
Part Six: Administrative, Economic, and
Environmental Impacts, and Last of
Subjects
I. State Authority
A. Applicability of the Rules in
Authorized States
Under section 3006 of RCRA. EPA
may authorize qualified States to
administer and enforce the RCRA
program within the State. (See 40 CFR
Part 271 for the standards and
requirements for authorization.)
Following authorization. EPA retains
enforcement authority under sections
3008, 7003. and 3013 of RCRA. although
authorized States have primary
enforcement responsibility.
Prior to the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), a
State with final authorization
administered its hazardous waste
program entirely in lieu of EPA
administering the Federal program in
that State. The Federal requirements no
longer applied in the authorized State.
and EPA could not issue permits for any
facilities in the State which the State
was authorized to permit. When new,
more stringent Federal requirements
were promulgated or enacted, the State
was obliged to enact equivalent
authority within specified time frames.
New Federal requirements did not take
effect in an authorized State until the
State adopted the requirements as State
law.
In contrast under section 3006(g) of
RCRA. 42 U.S.C. 6926(g), new
requirements and prohibitions imposed
by the HSWA take effect in authorized
States at the same time that they take
effect in nonauthorized States. EPA is
directed to carry out those requirements
and prohibitions in authorized States,
including the issuance of permits, until
the State is granted authorization to do
so. While States must still adopt
HSWA-related provisions as State law
to retain final authorization, the HSWA
applies in authorized States in the
interim.
Today's proposed rule will be
promulgated pursuant to section 3004{q)
of RCRA. a provision added by HSWA.
Therefore, this rulemaking would be
added to Table 1 in § 271.1(j) which
identifies the Federal program
requirements that are promulgated
pursuant to HSWA and that take effect
in all States, regardless of their
authorization status. States may apply
for either interim or final authorization
for the HSWA provisions identified in
Table 1 as discussed below.
-------
B. Effect on State Authorization
As noted above. EPA would A. Purpose
implement today's rule in authorized
States until they modify their programs
to adopt these rules and the
modification is approved by EPA.
Because the rule would be promulgated
pursuant to HSWA. a State submitting a
program modification may apply to
receive either interim or final
authorization under section 3006(g)(2) or
3006(b), respectively, on the basis of
requirements that are substantially
equivalent or equivalent to EPA's. The
procedures and schedule for State
program modifications under section
3006(b) are described in 40 CFR 271.21.
See 49 FR at 21678 (May 22.1984). The
same procedures should be followed for
section 3006(g)(2).
40 CFR 271.21(e)(2) requires that
States that have final authorization must
modify their programs to reflect Federal
program changes, and must
subsequently submit the modifications
to EPA for approval. The deadlines for
the State to modify its program for this
proposed regulation will be determined
by the date of promulgation of the final
rule in accordance with § 271.21(e).
These deadlines can be extended in
exceptional cases (40 CRF 271.21(e)(3}).
Once EPA approves the modification.
the State requirements become Subtitle
C RCRA requirements.
States with authorized RCRA
programs may already have
requirements similar to those in today's
rule. These State regulations have not
been assessed against the Federal
regulations being proposed today to
determine whether they meet the tests
for authorization. Thus, a State is not
authorized to implement these
requirements in lieu of EPA until the
State program modification is approved.
Of course, States with existing
standards may continue to administer
and enforce their standards as a matter
of State law. In implementing the
Federal program EPA will work with
States under cooperative agreements to
minimize duplication of efforts. In many
cases EPA will be able to defer to the
States in their efforts to implement their
programs, rather than take separate
actions under Federal authority.
States that submit official applications
for final authorization less than 12
months after promulgation of EPA's
regulations may be approved without
including standards equivalent to those
promulgated. However, once.authorized.
a State must modify its program to
include standards substantially
equivalent or equivalent to EPA's within
the time periods discussed above.
//. Regulatory Impact Analysis
The Agency is required under
Executive Order 12291 to prepare a
Regulatory Impact Analysis that
provides estimates of compliance costs,
economic impacts, and the risk
reduction associated with the proposed
regulation. The results of these analyses
are used to determine whether the
regulation is "major" as defined by E.O.
12291. The Agency is also required
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act to
assess small business impacts resulting
from the proposed rule.
The results of the above analyses
indicate that today's proposed
regulation is neither a major rule, nor
will it significantly impact small entities.
This section of the preamble discusses
the results of the cost, impact, and risk
analyses of the proposed rule as
detailed in the draft Regulatory Analysis
for Waste-as-Fuel Technical Standards:
Proposed Rule. October. 1986. The draft
RIA is available in the public docket.
The regulatory impact analysis results
(i.e.. costs, impacts, risks) presented in
this section do not fully reflect today's
proposed rule. Specifically, the RIA does
not fully assess the effects of the risk
based standards for metals and chlorine.
The RIA does not assess the effect of
varying the standards with the type and
number of devices at a given facility,
and on the type of surrounding terrain
(flat or complex). Other components of
the rule that are not analyzed in the RIA
include the Tier IV standard, current
quantity limits for the small quantity
burner exemption, variance for low risk
wastes, eligibility of stoker coal devices
for the trial burn waiver, the
requirement of a redundant carbon
monoxide monitoring system, and
burning solely for the purpose of
materials recovery. These new
components of the rule, and how they
may affect the analysis presented in the
RIA, are discussed in the draft Effects of
Recent Changes on the Estimated Costs
and Benefits of the Proposed Waste as
Fuel Technical Standards. January 1987.
This report is an addendum to the RIA
and is available in the public docket.
It is unclear how these components of
the rule would affect the absolute
results of the cost, economic impact, and
risk analyses presented in the RIA.
However, the Agency believes that the
basic conclusions presented in this
section should be applicable to today's
rule. Moreover, the Agency believes that
the rule would remain a non-major
regulation as defined by the S100 million
annual criteria of E.0.12291.
B. Affected Population
The characteristics of the burners that
would be potentially affected by today's
proposed rule were obtained from the
Waste-as-Fuel Survey of 1984.73 The
sample design and general survey
results are described in the Final Report
for the Survey of Waste-as-Fuel: Track
II. November 1985, conducted for EPA
by Westat, Inc. This report is available
in the public docket.
The Waste-as-Fuel (WAF) Survey was
designed to collect information on
burners of waste derived fuel material
(WDFM) and used or waste oil that are
not regulated as incinerators under
RCRA Subtitle C. The subset of those
devices burning hazardous waste
derived fuel material (HWDFM) for
energy recovery was identified from the
set of all WDFM burners.
The baseline for this analysis consists
of burners who currently fire HWDFM
for energy recovery. The WAF Survey
characterized burning practices in 1983.
Several rules have been imposed since
then that would affect the decision to
burn HWDFM. The results from the
survey were adjusted, to the extent
possible, to account for these rules: the
Definition of Solid Waste promulgated
January 4.1985 (50 FR 614). the Phase I
Administrative Standards promulgated
November 29.1985 (50 FR 49164), and
the Standards for Hazardous Waste
Storage and Treatment Tank Systems
and Generators promulgated July 14.
1986 (51 FR 25422). The adjusted set of
hazardous waste burners represents the
population potentially affected by
today's proposed rule.
EPA estimated the cost, impact, and
risks on facilities that are estimated to
be burning HWDFM when today's
proposed rule becomes effective. EPA
did not estimate the net effect of various
incentives (or disincentives) that will
exist in the future on burning HWDFM
and are independent of today's
proposed rule. Generally, cost increases
for alternative waste management
practices will act as .an incentive for
burning, while lowering of energy prices
will serve as a disincentive to burn
HWDFM. New restrictions on land
disposal generator wastes serve as
incentives for increased burning of
HWDFM. The net effect will likely be
increased incentives for burning
hazardous waste. An increase in future
burning of HWDFM would result in
" The survey sample design did not include SIC
M for which Ihe Agency » aware of lighl-weighl
aggregate kilns thai are fired wilh hazardous waste
derived fuel material (HWDFM). The Agency
adiusted the survey results to account for these
devices.
-------
Federal Register /• Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules 17023
greater costs and changes in risk when
compared to the estimates presented in
this analysis. However, at present the
Agency is unable to determine the net
effect of these factors on future burners
of hazardous waste, the characteristics
of future burners, and the subsequent
responses to the proposed requirements.
Thus, the analysis presented here
concerns only current burners of
HWDFM as reported in the WAF Survey
and as adjusted to include lightweight
aggregate kilns.
The affected population consists of
approximately 895 boilers burning 115
million gallons of HWDFM per year and
57 industrial furnaces burning 114
million gallons of HWDFM per year.
Industrial boilers represent 94 percent of
all devices burning HWDFM and burn
50 percent of all HWDFM.
The majority of the HWDFM is
burned by a few facilities.
Approximately three percent of the
facilities burn 44 percent of all HWDFM.
Moreover, the WAF Survey indicates
that although the burning of HWDFM is
widespread across many industries, it is
not prevalent within any one industry.
Based on the WAF Survey and the 1982
Census of Manufacturers, only SIC 2611
(pulp mills) and SIC 2865 (cyclic crudes
and intermediate organic chemicals)
have reported burning of HWDFM in
greater than 10 percent of the industry
(11.2 and 11.1 percent respectively).
The chemicals industry (SIC 28)
contains 17 percent of the facilities that
bum 54 percent (or 123 million gallons
annually) of the HWDFM. Thus.
typically large quantities of HWDFM
(986,511 gallons annually) are burned
per facility in this industry. Most
facilities in the chemicals industry bum
wastes that are generated on-site.
Other industries that burn large
quantities of HWDFM annually (greater
than 10 million gallons) are: non-metallic
minerals, except fuels (SIC 14): paper
and allied products (SIC 26); chemicals
and allied products (SIC 28): petroleum
and related products (SIC 29); and stone.
clay, glass, and concrete (SIC 32).
Similar to the chemicals industry.
relatively few facilities are reported in
these industries indicating that, on
average, large quantities of HWDFM are
burned per facility.
Two industries, in addition to SIC 28.
have more than 100 facilities burning
HWDFM: furnitures and fixtures (SIC
25); and auto repair and service (SIC 75).
These industries burn less than one
percent of all HWDFM. On average.
relatively small quantities of HWDFM
(i.e.. 6.000 gallons annually) are burned
per facility within these industries.
C. Cost Analysis
1. Methodology. To obtain the
incremental regulatory costs.74 it is first
necessary to determine the net savings
achieved in the baseline from Tiring
HWDFM. Burning HWDFM for energy
recovery results in reduced
requirements for primary (conventional)
fuels. The savings are a function of the
quantity and price of primary fuel
displaced. Relative heat content must be
considered when determining quantity
of primary fuel displaced with HWDFM.
Savings also include the avoided
alternative disposal costs for on-site
burners. The alternative method of
disposal was considered to be
incineration at a cost of $0.34 per gallon
of HWDFM bumed. This figure includes
a component for transporting the wastes
off-site. The actual alternative disposal
cost will depend on what options are
available to the facility operator, and on
the characteristics of the diverted
wastes (i.e.. suitability of wastes for
burning). More precise estimates of
disposal costs were not possible due to
limited information on available options
and waste characteristics for the
specific burners.
The above net savings were not
adjusted to account for increased
operating and maintenance costs due to
firing hazardous waste fuel It is
possible that burners would encounter
increased costs due to corrosion, fouling.
ash disposal, or pretreatment of the
wastes. These costs would vary with the
device and waste type. Detailed
information was not available to
estimate these costs. Net savings tend to
be overstated by not including these
costs.
The level of net savings for a given
burner was used to predict the response
to the proposed rule. The methodology
assumes that burners will discontinue
burning HWDFM if their potential
compliance costs exceed net savings.
Thus, the total net savings for all
burners represents an upper bound on
compliance costs reflecting the worst
case scenario where all burners would
discontinue firing HWDFM.
To derive compliance costs, the
Agency developed unit costs of
compliance for the proposed rule and
engineering costs for model devices.76
14 All coal figures are in 1985 dollars. A seven
percent real rale and a five percent inflation rate
were used to discount future cash now*.
76 Engineering-Science. Background Information
Document for the Development of Regulations to
Control Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces. Volumes I and 11. January
1987. NT1S Order Nos PB 87173829 and PB 87
173837.
Compliance activities include
installation of carbon monoxide and
oxygen monitors, trial bums, reduction
in quantity of HWDFM fired to meet
emissions limits, prohibiting firing of
HWDFM at start-up and shut-down, trial
burns, installation of air pollution
control equipment, and administrative
requirements.
Each of the devices that reported
burning HWDFM in the WAF Survey
was assigned to a model device. The
least-cost option was determined for
each device reported in the survey to
comply with the regulation (or
discontinue burning if compliance costs
exceed net savings). The costs for the
individual survey respondents were then
extrapolated to estimate national costs.
The characteristics of each device as
reported in the WAF Survey represent
the current design and operating
practices from which the Agency
estimated incremental costs. The WAF
Survey provided detailed information on
the burners that included device type,
device size, annual quantity of HWDFM
burned, use of monitoring and air
pollution control devices, source of
waste (on-/off-site). method of firing
wastes into the combustion device, and
current regulatory status under RCRA.
Although the survey requested waste
code and a description of the waste
burned, it did hot ask for waste
constituent data. Since costs (and risks)
can vary considerably with waste
constituent levels, a sensitivity analysis
was performed to account for various
waste levels (e.g., POHCs. metals.
chlorine).
Costs and risjts also vary with
assumptions on the levels of device
destruction and removal efficiency
(DRE) of organics and air pollution :
control device removal efficiencies
(REs) achieved in the baseline. (All
devices are assumed to meet the target
level of 99.99 percent DRE after
imposition of the proposed
requirements.) The DRE and RE levels
were varied in the baseline to test the
sensitivity of these assumptions to costs
and risks. Results of varying DRE and
RE levels are not presented in this
preamble although the results are
detailed in the RIA. Waste
characteristics tend to vary across
burners more so than DRE or RE. and
the waste sensitivity analysis that has
been conducted has the greatest affect
on costs and risks.
Costs were estimated for two types of
wastes: a base case waste and a high
risk waste. A waste database (for
metals levels) was assembled from
wastes that are currently being burned
-------
17024
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
or could potentially be combusted.16
The base case waste was assumed to
contain metals levels at the 50th
percentile and 'typical' POHC and
chlorine levels.71 The high risk waste
was assumed to contain 90th percentile
metals levels and 'high' POHC and
chlorine levels.
The actual cost of the proposed rule is
more likely to be near the cost for the
base case waste scenario. The base case
waste is assumed to be a more
representative waste (containing 50th
percentile metals levels and typical
levels of POHCs and chlorine) than the
high risk waste. However, an exact
estimate of compliance costs cannot be
made due to the lack of waste
constituent data for specific burners.
Facility operators have several
options for complying with the proposed
rule. These options consist of conducting
a trial burn to prove 9959 percent
destruction and removal efficiency (4-
9's ORE); waiving the trial burn if
special design and operating conditions
are met (for boilers only); qualifying for
the small quantity burner exemption if
quantity limits are met for a given
device size and wastes are burned on-
site; and discontinue burning HWDFM if
compliance costs exceed net savings.
Estimates of costs presented in this
section assume that the facility operator
will choose the least-cost option in
complying with the proposed rule.
2. Results. The Agency determines
that the proposed rule will result in a
social cost between 8.2 and 77.0 million
dollars on an annualized basis.18 Thus,
based on the $100 million annual cost
threshold established in E.0.12291.
today's proposed rule is non-major.
The $8.2 million figure is the social
cost for the base case waste scenario;
the $77.0 million figure represents the
worst case scenano where all devices
discontinue burning HWDFM. (Although
the Agency does not believe that the
worst case scenario is the likely
outcome of the proposed rule, it does
provide an upper bound on the cost of
today's rule.) The social cost associated
with the high risk waste scenario is
$37.3 million annually.
Table 5 presents the estimated
average compliance cost per device type
and the anticipated response of device
owner/operators to the proposed rule.
Also listed is the percent of waste
burned (or displaced) for each option.
Sixty-five percent of the boilers are
estimated to qualify for the small
quantity burner exemption; however.
11 Engineering-Science. Background Information
Document for the Development of Regulations to
Control Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces. Volume 1. January 1987. NT1S
Order No PB 87173829
M POHC and Cl levels obtained from the RCRA
Risk-Cost Analysis Model Waste Stream Data. SCS
Engineers. July 1984
'• The social cost is the cost to society.
independent of any transfer payments (e g.. taxes).
The social cost of the proposed rule does not
include lost fuel savings to the original burner for
displaced wastes. Thus, the social cost for displaced
wastes is only the alternative disposal cost assumed
to be SO 34 per gallon The lost conventional (e g..
fossil) fuel savings for a burner who reduces the
quantity fired or stops burning HWDFM are
assumed to be transferred to the burner who has
excess capacity to accept the displaced wastes.
However, the lost fuel savings are Included when
estimating the before and after-tax pnvate costs to
individual facilities The after-tax annualized cost to
industry for the base case waste scenano is $5.2
million. S30.6 million for the high risk waste, and $83
million for the worst case scenano (where all
devices discontinue burning HWDFM).
less than one percent of all HWDFM is
burned under this exemption. This
reflects the WAF Survey finding that a
large number of boilers fire very small
quantities of waste. These boilers would
most likely discontinue burning
HWDFM if not allowed to continue
under the small quantity burner
exemption. Approximately 40 percent of
the boilers that elect the small quantity
burner exemption do so while firing the
same quantity of HWDFM as in the
baseline. The other 60 percent of the
boilers reduce the amount of HWDFM
fired (and incur lost savings) in order to
meet the small quantity burner
exemption quantity limits.
TABLE 5. AVERAGE COMPLIANCE COST PER DEVICE AND ESTIMATED RESPONSE TO
REGULATION
[Base Case Waste!
Boilers
Kilns
Other furnaces ........._
Percent of waste burned/dis-
placed
Average
cost per
device*
$8,942
$47.754
$34.314
Small
quantity
burner
exemp-
tion.
(percent)
65
5
13
<1
Trial bum
waiver,
(percent)
11
N/A
N/A
44
Trial
burn,
(percent)
2
95
87
53
Discontin-
ue
burning,
(percent)
22
0
0
3
• Dollars are before-tax, annualized.
N/A-not applicable as device type is not eligible for trial bum waiver.
The weighted average annualized
before-tax cost for boilers of $8,942
consists of: an average cost of $5,490 for
boilers operating under the small
quantity burner exemption (representing
lost savings to meet the quantity limits);
an average cost of $40.260 for boilers
that elect the trial burn waiver an
average cost of $42.650 for boilers that
conduct a trial burn; and an average
cost of $161 for boilers that discontinue
burning HWDFM. The majority of
boilers that stop burning HWDFM are
space heaters and are not eligible for the
small quantity burner exemption
because their design heat input is less
than the minimum allowed for the small
quantity burner exemption. These space
heaters are operated in the services
(non-manufacturing) industry and burn .
very small quantities of hazardous
waste as reflected by the low average
annualized compliance cost.
Kilns and other industrial furnaces
can incur substantial compliance costs
and continue burning HWDFM due to
the large quantities of waste fired per
device. The average annualized before-
tax compliance cost for kilns (i.e..
cement, lime, lightweight aggregate) is
$47,754 and the average cost for other
furnaces (e.g., blast furnaces) is $34.314.
Almost all of the waste (97 percent) is
burned by devices that conduct a trial
bum or satisfy the trial bum waiver
conditions. Approximately three percent
of the HWDFM burned in the baseline is
displaced from devices that discontinue
burning or devices that continue to bum
but at a reduced quantity. As stated
previously, less than one percent of the
waste is burned under the small
quantity burner exemption.
Table 6 presents similar information
for the high risk waste (i.e.. 90th
percentile metals levels, "high" POHC
and Cl levels). The device response to
the proposed rule is similar to the base
case waste although the average cost
per device is significantly higher for all
devices.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules 17025
TABLE 6. AVERAGE COMPLIANCE COST PER DEVICE AND ESTIMATED RESPONSE TO
REGULATION
[High Risk Waste]
Boilers
Kilns
Other furnaces
Percent of waste burned/dis-
placed
Average
cost per
device*
S58.400
$160428
SI 49 763
Small
quantity
burner
exemp-
tion.
(percent)
66
11
Tnal bum
waiver.
(percent)
10
M/A
hi/A
1C
Trial
burn.
(percent)
3
O7
ei
Discontin-
ue
burning.
(percent)
22
14
' Dollars are before-tax. annualized.
N/A—not applicable as device type is not eligible for trial burn waiver.
Table 7 shows the components of the
aggregate compliance costs for the base
case and high risk waste scenarios. The
major component under each waste
scenario is lost savings from burners
who must reduce the quantity of
HWDFM fired in order to meet the limits
for organics. metals, and chlorine.
Boilers will reduce tne HWDFM
quantity fired under either waste
scenario. Boilers are more likely to
reduce the quantity of HWDFM burned
rather than install expensive air
pollution control equipment. The Agency
estimates that no boilers will be
installed with new air pollution control
under the base case waste scenario and
only 10 boilers will be equipped with air
pollution control under the high risk
waste scenario. These 10 boilers fire
large quantities of HWDFM (greater
than 1 million gallons annually) and at
high feed rates (greater than 25 percent
total heat input). Thus, for these boilers,
the potential lost savings in displaced
wastes required by blending to meet the
limits would exceed the cost to install
air pollution control. The difference
between the two scenarios for the CO
and Ot monitors reflects the greater
number of devices that discontinue
burning HWDFM under the high risk
waste scenario.
TABLE 7.—COMPONENTS OF COMPLIANCE
COSTS
f Dollars in millions, annualized, after-tax]
Type of cost
Lost savings
Oj Monitoring
Scenario
Base
case
waste
$2.3
0.4
High
nsk
waste
S25
0.3
Worst
case (all
stop
firing)
$63.0
TABLE 7.—COMPONENTS OF COMPLIANCE
COSTS—Continued
[Dollars in millions, annualized. after-tax]
CO monitoring
Air pollution
control
Tnal bums
Administrative
requirements
Testing
Total costs..
Base
case
waste
1.5
0.0
0.4
0.6
<0.1
5.2
Scenan
High
risk
waste
1.3
29
0.4
06
0.1
30.6
O
Worst
case (all
stop
firing)
63.0
Industrial furnaces are currently
installed with some form of air pollution
control equipment that will allow for
compliance with the emissions limits.
without reducing the quantity of
HWDFM fired, under the base case
waste scenario. However, in certain
cases under the high risk waste
scenario, the air pollution control
equipment must be supplemented with a
reduction in quantity in order to meet
the limits.
Carbon monoxide (CO) monitoring is
also a significant component of
compliance costs. The WAF Survey
indicates that only a few boilers (mostly
those burning large quantities of
HWDFM) are currently monitoring for
CO. Although most kilns and other
furnaces currently monitor for CO, the
Agency believes that these monitors are
not sensitive enough to show
compliance with the limits established
in today's proposed rule. A total of 104
boilers, 30 kilns, and 22 other furnaces
(about 16 percent of all devices
currently burning HWDFM) are
estimated to install CO monitors under
the base case waste scenario. A total of
95 boilers. 26 kilns, and 22 other
furnaces (15 percent of all devices
burning HWDFM) are estimated to
install CO monitors under the high risk
waste scenario. The annualized before-
tax cost for CO monitoring is
approximately $20,000 per year.
D. Economic Impacts
1. Methodology. The economic
analysis focused on facility level
impacts. Industry level impacts were not
considered since the results of the WAF
Survey suggest that burning HWDFM is
practiced by only a small percentage of
facilities in any one industry. (Although
the burning of HWDFM is practiced
across a wide range of industries.)
Industry-wide impacts would not be
significant where only a small
percentage of facilities incur regulatory
costs.
The percentage of facilities firing
HWDFM also influences whether
compliance costs, resulting from the
proposed rule, are absorbed by the
facility or are passed through as price
increases. Since few facilities within
any industry bum HWDFM, they are
more likely to absorb regulatory costs
and thus face reduced profitability or
possibly plant closure.
If the facilities were to pass through
the compliance costs in the form of
higher prices, the facilities might then be
at a competitive disadvantage with
other facilities that did not incur
increased costs. Therefore, potential
economic impacts of this rule are more
likely to take the form of reduced
profitability and possibly plant closure.
Little information was available
regarding the •profitability of affected
burners in the baseline. Facilities
burning HWDFM might be experiencing
returns that are below or above the
industry average. The lack of
uncertainty on the financial strength of
the affected burners prohibits predicting
impacts with certainty. Thus, the
economic analysis presented will
identify industries where facilities are
most likely to experience impacts, based
on average financial measures of
strength for that industry and employee
size range.
A two stage analysis was conducted
in determining impacts. First, a
screening analysis was performed to
identify those facilities that may be
significantly impacted. The total
compliance cost for all devices burning
HWDFM at a facility was compared to
the total baseline operating and
maintenance (O&M) cost for those
devices. Operating and maintenance
costs include net fuel savings from
-------
17026 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. B7 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
burning HWDFM. As stated previously.
net savings have not been adjusted due
to increased costs for pretreatment.
corrosion maintenance, or ash disposal.
Overstating net savings will understate
total O&M costs: thus, the percent
increase in O&M costs due to the
compliance costs may be overstated.
Facilities were considered to face
potentially significant impacts if the
total cost of compliance exceeded the
total O&M cost for all devices by five
percent or greater. Generally, an
increase in facility costs will be less
than the increase in device O&M costs.
Similarly, it is unlikely that significant
impacts would be imposed on a facility
if one segment of its operations incurred
an increase of less than five percent.
Thus, a five percent increase in device
O&M costs represents a conservative
screen for potential facility impacts.
-The screening analysis was conducted
on boilers only. No baseline device
O&M costs were available for kilns and
other furnaces. However, all kilns and
other furnaces burning HWDFM were
included in the second stage of the
analysis.
The second stage consisted of an
analysis to assess impacts on the facility
level. All devices were analyzed for ••' -
facility level impacts. The facility's cost
of compliance was compared to three
measures of plant financial strength:
cash from operations (CFO), cost of
production (COP), and value of
shipments (VOS). Plant-specific
financial information was not available
for the affected burner population. The
three measures of plant financial
strength that were used in the analysis
are representative facility values for a
given four digit SIC code and employee
size range. A facility is considered to
face a significant impact if the cost of
compliance for all devices at the facility
exceeds 5 percent of any of the three
financial measures.
The ratio of compliance costs to COP
reflects the price increase required to
recover the compliance costs and
maintain the facility's profit margin;
comparing costs to VOS represents the
required price increase to recover costs
without any mark-up for profit margin:
the ratio of compliance costs to CFO
represents the decrease in profitability if
the facility absorbs the regulatory costs.
As stated previously, it is probable that
costs will be absorbed where few
facilities within an industry incur
compliance costs from today's proposed
rule and. thus, compliance costs as a
percentage of CFO is the most relevant
parameter.
Moreover, the cost of compliance
relative to CFO is often the most
conservative indicator of potential
impacts. Cash from operations is the
difference between the value of
shipments (VOS) and the cost of
production (COP). CFO is always less
than VOS and often smaller than COP.
Thus, costs as a percentage of CFO is
usually greater than costs as a
percentage of VOS or COP and will
typically represent the most
conservative indicator.
2. Screening analysis results. For the
base case waste scenano, 14 facilities
(representing 15 boilers), from a total of
708 facilities with boilers burning
HWDFM, incur compliance costs that
exceed 5 percent of total baseline O&M
costs. Table 6 presents these figures.
These facilities mostly operate in the
chemicals industry (SIC 28) and tend to
fire HWDFM at greater percentages of
the heat input than other facilities
whose compliance costs are less than 5
percent of baseline O&M costs.
TABLE 8.—OVERVIEW OF SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR BOILERS BASE CASE
WASTE
Increase in O&M costs (percent)
<5
5-9
10-24 ._ _
25-74 _
75-99 _
100+ ....
All boilers
Number
of
facilities
694
9
0
5
0
0
708
Number
of boilers
880
10
0
5
0
0
895
Percent
of all
boilers
(percent)
98.3
1.2
00
05
00
0.0
100.0
Annual
average
HWDFM
per
device
(percent
total Btu)
1.52
926
NA
38.17
NA
NA
1.79
The Agency estimates that all of these
boilers will continue burning HWDFM
after implementation of the proposed
rule. The Agency also believes that this
scenario is the most likely outcome of
the proposed rule.
Table 9 provides screening analysis
results for the high nsk waste scenario.
Sixty-two facilities (representing 102
boilers) incur compliance costs that
exceed 5 percent of baseline O&M costs
The boilers at these facilities also tend
to be fired with HWDFM at higher rates
than boilers at other facilities. All of
these boilers are estimated to continue
burning HWDFM as a result of the
proposed rule.
TABLE 9.—OVERVIEW OF SCREENING ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR BOILERS HIGH
RISK WASTE SCENARIO
Increase in O&M costs (percent)
<5 _
5.9
10-24
25-74 _ _
75-99
100+
All boilers _
Number
of
facilities
646
19
26
17
0
0
708
Number
of boilers
793
39
30
33
0
0
895
Porosnt
ofay
boilers
(percent)
88.6
4.3
3.4
37
0.0
0.0
100.0
Annual
average
HWDFM
.P«
device
(percent
total Btu)
069
5.03
9.72
17.15
NA
NA
1.79
Under the worst case scenano. where
all devices discontinue burning
HWDFM. 71 facilities (representing 116
boilers) are estimated to incur
compliance costs exceeding 5 percent of
baseline O&M costs. The Agency does
not believe this scenario is the likely
outcome of the proposed rule, especially
for those boilers firing large quantities of
HWDFM that are likely to incur
-------
compliance costs that are well below
net savings. However, these results do
provide an upper-bound estimate of cost
increases and impacts from the
proposed rule.
3. Facility level analysis results.
Under the base case scenario, one WAF
Survey respondent (representing 14
facilities with one boiler each operating
in SIC 7399) is estimated to incur
compliance costs exceeding 5 percent of
CFO. This respondent does not incur
compliance costs greater than 5 percent
of baseline O&M costs in the screening
analysis. The Agency believes that the
/ Vol. 52. No. 67 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules 17037
industry average financial measures
may understate the true financial health
of this facility, and that the result from
the screening analysis is a better
indicator of potential impacts for this
facility. These 14 facilities are reported
as operating in the services industry as
solvent recyclers and are estimated to
continue burning HWDFM under the
trial burn waiver (for both the base case
and high risk waste scenarios). The
Agency, therefore, believes it is unlikely
that there will be significant impacts on
any facilities under the base case waste
scenario.
Table 10 presents estimates of
facilities experiencing significant
impacts for any of the three financial
measures under the high risk waste
scenario. Of the twenty-three facilities
estimated to face potentially significant
impacts, only two facilities (with two
kilns each), operating in SIC 3241. are
estimated to discontinue firing HWDFM
The 23 facilities operate in SICs: 1422—
Crushed and Broken Limestone; 2800—
Chemicals Manufacturing: 2861—Gum
and Wood Chemicals: 3241—Cement.
Hydraulic: and 7399—Business Services.
Not Elsewhere Classified.
TABLE 10-OVERVIEW OF IMPACTS BY INDUSTRY > UNDER THE HIGH RISK WASTE SCENARIO PROPOSED RULE
SIC
Crushed and Broken
Limestone
1422
Chemicals and Allied
Products
2800
Gum and Wood Chemicals
2861
Cement Hydraulic
3241
Business Service, NEC
7399
Totals*
Number of
facilities
\
14
23
Number
of
devices
in
14
41.0
Average
number of
employees
per facility
60
14SU
2Z1
165
45
Average
device size
(MMBtu/hour)
500
497.7
73.8
180.0
200
Average
HWDFM
burned per
device
(gallon/hour)
4.000,000
4.513,880
623,698
2,372.486
1 on nnn
Average cost
of
compliance/
cost of
production per
facility
(percent)
2912
3.16
2.34
4.15
lo.jy
Average cost
of
compliance/
value of
shipments per
facility
(percent)
-
61.88
201
199
2.79
13 12
Average cost
of
compliance/
cash from
operation per
facility
(percent)
1980
5.51
1348
850
65.58
1 Totals may not equal sum of rows due to rounding
Under the worst case scenario. 33
facilities are estimated to incur
significant impacts as a result of the
proposed rule. In addition to the five
industries impacted under the high risk
waste scenario, facilities in SIC 2631—
Paperboard Mills. SIC 2819—Industrial
Inorganic Chemicals. Not Elsewhere
Classified: SIC 2869—Industrial Organic
Chemicals. Not Elsewhere Classified:
and SIC 3312—Blast Furnaces.
Steelworks, and Rolling Mills are also
estimated to incur significant impacts.
As stated previously, the Agency does
not believe this scenario to be the likely
outcome of the proposed rule.
E. Risk Analysis
1. Methodology. For each of the
boilers and industrial furnaces, EPA
estimated the quantity and composition
of stack releases: atmospheric transport.
resulting ground level concentration and
exposure to the stack release
constituents: and, the doses received by
the most exposed individual (MEI) and
by human populations within 50
kilometers of each device. Estimates
were made for each device burning
HWDFM in the baseline and after
imposition of the proposed rule. This
allowed for a determination of the
incremental risk reduction achieved by
the proposed requirements.
The Agency estimated carcinogenic
health effects (i.e.. cancer cases) from
emissions of principal organic
hazardous constituents (POHCs),
products of incomplete combustion
(PICs). and metals (i.e.. arsenic,
cadmium and chromium). The Agency
also determined exposure levels (but not
cases) from emissions of the threshold
compounds lead, hydrogen chloride, and
toluene. EPA considered air emissions
and exposure due to inhalation but did
not address other types of releases (e.g..
spills from storage or transportation,
fugitive emissions) and routes of
exposure (e.g., ingestion of
contaminated crops or animals).
Changes in health risk may result
from the upgraded performance of a
device due to achieving compliance with
the proposed rule. Improved
performance may result from the
installation (or upgrading) of APCDs. the
installation of CO and Oj monitors to
ensure optimum combustion efficiency.
and prohibiting firing of HWDFM at
start-up and shut-down.
Alternative management of displaced
wastes will also affect changes in risk.
Displaced HWDFM from devices that
stop burning or that reduce the quantity
fired was assumed to be burned in
-------
17028 Federal Register / Vol. 52. N&LJ? / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
industrial furnaces that accept off-site
wastes and continue to burn HWDFM
(but not reduce the quantity fired) after
imposition of the proposed rule. Results
from the WAF Survey indicate that
industrial furnaces, especially kilns.
tend to burn large quantities of HWDFM
that are generated off-site. Boilers tend
to fire smaller quantities of HWDFM
that are often generated on-site. Thus.
industrial furnaces are more likely than
boilers to accept off-site wastes.
Inherent in this scenario is the
assumption that the displaced wastes
contain sufficient heat content so that
they are attractive for burning for energy
recovery.
The waste scenarios used in the risk
analysis are identical to those used in
the cost analysis. The composition and
firing rate of the HWDFM determines
the amount of hazardous constituents
potentially released from the stack. The
HWDFM firing rate for devices in the
baseline is that reported in the WAF
Survey. The firing rate for post-
regulation is the level associated with
the least-cost compliance method per
device.
The level of destruction and removal
efficiency (DRE) for organics and APCD
removal efficiency (RE) for metals
determines the actual stack releases of
the constituents.
Devices operating in the baseline
were assumed to be equipped with air
pollution control devices (APCDs) as
reported in the WAF Survey. Each
APCD was assumed to achieve a level
of removal efficiency that was
considered typical for that APCD type.
Various DRE levels were assigned to
the devices based on the reported
presence of CO and Ot monitors,
charging of solid or liquid wastes into
•he device, and whether HWDFM
represented more or less than 50 percent
of the total fuel input. Although the
stack tests conducted by EPA reveal
that boilers can readily achieve 99.99
percent DRE. the range of design and
operating conditions in the stack tests
did not cover the wide range of
conditions reported in the WAF Survey.
Thus, respondent devices from the WAF
Survey were assigned to DRE categories.
All devices burning HWDFM after
imposition of the proposed rule were
assumed to achieve the target level of
99.99 percent DRE.
The location of each device as
reported in the WAF Survey was used
as an input for dispersion modeling that
estimated the resulting exposure to
human populations. Incorporating the
location of each of the WAF Survey
respondents allows for dispersion
modeling that accounts for the
climatology and general population
surrounding the specific device.
Once the exposure estimates were
determined, the dosage and resulting
increased risk received by the human
population (and most exposed
individual) were calculated. Humans
were assumed to breathe 22 cubic
meters of air per day. absorb 100 percent
of the hazardous material inhaled, weigh
70 kilograms, and be of "average"
susceptability. No antagonistic or
synergistic affects among the various
compounds were analyzed. Stack
releases were assumed to continue for
70 years, and all other factors also
remained constant over this period (e.g..
human population, weather). Finally.
each incidence of nsk for a device
reported in the WAF Survey was
extrapolated to obtain national
estimates for the total population of
devices burning HWDFM.
Health effects were also assessed
from emissions of the non-carcinogenic
(threshold) compounds lead, hydrogen
chloride (HC1). and toluene. Toluene
was chosen to represent a non-
carcinogenic POHC since it is a
compound often present in organic
hazardous wastes.
The Agency calculated the ratio of
predicted exposure (for both the MEI
and average population) to the reference
dose for each of the three threshold
compounds. The sum of the three ratios
was also calculated. Although the risks
from threshold compounds may not be
additive, the sum of the ratios does
serve as an indicator of potential effects
from exposure to multiple contaminants.
No information was available on the
ambient (background) levels of the three
compounds surrounding each specific
device. This lack of data prohibits an
analysis of how the exposure from
burning HWDFM contributes to total
ambient levels. If the resulting exposure
from all sources of threshold compounds
is less than the reference dose, then the
burning of HWDFM produces no
incremental health risk for these
compounds. However, if the exposure
from baseline burning of HWDFM and
other sources exceed the reference dose.
then the reduced exposure resulting
from today's rule may reduce the health
risk from any or all of these three
compounds.
In order to consider the potential for
significant ambient levels. EPA assumed
that other sources could account for up
to 90 percent of the reference does. This
would allow for the burning of HWDFM
to pose no health risk from each of the
threshold compounds if the resulting
exposure was less than 10 percent of the
reference dose. Thus, a screening
analysis was done to identify the
number of devices burning HWDFM that-
produced emisisons of threshold
compounds, in the baseline and after
imposition of the proposed rule, that
exceeded 10 percent or more of the
reference dose.
2. Results. Table 11 presents estimates
of the lifetime (i.e., 70 year) cancer case*
for the base case waste scenario.
Estimates are provided for devices
operating in the baseline and those that
continue to burn HWDFM (or burn
displaced wastes) after imposition of the
proposed rule.
TABLE 11.—EXPECTED LIFETIME CANCER CASES
[Base case waste scenario]
^
Baseline - - -
Cases avoided from devices mat discontinue burning
POHC's
1
0
1
piers
1
0
1
Metals
16
15
1
Total
18
15
3
3
0
«1)
3
The base case waste scenario results
in 3 cases avoided from the 759 devices
that continue to burn HWDFM after
imposition of the proposed rule. There
are no cases avoided from the 193
devices that discontinue burning
HWDFM because over 95 percent of
these devices are space heaters that are
fired with very low quantities (100
gallons annually) of HWDFM. The
burning of displaced HWDFM in
industrial furnaces results in less than
one lifetime cancer case. Thus, the net
reduction in 70-year cases is
approximately three. Under this waste
scenario, all of the after-regulation risk
and the majority of the baseline risk is
from metals (i.e., arsenic, cadmium,
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules 17029
chromium) emissions. It is likely that
many wastes will not have all three
metals at the assumed levels. The above
results may overstate risks for these
types of wastes
Table 12 presents the risks to the most
exposed individual (MEIJ. the Agency
estimates that there are no devices
burning HWDFM in the baseline that
pose a lifetime risk equal to or greater
than one in ten thousand. Ten devices
produce a risk to the MEI in the one in
one hundred thousand range. The
remaining 942 devices are estimated to
produce a MEI risk in the one in one
million range or less. After compliance
with the proposed rule, no devices that
were burning HWDFM in the baseline
would generate incremental lifetime
risks in the one in ten thousand range.
Forty-eight devices are estimated to
produce a MEI risk in the one in one
million range, while the remaining 708
devices burning HWDFM generate risks
in the one in ten million range or less.
TABLE 12.— RISKS TO THE MEI
[Base case waste scenario]
Baseline
Do
Do
Do _
Do . ..._
Do _
Total
Post-regulation
Do ."
Do
Do
Do
Do
Total
Devices that
discontinue
burning
Risk
level
>10-«
lo-«
io-»
io-«
10-'
<10-'
>10-
10-
10-
10-
10-
ase case waste scenario, EPA
istimates that there are no devices
>roducing MEI or average population
ixposures. in the baseline or after-
regulation, exceeding 10 percent of any
of the reference doses. The sum of the
ratios is also less than 10 percent. Thus.
if other sources produce exposure levels
less than 90 percent of the reference
doses, then the proposed rule achieves
no benefits from reduced emissions of
threshold compounds.
The Agency estimates that, under the
high risk waste scenario, there are 391
cases avoided from the 755 devices that
continue to burn and no cases avoided
from the 197 devices that discontinue
burning HWDFM. Table 13 presents
these results. Alternative management
of the displaced HWDFM produces 74
cases. Thus, there is a net reduction of
317 lifetime cases. Similar to the base
case waste results, metals emissions
account for the majority of the baseline
and post-regulation risks.
TABLE 13 —EXPECTED LIFETIME CANCER
CASES
[High risk waste scenario]
Baseline .
Post-
regula-
tion . ...
Cases
avoid-
ed.
Cases
avoided
from
devices
that
contin-
ue to
bum
Cases
avoided
front
devices
that
discon-
tinue
burning...
Cases
from
burning
of
dis-
placed
wastes....
Net
cases
avoid-
ed.
POHC's
25
2
23
—
PIC's
4
0
4_
-
Metals
582
218
364
—
Total
611
220
391
391
0
(74)
317
Table 14 presents estimates of MEI
risk for the high risk waste scenario. In
the baseline, 19 devices produce an MEI
risk in the one in ten thousand range
100 devices produce an MEI risk in the
one in one hundred thousand range, and
the remaining 833 devices produce an
MEI risk in the one in one million range
or less. After imposition of the proposed
rule, no devices produce an MEI risk in
the one in ten thousand range. 73
devices produce an MEI risk in the one
in one hundred thousand range, and 682
devices produce an MEI risk in the one
in one million range or less (197 devices
discontinue burning HWDFM}.
TABLE 14 —RISKS TO THE MEI
[High risk waste scenario]
Baseline
Do
Do
Do
Do
Do
Total.
Post-
regula-
tion
Do
Do
Do
Do._
Do
Total-
Devices
thai
discontin-
ue
burning ..
Risk
level
>io-
10-
10-
10-
10-
10-«
10-«
io->
10-«
10-'
<10-'
Number
of
devices
0
19
100
167
198
468
952
=
0
0
73
52
35
595
755
===
197
Percent of
device
population
0
2
11
17
21
49
100
=====
0
0
a
5
4
62
79
=====
21
For the high risk waste scenario,
Table 15 shows that 45 devices would
produce exposures exceeding 10 percent
of the HCI threshold level in the
baseline. A total of 58.838 people would
be exposed to this HCI level. The sum of
the ratios for the three compounds
exceeds 10 percent at 47 devices (5
percent of all devices burning HWDFM)
in the baseline. For these devices, the
proposed rule eliminates all exposures
greater than 10 oercent of thp thi-oak^M
-------
TABLE 15.—CHANGES IN NON-CANCER HEALTH RISK
[High nsk waste scenario, average ratio of exposure to RFD >0.1]
Constituent
uci
Lead
Sum of ratios
Baseline
Number o)
devices
0
0
0
0
Total
population
w/in SO km
0
0
0
0
Post-regulation
Number of
devices
0
0
0
0
Total
population
w/m 50 km
0
0
0
0
MEI RATIO OF EXPOSURE TO RFD >0.1
Constituent
lJf*l
I_g3d
Sum of ratios
Baseline
Number ot
devices
0
45
0
47
Total
population
w/m 50 km
0
58,638
0
64.915
Post-regulation
Number of
devices
0
0
0
0
Total
population
w/m 50 km
0
0
0
0
F. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
requires Federal regulatory agencies to
evaluate the impacts of regulations on
small entities. The RFA requires an
initial screening analysis to determine
whether the proposed rule will have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small businesses.
This section discusses the
methodology and results of the Agency's
RFA screening analysis. Based on this
analysis, the Agency has determined
that today's rule will not have a
substantial impact on a substantial
number of small firms. _
1. Methodology. The facility financial
measures used in the overall economic
analysis were used for the RFA
screening analysis. A small entity was
considered to be significantly impacted
when the cost of compliance for one or
more devices exceeded by five percent
any of the three financial measures (i.e..
cost of production, value of shipments.
cash from operations).
The RFA defines small entities as
small businesses, small organizations.
and small governmental jurisdictions.
The Small Business Administration's
"• EPA. Guidelines for Implementing the
Resulmor} Flexibility Act pp 6-7.
(SBA) definition of "small" ranges from
100 to 500 employees depending on the
Standard Industnal Classification (SIC]
code.
The cost and impact analyses were
conducted at the facility rather than at
the firm level due to lack of information
on firm size. Neither the RFA nor the
SBA defines "small" establishments.
although for single-establishment firms
the SBA's small business standards
would apply. All facilities are
considered to be single establishment
firms for the impact assessment.
For purposes of this analysis, small
entities were defined to be those
facilities with fewer than 100 employees.
Four size categories (i.e.. less than 10.10
to 50.51 to 100. greater than 100
employees) were used to compare
impacts between small and large-
establishments and the relative burden
imposed on small businesses.
The Agency has defined "substantial
number" as twenty percent of the
affected small entities.79 The population
of affected small facilities as reported in
the WAF Survey (and as adjusted to
include lightweight aggregate kilns) was
used for the analysis. If twenty percent
of all facilities with less than 100
employees are significantly affected.
then the proposed rule is considered to
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
2. Results. The assessment of small
business impacts was conducted for all
devices burning HWDFM in the
baseline.
As stated in Section D—Economic
Impacts, the Agency estimates that no
facilities will incur compliance costs
that exceed 5 percent of any of the three
financial measures for the base case
waste scenario. Although, as identified
above. 14 facilities operating in SIC 7399
are estimated to incur costs greater than
5 percent of CFO. EPA believes that the
industry financial data on which this
finding is based are not reliable for
these facilities. Thus. EPA believes that
these facilities will not experience
significant impacts. Moreover, although
these 14 facilities represent 49 percent of
all facilities in the 10 to 49 employee size
range, they represent only 5 percent of
all small facilities (facilities with less
than 100 employees). Thus, the Agency
estimates that a substantial number of
small entities will not be significantly
' impacted under the base case waste
scenario. The Agency believes this
scenario to be the most likely outcome
of the proposed rule.
Table 16 shows an overview of
impacts for the high risk waste scenario.
Excluding the 14 facilities in SIC 7399.
whose industry financial information is
believed to be inappropriate, one
"small" facility (in the 50 to 99 employee
size range) is estimated to incur
significant impacts. This facility
operates in SIC 1422 and burns HWDFM
in two kilns. Eight facilities (operating in
SICs 2800.2861 and 3241) with greater
than 100 employees are also estimated
to face significant impacts. The one
"small" facility represents less than one
percent of all facilities with less than
100 employees. (Including the 14
facilities in SIC 7399 would bring the
total of significantly impacted small
facilities to 6 percent of all facilities
with less than 100 employees.) Thus.
under the high risk waste scenario, it
appears that a significant number of
small entities will not be significantly
impacted by today's rule.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17031
TABLE IB.-OVERVIEW OF IMPACTS FOR SMALL ESTABLISHMENTS
(High nsk waste scenario]
Establishment size (number of
employees)
Total
number of
facilities
Total
number of
devices
Average cost
of
compliance/
cost of
production per
facility
(percent)
10 to 49
50 to 99
100+
Average cost
of
compliance/
value of
shipments per
facility
(percent)
In summary, the Agency believes that
it is unlikely that small entities will
experience significant impacts under the
base case scenario. Although one
facility does experience significant
impacts under the high nsk waste
scenario, it does not represent a
"substantial number" of the affected
small entities. Therefore, the proposed
rule does not meet the Regulatory
Flexibility Act criteria requiring that a
full Regulatory Flexibility Analysis be
completed.
The Agency solicits public comments
and additional data regarding the
assumptions, costs, risks, and possible
impacts identified in the regulatory
analysis.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act. 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An
Information Collection Request
document has been prepared by EPA
(ICR No. 1361) and a copy may be
obtained from Rick Westlund.
Information Policy Branch; EPA: 401 M
Street. SW.. (PM-223); Washington. DC
204BO or by calling (202) 382-2745.
Submit comments on these requirements
to EPA and: Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs: OMB: 726 Jackson
Place. NW.: Washington. DC 20503
marked "Attention: Desk Officer for
EPA." The final rule will respond to any
OMB or public comments on the
information collection requirements.
III. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 260,
261. 264. 265. 266. 270. and 271
Administrative practices and
procedures. Confidential business
information. Hazardous materials
transportation. Hazardous waste. Indian
lands. Insurance. Intergovernmental
relations. Packaging and containers.
Penalties. Recycling. Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements. Security
measures. Security bonds. Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Dated: April 17.1987.
Lee M. Thomas.
Administrator.
APPENDIX A.—REFERENCE AIR CON-
CENTRATIONS (RAC's) FOR
THRESHOLD CONSTITUENTS
Constituent
Acetoratrile
Acetophenone
Acrolein
Aluminum phosphide
Ally) alcohol
Antimony ,
Banum
Banum cyanide
Benzidine
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate...
Bromomethane
Calcium cyanide
Carbon disulfide
Chlordane
2-chloro-l ,3-butadiene.""!!"
Chloromethane
Chromium III
Copper cyanide ".
Cresols
Cyanide(free) '„
Cyanogen
Dwvoutvl phthalate !!!"!
O-dichlorobenzene
Dichlorodifluoromethane
2.4-dichlorophenol
i ,3-dichloropropene
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethoate
2,4-dinrtrophenol
Diphenylamine
Endosulfan
Endnn
Flounne
Maximum
annual
average
ground level
concentra-
tion (fig/
m')
10
500
0.25
0.25
5
0.25
. 50
50
0.5 x 10"«
17
0.7
25
200
5 x ID"1
2.5
0.7
1.000
50
100
17
25
10
10
170
2.5
0.25
10
1.0
1.0
225
0.01
0.05
50
Average cost
of
compliance/
cash from
operations per
facility
(percent)
Facilities experiencing
significant impacts
(Number)
(Percent of
total)
APPENDIX A.—REFERENCE AIR CON-
CENTRATIONS (RAC's) FOR
THRESHOLD CONSTITUENTS—Con-
tinued
Constituent
Fotnialdehyde ,
Formic acid
Heptachlor .'.„"
Hexachlorocycolepentadiene..
Hydrocyanic acid
Hydrogen chloride
Hydrogen sulfide _
Isobutyl alcohol
Lead
Mercury _
Metholmyl
Methoxychlor.
Methly ethyl ketone
Methyl hydrazina.
Methyl parathion
Nickel™
Nickel cyanide
Nrtnc oxide ,
Nitrobenzene
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
M-phenylenediamine
Phenylmercunc acetate
Phosphine _
PCBs.._
Potassium cyanide _
Potassium silver cyanide
Pyndine _..._
Setemous acid
Selenourea
Silver
Silver cyanide
Sodium cyanide
Strychnine.
1.2.4.5-tetrachlorobenzene
2.3,7.8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-
doxin _..._..„_
2.3.7.6-tetrachlorophenol _
Tetraethyl lead
Thalle oxide
Maximum
annual
average
ground level
concentra-
tion (>ig/
m3)
2x 10-'
1700
01
5
17
(')
2.5
250
0.09
17
23
50
75
7x10->
25
10
17
25
05
17
25
100
5
0.08
0.025
2 X 10'«
50
170
5
2.5
5
5
100
25
0.25
0.25
5 x 10-«
10
1 X 10 -•
0.25
-------
17032
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX A.—REFERENCE AIR CON-
CENTRATIONS (RAC's) FOR
THRESHOLD CONSTITUENTS—Con-
tinued
Constituent
Thallium ,
Thallium (I) acetate
Thallium (I) carbonate
Thallium (I) chloride
Thallium (I) nitrate
Thallium selenite
Thallium (I) sulfate
Toluene ,
1,2.4-tnchlorobenzene ,
Tnchloromonofluoromethane....
2.4.5-tnchlorophenol
Vandium pentoxide
Vinyl chloride
Maximum
annual
average
ground level
concentra-
tion (fig/
md)
500
0.5
025
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
500
17
250
100
17
0.05
1 Maximum of 150 for three minute average.
APPENDIX B.—RISK SPECIFIC DOSES FOR
CARCINOGENIC CONSTITUENTS AT 10~S
Risk Level
Constituent
Acrylamide
Acrylonitnle
Aldnn
Aniline
Arsenic
Benzene
Benzo(a)pyrGne
Beryllium
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloromethyl)ether
Cadmium
Carbon tetrachlonde
1-Chloro-2,3-epoxypropane
Chloroform
Chloromethyl methyl ether
Chromium (hexavalent)
DDT
Dibenz(a.h)anthracene
1 ,2-Dibromo-e-chloropropane
1 2-Dibromoethane
1 4-Dichlorobenzene ,
1.2-Dichloroethane
1.1-Dichloroethylene
Dieldnn
Diethylstitbestrol
Dimethylmtrosamtne
2 4-Dinitrotoluene
Dioxane
Ethylene oxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hydrazine — -
Hydrazine Sulfate
3-Methylchlolanthrene
Risk
specific
dose(ftg/
nO
9x10-'
1x10"'
2x10'J
1
2x10"'
1x10-f
1
3x10"'
4x10"'
3x10"'
4x10'»
6x10-'
7x10"'
B
4x10"'
4x10-'
8x10-'
3x10-'
7x10-'
2X10-'
8x10"'
2
4X10-'
2x10-'
2x10-'
7x10"*
IXlO"4
1X10'1
7
1x10"'
2
5X10-'
3x10"'
3X10-'
4x10'»
APPENDIX B.—RISK SPECIFIC DOSES FOR
CARCINOGENIC CONSTITUENTS AT 10~S
Risk Level—Continued
Constituent
Subsul-
Methylene chloride
4.4-Methylene-bts-2-
chloroanihne
Nickel (carbonyl and
fide)
2-Nitropropane
N-Nitroso-n-methylurea
N-Nitrosopyrrolidine
Pentachloronitrobenzene....
Reserpine ,
1.1,2.2-Tetrachloroethane..
Tetrachloroethylene
Thiouroa -
Tnchloroethylene
Risk
specific
dose (fig/
2x10-'
3x10'*
4x10'»
1X10-'
2x10-'
1x10-'
2
3x10-'
2x10-'
21
2x10"
8
Appendix C—Example Tier I and Tier II
Calculations
Example *1 (Tier I)
A 10 MM Btu/hr (heat input) boiler is
burning hazardous waste at a rate of 150 Ibs/
hr along with 400 Ibs/hr of heating oil. The
boiler is located in flat terrain. The waste has
a heating value of 10.000 Btu/lb and contains
the metal concentrations:
Arsenic =0.5 ppm
Cadmium=1.0 ppm
Chromium =0.4 ppm
Lead=1.0 ppm
Question: Is the waste ID compliance with
Tier I standards?
For this case the following equation from
proposed i 266.34-4(b)(3)(i)(B) applies.
(As) (Cd) (Cr+6)
(1) + + 0.0
3.9X10"' 9.8X10-' 1.4X10"'
Note.—For Tier I. all chromium in the
waste is treated as hexavalenl chromium
(Cr+6).
First (As). (Cd). and (Cr) in units of Ib/MM
Btu. must be determined for the waste using
the following equation(s):
(M)=
Cm (10« Btu)(10-« Ibs/PPm)
Hw
which simplifies to:
Cm
(2) (M)= —
Hw
where:
(M) is the metal feedrate in the waste in Ib/
MM Btu.
Cm is the metal concentration in the waste in
ppm.
Hw is the heat content of the waste in Btu/lb.
Therefore:
(Ag)= _- =5XlO-Mb/MM Btu
10'
(Cd)= — =1X10- Ib/MM Btu
10'
(Cr)= — =4X10-' Ib/MM Btu
10'
Substituting in equation *1:
3.9X10-' 9.8X10-' 1.4X10"4
0.13+0.10+0.28=0.520.0
Therefore, the facility is in compliance with
Tier I standards for arsenic, cadmium, and
chromium.
As for lead, using equation *2:
10
(Pb)= =1X10-' Ib/MM Btu
10'
From proposed § 266.34-4(b)(3)(i)(B).
maximum lead levels are 1.6 x 10" * Ib/MM
Btu. Therefore, the facility is in compliance
with the all Tier 1 metal standards. Note: It is
proposed that the specific levels for the
metals will be fixed in the final permit based
on the characteristics of the waste and
equation *l.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17033
Example #2 (Tier II)
The above boiler is burning a hazardous
waste under the same conditions as example
*1 except the hazardous waste has the
following metals concentrations'
Arsenics 2.0 ppm
Cadmium=1.0 ppm
Chromium=0.4 ppm
Lead=20 ppm
Question: Would the bailer be in
compliance with Tier II standards when
burning fuel oil containing the following
metals:
Arsenic=0.5 ppm
Cadmium =0.2 ppm
Chromium=0.2 ppm
Lead=1.0ppm
In this case, the following equation for Tier
II (from proposed 8 266.34-l(b)(2)J must be
used to calculate the metal feed rate (MFR):
x Rw
(3)
MFR
x R
H,
Fi + I "FSj x "FSj
-izi
x 10
-6
to the
be S'mpllfled Mw m
-------
17034
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
produced from decanter tank tar sludge,
EPA Hazardous Waste K087.
PART 264—STANDARDS FOR
OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT,
STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL
FACILITIES
III. In Part 264:
1. The authority citation for Part 264
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sees. 1006, 2002(a), 3004. 3005 of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act. as amended by
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
of 1976. as amended (42 U S.C. 6905.6912(a).
6924. and 6925).
2. It is proposed to amend § 264.340 by
revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
§264.340 Applicability.
(a) The regulations of this subpart
apply to owners and operators of
hazardous waste incinerators (as
defined in § 260.10 of this chapter).
except as § 264.1 provides otherwise.
• • • • •
PART 265—INTERIM STATUS
STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND
OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND
DISPOSAL FACILITIES
IV. In Part 265:
1. The authority citation for Part 265
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sees. 1006. 2002(a). 3004. and
3005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976. as amended (42 U.S.C.
6905.6924. and 6925).
2. It is proposed to amend § 265.340 by
revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
§26&340 Applicability.
(a) The regulations of this subpart
apply to owners and operators of
hazardous waste incinerators (as
defined in § 260.10 of this chapter).
except as § 265.1 provides otherwise.
PART 266— STANDARDS FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF SPECIFIC WASTES
AND SPECIFIC TYPES OF WASTE
MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
V. In Part 266:
1. The authority citation for Part 266
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sees. 1006. 2002(a). 3004. and
3014 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976, as amended (42 U.S.C.
6905. 6912(a). 6924. and 6934).
2. It is proposed to revise Subpart D to
read as follows:
Subpart D—Hazardous Waste Burned In
Boilers and Industrial Furnaces
Sec
266.30 Applicability.
266.31 Standards for generators.
266.32 Standards for transporters.
266.33 Standards for owners and operators
of treatment or storage facilities.
266.34 Standards for owners and operators
of facilities that burn hazardous waste in
a boiler or industrial furnace.
266.34-1 Applicability.
266.34-2 Hazardous waste analysis.
266.34-4 Standards to control emissions
266.34-5 Permits.
266.34-6 Operating requirements.
26634-7 Monitoring and inspections.
266.34-8 Closure.
266.35 Interim status standards for owners
and operators of facilities that burn
hazardous waste in a boiler or industrial
furnace.
266.35-1 Applicability.
266.35-2 Hazardous waste analysis.
266.35-3 Operating requirements.
266.35-4 Monitoring and inspections.
266.35-5 Closure.
§266JO Applicability.
(a) The regulations of this subpart
apply to hazardous waste burned in a
boiler or industrial furnace (as defined
in S 260.10 of this chapter), except as
provided by paragraph (b) of this
section. A secondary material burned in
an industrial furnace exclusively for
materials recovery is not a solid (and if
hazardous, hazardous) waste, however.
if it is indigenous to the process in which
the industrial furnace is used, in the
sense of being generated by the same
type of industrial furnace as that in
which burning occurs, or, for secondary
smelting furnaces, the material is scrap
metal or battery plates and groups.
These regulations also do not apply to
gas recovered from hazardous (or solid)
waste landfills when such gas is burned
for energy recovery.
(b) The following hazardous wastes
and facilities are not subject to
regulation under this subpart:
(1) Used oil burned for energy
recovery that is also a hazardous waste
solely because it exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste
identified in Subpart C of Part 261 of this
chapter. Such used oil is subject to
regulation under Subpart E of Part 266
rather than this subpart and
(2) Hazardous wastes that are exempt
from regulation under 55 261.4 and 261.6
(a)(3)(vH»x) of this chapter, and
hazardous wastes that are subject to the
special requirements for small quantity
generators under S 261.5 of this chapter.
§ 266.31 Standards tor generators.
Generators of hazardous waste that is
burned in a boiler or industrial furnace
are subject to Part 262 of this chapter.
Generators who burn such hazardous
waste also are subject to §§ 266.34 and
266.35.
§ 266.32 Standards for transporters.
Transporters of hazardous waste that
is burned in a boiler or industrial
furnace are subject to Part 263 of this
chapter.
§ 266.33 Standards for owners and
operators of treatment or storage facilities.
(a) Owners and operators of facilities
that treat or store hazardous waste that
is burned in a boiler or industrial
furnace are subject to the applicable
provision of Subparts A through L of
Part 264. Subparts A through L of Part
265. and Part 270 of this chapter, except
as provided by paragraph (b) of this
section. These standards apply to
storage by the burner as well as to
storage and treatment facilities operated
by intermediaries (processors, blenders,
distributors, etc.) between the generator
and the burner.
(b) Owners and operators of facilities
that burn, in an on-site boiler or
industrial furnace exempt from
regulation under the small quantity
burner provisions of § 266.34-l(b),
hazardous waste that they generate are
exempt from regulation under Subparts
A through L of Part 264. Subparts A
through L of Part 265. and Part 270 of
this chapter with respect to the storage
of mixtures of hazardous waste and the
boiler or industrial furnace primary fuel
in tanks that feed the fuel mixture
directly to the boiler. Storage of
hazardous waste prior to mixing with
the primary fuel is subject to regulation
as prescribed in paragraph (a) of this
section.
§266.34 Standards for owners and
operators of facilities that burn hazardous
waste In a boiler Of Industrial furnace.
§266.34-1 Applicability.
(a) General. Owners and operators of
facilities that burn hazardous waste in a
boiler or industrial furnace are subject
to this section except as provided by
§ 266.30 and paragraphs (b) and (c) of
this section.
(b) Small quantity on-site burner
exemption. Owners and operators of
facilities that burn hazardous waste that
they generate in an on-site boiler, blast
furnace, sulfur recovery furnace, light-
weight aggregate kiln, asphaltic concrete
kiln, lime kiln, or cement kiln are
exempt from the requirements of this
section provided that:
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday, May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17035
(1) The quantity of hazardous waste
burned in a calendar month does not
exceed the limits provided below as a
function of device size. No more than
one type of device may burn hazardous '
waste at a given site under this
exemption, and the number of devices of
each type thai can burn waste at a given
site are limited (i.e.. hazardous waste
may be burned at a given site under
only one of the following paragraphs.
(b)(l) (i) through (viii) of this section,
and only in the maximum number of
devices precribed for that paragraph).
The size of the boiler or industrial
furnace means maximum rated heat
input capacity.
(i) Boilers:
Baler size (million Btu/nr)
0 4 10 1 5 . _
>15» 10
> 10 lo SO ._ .
>SOto ISO
> ISO to 400 . .
>400
Quantity
limn/device
(gallon/
month)
7
13
26
55
100
300
No more than two boilers may burn
hazardous wastes under this exemption
at a site.
(ii) Blastfurnaces:
Blast lumace tat (million Blu/hr)
500 to 1 400
>1400
Quantity
tont/ device
(gallon/
month)
250
420
No more than two blast furnaces may
burn hazardous wastes under this
exemption at a site.
(in) Sulfur recovery furnaces-
Furnace size (melton Btu/hr)
Quantity
limn/dewee
(gallon/
month)
>so
40
No more than four sulfur recovery
furnaces may burn hazardous wastes
under this exemption at a site.
(iv) Asphaltic concrete kilns:
Kiln size (million Btu/nr)
Quantity
him/device
(gallon/
month)
110
No more than one asphaltic concrete
kiln may burn hazardous wastes under
this exemption at a site.
(v) Lime kilns:
Kiln sue (mdbon Btu/nr)
>60 . .
Quantity
bmn/devica
(gallon-
month)
200
No more than two lime kilns may burn
hazardous wastes under this exemption
at a site.
(vi) Light-weight aggregate kilns:
Kdn sue (million Blu/hr)
>45
Quantity
ImM/davm
(gallon.
month)
110
No more than three light weight
aggregate kilns may burn hazardous
wastes under this exemption at a site.
(vii) Wet cement kilns:
Kiln sae (million Btu/nr)
90 to 200 _ - . .
>200
Quantity
bmt/daviea
(gallon/
month)
170
420
No more than three wet cement kilns
may burn hazardous wastes under this
exemption at a site.
(vin) Dry cement kilns:
Kdn tat (mtihon Btu/hi)
60 to 160 . ._ - - . _ _ _
> 160 . _.r. _ .
Quantity
hml/devm
(gallon-
month)
140
280
No more than three dry cement kilns
may burn hazardous wastes under this
exemption at a site.
(2) The hazardous waste fuel does not
contain (and is not derived from) EPA
Hazardous Waste Nos. F020. F021. F022,
F023. F02B. or F027.
(3) The maximum hazardous waste
firing rate cannot exceed at any time 1
percent of the total boiler or industrial
furnace fuel (hazardous waste plus other
fuel) on a volume basis.
Note.—Hazardous wastes that are subject
to the special requirements for small quantity
generators under § 261.5 of this chapter may
be burned in an off-site device under the
exemption provided by § 266.34-1 (b). but
must be included in the quantity
determination of the exemption.
(4) Notification requirements. The
owner/operator of facilities qualifying
for the on-site small quantity burner
exemption under paragraphs (b) (1), (2),
and (3) of this section must provide a
one-time written notice to EPA
indicating the following:
(i) The combustion unit is operating as
a small quantity burner of hazardous
waste;
(11) The requirements of § 266.34-1 and
any other applicable standards
providing for their status as a small
quantity burner will be complied with at
all times: and
(liil Hazardous waste generated off-
site (other than small quantity generator
hazardous waste exempt under § 261.S
of this chapter) will not be burned:
(5] Recordkeepmg requirements. The
owner or operator must maintain the
following records at the site to show
compliance with this subsection:
(i) Sufficient records to show
compliance with the hazardous waste
quantity and firing rate limits must be
maintained at the facility for three
years:
(ii) These records, at a minimum, must
indicate the device capacity size and the
quantity of hazardous waste and other
fuel burned in each unit per month.
(c) Applicability of Part 264
standards. Owners and operators of
boilers and industrial furnaces that burn
hazardous waste are subject to the
following provisions of Part 264 of this
chapter, except as provided otherwise
by this section:
(1) In Subpart A (General). § 264.4:
(2) In Subpart B (General facility
standards), §5 264.11-264.18;
(3) In Subpart C (Preparedness and
prevention). §§ 264.31-264.37;
(4) In Subpart D (Contingency plan
and emergency procedures), §§ 264.51-
264.56;
(5) In Subpart E (Manifest system.
recordkeeping, and reporting),
§S 264.71-264.77, except that §§ 264.71.
264.72. and 264.76 do not apply to
owners and operators of on-site
facilities that do not receive any
hazardous waste from off-site sources:
(6) In Subpart F {Corrective Action).
§§264.90 and 264.101.
(7) In Subpart G (Closure and post-
closure). §§ 264.111-264.115; and
(B) In Subpart H (Financial
requirements), §§ 264.141.264.142.
264.143, and 264.147-264.151. except that
States and the Federal government are
exempt from the requirements of
Subpart H.
§ 266.34-2 Hazardous waste analysis.
(a) The owner or operator must
provide an analysis of the
hazardous waste that quantifies the
concentration of any constituent
identified in Appendix VIII of Part 261 of
this chapter that may reasonably be
expected to be in the waste. Such
constituents must be identified and
quantified if present, at levels detectable
by analytical procedures prescribed by
EPA Publication SW-846 referenced in
§ 260.11 of this chapter. This analysis
-------
17036
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1967 / Proposed Rules
will be used to provide all information
required by this section and §§ 270.22
and 270.65 of this chapter and to enable
the permit writer to prescribe such
permit conditions as necessary to
protect human health and the
environment under authority of section
3005(c) of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendment (HSWA). Such
analysis must be included as a portion
of the Part B permit application, or. for
facilities operating under the interim
status standards of § 266.35, as a portion
of the trial bum plan that may be
submitted before the Part B application
under provisions of § 270.65(d) of this
chapter as well as any other analysis
required by the permit authority in
preparing the permit. Owners and
operators of boilers and industrial
furnaces not operating under the interim
status standards of § 266.35 must
provide the information required by
§§ 270.22 or 270.65(c) of this chapter to
the greatest extent possible.
(b) Throughout normal operation, the
owner or operator must conduct
sufficient analyses to ensure that the
hazardous waste fired to the boiler or
industrial furnace is within the physical
and chemical composition limits
specified in his permit.
§266.34-4 Standards to control
emissions.
A boiler or industrial furnace burning
hazardous waste must be designed.
constructed, and maintained so that.
when operated in accordance with
operating requirements specified under
§ 266.34-6. it will meet the following
standards:
(a) Organic emissions. A boiler or
industrial furnace burning hazardous
waste must meet the ORE performance
standard of paragraph(a](l] of this
subsection and the stack gas carbon
monoxide standard of paragraph (a)(2)
of this section, except as provided by
paragraph(a)(3) of this section. A boiler
operated under the special conditions
provided by paragraph (a)(4) of this
section is deemed to be in compliance
with the ORE performance standard of
paragraph (a)(l) of this section without
conducting a trial burn.
(1) ORE standard, (i) Except as
provided in paragraph (a)(l)(iii) of this
section, a boiler or industrial furnace
burning hazardous waste must achieve a
destruction and removal efficiency
(ORE) of 99.99% for each principal
organic hazardous constituent (POHC)
designated (underparagraph (a)(l)(ii) of
this section) in its permit for each
hazardous equation:
ORE
X100%
where
W,n=Mass feed rate of one principal organic
hazardous constituent (POHC) in the
hazardous waste Tired to the boiler or
industrial furnace, and
W,«=Mass emission rate of the same POHC
present in exhaust emissions prior to
release to the atmosphere.
(ii) Principal organic hazardous
constituents (POHCs) are designated as
follows:
(A) One or more POHCs will be
specified in the facility's permit, from
among those constituents listed in Part
261. Appendix VIII of this chapter, for
each hazardous waste to be burned.
This specification will be based on the
degree of difficulty of combustion of the
organic constituents in the hazardous
waste and on their concentration or
mass in the hazardous waste,
considering the results of hazardous
waste analyses and trial bums or
alternative data submitted with Part B of
the facility's permit application. Organic
constituents which represent the
greatest degree of difficulty of
combustion will be those most likely to
be designated as POHCs. Constituents
are more likely to be designated as
POHCs if they are present in large
quantities or concentrations in the
waste.
(B) Trial POHCs will be designated for
performance of trial bums in accordance
with the procedure specified in § 270.65
of this chapter for obtaining trial burn
permits.
(iii) A boiler or industrial furnace
' burning hazardous waste containing (or
derived from) EPA hazardous wastes
F020. F021. F022. F023. F026. or F027
must achieve a destruction and removal
efficiency (DRE) of 99.9999% for each
principal organic hazardous constituent
(POHC) designated (under paragraph
(a)(l)(ii) of this section) in its permit.
This performance must be demonstrated
on POHCs that are more difficult to bum
than tetra-. penta-. and
hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins and
dibenzofurans, DRE is determined for
each POHC from the equation in
paragraph (a)(l) of this section. In
addition, the owner or operator of the
boiler or industrial furnace must notify
the Regional Administrator of his intent
to bum EPA Hazardous Waste Nos.
F020. F021, F022. F023. F026. or F027.
(2) Carbon monoxide standard, (i) A
boiler or industrial furnace burning
hazardous waste must be operated so
that carbon monoxide (CO) levels in the
stack gas do not exceed the time-
weighted average limits provided below.
If a limit is exceeded, the hazardous
waste feed must be shutoff within the
time specified:
CO ma (7 pnoent Oil
100 ppm average ever any 60
nwuitfi pttnod.
500 ppm average over any 10
minute p0nod
M eneeded. tfmtoH
hazardous waste lead-
WWvn lOmmutes
invnootBlBly
When the stack gas oxygen content
differs from 7 percent measured CO
levels must be corrected to those levels
that would result if the stack gas oxygen
content were 7 percent.
(ii) Hazardous waste burning may not
resume until the device has resumed
steady-state (normal) operations as
evidenced by maintaining a time-
weighted average carbon monoxide
(CO) level not to exceed 100 ppm for an
averaging period of not less than 10
minutes nor more than 60 minutes.
(iii) If the CO limits provided by
paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section are
exceeded an aggregate of 10 times in a
calendar month, the owner or operator
(A) Must cease burning hazardous
waste:
(B) Must notify the Regional
Administrator in writing within 5
calendar days: and
(C) May not resume burning
hazardous waste unless and until
written authorization is received from
the Regional Administrator.
(iv) Carbon monoxide and oxygen
levels in the stack gas must be
monitored in accordance with § 266.34-
(v) The boiler or industrial furnace
must be operated with a functioning
system that automatically cuts off the
hazardous waste feed when the 500
ppm. 10 minute tune-weighted average
CO limit is exceeded.
(3) Provision for low risk waste. The
DRE and CO standards of paragraphs
(a)(l) and (a)(2) of this section do not
apply if the boiler or industrial furnace
is operated in conformance with
paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section, and
the owner or operator demonstrates by
emissions modeling in conformance with
paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section that
the burning will not result in significant
adverse health effects.
(i) The device is operated as follows:
(A) A minimum of 50 percent of the
fuel fired to the device is one or more of
the fossil fuels: oil. natural gas, or coal.
or fuels derived from those fossil fuels.
The fossil fuel firing rate must be
determined on a total heat or volume
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17037
input basis, whichever results in the
smaller volume of fossil fuel Tired:
(B) The hazardous waste has an as-
fired heating value of at least 8.000 Btu/
Ib; and
(C) The hazardous waste is fired
directly into the flame zone of the
combustion chamber.
(ii) The burning will be considered to
result in insignificant adverse health
effects if the owner or operator conducts
the following demonstrations in
conformance with the procedures
prescribed in "Guidelines for Permit
Writers: Permitting Hazardous Waste
Combustion Facilities Using Risk
Assessment" (incorporated by
reference, see § 260.11 of this chapter).
This document is herein referred to as
the Risk Assessment Guideline (RAG).
(A) Identify and quantify those
organic constituents listed in Appendix
VIII of 40 CFR Part 261 that could
reasonably be expected to be in the
hazardous waste. To be eligible for the
waiver, every Appendix VIII organic
constituent identified in the waste must
be listed in the RAG where a reference
air concentration (RAC) for
noncarcmogemc compounds or a risk
specific dose (RSO) carcinogenic
compound is provided. (The owner or
operator may petition the Administrator
under provisions provided by § 260.20 of
this chapter to list other hazardous
constituents in the RAG or to revise
RACs or RSDs for compounds listed in
the RAG. Such petitions must include
supporting health effects data.)
(B) Calculate reasonable, worst-case
emission rates for each constituent
identified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section by assuming the device
achieves a 99 percent destruction and
removal efficiency:
(C) Calculate reasonable, worst case
emission rates of products of incomplete
combustion (PICsj for each constituent
identified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section under procedures prescribed
in the RAG.
(D) For noncarcmogemc constituents.
use emissions modeling in conforraance
with § 270.22 of this chapter to
demonstrate that emissions do not result
in an exceedance of the reference air
concentrations (RACs) established by
the RAG.
(E) For carcinogenic constituents, use
emission modeling in conformance with
§ 270.22 of this chapter and the risk-
specific doses identified in the RAG to
demonstrate that emissions of the
carcinogenic constituents and emissions
of PICs estimated in conformance with
paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) (B) and (C) of this
section do not result in maximum off-
site annual average ground level
concentrations that would pose an
aggregate risk to an exposed individual
of greater than 1 X10~k (1 in 100.000)
using the following equation:
where:
N
means the sum of all values for all carcinogenic constituents,
from the first constituent, 1, to the Nth constituent, N.
RSDC1
C
means predicted maximum annual average ground level
concentration of constituent, i, in ug/fn3.
means risk-specific dose at 10'5 risk for constituent, i, in
ug/nr .
means predicted maximum annual average ground level
concentration of PICs, in ug/m3.
means risk-specific dose at 10'5 risk for PICs, in ug/m3.
(4) Boilers operated under specie/
operating requirements in lieu of a trial
burn. Boilers operated under the
following special operating
requirements, and that do not bum
hazardous waste containing (or derived
from] EPA Hazardous Waste Nos. F020,
F021, F022. F023. F026. or F027. are
considered to be in conformance with
the organic emissions performance
standard of § 266.34-4(a). and a trial
burn to demonstrate ORE is waived.
When burning hazardous waste:
(i) A minimum of 50% of the fuel fired
to the boiler is any of the following
fossil fuels: oil. natural gas, or coal, or
fuels derived from those fossil fuels. The
fossil fuel firing rate must be determined
on a total heat or volume input basis.
whichever results in the smaller volume
of fossil fuel fired;
(ii) Boiler load is equal to or greater
than 25%. Boiler load is the ratio at any
time of the total heat input to the
maximum design heat input:
(iii) The hazardous waste has an as-
fired heating value of at least 8.000 Btu/
Ib; and
(iv) The hazardous waste is fired
directly into the flame zone of the
combustion chamber with an air or
steam atomization firing system, a
mechanical atomization system, or a
rotary cup atomization system under the
following restrictions on the as-fired
viscosity and maximum particle size of
the hazardous waste:
-------
17038
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
AtomaaKm systftm
High pressure an of
steam aiormzawxi
Low pressure air or
steam •tomuation
Icttpsq)
Meehameal
aiomaatnn
Rotary cup
atormation.
Haurdous waste
viscosity iimiu
150 10 5,000 SSU
200 to 1.500 SSU . .
c 150 SSU.
175 10 300 SSU. .
Hanntous
waste
maKimum
particle SIM
(mesn)
200
200
200
100
SSU Seconds. SayMl Universal
{A) Mechanical atomization systems.
Fuel pressure within a mechanical
alomization system and fuel flow rate
must be maintained within the design
range taking into account the viscosity
and volatility of the fuel.
(B) Rotary cup atomization systems.
Fuel flow rate through a rotary cup
atomization system must be maintained
within the design range taking into
account the viscosity and volatility of
the fuel.
(v) Stack gas carbon monoxide levels
do not exceed the standard provided by
! 266.34-4(a)(2). |
(b) Metals. The owner or operator
must comply with the metals controls
provided by paragraphs (b){l), (b)(2).
(b)(3). or (b)(4) of this section. Standards
are provided in each of those
paragraphs according to the type and
location of the device. Devices located
where any part of the surrounding
terrain within 20 kilometers of the stack
equals or exceeds the elevation of the
stack are considered to be in complex
terrain and the complex terrain
standards apply. For the purpose of this
determination, the stack may not exceed
good engineering practice as specified in
40 CFR Part 51. All other devices are
considered to be in flat terrain and flat
terrain standards apply. The standards
apply to a single site and are not to be
exceeded at any time. If there is more
than one device on a site, the limits for
the largest device must be apportioned
among the devices based on the thermal
capacity of the devices at the site. The
following definitions apply:
(As) Means level of total arsenic in
pounds/million Btu;
(Cd) Means level of total cadmium in
pounds/million Btu;
(Cr+6) Means level of hexavalent
chromium in pounds/million Btu: and
! (Pb) Means level of lead in pounds/
million Btu
(1) Tier I. The hazardous waste must
not contain arsenic, cadmium.
chromium, and lead at levels greater
than allowed by paragraphs (b)(3) (i) or
(ii] of this section. The concentration
limits are based on the heating value of
the hazardous waste in terms of pounds
of metal per million Btu of waste heating
value (Ib/MM Blu). The limits apply to
the hazardous waste directly or as-fired
after any blending with other waste or
fuel. Hazardous waste exceeding any
specification level is "off-specification".
For purposes of compliance with this
paragraph with respect to chromium.
total chromium levels rather than
hexavalent chromium levels must be
considered in applying the limits
provided by paragraphs (b)[3) (i) and (ii)
of this section; or
(2) Tier 11. The feed rate of arsenic.
cadmium, chromium, and lead to the
device considering the metals contained
in the hazardous waste, other fuels, and
industrial furnace feedstocks shall not
exceed limits resulting from applying the
limits provided by paragraphs (b)(3) (i)
or (ii) of this section as follows:
(i) For each metal, use the following
equation to determine the feed rate of
the metal to the device in terms of lb/
MM Btu of total heat input:
-------
Where:
MFR
Mw
Rw
N
N
Mw x Rw + \ Mpi x Rp. +
MFR i:=1 i
nr r\ -
HT
means the individual metal feed rate
total heat input to the device.
means individual metal concentration
means the hazardous waste feed rate
means the sum of all 1/ainoc fm~ tho /
, .-.— j v, ^w*n t m IvpuacU IXU1C3 1/IM9
N
} MFSj x RFSj
= 1 '6
x 10
in pounds/million Btu of
in the hazardous waste in ppm.
in pounds/hour.
•\thov* f i irt 1 *» /M^U^.* ^ U . _
2 hazardous waste) from, i=l, to the Nth fuel.
i = l
Mr •
means the concentration of metal in the other fuel, Fi, in ppm.
RFJ means the feed rate for the other fuel, Fi, in pounds/hour.
N means, for industrial furnaces, the sum of all the values for all
z feedstocks from the first, j-l, to the Nth feedstock.
j=l
MFSj means the concentration of metal in the feedstock, FSj, in ppm.
RFSj means the quantity of feedstock, FSj, charged to the industrial
furnace in pounds/hour.
HT means the total heat input to the device in million Btu/hour.
ant|. chromium, the total chromium feed rate each of the following metals must not
(ii) Use the feed rates determined by determined by this paragraph is to be exceed the limits specified below. The
paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section in lieu considered in lieu of hexavalent limits are based on the instantaneous
of metals emission rates to show that chromium when applying the limits total heat input to the device.
the limits provided by paragraphs (h)(3) provided by paragraphs (bj(3) (i) and (i) Flat terrain standards:
i and ii of this section are not fiil. r/ii/-, , 0 i*
exceeded. For purposes of compliance I' f^S^S^X^SSZ. blast
with this paragraph with respect to (3) Tier III. Stack emission rates of furnaces, and halogen acid furnaces:
-------
(As) + (Cd) +
1.0 x 10
•4 2.5 x 10'4 3.7 x 10
-5
(Pb) shall not exceed 4.1X10''pounds/ (B) Category 2: Light-weight aggregate
million Btu. kilns, lime kilns, and boilers.
(As) t (Cd) + JCr+6)__ < 1>0
3.9 x 10'4 9.8 x 10"4 1.4 x 10"4
shall not exceed 1.8 X10" pounds/ (C) Category 3: Cement kilns, wet and
dry:
(Pb)
million Btu.
(As)_^ + (Cd) ^ _(Cr+6)__ <10
1.7 x 10"3 4.3 x 10"3 6.3 x 10"4
ffiohnB1trtexceed6'7xl°"2polind8/
(As) A (Cd) «.
'
-5
1.3 x 10'b 3.3 x 10'3 4.9 x 10
(Pb) shall not exceed 5.3X10' 'pounds/ (B) Category 2: Sulfur recovery
million Btu. furnaces:
^ (Cd) t
10
^
3.9 x 10'5 9.9 x 10'5 1.4 x 10"4
shall not exceed 1.8Xlfl-s pounds/ kilns, lime kilns, and halogen acid
(Pb)
million Btu. .
(C) Category 3: Asphatic concrete
kilns, boilers, light-weight aggregate
furnaces:
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
™ ^—.
(As)
(Cd)
(Cr+6)
5.9 x 10"5 1.6 x 10'4 2.2 x 10~4
< 1.0
I not exceed 2.4 x 10''
million Btu.
(D) Category 4: Ccmen. kilns, wet and
dry processes:
(As)
(Cd)
(Cr+6)
1.2 x 10'4 3.0 x 10'4 4.5 x 10'4
< 1.0
(Pb) shall not exceed 4.7x10"'pounds/
million Btu.
.or
(4) Tier IV. For arsenic, cadmium, and
chromium, the sum of the products of the
predicted maximum off-site annual
average ground level concentration
times the unit risk for each metal shall
not exceed 1.0. Unit risk values are
provided in the RAG. For lead, the
predicted maximum quarterly average
ground level concentration shall not
exceed 0.15 fig/ma. Conformance with
this standard is demonstrated by
dispersion modeling of stack emissions
in conformance with § 270.22(d) of this
chapter. All boilers and furnaces not
specifically identified in paragraphs
(b)(l), (b)(2), or (b)(3) of this section
must comply with the requirements of
this paragraph.
(c) Hydrogen chloride (HCl). The
owner or operator must comply with the
hydrogen chloride (HCl) controls
provided by paragraphs (c)(l). (c)(2).
(c)(3). or (c)(4) of this section. Standards
are provided in each of those
paragraphs according to the type and
location of the device. Devices located
where any part of the surrounding
(1) Tier I. The hazardous waste must
not contain chlorine at levels greater
17041
terrain within 20 kilometers of the stack
equals or exceeds the elevation of the
stack are considered to be in complex
terrain and the complex terrain
standards apply. For the purpose of this
determination, the stack may not exceed
good engineering practice as specified in
40 CFR Part 51. All other devices are
considered to be in flat terrain and flat
terrain standards apply. The standards
apply to a single site and are not to be
exceeded at any time. If there is more
than one device on a site, the limits for
the largest device must be apportioned
among the devices based on the thermal
capacity of the devices at the site.
than allowed by paragraph (c)(3) (i) or
(ii) of this subsection. The concentration
limits are based on the heating value of
the hazardous waste in terms of pounds
of chlorine per million Btu of waste
heating value (lb/MM Btu). The limits
apply to the hazardous waste directly or
as-fired after any blending with other
waste or fuel. Hazardous waste
exceeding the specification level is "off-
specification".
(2) Tier II. The feed rate of chlorine to
the device considering the chlorine
contained in the hazardous waste, other
fuels, and industrial furnace feedstock
shall not exceed limits provided by
paragraphs (c)(3) (i) and (ii) of this
section as follows:
(i) Use the following equation to
determine the feed rate of chlorine to
the device in terms of lb/MM Btu of
total heat input:
-------
Cw x Rw + S CFi x Rfi + 2 CFSj x *FSj
CFR
x 10
Where:
CFR
Cw
Rw
N
Z
1-1
N
£
means total chlorine feed rate in pounds/MM Btu of total heat
input to the device.
means chlorine concentration in the hazardous waste in ppm.
means the hazardous waste feed rate in pounds/hour.
means the sum of all values for the other fuels (other than
hazardous waste) from, 1-1, to the Nth fuel.
means the chlorine concentration in the other fuel, Fi, in ppm.
means the feed rate of the other fuel, Fi. in pounds/hour.
means, for industrial furnaces, the sum of all of the values for
all feedstocks from the first, j-1, to the Nth feedstock.
CFSi means the chlorine concentration in feedstock, FS1, in ppm.
RFSi means the quantity of feedstock, FSi, charged to the Industrial
furnace in pounds/hour.
HT
means the total heat input to the device in million Btu/hr.
and
(ii) Use the feed rates determined by
paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section in lieu
of the chlorine emission rates to show
that the limits provided by paragraphs
(c)(3) (i) or (ii) of this section are not
exceeded.
; or
(3) Tier III. The slack emission rate of
HC1 must not exceed the limits specified
below. The limits are based on the
instantaneous total heat input to the
device.
(i) Flat terrain standards:
(A) Category 1: Sulfur recovery
furnaces and halogen acid furnaces: 0.18
Ib/milhon BTU.
(B) Category 2: Blast furnaces and
asphaltic concrete kilns: 0.32 Ib/million
BTU.
(C) Category 3: Light-weight aggregate
kilns, boilers, and lime kilns: 0.70 lb/
million BTU.
(D) Category 4: Cement kilns, wet and
dry: 1.8/million BTU.
(ii) Complex terrain standards:
(A) Category 1: Blast furnaces:
2.5 X 10~* Ib/million BTU.
(B) Category 2: Sulfur recovery
furnaces: 4.1X10'* Ib/million BTU.
(C) Category 3: Asphaltic concrete
kilns, light-weight aggregate kilns.
boilers, halogen acid furnaces, and lime
kilns: 7.3X10'* Ib/million BTU.
(D) Category 4: Cement kilns, wet and
dry processes: 0.21 Ib/million BTU.
(4) Tier IV. The predicted maximum
off-site annual average and maximum
off-site 3-minute ground level
concentrations of HC1 attributable to
stack emissions from the boiler or
industrial furnace must not exceed 15
Hg/m8 and 150 ug/m3. respectively.
Conformance with this standard is
demonstrated by dispersion modeling of
stack emission in conformance with
§ 270.22(e) of this chapter. All boilers
and industrial furnaces not specifically
identified in paragraphs (c)(l). (c)(2). or
(c)(3) of this section must comply with
the requirements of this paragraph.
(d) For purposes of permit
enforcement, compliance with the
operating requirements specified in the
permit (under § 266.34-6) will be
regarded as compliance with this
subsection. However, evidence that
compliance with those permit conditions
is insufficient to ensure compliance with
the requirements of this subsection may
be "information" justifying modification,
revocation, or reinsurance of a permit
under 5 270.41 of this chapter.
§266.34-5 Permits.
(a) The owner or operator of a boiler
or industrial furnace may burn only
hazardous wastes specified in his permit
and only under the operating conditions
specified for those hazardous wastes
under § 266.34.6. except in approved
trial burns under the conditions
specified in § 270.65 of this chapter.
(b) Other hazardous wastes may be
burned only under a new permit or
permit modification, as applicable, that
specifies the operating requirements as
provided by 5 266.34 6.
(c) Boilers and industrial furnaces
operating under the interim status
standards of 5 266.35 are permitted
under procedures provided by § 270.65
of this chapter.
(d) A permit for new boilers and
industrial furnaces (those boilers and
industrial furnaces not operating under
the interim status standards of § 266.35)
must establish appropriate conditions
for each of the applicable requirements
of this subsection, including but not
limited to allowable hazardous waste
firing rates and operating conditions
necessary to meet the requirements of
§ 266.34-6. sufficient to comply with the
following standards:
(1) Boilers that will be permitted
without conducting a trial burn because
they operate under the special operating
conditions provided by § 266.34-4(a)(4)
(that ensure compliance with the organic
emissions standard), and burn
hazardous waste containing metals and
chlorine at concentrations in
conformance with the limits provided by
§§ 266.34-4(b) (1) or (2) and 266.34-4(c)
(1) or (2) (that ensure compliance with
the metals and hydrogen chloride
standards) are subject to the following
permits and are said to be operating
under Special Operating Requirements:
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17043
. J'.l f ?r the Period beginning with
initial introduction of hazardous waste
to the boiler and for the minimum time
required, not to exceed a duration of 720
hours operating time when burning
hazardous waste, to bring the boiler to a
point of operational readiness, the boiler
must be operated in conformance with
the Standard Operating Requirements.
The Regional Administrator may extend
the duration of this period once for up to
720 additional hours when good cause
for the extension is demonstrated by the
aplicant.
(ii) For the period immediately after
completion of the first period of
operation and only for the minimum
penod sufficient to allow sample
analysis, data computation, and
submission of the results by the
applicant demonstrating conformance
with the Special Operating
Requirements, the boiler is subject to the
Special Operating Requirements.
(iii) For the remaining duration of the
permit, the boiler is subject to the
Special Operating Requirements. If the
hazardous waste is off-specification for
metals or chlorine, the Regional
Administrator will specify limitations,
as appropriate, on the metals and
chlorine content, heating value, and feed
rates of the hazardous waste, and other
fuels necessary to ensure compliance
with §§ 266.34-4(b)(2J or 266.34(c)(2).
(2) For boiler and industrial furnaces
that will be permitted without
conducting a trial bum under the
provision for low risk provided by
§ 286.34-4(a)(3) and which burn
hazardous waste containing metals and
chlorine at concentrations in
conformance with the limits provided by
§§ 266.34~4(b) (1) or (2) and 266.34-4(c)
(1) or (2). the permit must:
(i) Incorporate the special operating
requirements provided by § 266.34-
4(a)(3i(i): and
(ii) Specify feed rate limits (Ib/hr) for
each Appendix VIII organic constituent
in the hazardous waste consistent with
the requirements of § 266.34-4(a)(3)(ii).
(3) For boilers and industrial furnaces
that will be permitted based on a trial
burn:
(i) For the period beginning with
initial introduction of hazardous waste
and ending with initiation of the trial
burn, and only for the minimum time
required to bring the device to a point of
operational readiness to conduct a trial
burn, not to exceed a duration of 720
hours operating time when burning
hazardous waste the operating
requirements must be those most likely
to ensure compliance with the standards
of § 266.34-4, based on the Regional
Administrator's engineering judgment.
The Regional Administrator may extend
the duration of this period for up to 720
additional hours when good cause for
the extension is demonstrated by the
applicant.
(ii) For the duration of the trial bum.
the operating requirements must be
sufficient to demonstrate compliance
with the standards of § 266.34-4 and
must be in accordance with the
approved trial burn plan:
(iii) For the period immediately
following completion of the trial burn.
and only for the minimum period
sufficient to allow sample analysis, data
computation, and submission of the trial
bum results by the applicant, and
review of the trial burn results and
modification of the facility permit by the
Regional Administrator to reflect the
trial bum results, the operating
requirements must be those most likely
to ensure compliance with the standards
of § 266.34-4, based on the Regional
Administrator's engineering judgment.
(iv) For the remaining duration of the
permit, the operating requirements must
be those demonstrated in a trial burn or
by alternative data specified in 8 270.22
of this chapter, as sufficient to ensure
compliance with the standards of
§266.34-4.
§266.34-6 Operating requh
(a) General. A boiler or industrial
furnace burning hazardous waste must
be operated in accordance with the
operating requirements specified in the
permit.
(b) Specific requirements to ensure
compliance with the organic emissions
standards—(I) Carbon monoxide
standard. The permit must incorporate
the stack gas carbon monoxide (CO)
standard provided by S 266.34-4(a)(2).
(2) ORE standard. Operating
conditions will be specified on a case-
by-case basis for each hazardous waste
burned as those demonstrated (in a trial
bum or by alternative data as specified
in § 270.22) to be sufficient to comply
with the destruction and removal
efficiency (ORE) performance standard
of 8 266.34-4(a)(l). except as provided
by paragraph (b)(4) of this subsection.
Each set of operating requirements will
specify the composition of the
hazardous waste (including acceptable
variations in the physical or chemical
properties of the hazardous waste which
will not affect compliance with the ORE
performance standard) to which the
operating requirements apply. For each
such hazardous waste, the permit will
specify acceptable operating limits
including the following conditions as
appropriate:
(i) Hazardous waste feed rate:
(ii) Type and feed rate of other fuels
with which the hazardous waste is
cofired:
(iii) Type and feed rate of industrial
furnace feedstocks when hazardous
waste is burned:
(iv) Minimum boiler load or industrial
furnace production rate;
(v) Appropriate controls on operation
and maintenance of the hazardous
waste firing system:
(vi) Allowable variation in boiler and
industrial furnace system design or
operating procedures: and
(vii) Such other operating
requirements as are necessary to ensure
that the DRE performance standard of
§ 266.34-4(a)(l) is met.
(3) Start-up and shut-down.
(i) A boiler or industrial furnace may
not bum hazardous waste during start-
up. Hazardous waste may be bumed
after the device has reached steady-
state (normal) operations as evidenced
by maintaining a time-weighted average
carbon monoxide (CO) level in the flue
gas not to exceed 100 ppm for an
averaging period of not less than 10
minutes nor more than 60 minutes.
(ii) A boiler or industrial furnace may
not burn hazardous waste during shut-
down.
(4) For boilers that will be permitted
without conducting a trial burn because
they operate under the special operating
requirements provided by S 266.34-
4(a)(4) (that ensure compliance with the
organic emission standard) and bum
hazardous waste containing metals and
chlorine at concentrations in
conformance with the limits provided by
§5 266.34-4(b) (1). (2). or (3) and 266.34-
4(c) (1), (2), or (3), the permit must
include operating requirements that
ensure conformance with each special
operating requirement provided by
§ 266.34-4(a)(4) and the metals and
chlorine limits of §§ 266.34-4(b) (1) or (2)
and266.34-4(c)(l]or(2).
(5) For boilers and industrial furnaces
that will be permitted without
conducting a trial bum under the
provision for low risk waste provided by
i 268.34-4(a)(3) and which burn
hazardous waste containing metals and
chlorine at concentrations in
conformance with the limits provided by
§§ 266.34-4(b) (1) or (2) and 266.34-4(c)
(1) or (2), the permit must include
operating requirements that ensure
conformance with each special
condition provided by § 266.34-4(a)(3](i)
and the metals and chlorine limits of
§§ 268.34-4{b) (1) or (2) and 266.34-4(c)
(1) or (2).
(c) Specific operating requirements to
ensure conformance with the metals
standards provided by § 26&34-f(b). (1)
-------
17044
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
For conformance with the Tier I metals
specification standard provided by
§ 266.34-4(b)(l). the permit will specify
the following operating requirements:
(i) Hazardous waste feed rate;
(n) Metals levels in the hazardous
waste: and
(iii) A hazardous waste sampling and
metals analysis program.
(2) For conformance with the Tier II
metals feed rate standard provided by
§ 266.34-4(b)(2), the permit will specify
the following operating requirements:
(i) Hazardous waste feed rate;
(n) Type and feed rate of other fuels
and industrial furnace feedstocks with
which the hazardous waste is burned:
(iii) Levels of metals in the hazardous
waste, other fuels, and industrial
furnace feedstocks: and
(iv) A sampling and metals analysis
program for the hazardous waste, other
fuels, and industrial furnace feedstocks.
(3) For conformance with the Tier III
metals emission rates provided by
S 266.34-4(b)(3), and the Tier IV metals
ground level concentrations provided by
§ 266.34-4(b)(4). the permit will specify
the following operating requirements:
(i) The requirements provided by
paragraphs (c)(2)(iH'vj of this section:
(ii) Operation and maintenance of
emissions control equipment sufficient
to maintain removal efficiencies
achieved during the trial burn: and
(iii) Such other operating requirements
as are necessary to ensure that the
metals standard is met.
(d) Specific operating requirements to
ensure conformance with the hydrogen
chloride standards provided by
§266.34-4(0). (1) For conformance with
the Tier I chlorine specification standard
provided by 8 268.34.4(c)(l). the permit
will specify the following requirements:
(i) Hazardous waste feed rate;
(ii) Total chlorine level in the
hazardous waste; and
(iii) A hazardous waste sampling and
chlorine analysis program.
(2) For conformance with the Tier II
chlorine feed rate standard provided by
S 266.34-4(c)(2), the permit will specify
the following operating requirements:
(i) Hazardous waste feed rate;
(ii) Type and feed rate of other fuels
and industrial furnace feedstocks with
which the hazardous waste is burned;
(iii) Levels of chlorine in the
hazardous waste, other fuels, and
industrial furnace feedstocks; and
(iv) A sampling and chlorine analysis
program for the hazardous waste, other
fuels, and industrial furnace feedstocks.
(3) For conformance with the Tier III
hydrogen chloride (HC1) emissions rates
provided by S 286.34-4(b)(3). and the
Tier IV HCI ground level concentrations
provided by S 266.34-4(c)(4). the permit
will specify the following operating
requirements:
(i) The requirements provided by
paragraphs (d)(2)(i)-{iv) of this section;
(ii) Operation and maintenance of
emissions control equipment sufficient
to maintain removal efficiencies
achieved during the trial burn: and
(iii) Such other operating requirements
as are necessary to ensure that the HCI
standards are met: and
(e) General requirements—(I) Fugitive
emissions. Fugitive emissions from the
combustion zone when burning
hazardous waste must be controlled by:
(i) Keeping the combustion zone
totally sealed against fugitive emissions;
(ii) Maintaining a combustion zone
pressure lower than atmospheric
pressure; or
(iii) An alternate means of control
demonstrated (with Part B of the permit
application) to provide fugitive
emissions control equivalent to
maintenance of combustion zone
pressure lower than atmospheric
pressure.
(2) Automatic cutoff. A boiler or
industrial furnace must be operated with
a functioning system that automatically
cuts off the hazardous waste feed when
operating conditions deviate from those
established under this subsection.
(3) Changes. A boiler or industrial
furnace must cease burning hazardous
waste when changes in composition,
properties, or feed rates of the
hazardous waste, other fuels, or
industrial furnace feedstocks, or
changes in the boiler or industrial
furnace design or operating conditions
exceed the limits designated in its
permit
§266.34-7 Monitoring and Inspections.
(a) The owner or operator must
monitor and record the following, as a
minimum, while burning hazardous
waste:
(1) Hazardous waste feed rate, and. if
required by the permit, the feed rate of
other fuels and industrial furnace
feedstocks.
(2) Carbon monoxide (CO) and
oxygen on a continuous basis at a
common point in the boiler or industrial
furnace downstream of the combustion
zone and prior to release of stack gases
to the atmosphere. CO and oxygen
monitors must be installed, operated.
and maintained in accordance with
Guideline for Continuous Monitoring of
Carbon Monoxide at Hazardous Waste
Incinerators. Appendix D. PES. January
1987.
(3) Upon the request of the Regional
Administrator, sampling and analysis of
the hazardous waste (and other fuels
and industrial furnace feedstocks as
appropriate) and exhaust emissions
must be conducted to verify that the
operating requirements established in
the permit achieve the standards of
§ 266.34-4.
(b) The boiler or industrial furnace
and associated equipment (pumps.
valves, pipes, fuel storage tanks when
they contain hazardous waste, etc.) must
be subjected to thorough visual
inspection, at least daily when
hazardous waste is burned, for leaks,
spills, fugitive emissions, and signs of
tampering.
(c) The emergency hazardous waste
feed cutoff system and associated
alarms must be tested at least weekly
when hazardous waste is burned to
verify operability. unless the applicant
demonstrates to the Regional
Administrator that weekly inspections
will unduly restrict or upset operations
and that less frequent inspections will
be adequate. At a minimum, operational
testing-must be conducted at least
monthly.
(d) These monitoring and inspection
data must be recorded and the records
must be placed in the operating log1
required by § 264.73 of this chapter.
§266.34-8 Closure.
At closure, the owner or operator
must remove all hazardous waste and
hazardous waste residues (including.
but not limited to. ash. scrubber waters,
and scrubber sludges) from the boiler or
industrial furnace site.
S 266.35 Interim status standards for
owners and operators of facilities that bum
hazardous waste hi a boiler or Industrial
furnace.
§266.35-1 Applicability.
(a) General. The purpose of this
section is to establish minimum national
standards for owners and operators of
facilities that bum hazardous waste in
boilers or industrial furnaces where
such standards define the acceptable
management of hazardous waste during
the period of interim status and until
certification of final closure. The'
standards of this section apply to
owners and operators of facilities that
are in existence on the effective date of
this section until either a permit is
issued under S 268.34 or until the closure
responsibilities identified in this section
are fulfilled.
Note.—A boiler or industrial furnace is "in
existence" if it was burning hazardous waste
or was under construction that would enable
it to burn hazardous waste on or before the
effective date of S 266.35. A facility has
commenced construction if it meets the
conditions provided by paragraphs (1) and (2)
of the definition of "Existing hazardous waste
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed. Rules
17045
management (HWM) facility" in § 26010 of
this chapter. If the boiler or industrial furnace
is located at a facility that already has a
permit or interim status, then the facility must
comply with the applicable regulations
dealing with modifications in §§ 27041 and
42 of this chapter.
(b) Exemptions. The requirements of
this section do not apply to:
(1) Hazardous waste exempt under
§ 266.30(b): and
(2) Small quantity on-site burners
Owners and operators of facilities that
burn hazardous waste that they
generate in an on-site boiler and
industrial furnace are exempt from the
requirements of this section provided
that they meet the requirements of
§ 266.34-l(b).
(c) Prohibition on burning dioxm-
containing wastes. Hazardous waste
containing or derived from any of the
following dioxin-containmg waste may
not be burned in a boiler or industrial
furnace operating under the interim
status standards of this section: EPA
Hazardous Waste Nos. F020, F021, F022.
F023, F026. and F027.
(d) Applicability of Part 265
standards. Owners and operators of
boilers and industrial furnaces that bum
hazardous waste are subject to the
following provisions of Part 265 of this
chapter, except as provided otherwise
by this subsection:
(1) In Subpart A (General). § 265.4-
(2) In Subpart B (General facility
standards). §§ 265.11-265.17;
(3) In Subpart C (Preparedness and
prevention), §§265.31-265.37;
(4) In Subpart D (Contingency plan
and emergency procedures). §§ 265.51-
265.56;
(5) In Subpart E (Manifest system.
recordkeeping. and reporting).
§§ 265.71-265.77. except that §§ 265.71.
265.72. and 265.76 do not apply to
owners and operators of on-site
facilities that do not receive any
hazardous waste from off-site sources:
(6) In Subpart G (Closure and post-
closure). §§ 265.111-265.115; and
(7) In Subpart H (Financial
requirements), §§ 265.141, 265.143. and
265.147-265.151. except that States and
the Federal government are exempt from
the requirements of Subpart H.
§ 266.35-2 Hazardous waste analysis.
(a) In addition to the waste analyses
required by § 265.13 of this chapter, the
owner or operator must sufficiently
analyze any hazardous waste that he
has not previously burned in his boiler
or industrial furnace to enable him to
establish steady-state (normal)
operating conditions and to comply with
the stack gas carbon monoxide standard
and metals and hydrogen chloride
standards provided by § 266.35-3.
(b) The owner or operator must
sufficiently analyze the hazardous
waste that he bums to determine the
type of pollutants that might be emitted.
At a minimum, the analysis must
determine:
(1) Heating value of the hazardous
waste, as fired:
(2) Concentrations in the hazardous
waste itself, or. as fired after blending
with other waste or fuel, of arsenic.
cadmium, chromium, and lead, unless
the owner or operator has written,
documented data that show that the
metal is not present: and
(3) Chlorine content of the hazardous
waste itself, or. as fired.
Note.—As required by g 265.73 of this
chapter, the owner or operator must place the
results from each waste analysis, or the
documented information in the operating
record of the facility.
§ 266.35-4 Operating requirements.
(a) A boiler or industrial furnace
burning hazardous wastes under this
subsection shall meet and demonstrate
compliance with the metals and
hydrogen chloride standards provided in
§ 266.34-4 (b) and (c).
(b) Carbon monoxide standard. (1)
Except as provided by paragraph (b)(2)
of this subjection, a boiler or industrial
furnace burning hazardous waste must
be operated in conformance with the
carbon monoxide (CO) standards
provided by § 266.34-4(a)(2).
(2) Owners and operators who submit
a Part B application six months prior to
the effective date of the carbon
monoxide monitoring requirement of
this paragraph and who claim to
demonstrate that the hazardous waste is
a low risk waste under provisions of
§ 266.34-4{a)(3) (and not subject to CO
monitoring or the ORE performance
standard) are nol subject to the CO
monitoring requirements of this
paragraph.
(b) Start-up and shut-down. (I) A
boiler or industrial furnace may not burn
hazardous waste during start-up.
Hazardous waste may be burned after
the device has reached steady-state
(normal) operations as evidenced by
maintaining a time-weighted average
carbon monoxide (CO) level in the flue
gas not to exceed 100 ppm for an
averaging period of not less than 10
minutes nor more than 60 minutes.
(2) A boiler or industrial furnace may
not bum hazardous waste during shut-
down.
§ 266.35-4 Monitoring and Inspections.
(a) The owner or operator must
conduct, at a minimum, the following
monitoring while burning hazardous
waste:
(1) Except as provided by § 266.35-
3(b)(2). carbon monoxide (CO) and
oxygen must be monitored on a
continuous basis at a common point in
the boiler or industrial furnace
downstream of the combustion zone and
prior to release of stack gases to the
atmosphere. CO and oxygen monitors
must be installed, operated, and
maintained in accordance with:
Guideline for Continuous Monitoring of
Carbon Monoxide at Hazardous Waste
Incinerators. Appendix D. PES, January
1987.
(2) Other existing instruments that
relate to combustion and emission
control must be monitored at least every
15 minutes. Appropriate corrections to
maintain steady state combustion
conditions and normal emission control
operations must be made immediately
either automatically or by the operator.
Instruments that relate to combustion
and emission control would normally
include those measuring hazardous
waste feed rates, feed rate of other fuels,
feed rate of industrial furnace
feedstocks, hazardous waste firing
system pressure, scrubber flow and
scrubber water pH. electrostatic
precipitator spark rate, and fabric filter
pressure drop.
(b) The boiler or industrial furnace
and associated equipment (pumps,
valves, pipes, etc.) must be subjected to
thorough visual inspection, at least daily
when hazardous waste is burned, for
leaks, spills, fugitive emissions, and
signs of tampering.
(c) The emergency hazardous waste
feed cutoff system and associated
alarms must be tested at least weekly
when hazardous waste is burned to
verify operability, unless the owner or
operator has written documentation that
weekly inspections will unduly restrict
or upset operations and that less
frequent inspections will be adequate.
At a minimum, operational testing must
be conducted at least monthly.
§266.35-5 Closure.
At closure, the owner or operator
must remove all hazardous waste and
hazardous waste residues (including,
but not limited to, ash, scrubber water,
and scrubber sludges) from the boiler or
industrial furnace site.
PART 270—EPA ADMINISTERED
PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMIT
PROGRAM.
VI. In Part 270:
1. The authority citation for Part 270
continues to read as follows:
-------
17D46
Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
Authority: Sees. 1006. 2002. 3005. 3007. and
7004 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976. as amended by the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of
1984 (42 U.S.C. 6905. 6912. 6925. 6927. and
6974).
2. It is proposed to amend paragraph
(a) of S 270.6 by adding the following:
§270.6 References
(a) * ' *
"Guideline on Air Quality Models
(Revised)". July 1986. EPA Publication
Number 450/2-78-027R (OAQPS
Guideline No. 1.2-080). available from
National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Virginia. Order No. PB 86-
245286.
"Guidelines for Permit Writers:
Permitting Hazardous Waste
Combustion Facilities Using Risk
Assessment".
3. It is proposed to add § 270.22 to
Subpart B to read as follows:
§270.22 Specific Part B Information
requirement* for bolters and industrial
furnaces burning hazardous waste.
(a) Except as provided otherwise by
§ 266.30(d) (exemption of certain
hazardous waste) and § 268.34-l(b)
(exemption of small quantity on-site
burners) of this chapter, owners and
operators of boilers and industrial
furnaces that burn hazardous waste
must conduct a trial burn in accordance
with § 270.65 to demonstrate
conformance with the standards in
§ 266.34-4 of this chapter, unless a trial
bum is not required under provisions of
that section and the owner or operator
demonstrates compliance with those
provisions as provided by paragraph (c)
of this section.
(b) Owners and operators not seeking
to be permitted under provisions that do
not require a trial burn must submit a
trial burn plan or the results of a trial
burn, including all required
determinations, in accordance with
§ 270.65.
(c) Owners and operators seeking to
be permitted under provisions of
§ 266.34-4 of this chapter that do not
require a trial burn must submit
documentation as follows:
(1) Boilers operated under special
operating requirements for conformance
with the organic emissions standard.
When seeking to be permitted under
§ 266.34-4(a)(4) of this chapter, the
owner or operator of a boiler must
submit documentation that the boiler
operates under the special operating
requirements provided by that
paragraph;
(2) Boilers and industrial furnaces
burning low risk waste. When seeking
to be permitted under the provisions for
low risk waste provided by S 266.34-
4(a)(3) of this chapter so that neither the
trial burn nor carbon monoxide (CO)
monitoring are required, the owner or
operator of a boiler or industrial furnace
must submit:
(i) Documentation that the device is
operated in conformance with the
requirements of S 266.34-4(a)(3)(i) of this
chapter.
(ii) Results of analyses documenting
the concentration of organic compounds
listed in Appendix VIII of Part 261 of
this chapter that could reasonably be
expected to be constituents of each
hazardous waste to be burned.
(iii) Documentation of hazardous
waste firing rates and calculations of
reasonable, worst-case emission rates of
each constituent identified in paragraph
(c)(3)(ii) of this section assuming the
device achieves a 99% destruction
efficiency for each constituent as
provided by S 266.34-4(a)(3)(ii)(B) of this
chapter.
(iv) Calculations of reasonable, worst-
case emission rates of products of
incomplete combustion (PICs) for each
constituent identified in paragraph
(c)(3)(ii) of this section using procedures
established in "Guidelines for Permit
Writers: Permitting Hazardous Waste
Combustion Facilities Using Risk
Assessment" (incorporated by. __ -
reference, see § 270.6). This document is
herein termed the Risk Assessment
Guideline or RAG.
(v) Results of emissions modeling for
emissions identified in paragraphs
(c)(2)(iii) and (iv) of this section using
modeling Procedures provided by
"Guideline on Air Quality Models
(Revised)" (incorporated by reference.
see § 270.6). This document is herein
termed the GAQM. The Director will
review the emission modeling conducted
by the applicant to determine
conformance with the GAQM. The
Director will either approve the
modeling or determine that alternate or
supplementary modeling is appropriate.
(vi) For each noncarcmogenic
constituent identified in paragraph
(c](2](ii) of this section, provide
documentation that emissions will not
result in exceedances of the reference
air concentrations (RACs) identified in
the RAG.
(vii) For each carcinogenic constituent
identified in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this
section and for products of incomplete
combustion (PICs) quantified in
conformance with paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of
this section, results of the computation
required by § 266.34-4(a)(3)(ii)(E) of this
chapter.
(3) Boilers and industrial furnaces -
meeting the Tier I or Tier II metals
controls. When seeking to be permitted
under the provisions of § 266.34-4(b)(l)
(Tier I) or S 266.34-4(b)(2) (Tier II) that
control metals emissions without
requiring a trial burn, the owner or
operator of a boiler or industrial furnace
must submit:
(i) For conformance with the Tier I
metal specification provided by
S 266.34-4(b)(l] of this chapter:
(A) Documentation of the hazardous
waste feed rate:
(B) Documentation of metals levels in
the hazardous waste;
(C) Documentation of the heat input
capacity (MM Btu/hr) of the device: and
(D) Proposed hazardous waste
sampling and metals analysis plan.
(ii) For conformance with the Tier II
metals feed rate standard provided by
§ 266.34-4(b)(2) of this chapter.
(A) Documentation of the hazardous
waste feed rate;
(B) Documentation of the type and
feed rate of other fuels and industrial
furnace feedstocks with which the
hazardous waste is burned;
(C) Documentation of the levels of
metals in the hazardous waste, other
fuels, and industrial furnace feedstocks.
(D) Documentation of the heat input
capacity (MM Btu/hr) of the device; and
(E) Proposed sampling and metals
analysis plan for the hazardous waste.
other fuels, and industrial furnace
feedstocks.
(4) Boilers and industrial furnaces
meeting the Tier I or Tier IIHC1 control.
When seeking to be permitted under the
provision of § 266.34-4(c)(l) (Tier I) or
i 268.34-4(c)(2) (Tier II) that control
hydrogen chloride (HC1) emissions
without requiring a trial burn, the owner
or operator of a boiler or industrial
furnace must submit:
(i) For conformance with the Tier I
chlorine specification provided by
S 266.34-4(c)(l) of this chapter
(A) Documentation of the hazardous
waste feed rate;
(B) Documentation of the chlorine
level in the hazardous waste;
(C) Documentation of the heat input
capacity (MM Btu/hr) of the device, and
(D) Proposed hazardous waste
sampling and chlorine analysis plan.
(ii) For conformance with the Tier II
chlorine feed rate standard provided by
§ 266.34-4(c)(2) of this chapter.
(A) Documentation of the hazardous
waste feed rate;
(B) Documentation of the type and
feed rate of other fuels and industrial
furnace feedstocks with which the
•hazardous waste is burned:
(C) Documentation of the levels of
chlorine in the hazardous waste, other
fuels, and industrial furnace feedstocks;
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17047
(D) Documentation of the heat input
capacity (MM Btu/hr) of the device; and
(E) Proposed sampling and chlorine
analysis plan for the hazardous waste
other fuels, and industrial furnace
feedstocks.
(5) Data in lieu of a trial burn The
owner or operator of a boiler or
industrial furnace may seek an
exemption from the trial burn by
providing information from trial or
operational burns of similar boilers or
industrial furnaces burning similar
hazardous wastes under similar
conditions. The Director shall approve a
permit application without a trial burn if
he finds that the hazardous wastes are
sufficiently similar, the devices are
sufficiently similar, and the data from
other trial burns are adequate to specify
(under § 266.34-6 of this chapter)
operating conditions that will ensure
conformance with the standards in
§ 266.34-4 of this chapter. In seeking this
exemption, the applicant must submit
the following information:
(i) An analysis of each hazardous
waste to be burned including:
(A) Heating value, levels of arsenic.
cadmium, chromium, lead, and chlorine
and the composition of the hazardous
waste, as fired (after blending);
(B) Viscosity and maximum particle
size (if applicable), or a description of
the physical form of the hazardous
waste:
(C) An identification of any hazardous
organic and inorganic constituents listed
in Part 261. Appendix VIII. of this
chapter, which are present in the
hazardous waste, except that the
applicant need not analyze for
constituents listed in Appendix VIII
which would reasonably not be
expected to be found in the hazardous
waste. The constituents excluded from
analysis must be identified and the
basis for their exclusion explained. The
analysis must rely on analytical
techniques specified in "Test Methods
for the Evaluation of Solid Waste.
Physical/Chemical Methods"
(incorporated by reference, see I 270.6
and referenced in 40 CFR Part 261.
Appendix III, or their equivalent);
(D) An appropriate quantification of
the hazardous constituents identified in
the hazardous waste, within the
precision produced by the analytical
methods specified in "Test Methods for
the Evaluation of Solid Waste. Physical/
Chemical Methods" (incorporated by
reference, see § 270.6); and
(E) A quantification of those
hazardous constituents in the hazardous
waste that may be designated as POHCs
based on data submitted from other trial
or operational burns which demonstrate
compliance with the performance
standards in § 266.34 4 of this chapter
(n) A detailed engmeenng description
of the boiler or industrial furnace.
including:
(A) Manufacturer's name and model
number of boiler or industrial furnace;
(B) Type of boiler or industrial
furnace;
(C) Description of feed system for
hazardous waste, other fuel, and
industrial furnace feedstocks;
(D) Capacity of hazardous waste feed
system:
(E) Description of automatic
hazardous waste feed cutoff system(s);
(F) Description of any emission
control system(s): and
(G) Description of stack gas
monitoring and any pollution control
monitoring systems;
(iii) A description and analysis of the
hazardous waste to be burned compared
with the hazardous waste for which
data from operational or trial burns are
provided to support the contention that
a trial bum is not needed. The data
should include those items listed in
paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section. This
analysis should specify the POHCs that
the applicant has identified in the
hazardous waste for which a permit is
sought, and any differences from the
POHCs in the hazardous waste for
which burn data are provided;
(iv) The design and operating
conditions of the boiler or industrial
furnace to be used, compared with that
for which comparative burn data are
available, including:
(A) Feed rate of the hazardous waste;
(B) The type, feed rate, and heating
value of other fuels fired when
hazardous waste is burned, and, if the
levels of arsenic, cadmium, chromium,
lead, or chlorine in the hazardous waste
exceed the specification levels provided
by §§ 26&34-6(c)(3) and 266.39-6(d)(3) of
this chapter, the levels of those
constituents in the other fuels; and
(C) The type and feed rate of
industrial furnace feedstocks, and. if the
levels of arsenic, cadmium, chromium,
lead, or chlorine in the hazardous waste
exceed the specification levels provided
by §§ 266.34-6(c)(3) and 266.34-6(d)(3) of
this chapter, the levels of those
constituents in the feedstocks;
(v) A description of the results
submitted from any previously
conducted trial burn(s) including:
(A) Sampling and analysis techniques
used to calculate conformance with
performance standards in § 266.34-4 of
this chapter: and
(B) Methods and results of monitoring
feed rates of hazardous waste and, as
appropriate, other fuels and industrial
furnace feedstocks;
(vi) The expected boiler or industrial
furnace operation information to
demonstrate compliance with § § 266.34-
4 and 266.34-6 of this chapter, including:
(A) Hazardous waste feed rate. and.
as appropriate, feed rate of other fuels
and industrial furnace feedstocks;
(B) Expected removal efficiency for
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, and
hydrogen chloride;
(C) Expected fugitive emissions and
their control procedures; and
(D) Proposed allowable hazardous
waste feed variations including feed
rate, composition, metals, and chlorine
levels;
(vi) Such supplemental information as
the Director finds necessary to achieve
the purposes of this paragraph.
(vii) Hazardous waste analysis data,
including that submitted in paragraph
(c)(5)(i) of this section, sufficient to
allow the Director to specify in the
permit the Principle Organic Hazardous
Constituents (permit POHCs) for which
destruction and removal efficiencies will
be required.
(d) Owners and operators seeking to
be permitted under Tiers I, II, or III for
metals and chlorine under the
provisions of § 266.34-4(b)(l)-(3) and
§ 266.34-4(c)(l)-(3) of this chapter must
submit the documentation needed to
determine whether the permitted device
is sited in complex or flat terrain as
defined in the aforementioned
provisions. The applicant must give the
methodology for the determination
including such information as the stack
height and topographical data including
maps used in making the determination.
(e) Owners and operators seeking to
be permitted under the Tier IV metals
provision of 5 266.34-4(b)(4) of this
chapter must submit a dispersion
modeling plan with Part B of the permit
application. The Director will review the
plan for conformance with the
"Guideline for Air Quality Monitoring"
(incorporated by reference, see § 270.6).
The Director will either approve the
modeling plan or determine that an
alternate or supplementary plan is
appropriate. After completion of the trial
burn to measure metals emission rates,
the owner or operator must conduct
dispersion modeling according to the
approved plan and submit the results to
the Director. The Director will determine
whether the results are in conformance
with the requirements of S 268.34-4(b)(4)
of this chapter and will establish
appropriate operating requirements as
required by § 266.34-4(c)(3] of this
chapter.
(f) Owners and operators seeking to
be permitted under the Tier IV hydrogen
chloride (HC1) provisions of § 266.34-
-------
17048
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday, May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
4(c)(4) of this chapter must submit a
dispersion modeling plan with Part B of
the permit application. The Director will
review the plan for conformance with
the "Guideline for Air Quality
Monitoring (Revised)" (incorporated by
reference, see § 270.6). The Director will
either approve the modeling plan or
determine that an alternative or
supplementary plan is appropriate. After
completion of the trial burn to measure
HC1 emission rates, the owner or
operator must conduct dispersion
modeling according to the approved
plan and submit the results to the
Director. The Director will determine
whether the results are in conformance
with the requirements of § 266.34-4(c)(4)
of this chapter and will establish
appropriate operating requirements as
required by § 266.34-6(d)(3) of this
chapter.
Subpart F—Special Forms of Permits
4. It is proposed to add § 270.66 to
Subpart F to read as follows:
§ 270.66 Permits for boilers and Industrial
furnace* burning hazardous waste.
(a) General. New boilers (those
boilers not operating under the interim
status standards of § 266.35 of this
chapter) are subject to paragraph (b) of
this section if they will be permitted
without a trial bum under § 266.34.5-
(d)(l) of this chapter. New boilers and
industrial furnaces that will be
permitted based on a trial burn under
§ 266.34-5(d)(3) of this chapter are
subject to paragraph (c) of this section.
Boilers and industrial furnaces operating
under the interim status standards of
§ 266.35 of this chapter are subject to
paragraph (d) of this section.
Note.—New boilers and industnal furnaces
permitted without a trial bum under the
provision for low risk waste provided by
S 268.34-»(a)(3) of this chapter are not subject
to the special permits of this section if a trial
bum is not required to demonstrate
compliance with the Tier III or Tier IV metals
or HCI controls. Such facilities are awarded
an operating permit after the Director
establishes that the facility is in conformance
with { 266.34-4(a)(3) of this chapter and the
Tier 1 or Tier II metals and HCI controls.
(b) New boilers permitted without a
trial burn. New boilers that will be
permitted without a trial burn under
§ 266.34-5(d)(l) of this chapter are
subject to the operating requirements in
§8 266.34-6(b)(4) (to control organic
emissions). 266.34-«(c] (2) or (3) (to
control metals emissions), and 266.34-
6(d) (2) or (3) (to control HCI emissions)
of this chapter. These requirements are
termed "Special Operating
Requirements." New boilers that operate
under the Special Operating
Requirements are subject to the
following permits:
(1) Predemonstration period. The
predemonstration period begins with
initial introduction of hazardous waste
to the boiler and extends for the
minimum time required, not to exceed a
duration of 720 hours operating time
when burning hazardous waste, to bring
the boiler to a point of operation
readiness to conduct a demonstration
that the boiler can operate under the
Standing Operating Requirements.
During this period, the boiler must be
operated in conformance with the
Standard Operating Requirements. The
Regional Administrator may extend the
duration of this period once for up to 720
additional hours when good cause for
the extension is demonstrated by the
applicant. The permit may be modified
to reflect the extension according to
§ 270.42 (minor modifications of
permits).
(i) Applicants must submit a
statement with Part B of the permit
application demonstrating how they will
comply with the Standard Operating
Requirements. If the hazardous waste is
off-specification for metals or chlorine.
the statement should include limitations,
as appropriate, on the metals and
chlorine content, heating value, and feed
rates of the hazardous waste, other fuel,
and industrial furnace feedstocks to
demonstrate conformance with
§§ 266.34-«(c)(2) and 266.34-6(d)(2) of
this chapter,
(ii) The Director will review this
statement and any other relevant
information submitted with Part B of the
permit application and determine
whether the applicant is likely to be able
to comply with the Standard Operating
Requirements.
(2) Demonstration period. For the
period immediately after completion of
the first period of operation and only for
the minimum period sufficient to allow
sample analysis, data computation, and
submission of the results by the
applicant demonstrating conformance
with the Standard Operating
Requirements, the boiler is subject to the
Standard Operating Requirements.
During this period, the applicant is
operating under a Demonstration Permit.
The Demonstration Permit is an
extension of the Predemonstration
Permit and constitutes a minor
modification of permits under S 270.42.
(3) Post-demonstration period. After
successful completion of the
demonstration period, the boiler
operates under a Final Permit in
conformance with the Standard
Operating Requirements. If the
hazardous waste is off-specification for
metals or chlorine, the Director will
specify changes to limitations, as
appropriate, on the metals and chlonne
content, heating value, and feed rates of
the hazardous waste, other fuels, and
industrial furnace feedstocks and
requirements for the operation and
maintenance of emissions control
equipment necessary to ensure
compliance with §§ 266.34-6(c)(2) or
266.34-6(d)(2) of this chapter. The Final
Permit is an extension of, and
modification to, as necessary, the
Demonstration Permit and constitutes a
minor modification of permits under
i 270.42.
(c) New boilers and industrial
furnaces permitted with a trial burn.
New boilers and industrial furnaces that
will be permitted with a trial burn under
§ 266.34-5(d)(2) of this chapter are
subject to the following permits:
(1) Pretrial bum period. For the period
beginning with initial introduction of
hazardous waste and ending with
initiation of the trial burn, and only for
the minimum time required to bring the
boiler or industnal furnace to a point of
operation readiness to conduct a trial
burn, not to exceed 720 hours operating
time when burning hazardous waste, the
Director must establish in a Pretrial
Burn Permit conditions, including but
not limited to, allowable hazardous
waste feed rates and operating
conditions. The Director may extend the
duration of this operational period once.
for up to 720 additional hours, at the
request of the applicant when good
cause is shown. The permit may be
modified to reflect the extension
according to § 270.42 (minor
modifications of permits).
(i) Applicants must submit a
statement, with Part B of the permit
application, that suggests the conditions
necessary to operate in compliance with
the standards of §-266.34-4 of this
chapter during this period. This
statement should include, at a minimum,
restrictions on hazardous waste
constituents including arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, lead, and chlorine, hazardous
waste heating value and feed rates, and
the operating parameters identified in
§ 266.34-6 of this chapter.
(ii) The Director will review this
statement and any other relevant
information submitted with Part B of the
permit application and specify
requirements for this period sufficient to
meet the performance standards of
§ 266.34-4 of this chapter based on his
engineering judgment.
(2) Trial bum period. For the duration
of the trial burn, the Director must
establish conditions in the permit for the
purposes of determining feasibility of
compliance with the performance
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 8. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17D49
standards of § 266.34-4 of this chapter
and of determining adequate operating
conditions under § 266.34-6 of this
chapter.
(i) Applicants must propose a trial
burn plan, prepared under paragraph
(c)[2)(u) of this section, to be submitted
with Part B of the permit application.
(ii) The trial burn plan must include
the following information:
(A) An analysis of each hazardous
waste, as fired, that includes:
(1) Heating value, levels of arsenic.
cadmium, chromium, lead, and chlorine.
and composition of the hazardous
waste:
(2) Viscosity and maximum particle
size (if applicable), or description of the
physical form of the hazardous waste;
(3) An identification of any hazardous
organic constituents listed in Part 261.
Appendix VIII of this chapter that are
present in the hazardous waste, except
that the applicant need not analyze for
constituents listed in Appendix VIII that
would reasonably not be expected to be
found in the hazardous waste. The
constituents excluded from analysis
must be identified and the basis for their
exclusion explained. The analysis must
rely on analytical techniques specified
in 'Test Methods for the Evaluation of
Solid Waste. Physical/Chemical
Methods" (incorporated by reference.
see § 270.6), or their equivalent.
(4) An approximate quantification of
the hazardous constituents identified in
the hazardous waste, within the
precision produced by the analytical
methods specified in 'Test Methods for
the Evaluation of Solid Waste. Physical/
Chemical Methods" (incorporated by
reference, see § 270.6). or other
equivalent.
[5] A description of blending
procedures, if applicable, prior to firing
the hazardous waste, including a
detailed analysis of the hazardous
waste pnor to blending, an analysis of
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, and
chlorine levels in the fuel with which the
hazardous waste is blended, and
blending ratios.
(B) A detailed engineering description
of the boiler or industrial furnace.
including:
(1) Manufacturer's name and model
number of the boiler or industrial
furnace:
(2) Type of boiler or industrial
furnace;
[3] Maximum rated heat input;
(4) Description of the feed system for
the hazardous waste, and. as
appropriate, other fuels and industrial
furnace feedstocks;
(5) Capacity of hazardous waste feed
system:
(£) Description of automatic
hazardous waste feed cutoff system(s):
(7) Description of any emission
control system(s): and
[8] Description of stack gas monitoring
and any pollution control monitoring
systems.
(C) A detailed description of sampling
and monitoring procedures including
sampling and monitoring locations in the
system, the equipment to be used,
sampling and monitoring frequency, and
planned analytical procedures for
sample analysis.
(D) A detailed test schedule for each
hazardous waste for which the trial bum
is planned, including date(s). duration.
quantity of hazardous waste to be
burned, and other factors relevant to the
Director's decision under paragraph
(c)(2)(v) of this section.
(E) A detailed test protocol, including.
for each hazardous waste identified, the
ranges of hazardous waste feed rate,
and. as appropriate, the feed rates of
other fuels and industrial furnace
feedstocks, and any other relevant
parameters that will be varied and that
may affect the ability of the boiler or
industrial furnace to meet the •
performance standards in § 266.34-4 of
this chapter.
(F) A description of. and planned
operating conditions for, any emission
control equipment that will be used.
(G) Procedures for rapidly stopping
the hazardous waste feed and
controlling emissions in the event of an
equipment malfunction.
(H) Such other information as the
Director reasonably finds necessary to
determine whether to approve the trial
burn plan in light of the purposes of this.
paragraph and the criteria in paragraph
(c)(2)(v) of this section.
(iii) The Director, in reviewing the
trial burn plan, shall evaluate the
sufficiency of the information provided
and may require the applicant to
supplement this information, if
necessary, to achieve the purposes of
this paragraph.
(iv) Based on the hazardous waste
analysis data in the trial burn plaa the
Director will specify as trial Principal
Organic Hazardous Constituents
(POHCs). those constituents for which
destruction and removal efficiencies
must be calculated during the trial burn.
These trial POHCs will be specified by
the Director based on his estimate of the
difficulty of destroying the constituents
identified in the hazardous waste
analysis, their concentration or mass in
the hazardous waste feed. and. for
hazardous waste containing or derived
from wastes listed in Part 261. Subpart D
of this chapter, the hazardous waste
organic constituent(s) identified in
Appendix VII of that part as the basis
for listing.
(v) The Director shall approve a trial
burn plan if he finds that:
(A) The trial burn is likely to
determine whether the boiler or
industrial furnace can meet the
performance standards in § 266.34-4 of
this chapter
(B) The trial burn itself will not
present an imminent hazard to human
health and the environment:
(C) The trial bum will help the
Director to determine operating
requirements to be specified under
§ 266.34-6 of this chapter, and
(D) The information sought in
paragraphs (c)(2)(v) (A) and (C) of this
section cannot reasonably be developed
though other means.
(vi) The Director shall extend and
modify the Pretrial Burn Permit as
necessary to accommodate the
approved trial burn plan. The permit
modification shall proceed as a minor
modification according to 8 270.42.
(vii) During each approved trial burn
(or as soon after the burn as is
practicable), the applicant must make
the following determinations:
(A) A quantitative analysis of the trial
POHCs and of arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, lead, and chlorine, in the
hazardous waste feed to the boiler or
incinerator
(B) A quantitative analysis of the
exhaust gas for the concentration and
mass emissions of the trial POHCs:
(C) If the hazardous waste is off-
specification for arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, lead, or chlorine, for each
element for which the hazardous waste
is off-specification:
(1) A quantitative analysis of levels of
the element(s) in-other fuels and
industrial furnace feedstocks, the
heating value of the hazardous waste
and other fuels, and the feed rates of the
hazardous waste, other fuels, and
industrial furnace feedstocks to
demonstrate conformance with the
computed allowable concentrations of
metals and chlorine provided in
§§ 268.34-6 (c)(2) and (d)(2) of this
chapter or
[2] A quantitative analysis of the
exhaust gas for the concentration and
mass emission of the metal(s) or
hydrogen chloride (HC1), and a
computation showing conformance with
the metals or HC1 emission performance
standard in § 266.34-4 (c) and (d) of this
chapter
(E) A quantitative analysis of the
scrubber water (if any), ash residues,
and other residues, for the purpose of
estimating the fate of the trial POHCs,
the fate of any metal subject to
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 87 / Wednesday. May 6. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17050
emissions testing under paragraph
(c)(vi)(C)(2) of this section, and the fate
of chlorine if subject to emission testing
under paragraph (c)(vi](D)(2) of this
section;
(F) A computation of destruction and
removal efficiency (ORE), in accordance
with the ORE formula specified in
§ 268.34-4(a)(l) of this chapter
(G) An identification of sources of
fugitive emissions and their means of
control;
(H) A continuous measurement of
carbon monoxide (CO) and oxygen in
the exhaust gas; and
(1) Such other information as the
Director may specify as necessary to
ensure that the trial bum will determine
compliance with the performance
standards in S 266.34-4 of this chapter
and to establish the operating conditions
required by § 266.34-6 of this chapter as
necessary to meet those performance
standards.
(viii) The applicant must submit to the
Director a certification that the trial
burn has been carried out in accordance
with the approved trial bum plan, and
must submit the results of all the
determinations required in paragraph
(c](2)(vi) of this section. This submission
shall be made within 90 days of
completion of the trial bum. or later if
approved by the Director.
(ix) All data collected during any trial
burn must be submitted to the Director
following completion of the trial bum.
(x) All submissions required by this
paragraph must be certified on behalf of
the applicant by the signature of a
person authorized to sign a permit
application or a report under § 270.11.
(xi) Based on the results of the trial
bum. the Director shall set the operating
requirements in the Final Permit
according to § 266.34-6 of this chapter.
The permit modification shall proceed
as a minor modification according to
S 270.42.
(3) Post-trial burn period. For the
period immediately following
completion of the trial burn, and only for
the minimum period sufficient to allow
sample analysis, data computation, and
submission of the trial bum results by
the applicant, and review of the trial
bum results and modification of the
facility permit by the Director to reflect
the trial burn results, the Director will
establish the operating requirements
most likely to ensure compliance with
the performance standards of § 266.34-4
of this chapter based on his engineering
judgment. The Director shall so extend
and modify the Trial Burn Permit to
develop the Post-Trial Burn Permit. The
permit modification shall proceed as a
minor modification according to
§270.42. .
(i) Applicants must submit a
statement with Part B of the permit
application, that identifies the
conditions necessary to operate in
compliance with the performance
standards of § 266.34-4 of this chapter.
during this period. This statement
should include, at a minimum.
restrictions on hazardous waste
constituents, including arsenic.
cadmium, chromium, lead, and chlorine.
hazardous waste feed rates, and the
operating parameters identified in
§ 266.34-6 of this chapter.
(ii) The Director will review this
statement and any other relevant
information submitted with Part B of the
permit application and specify
requirements for this period sufficient to
meet the performance standards of
§ 266.34-4 of this chapter based on his
engineering judgment.
(4) Final permit. After review of the
trial burn results, the Director will
modify the permit as necessary to
develop the Final Permit that will ensure
compliance with the performance
standards of § 266.34-4 of this chapter.
The permit modification shall proceed
as a minor modification according to
§270.42.
(d) Interim status boilers and
industrial furnaces—<1) Existing boilers
to be permitted without a trial bum.
Applicants owning or operating existing
boilers operated under the interim status
standards of § 266.35 of this chapter and
that will be permitted without
conducting a trial burn because they
operate under the Standard Operating
Requirements in S S 266.34-6(b)(4).
286.34-fl(c] (2) or (3). and 266.34-«{d) (2)
or (3) of this chapter must submit with
Part B of the permit application
documentation that the boiler is
operated in accordance with the
Standard Operating Requirements. The
statement must include, at a minimum.
the operating record documenting
continuous measurement of carbon
monoxide (CO) and oxygen in the
exhaust gas. If the hazardous waste IB
off-specification for metals or chlorine,
the statement must also include
limitations, as appropriate, on the
metals and chlorine content, heating
value, and feed rates of the hazardous
waste, other fuel, and industrial furnace
feedstocks to demonstrate conformance
with §§ 286.34-6(c)(2) and 266.34-«(d)(2)
of this chapter.
(2) Existing industrial furnaces ana
boilers that will be permitted with a
trial burn. Applicants owning or
operating existing boilers or industrial
furnaces operated under the interim
status standards of § 266.35 of this
chapter and that will be permitted with
a trial burn for the purposes of
determining compliance with the
performance standards of § 266.34-4 of
this chapter and of determining
adequate operating conditions under
§ 266.34-6 of this chapter, must prepare
and submit a trial burn plan and perform
a trial burn in accordance with
paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) through (c)(2)(ix) of
this section. Applicants who submit a
trial burn plan and receive approval
before submission of the Part B permit
application must complete the trial burn
and submit the results specified in
paragraph (c)(2)(vi) of this section with
the Part B permit application. If
completion of this process conflicts with
the date set for submission of the Part B
application, the applicant must contact
the Director to establish a later date for
submission of the Part B application or
the trial bum results. If the applicant
submits a trial bum plan with Part B of
the permit application, the trial bum
must be conducted and the results
submitted within a time period to be
specified by the Director.
PART 271— REQUIREMENTS FOR
AUTHORIZATION OF STATE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAMS
VII. In Part 271:
1. The authority citation for Part 271
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sees. 1006. 2002(a). and 3006 of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act. as amended by
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
of 1976. as amended (42 U.S.C. 6905.69l2(aJ.
and 692.6).
§ 271.1 (Amended)
2 It is proposed to amend S 271.1(j) by
adding the following entry to Table 1 in
chronological order by date of
publication:
TABLE 1 —REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE
HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE AMEND-
MENTS OF 1984
Data of publication n
the FEDERAL REGISTER
Title of regulation
(Insert promulgation
data).
Standards for Owners and Opera-
Ion of Bofen and Industrial
Furnaces.
|FR Doc. 87-9769 Filed 5-5-87; 8:45 am)
BILUNO CODE 6MO-M-M
-------
Corrections
Federal Regiiler
Vol. 52. No. 92
Wednesddy. May 13. 1987
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains editorial corrections of previously
published Presidential. Rule. Proposed
Rule, and Notice documents and volumes
of the Code of Federal Regulations
These corrections are prepared by the
Office of me Federal Register Agency
prepared corrections are issued as signed
documents and appear in the appropriate
document categories elsewhere in the
issue.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 266
[FRL-3153-5]
Burning of Hazardous Waste In Boilers
and Industrial Furnaces
Correction
In proposed rule document 87-9769
beginning on page 16982 in the issue of
Wednesday. May 6.1987. make the
following correction:
§26644-4 (Corrected)
On page 17041. in { 268.34-4(c)(l), in
the second column, the last two lines
were incorrectly placed and should
appear immediately following the 16th
line in the third column.
atUJNOCOOt IMMt-O
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK BOARD
12 CFR Part 563
[No. 87-517)
Bank Secrecy Act Compliance
Procedures
Correction
In proposed rule document 87-10578
beginning on page 17406 in the issue of
Fnday. May 8.1987. make the following
correction:
On page 17408. in the first column.
insert the following name and title
preceding the FR document line:
feffSconyers.
Secretary.
MJJNOCOOC UOS41-O
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
Advisory Committees; Meetings
Correct/on
In notice document 87-8234 beginning
on page 12078 in the issue of Tuesday.
April 14.1987. make the following
correction:
On page 12078. in the third column, in
the fifth complete paragraph, in the last
line, the U.S.C. cite should read "(5
U.S.C. 552b(c)(4))".
BU1MG CODE 150S-OH)
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
Fanner's Union Grain Terminal
Association; Withdrawal of Approval
of NADA
Correction
In notice document 87-8232 appearing
on page 12081 in the issue of Tuesday.
Apnl 14.1987. make the following
correction:
In the first column, in the last line, the
U.S.C. cite should read "(21 U.S.C.
360b(e))".
MJJNO COM IMft-01-0
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 92 / Wednesday. May 13. 1987 / Proposed Rules 17991
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment.
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
enterprises to compete with foreign-
based enterprises in domestic or export
markets.
The Administrator of Veterans Affairs
has certified that this proposed
amended regulation, if promulgated, will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
as they are denned in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA). 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b). the proposed
amended regulation, therefore, is
exempt from the initial and final
regulatory flexibility analyses
requirements of 8 } 603 and 604.
This certification can be made
because the proposed amended
regulation affects only individuals. It
will have no significant ecomomic
impact on small entities, i.e.. small
businesses, small private and nonprofit
organizations and small governmental
jurisdictions.
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance number for the program
affected by this proposed amended
regulation is 64.120.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 21
Civil rights. Claims. Education. Grant
programs-education. Loan programs-
education. Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Schools. Veterans.
Vocational education. Vocational
rehabilitation.
Approved: January 15.1987.
Thomas K. Tiimage,
Administrator.
Approved: March 9.1987.
A. Lukeman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense.
PART 21-{ AMENDED]
In 38 CFR Part 21. Vocational
Rehabilitation and Education. 121.5076
is proposed to be revised as follows:
§21.5076 Entntement charge—
overpayDient ceeee.
(a) Overpayment cases. The VA will
make a charge against an individual's
entitlement of an overpayment of
educational assistance allowance only
if:
(1) The overpayment is discharged in
bankruptcy; or
(2) The VA waives the overpayment
and does not recover it; or
(3) The overpayment is compromised.
(38 U.S.C. 1631)
(b) Debt discharged in bankruptcy or
is waived. If the overpayment is
discharged in bankruptcy or is waived
and is not recovered, the entitlement
charge will be at the appropriate rate for
the elapsed period covered by the
overpayment [exclusive of interest.
administrative costs of collection, court
costs and marshal fees). (38 U.S.C. 1631;
Pub. L 94-502)
(c) Overpayment is compromised. (1)
If the overpayment is compromised and
the compromise offer is less than the
amount of interest, administrative costs
of collection, court costs and marshal
fees, the charge against entitlement will
be at the appropnate rate for the
elapsed period covered by the
overpayment (exclusive of interest,
administrative costs of collection, court
costs and marshal fees).
(2) If the overpayment is compromised
and compromise offer is equal to or
greater than the amount of interest
administrative costs of collection, court
costs and marshal fees, the charge
against entitlement will be determined
by-
(i) Subtracting from the sum paid in
the compromise offer the amount
attributable to interest, administrative
costs of collection, court costs and
marshal fees.
(ii) Substracting the remaining amount
of the overpayment balance determined
in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section from
the amount of the original overpayment
(exclusive of interest, administrative
costs of collection, court costs and
marshal fees),
(iii) Dividing the result obtained in
paragraph (c)(2)(U) of this section by the
amount of the original debt (exclusive of
interest administrative costs of
collection, court costs and marshal fees).
and
(iv) Multiplying the percentage
obtained in paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of this
section by the amount of the entitlement
otherwise chargeable for the period of
the original overpayment. (38 U.S.C.
1631)
[FR Doc. 87-10710 Filed 5-12-87; 8:45 am]
BHUNO CODE mo-et-M
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-3199-7]
The National Priorities Ust-Usting
Policy for Federal Facilities
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed policy.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA") is proposing a policy
relating to the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Contingency
Plan ("NCP"). which was promulgated
on July 16.1982 pursuant to section 105
of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 ("CERCLA") and Executive
Order 12316. as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1986 (SARA).
CERCLA requires that the NCP
include a list of national priorities
among the known releases or threatened
releases of hazardous substances.
pollutants, and contaminants throughout
the United States, and that the list be
revised at least annually. The National
Priorities List (NPL). initially
promulgated as Appendix B of the NCP
on September 6.1983 (48 FR 40658).
constitutes this list and meets those
requirements.
This notice solicits comments on a
proposed policy for placing on the NPL
sites located on Federally-owned
facilities that are subject to the
corrective action authorities of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). These NPL sites may
encompass the entire Federal facility or
portions of it depending on the size and
characteristics of the facility.
DATE: Comments may be submitted on
or before June 12.1987.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed
to Stephen Lingle, Director. Hazardous
Site Evaluation Division (Attn: NPL
Staff). Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response (WH-548E). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
Street SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
C. Scott Parrish, Hazardous Site
Evaluation Division, Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response
(WH-548E). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street. SW..
Washington. DC 20460. Phone (800) 424-
9346 (or 382-3000 in the Washington.
DC, metropolitan area).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Content!
I. Introduction
II. Contents of This Proposed Policy
I. Introduction
Pursuant to section 105 of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980.42 U.S.C. sections 9601-9657
("CERCLA or the Act"), and Executive
Order 12316 (46 FR 42237, August 20.
1981). the Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA" or "the Agency")
promulgated the revised National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Contingency
Plan f"NCP"). 40 CFR Part 300. on July
-------
17992
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 92 / Wednesday. May 13. 1987 / Proposed Rules
16.1982 (47 FR 31180). EPA promulgated
further revisions to the NCP on
September 18.1985 (50 FR 37624) and
November 20.1985 (50 FR 47912). These
amendments to the NCP implemented
responsibilities and authorities created
by CERCLA to respond to releases and
threatened releases of hazardous
substances, pollutants, and
contaminants.
Section 105(8)(A) of CERCLA requires
that the NCP include criteria for
determining priorities among releases or
threatened releases throughout the
United States for the purpose of taking
remedial or removal action. Removal
action involves cleanup or other actions
that are taken in response to releases or
threats of releases on a short-term or
temporary basis (CERCLA section
101(23)). Remedial action tends to be
long-term in nature and involves
response actions which are consistent
with a permanent remedy for a release
(CERCLA section 101(24)). The Agency
developed the Hazard Ranking System
(MRS) to implement section 105(8)(A).
The HRS was codified as Appendix A of
the NCP.
Section 10S(8)(B) of CERCLA requires
that the statutory criteria described in
the HRS be used to prepare a list of
national priorities among the known
releases or threatened releases
throughout the United States. The list.
which is Appendix B of the NCP. is the
National Priorities List (NPL). Section
105(8)(B) also requires that the NPL be
revised at least annually. An initial NPL
of 406 sites was promulgated on
September 8,1983 (48 FR 40658). The
NPL has been amended several times
since then. Currently, there are 703 sites
on. and 248 sites proposed for. the NPL.
Under section 300.58(a) of the NCP. a
site must be on the NPL if a remedial
action is to be financed by the
Hazardous Substances Superfund set up
under the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
(this supersedes the Hazardous
Response Trust Fund originally set up
under CERCLA). CERCLA section
lll(e)(3) prohibits the use of the Fund
for remedial actions at Federal facilities.
However, pursuant to section
300.66(e)(2) of the NCP. the Agency can
place Federal facility sites on the NPL.
The Agency decided to place Federal
facility sites on the NPL in order to
inform the public about responses
undertaken at facilities (50 FR 47931.
November 20. 1985). Currently, 48
Federal facility sites have been proposed
for the NPL.
II. Contents of This Proposed Policy
Today's proposal would allow
including on the NPL Federal facility
sites that may be subject to the
corrective action authorities of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA).
When the initial NPL was
promulgated, the Agency announced
certain eligibility policies relating to
sites that might qualify for the NPL One
of these policies was that RCRA
"regulated units"—i.e., land disposal
units that received hazardous waste
after the effective date of the RCRA
land disposal regulations (48 FR 40962.
September 8.1983)—would not be
included on the NPL On April 10,1985
the Agency proposed a revision of that
policy based upon expanded RCRA
authorities enacted as part of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (50 FR 14117, April
10.1985).
On June 10.1986 (51 FR 21057). EPA
announced several components of a
final policy for placing non-Federal
RCRA-related sites on the NPL In
general, a listing of non-Federal sites
with releases that can be addressed
under the expanded RCRA Subtitle C
corrective action authorities will be
deferred. The Agency stated, however,
that certain sites subject to Subtitle C
corrective action requirements should
be listed if they have an HRS score of
28.50 or greater and meet at least one of
the following criteria: (1) Facilities
owned by persons who are bankrupt: (2)
facilities that have lost RCRA interim
status and for which there are
additional indications that the owner or
operator will be unwilling to undertake
corrective action: and (3) sites, analyzed
on a case-by-case basis, whose owners
or operators have shown an
unwillingness to undertake corrective
action.
At that time, EPA also announced that
it would consider, at a later date.
whether this revised policy should apply
to Federal facilities (51 FR 21059. June
10.1986). Subsequently, the Agency has
analyzed the appropriateness of
deferring the listing of Federal facility
sites which may be subject to RCRA
corrective action. In its deliberations,
EPA considered the policy announced
on March 5.1986 (51 FR 7722)
concerning RCRA corrective action at
Federal facilities with RCRA operating
units. Specifically, the policy stated that:
(1) RCRA section 3004(u) subjects
Federal facilities to corrective action
requirements to the same extent as
pnvately owned or operated facilities
and (2) the definition of a Federal
facility boundary is equivalent to the
property-wide definition of facility at
privately owned or operated facilities.
The Agency has determined that the
vast majority of Federal facility sites
that could be placed on the NPL have
RCRA regulated units within the Federal
facility property boundary. Therefore.
stnct application of the March 5,1988
boundary policy and the June 10,1986
deferred listing policy would result in
placing very few Federal facility sites on
the NPL The Agency believes that this
would be inconsistent with the spirit
and Intent of Section 120 of SARA. The
Statute and its legislative history
indicate that Congress intended the
Agency to place Federal facility sites on
the NPL and to effect cleanup at those
sites. Section 120(a) provides thai:
[a|ll guidelines, rules, regulations, and criteria
which are applicable to * * * inclusion on
the National Priorities List * * * shall also
be applicable to facilities which are owned or
operated by a department, agency, or
Instrumentality of the United Slates in the
same manner and lo the extent as such
guidelines, rules, regulations, and criteria are
applicable to other facilities.
Section 120 of SARA also contains
requirements for assessing releases at
Federal facilities, placing them on the
NPL and effecting remedial actions at
those sites that qualify for the NPL In
the floor debates. Senator Robert T.
Stafford explained section 120 as
follows:
Second, the amendments require a
comprehensive nationwide effort to identify
and assess all Federal hazardous waste sites
that warrant attention * * *. The legislation
• * * requires that any Federal facility that
meets the criteria applied to private sites
listed on the national priorities list [NPL|
must be placed on the NPL Cong.
Rec. S. 14902 (daily ed.. Oct 3.1986).
If the revised RCRA policy that is
applicable to non-Federal sites were
applied to Federal facility sites, the
purposes of section 120 would be
frustrated.
Given that Congress clearly
contemplated that Federal facility sites
would be placed on the NPL the Agency
interprets these provisons of section 120
to mean that the criteria to list Federal
facility sites should not be more
exclusionary than the criteria to list non-
Federal sites on the NPL Key elements
of the of the current policy for listing
non-Federal sites subject to RCRA
corrective action requirements include
whether the owner or operator has filed
bankruptcy or clearly demonstrated
unwillingness to comply with applicable
RCRA requirements or regulations.
Since bankruptcy proceedings are not
applicable to Federal agencies and
unwillingess to comply with Federal
laws is an unlikely occurrence.
application of the non-Federal facilities
policy for listing RCRA sites would
result in listing very few Federal sites.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 92 / Wednesday. May 13. 1987 / Proposed Rules
17993
Thus, in order to treat Federal and non-
Federal sites equally, as required by
SARA section 120. the Agency believes
that the RCRA status of the site should
not be considered in the decision to
place a Federal facility site on the NPL
The Agency believes that placing
RCRA-related Federal sites on the NPL
will also serve the purpose originally
intended by section 300.66(e){2) of the
NCP—to advise the public of the status
of Federal government cleanup efforts.
(50 FR 47931. November 20.1985). In
addition, listing on the NPL will help
other Federal agencies set priorities and
focus cleanup efforts on those sites
which present the most serious
problems.
The policy proposed today does not
restrict the use of either RCRA
corrective action or enforcement
authorities to achieve cleanup at Federal
facilities. EPA is in the process of
developing regulations for corrective
action under RCRA and for cleanup of
Superfund sites under the National
Contingency Plan. The cleanup goals
established in those regulations will be
consistent with each other, within the
limits of each statute, and it is EPA's
expectation that remedies selected and
implemented under CERCLA will
generally satisfy the RCRA corrective
action requirements, and vice versa.
EPA solicits comments on the
appropriateness of placing on the NPL
Federal facilities that may be subject to
RCRA corrective action authorities.
Comments should be submitted to
Stephen Lingle. Director. Hazardous Site
Evaluation Division (Attn. NPL Staff).
Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response (WH-548E) U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401M
Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20460. not
later than June 12.1987.
Dated: May 6.1987.
|.W. McGraw.
Acting Assistant Administrator. Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
|FR Doc. 87-10910 Filed 6-12-87: 8:45 am]
BILUNOCODE 6860 SB M
40 CFR Part 440
(OW-FRL-3199-61
Ore Mining and Dressing Point Source
Category; Gold Placer Mining; Effluent
Limitations Guidelines, Pretreatment
Standards and New Source
Performance Standards; Second
Notice of New Information; Request
for Comment and Extension of
Comment Period
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Extension of comment period.
SUMMARY: On March 24.1987 (52 FR
9414) EPA published a Notice of
Availability of New Information and
Request for Comment under the Clean
Water Act to limit effluent discharges to
waters of the United States from
facilities engaged in placer gold mining
operations (52 FR 9414). EPA is
extending the period for comment on the
proposed regulation from May 11.1987
to June 25.1987.
DATE: Comments on the Notice of
Availability of New Information for the
placer gold mining subcategory must be
submitted to EPA by June 25.1987.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to William
A. Telliard. Industrial Technology
Division (WH-552), Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street. SW..
Washington. DC 20460. Attention ITD
Docket Clerk. Proposed Placer Cold
Mining. The supporting information and
all comments on this proposal are
available for inspection and copying at
the EPA Public Information Reference
Unit in Washington. DC. Room 2404
(Rear) PM-213; at the EPA Library in
Seattle: at the EPA Alaska office in
Anchorage: and at the Alaska
Department of Environmental
Conservation office in Fairbanks.
Alaska. The comments will be added to
the record as they are received. The
EPA Information Regulation (40 CFR
Part 2) provides that a reasonable fee
may be charged for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Willis E. Umholtz (202) 382-7191.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
March 24.1987 EPA published a Notice
of New Information which announced
the availability for public review and
comment of new technical and economic
data and reports which EPA will utilize
in promulgating final effluent limitations
guidelines and standards for the placer
gold mining industry (52 FR 9414). The
notice stated that comments on the new
information were to be submitted on or
before May a 1987.
The Agency has received numerous
requests from members of the placer
gold mining industry, representatives of
the State of Alaska, and others
interested in this proposed regulation
that additional comment time be granted
to allow them to comment fully and to
supply data to support their comments.
Given the remote and sometimes
inaccessible locations of many of those
who wish to comment on the issues
raised in the notice, the consequent
difficulties they face in submitting
comments, and the complexity of issues
raised by this rulemaking. EPA has
determined that it is necessary to extend
the comment period 45 days to June 25.
1987. This will allow the public adequate
time to review and comment on the
issues raised by the notice.
Dated: May 7.1987.
Lawrence}. lenaen,
Assistant Administrator. Office of Water.
(FR Doc. 87-10911 Filed 5-12-87; 8:45 am)
HUHM COM 6SW-IO-M
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
(MM Docket No. 87-26]
Concerning Alternatives to the
General Fairness Doctrine Obligations
of Broadcast Licensees
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed Rule: extension of
time for filing comments.
SUMMARY: The FCC gives notice that the
Commission granted a motion for
-------
-------
Thursday
June 4, 1987
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 372
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting;
Community Right-To-Know; Proposed
Rule
-------
21152
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 372
[OPTS-400002, FRL-31S3-9]
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting;
Community Right-To-Know
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: This proposed rule publishes
the uniform toxic chemical release
reporting form as required by section
313 of Title III of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986. Section 313 requires that owners
and operators of certain facilities that
manufacture, import, process, or
otherwise use certain toxic chemicals
report annually their releases of those
chemicals to any environmental media.
DATE: Written comments on this
proposed rule should be submitted by
August 3,1987.
ADDRESS: Comments should bear the
docket control number OPTS-400002
and should be submitted to: TSCA
Public Information Office (TS-793),
Office of Toxic Substances.
Environmental Protection Agency. Rm.
NE-G004. 401 M St.. SW.. Washington.
DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edward A. Klein, Director. TSCA
Assistance Office (TS-799). Office of
Toxic Substances. Environmental
Protection Agency. Rm. E-543.401 M St.
SW.. Washington. DC 20460. (202-554-
1411).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Authority
The Agency is proposing this rule
pursuant to sections 313 and 328 of Title
III of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986. Pub. L. 99-
499. Title HI is also cited as "The
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-To-Know Act of 1986." Section 313
of Title III requires owners and
operators of covered facilities to report
annually their releases of listed toxic
chemical substances. Section 313 also
specifies that EPA must publish a
uniform toxic chemical release form by
June 1.1987. Section 328 provides EPA
with the authority necessary to
promulgate such regulations as may be
necessary to cany out the purposes of
Title III.
II. Background
A. Overview of Section 313
On October 17.1986. the President
signed into law the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1988 (SARA). Pub. L. 99-499. The
major function of this legislation is to
amend and reauthorize provisions of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). However. Title
III of SARA is a free-standing statute
(not part of CERCLA) that is itself titled
"The Emergency Planning and
Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986."
In general. Title III contains authorities
relating to emergency planning,
emergency notification, community
right-to-know on chemicals, and a toxic
chemical release inventory.
The focus of this proposed rule is the
toxic chemical release inventory
provision contained in section 313 of
Title III. Section 313 requires owners
and operators of certain facilities that
manufacture, process, or otherwise nse a
listed chemical to report annually their
releases of such chemicals to the
environment. The reports are to be sent
to both EPA and the State in which the
facility is located. The basic purpose of
this provision is to make available to the
public information about total annual
releases of toxic chemicals from
manufacturing facilities in their
community.
For emissions reporting purposes.
section 313(c) mandates an initial list of
'Toxic Chemicals Covered" that is
composed of 329 entries, including 20
categories of chemicals. This list ia a
combination of lists of chemicals used
by the States of Maryland and New
Jersey for emissions reporting under
their individual right-to-know laws.
Section 313 (d) and (e) authorize the
Administrator to modify by rulemaking
the list of "toxic chemicals covered"
either as a result of EPA's self-initiated
review or in response to petitions. For
more information on EPA's policy and
guidance with respect to such petitions
see the notice published in the Federal
Register of February 4.1987 (52 FR 3479).
Section 313(g) specifically requires
EPA to publish a uniform toxic chemical
release reporting form by June 1.1987. If
such a form is not published, then
owners and operators must report by
letter and include the specific
information identified in section 313(g).
As part of the community right-to-
know emphasis of Title III, section 313
requires EPA to make the emissions-
related information available to the
public. In particular, section 313(i)
requires EPA to develop a computer
data base containing this toxic chemical
release information and to make it
accessible by telecommunications on a
cost reimbursable basis.
Covered facilities are also required to
submit a copy of the Section 313 report
to the State. Some States may choose to
have their State Emergency Response
Commission (as established under
section 301 of Title III) be the focal point
for receipt and management of these
reports. Under Title III these
Commissions are designated as
recipients of reports and notifications
required by sections 302. 304. 311 and
312. However, section 313 does not
designate any specific agency as the
recipient of the reports submitted to the
States. Therefore, some States may
choose to direct such reporting to their
environmental or public health
departments. Whatever the decision.
States also have a responsibility under
Title in to make this information
available to the public.
Section 313(h) states that the toxic
chemical release information reported to
EPA and the States is intended to
provide information to Federal. State.
and local governments and the public,
including citizens of communities
surrounding covered facilities. To the
extent consistent with trade secret
considerations in section 322, the
information reported is intended to
inform persons about releases of toxic
chemicals to the environment. The
information is also intended to assist
government agencies, researchers, and
other persons in the conduct of research
and data gathering: to aid in the
development of regulations, guidelines,
and standards: and for other similar
purposes.
B. Summary of Public Participation
EPA held pre-proposal public
meetings on January 8 and 9,1987 to
discuss the section 313 reporting form
and related reporting requirements. Prior
to these meetings, EPA made materials
available to the public which included a
draft form with instructions, a draft
paper that discussed form-related
issues, a paper describing an exercise
conducted by EPA staff to test various
potential versions of a reporting form,
and a copy of section 313.
More than 100 persons, representing a
wide range of interests, attended the 2
days of public meetings. The discussion
at the meetings focused on the potential
reporting elements that the form could
contain and the associated reporting
issues. Comments received during these
meetings proved valuable in shaping the
proposed requirements depicted in this
proposed rule. The docket for this
rulemaking contains comments received
at these meetings as well as written
comments received at, and subsequent
to. the public meetings.
In addition to the public meetings
described above. EPA staff have met,
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday, June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
21153
upon request, with representatives of
companies and trade associations likely
to be affected by the rule, with
representatives of public interest groups.
and with State government
representatives. Summaries of such
meetings are also available for review in
the public docket.
HI. Chemicals Covered by the Proposed
Rule
A. The Mandated List of Chemicals
Section 313(c) of Title III states that
the toxic chemicals subject to the
requirements of the section are those
chemicals on the list in Senate
Environment and Public Works
Committee Print No. 99-169. including
any revisions to this list made by EPA.
The list in the above-referenced
Committee Print contains 309 entries.
with associated Chemical Abstracts
Service (CAS) registry numbers, plus 20
additional category entries (without
specific CAS numbers).
Subpart C of this proposed rule
contains those chemicals and categories.
Specifically, { 372.45 of Subpart C
contains the chemicals and categories
organized in several different ways. The
entries that have CAS numbers are
listed twice. One list is in alphabetical
order and the second list is in CAS
number order. These chemical entries
are presented in this manner so that
persons who must refer to the list may
more easily locate a chemical they
manufacture, process or otherwise use.
A third list contains the chemical
categories, which are arranged in
alphabetical order.
The effective date column in the
listings refers to the beginning calendar
year for which release data are to be
reported. This proposed rule contains
the initial listing of the chemicals.
Therefore, all chemicals have an
effective date of January 1,1987. If EPA
adds a chemical to the list, the effective
date column will contain a date
corresponding to the first calendar year
for which release data are to be
reported, in accordance with section
313(d)(4) of Title III.
B. Proposed Technical Modifications to
the List
EPA is proposing to incorporate
certain technical modifications and
clarifications to the list of chemicals and
chemical categories.
1. Duplicative Listings Relating to
Compounds. Upon reviewing the
Committee Print. EPA noted that certain
of the listed chemical categories appear
to be duplicated in the CAS number
specific list. For example. "Copper and
compounds" appears with the CAS
number 7440-50-6 and "Copper
compounds" also appears as a chemical
category listing. The reason for the
apparent duplication is that the
Committee Print listed the parent metal,
copper, with its attendant CAS number.
This same pattern holds true for the
other metal and metal compound
listings. Therefore. EPA is proposing a
technical modification to that part of the
chemical listing containing CAS
numbers. This change removes the "and
compounds" phrase designations where
the CAS number actually refers to a
specific parent metal or other specific
category member.
2. Basic definitions for the listed
chemical categories. The 20 chemical
categories mandated for inclusion by the
Committee Print cover a wide range of
metal-containing compounds as well as
certain organic compounds. EPA has
developed brief, proposed definitions for
each category. These definitions appear
after the listed category name in
proposed § 372.45(c). They are included
in the regulation to help clarify the basic
scope of each category for reporting
purposes.
3. Reporting listed trade name
chemicals. Certain of the entries on the
Committee Print are product trade
names, not chemical names. For
example, the entry Parathion is a trade
name. The chemical name with the
corresponding CAS registry number is
Phosphorothioic acid. 0,0-diethyl-o-{4-
nitrophenyl) ester. EPA has received
comment stating that a company that
makes a section 313 chemical, but sells
it under a different trade name, should
not be required to report the chemical
using its competitor's trade name. The
commenter stated that there may even
•be legal constraints to such reporting.
EPA agrees with this comment. As a
result EPA is proposing to replace trade
name entries with the CAS prefered
chemical name. The proposed list in
§ 372.45 contains the trade name as
present in the Committee Print followed
in solid brackets by the CAS prefered
chemical name. EPA proposes that this
CAS prefered chemical name be
reported rather than the trade name.
4. Clarification of certain qualifiers
that appear next to chemical names.
Certain of the chemicals listed in the
Committee Print have parenthetic
qualifiers listed next to them.
Commenters requested that EPA provide
some clarification or interpretation of
these qualifiers.
Three of the metals on the list
(aluminum, vanadium, and zinc) contain
the qualifier "fume or dust". EPA
interprets this qualifier to mean that a
facility is manufacturing, processing, or
using the metal in the physical form of
fume or dust. As explained in Unit IV.C.
the proposed definition of the term
manufacture includes the generation of
a chemical as a byproduct or impurity.
In such cases, a facility should
determine if. for example, it generated
more than the 1987 threshold of 75.000
pounds per year of aluminum fume or
dust as a byproduct of its activities. If so
then the facility must report. Similarly
there may be certain technologies in
which one of these metals are processed
m the form of a fume or dust In order to
make other chemicals or other products
for distribution in commerce. Again, if
more than the applicable threshold
quantity is processed in a year, this
triggers reporting.
Two of the chemicals entries contain
a qualifier relating to manufacture. For
isopropyl alcohol the qualifier reads
"mfg. — strong acid process." For
saccharin the qualifier simply reads
"manufacturing." In the case of
isopropyl alcohol. EPA proposes to
interpret the qualifier to mean that only
persons who manufacturer isopropyl
alcohol by the strong acid process
would be required to report. In the case
of saccharin, only manufactures of
saccharin would be required to report. A
facility that processes or otherwise uses
either chemical would not be required to
report for those chemicals.
Four substances on the list are
qualified by the term "solution." These
substances are ammonium nitrate,
ammonium sulfate. sodium hydroxide,
and sodium sulfate. EPA interprets the
term "solution" to refer to the physical
state of these chemicals. Only facilities
that manufacture, process, or use these
chemicals in the form of a solution
would be required to report these
chemicals.
The listing for phosphorus is qualified
by the term "yellow or white." This
refers to a chemical state of phosphorus
meaning that only manufacturing,
processing, or use of phosphorus in the
yellow or white states would trigger
reporting. Conversely, manufacturing,
processing, or use of "black" or "red"
phosphorus would not trigger reporting.
The listing for asbestos is qualified by
the term "friable." This term refers to a
physical characteristic of asbestos. The
EPA interprets "triable" as being
crumbled, pulverized, or reducable to J
powder with hand pressure. Again, only
manufacturing, processing, or use of
asbestos in the friable form would
trigger reporting.
C. Authority and Mechanisms for
Changing the List
Section 313(d) provides EPA the
authority to revise the list of chemicals.
-------
21154
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
Such revisions must be made through
notice and comment rulemaking
procedures. A chemical may be added
to the list if EPA determines that there is
sufficient evidence that the chemical
meets any one of several human health
or environmental effects criteria, as
outlined in section 313(d)(2). A chemical
may be deleted from the list if EPA
determines that there is not sufficient
evidence to establish that the chemical
meets any of the criteria.
Proposals to add or delete chemicals
can arise from two basic activities:
either by EPA's own review of
chemicals, or through consideration of
public petitions authorized under
section 313(e). For a detailed discussion
of the petitions process and the criteria
mentioned above, refer to EPA's section
313 petitions policy notice published in
the Federal Register of February 4.1987
(52 FR 3479).
IV. Who Must Report
Section 313(b) provides that owners
and operators of covered facilities are
subject to the reporting requirements
contained in section 313{a). If a facility
is owned by one person but operated by
another then either person may report.
However, if a report is not submitted for
a covered facility, EPA would hold both
persons liable for any applicable
penalties under section 325 of Title III.
Section 329(4) of Title III defines the
term "facility" as all buildings.
equipment, structures, and other
stationary items which are located on a
single site or on contiguous or adjacent
sites and which are owned or operated
by the same person (or by any person
who controls, is controlled by. or under
common control with, such person}.
Therefore, a facility is a broad
concept and may include the activities
of more than one manufacturing plant
site. One commenter stated that the
physical boundaries of their facility
would encompass five plant sites. These
sites are. for all practical purposes.
separate business units that may or may
not make, process, or use the same
chemicals. The commenter explained
that it would be difficult to develop a
single "facility" report for the purposes
of this proposed rule. One option EPA is
considering is to allow reporting by such
separate plants rather than requiring
one report that would aggregate the
emissions of the same chemical from all
plants within a facility. The major
disadvantage of this plant-specific
approach is that the Agency may lose
emissions data otherwise captured by
the broader approach. For example.
several of the sites may process the
same listed toxic chemical but none of
them individually may meet the
threshold for reporting that chemical.
Under the aggregate facility approach.
the total amount processed by all such
sites might exceed the threshold, thus
triggering a report. There is also the
basic difficulty of consistently defining
the subunits for reporting. EPA is
requesting comment on how common
such multiple plant site situations are
within the manufacturing industry and
how EPA may most reasonably deal
with this plant site versus facility
reporting issue.
A. Covered Facilities
Section 313(b) further specifies that a
facility is covered for purposes of
reporting if it meets all of the following
criteria:
The facility has 10 or more full-time
employees.
The facility is in Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC) codes 20 through 39
(as in effect on July 1.1985).
The facility manufactured (including
quantities imported), processed, or
otherwise used a listed chemical in
amounts that exceed certain threshold
quantities (see Unit V.A. below) during
the calendar year for which reporting is
required.
The statute targets facilities in the
manufacturing sector of the economy by
designating SIC codes 20 through 39. In
brief, a facility is considered to be
covered under the SIC code criteria if its
primary SIC code is within the 20
through 39 designations. A primary SIC
code is generally considered to be the
code related to the types of products
distributed from that facility that have
the highest dollar value added.
In addition, a facility that may not
consider its primary SIC code to be in
the 20 through 39 range. It may.
however, engage in 1 or more activities
in the SIC code 20 through 39 range, thus
meeting the SIC code criteria for the
purposes of this proposed rule. For
example, a large facility may consider
its primary SIC code to be 13. relating to
oil and gas extraction. However, within
that facility there may be specific sites
or other definable units engaged in
production of chemicals (SIC 28) or
refining of petroleum products (SIC 29).
EPA believes that it is important to
cover these situations where significant
emissions of chemicals might occur but
would not otherwise be reported. This
interpretation is also consistent with the
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration's (OSHA) intepretation
of facilities subject to the Hazard
Communication Standards.
At the time the legislation was
drafted, the most current revision of the
SIC code manual was actually 1972 with
a supplement published in 1977. EPA
interprets the parenthetical reference in
the statute to July 1.1985 to mean the
most recent update of the SIC code
system. EPA does not believe that
Congress intended the facility SIC code
designations to be frozen in time. The
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has updated the SIC code system
effective January 1.1987. Therefore. EPA
proposes to use this most current update
of the SIC code system and any
subsequent revisions as the basis for
facilities to determine whether they may
be subject to reporting. EPA expects that
these basic manufacturing designations
will remain relatively stable over time.
For example, in the 1987 revision there
are no basic additions, deletions, or
movements of facility types in the 20
through 39 code part (Part D—
Manufacturing) as compared with the
proceeding edition of the SIC Code
Manual.
OMB published its final notice of
decisions regarding the SIC code manual
update in the Federal Register of
October 1.1986 (51 FR 35170). Refer to
that notice for relevant modifications in
SIC codes 20 through 39. Also see the
Instructions for EPA Form R for
information on how to obtain a copy of
the updated SIC code manual, or check
with a local library. If a person engaged
in manufacturing activities is not
already familiar with the facility's
primary SIC code then he can contact
his trade association, legal counsel, or
the Chamber of Commerce for
assistance.
B. Modifying the Requirements for
Facilities Covered
This proposed rule contains the SIC
code designations as present in the
statute. However, section 313(b)(l)(B) of
the statute allows EPA to modify the
requirements for facilities covered by
adding or deleting SIC codes, but only to
the extent necessary to carry out the
purposes of section 313. Also. EPA may.
at its own discretion, or at the request of
a state governor, apply the reporting
provisions of section 313 to specific
facilities not covered by the SIC codes
(or other facility criteria) in accordance
with the criteria set forth in section
313(b)(2).
EPA is not proposing at this time to
add or delete SIC codes or make any
individual facility designations. The
Agency has received comments
suggesting that certain facilities in
segments of the economy other than
those covered by SIC codes 20 through
39 may release significant quantities of
toxic chemicals covered by this
proposed rule. Examples given are
warehouses or other storage facilities.
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday, June 4. 1987 / Proposed -Rules
wholesale distributors of chemicals
(where processing activities such as
repackaging may occur), commercial
waste treatment facilities, and some
types of Federal facilities. EPA is
seeking further comment on the issue of
modifying the SIC code coverage.
Commenters should state specifically
the segment of the industry they believe
should be covered or deleted, the
specific SIC code designation(s), and
how the inclusion or deletion of such
facilities is consistent with the basic
objectives of the statute.
C. Applicability Based on Manufacture,
Process, or Use
A person that determines that the
facility meets the employment and SIC
code standards for being a covered
facility must then determine if the
facility manufactures, processes, or
otherwise uses a listed toxic chemical in
excess of certain annual threshold
quantities (see Unit V for these
threshold values). Section 313(b)(l)(Q
contains definitions for the terms
"manufacture" and "process."
1. Manufacture. As defined by the
statute, the term "manufacture" means
to produce, prepare, import, or
compound a toxic chemical.
It is important to note that the term
manufacture includes importation.
Commenters requested clarification as
to whether all importers of listed toxic
chemicals are subject to reporting.
Inclusion of the term import in the
manufacture definition equates the
action of importing with that of
producing the same chemical. It does not
directly define a "person" subject to
reporting. The determining factor is
whether the facility receiving the
imported chemical falls within the SIC
code 20 through 39 range. For example, a
company that is primarily an import
agent may not be subject because its
facility may not be classified in the
covered SIC codes. On the other hand, a
chemical manufacturing facility that
orders and receives a chemical
substance from a foreign supplier (either
directly or through an agent) would most
likely be subject to reporting.
EPA wishes to clarify another point
relating to quantities imported and the
threshold determinations. If a facility
both makes and imports the same
covered chemical in the same year, then
the facility would add those quantities
together when making the
manufacturing threshold determination.
EPA is proposing to further interpret
the statutory definition of
"manufacture" to include coincidental
production of a toxic chemical (e.g., as a
byproduct or impurity) resulting from
the manufacture, processing, use or
disposal of other chemical substances.
EPA believes that significant quantities
of listed toxic chemicals can be
produced as byproducts or impurities. If
that chemical is produced comcidentally
in quantities that exceed the specified
thresholds under section 313. then it is
important to account for releases of that
toxic chemical to the environment in the
same way as a person would account
for the releases associated with
producing that chemical as a
commercial end product.
2. Process. As defined by the statute,
the term "process" means the
preparation of a toxic chemical after Its
manufacture for distribution in
commerce—(a) in the same form or
physical state as. or in a different form
or physical state from, that in which it is
received by the person so preparing
such substance, or (b) as part of an
article containing the toxic chemical.
In general, processing includes making
mixtures, repackaging, or use of a
chemical as a feedstock, raw material,
or starting material for making another
chemical. Processing also includes
incorporating a chemical into an article.
EPA also interprets the term
"process" to apply to the processing of a
toxic chemical that is a component of a
mixture or other trade name product.
This would include processing of a toxic
chemical that is an impurity in such
product. That is, if a person is
processing a chemical or mixture that
contains an impurity, then the person is
processing that impurity.
3. Otherwise used. The statute does
not define the term "otherwise used"
and no guidance with respect to this
term is provided in the legislative
history. EPA proposes to define
"otherwise used" as any use of a toxic
chemical at a covered facility that is not
an action covered by the terms
"manufacture" or "process," and
includes use of a toxic chemical
contained in a mixture or trade name
product. For example, a chemical would
be otherwise used if it is used as a
solvent to aid a chemical process but
does not intentionally become part of
the product distributed in commerce.
Another example would be a chemical
used as an aid in manufacturing such as
a lubricant or metalworking fluid. Such
uses do not fall within the definitions of
manufacture or process.
EPA believes that it is necessary to
define the term "otherwise used" to
make a distinction between processing
and other uses, primarily as they relate
to the threshold values discussed in Unit
V. In particular, a facility that processes
a chemical has a higher threshold
assigned to it by the statute than a
facility that uses (i.e.. otherwise uses]
21155
that chemical. For example, a facility
that incorporates toluene into a mixture
for distribution in commerce is
processing that chemical. Provided the
facility meets the SIC code and
employment triggers above, the facility
must report if it processes more than
75.000 pounds of toluene in 1987. A
facility that "otherwise uses" toluene,
for example to clean equipment, is not
processing toluene. Therefore the
threshold is use of more than 10,000
pounds per year of toluene. EPA
requests comment on the proposed
definition of "otherwise used" and its
application in the proposed rule.
EPA also interprets the terms
"otherwise use" or "otherwise used" to
include use of a toxic chemical that is a
component of a mixture or other trade
name product. That is. if a facility is
using such product it is thereby using
the toxic chemical.
4. Determining applicability when
mixtures or trade name products are of
undetermined composition. Commenters
pointed out to the Agency that
importers, users, and processors of
mixtures and trade name products may
not know that they are subject to
reporting because the composition of
such products may not be readily
apparent. EPA has developed a support-
document titled "Toxic Chemical
Release Inventory—Glossary of
Synonyms." This document is designed
to aid respondents in identifying the fact
that they may be making, processing, or
using a listed toxic chemical.
However, the Agency realizes that the
composition of many mixtures or trade
name products may be considered trade
secret by the manufacturer or supplier of
those products. Thus the identity of
chemicals subject to section 313
reporting may not for example, be
entered on the Material Safety Data
Sheet (MSDS) for that product.
Section 313{g)(l)(C) states that a
person must report the information
required for those toxic chemicals
"known to be present at the facility." In
those cases involving importation, use,
or processing of products of
undetermined composition, EPA
believes that a facility must take
reasonable steps to identify any
reportable chemicals in those products.
a. Guidance to importers, users, and
processors. EPA offers the following
guidance for making such a reasonable
determination relating to mixtures and
trade name products of unknown
composition. In this discussion the term
user applies to importers, users, and
processors of the product in question.
The term supplier is used to indicate the
-------
21156
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
manufacturer or processor who
distributed the product in commerce.
Users meeting the SIC code and
employment triggers should survey their
facilities for mixtures or trade name
products that they either use in excess
of 10.000 pounds per year or import or
process in excess of 75,000 pounds per
year (the 1987 processing threshold).
Contact the supplier of the product
and ask if the product contains a
chemical or chemical category members
listed for reporting under section 313. If
"the supplier-is unaware of the reporting
requirements, provide the supplier the
citation to this Federal Register
document and follow up on the contact.
If the supplier confirms that the
product contains no section 313 listed
chemical or category member, then the
user has no further reporting
responsibility with respect to that
particular product.
If the supplier of the product refuses
to answer the question on grounds of
trade secret protection, the user could
offer to enter into a confidentiality
agreement with the supplier. If this
approach is unsuccessful, EPA would
consider that the user has reached the
limit of his or her ability to reasonably
determine the presence of a listed
chemical in that product The user
should, however, document his or her
attempts to make this determination.
If the supplier of the product confirms
that the product contains a listed section
313 chemical, the user should request
the specific identity of the listed
chemical and the percent by weight of
that chemical in the product Should the
supplier refuse to provide this specific
identity, the user should ask for the
generic classification name that the
regulation assigns to that chemical (see
proposed § 372.42 for this list of generic
classifications to be used when a
respondent claims specific chemical
identity as trade secret). Disclosing this
generic identity to the user would give
the user enough information to make a
minimal report. Also, it would give the
Agency and the public at least an
indication that the user may be emitting
one or more listed toxic chemicals as a
result of the facility's use. importation.
or processing of a mixture or other trade
name product.
If the supplier provides the percentage
by weight information requested, the
user should first determine whether the
quantity of the chemical meets the
threshold for reporting that particular
listed chemical (i.e.. multiply that
percentage by the total annual pounds
of the product used). If an applicable
threshold is exceeded, that percentage
figure would be further applied for
purposes of calculating emissions of the
listed chemical.
If the supplier does not or will not
provide the percentage composition
information. EPA would consider that
the user still has a limited responsibility
to report. EPA is proposing that in such
cases where a product is known to
contain a listed toxic chemical but the
specific composition cannot be
determined, the statutory thresholds for
reporting would apply to such mixture
or trade name product as a whole. Such
product is known to contain a listed
toxic chemical, .Therefore. EPA proposes
to err on the side of caution*because,
under a worst-case assumption, it is
possible that the product is 100 percent
listed toxic chemical.
However, because of the lack of
composition information, EPA considers
that a user would not be able to
reasonably estimate the emissions of the
toxic chemical in question. Therefore, in
such cases the user would only be
responsible for completing sections of
the form that deal with facility
Identification, chemical identification.
and use of the chemical at the facility
(sections I through V of the reporting
form). No on-site quantity information.
release data, or treatment-related
information would be required because
the reporter would not have the
information to complete those sections
of the form. EPA believes that both
government authorities and the public
would still benefit from knowing that
products containing reportable toxic
chemicals are being imported, used, or
processed at certain locations even if
the emissions of such chemicals are not
quantified.
If the user is only able to determine
that the product contains some
unspecified listed chemical, the user
would fill in the product name in the
space provided on the form for chemical
identity. The Instructions for the form
provide a flow chart for determining the
information related to mixture and trade
name products that would be reported.
b. Guidance to producers of mixtures
and trade name products containing
listed toxic chemicals. It is obvious from
the above discussion that importers,
users, and processors of mixtures or
trade name products may have to do a
considerable amount of work to
determine if and what they must report
under section 313. As a means of
reducing this burden. EPA strongly urges
manufacturers or processors who
incorporate listed toxic chemicals Into
mixtures or trade name products to take
the initiative to inform their customers
of the presence of section 313 chemicals
in those products. Such producers
should provide information sufficient for
their customers to meet their
responsibilites under the statute. EPA
believes that the presence of one or
more of the section 313 toxic chemicals
in a product should be information
Incorporated into the MSDS for that
product. Such information should
include the percent composition of the
toxic chemicals in the product.
If the producer considers that the
specific chemical identity information is
worthy of trade secret protection, then
the producer should provide customers
with enough information for those
customers to meet their minimum
reportihjfrequirement. A» discussed -
above, producers and customers could
enter into confidentiality agreements.
Alternatively, the producer could
provide the customer with the generic
classification identity of the toxic
chemical that the producer would enter
on its own report to EPA and the State
under section 313. Because the specific
chemical identity would be masked.
providing the percentage composition
information to the customer should not.
in the Agency's opinion, jeopardize the
confidential nature of the formulation.
c. Alternatives for developing
information about mixtures and trade
name products. EPA is considering other
means for providing users and
processors of mixtures or trade name
products with information sufficient to
comply with the law.
One option would be to use the
general rulemaking authority of section
328 of Title III to require producers of
trade name products to notify
customers. Manufacturers, importers, or
processors of a listed substance would
be required to notify their customers
(who order 10,000 Ibs or more of the
product per year) that they are using a
product containing a section 313 listed
chemical and that they may be subject
to emissions reporting. This would at a
minimum increase the awarenesss of the
user community regarding its potential
reporting responsibility.
A second option would be to require
these same manufacturers, importers,
and processors to report to EPA the
trade name of the products they
distribute in commerce that contain a
section 313 chemical and the percentage
by weight of the chemical in that
product Chemical identity could be
claimed trade secret EPA would then
publish a comprehensive list of trade
name products containing listed
chemicals. The list would contain either
the specific Identity or the
corresponding generic classification
name along with the percent by weight
information.
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
21157
A third option would be to require
producers to report to EPA the names
and addresses of customers that
purchase more than the quantity of a
product that would potentially put that
customer over the threshold for use of
the specific toxic chemical contained in
that product. For example, if a product
contains 50 percent by weight of a toxic
chemical, then the producer would
report to EPA the names and addresses
of those customers who purchase in
excess of 20.000 pounds of the product
in a calendar year.
EPA requests comment on the issue of
reporting mixtures and trade name
products containing listed toxic
chemicals and options for providing
importers, users, and processors of such
products with the information they need
for purposes of compliance.
V. General Reporting Requirements
A. Threshold Amounts for Reporting
Section 313(f) establishes thresholds
for purposes of reporting toxic
chemicals. These threshold amounts
further define which owners or
operators of covered facilities must
submit toxic chemical release forms to
EPA and the States. These statutory
criteria are reflected in proposed
§ 372.12.
1. For a listed toxic chemical that is
manufactured (including imported) or
processed. Facilities that manufacture.
or process a listed chemical must report
if they manufactured (including
quantities imported) or processed
amounts in excess of the following
thresholds for the calendar years:
1987—75,000 pounds per year.
1986—50.000 pounds per year.
1989 and thereafter—25,000 pounds per
year.
2. For a listed toxic chemical
"otherwise used. "The threshold amount
for a use other than manufacturing,
importing, or processing of a listed toxic
chemical is 10,000 pounds per year. A
report must be submitted if a facility
"otherwise used" the chemical in excess
of this amount during a calendar year
for which reporting is required.
Owners or operators of facilities that
exceed any of the above thresholds are
subject to the reporting requirements
and must report all emissions of that
chemical from the facility. For example.
a company might manufacture 20.000
pounds of a listed toxic chemical and
use 15,000 pounds of that production
during a calendar year. The facility
would report because it exceeded the
use threshold quantity. The facility
would then be responsible for reporting
emissions of the chemical from the
manufacturing activity as well as the
use activity, even though the
manufacturing activity itself did not
trigger reporting.
3. Figuring thresholds in connection
with the listed categories. Companies
that manufacture, process, or otherwise
use one or more chemicals that would
be covered by a category listing (e.g., the
company makes several copper-
containing compounds) would count the
total pounds of all such compounds in
the category for purposes of making the
threshold determination.
4. Figuring threshold when a toxic
chemical is a mixture component. If a
toxic chemical is a component of a
mixture then the threshold would be
determined by multiplying the mass
percent of the chemical in the mixture
times the total annual quantity of the
mixture that is used or processed. One
commenter asked whether EPA would
apply some de minimis cut-off for this
percentage in a mixture. Another
commenter suggested a 1 percent cut-off,
citing the 1 percent cut-off in EPA's
interim final rule for implementing
section 302 of Title III (51 FR 41570).
EPA is not proposing any de minimis
cut-off as part of the threshold
determination provisions of this
proposed rule. EPA believes that if a
facility can determine that it exceeds the
appropriate poundage thresholds for a
particular chemical it must report,
regardless of the mass percent value of
that toxic chemical in the mixture. For
example, a company uses 2,200,000
pounds of a mixture in a year. A
chemical is known to constitute one-half
percent by weight of that mixture. The
company has therefore used 11.000
pounds of the toxic chemical and would
thus be subject to reporting.
5. Figuring thresholds when a toxic
chemical is recycled or reused at the
facility. Commenters pointed out that
certain chemicals may be recycled or
otherwise reused in processes within the
facility. For example, the company uses
and recycles 15,000 pounds of a solvent
in a process. However, during any given
year they may only purchase 2,000
pounds of the solvent to replace
quantities lost or amounts of spent
solvent removed from the facility. On an
annual, "consumptive" basis one could
argue that they have not exceeded the
use threshold. Commenters questioned
how they should determine whether
they exceed the annual threshold
quantities in such cases. EPA proposes
that the quantity that must be figured is
the combination of the amount of the
chemical in the recycle or reuse activity
at the beginning of the reporting period
plus any additional quantity of the same
chemical brought on site during the year.
6. EPA's authority to modify
thresholds. Section 313(0(2) states that
EPA may establish a different threshold
amount for a toxic chemical. However,
under the statute any revised threshold
must obtain reporting on a substantial
majority of total releases of the chemical
at all facilities subject to reporting. In
addition. EPA has some further
discretion under this paragraph to
establish different threshold amounts
based on classes of chemicals or
categories of facilities. For example, the
Agency could apply a different
threshold for reporting to the class of
metal compounds. A threshold change
based on a category of facilities could
include facilities in certain SIC codes:
facilities with a different number of full-
time employees than is specified by the
statute; or facilities with air or water
releases above certain thresholds (e.g.,
major water dischargers or those subject
to an air permit).
EPA is requesting comment on the
issue of whether it should or should not
establish modified thresholds. The
Agency is interested in data that would
support the necessary finding that a
modified threshold would still generate
reporting on a substantial majority of
total releases, as the statute requires.
For example, the Small Business
Administration (SBA) has suggested that
the thresholds be modified to capture
only larger facilities (e.g., facilities with
more than 50 employees). SBA believes,
based on recent EPA studies conducted
or underway in four regions (i.e., Santa
Clara Valley. Philadelphia. Baltimore,
and Kanawa Valley), that releases from
small facilities represent a small percent
of aggregate emissions and health risks.
Consequently, this approach could
potentially capture the substantial
majority of total releases and provide
several benefits. SBA believes that this
approach could allow EPA. States, and
the facilities to concentrate resources on
estimating releases of concern, reduce
implementation problems, and provide
more time for EPA to develop a quality
data base and refine its guidance for
small business. Under SBA's approach.
EPA, after a review of the first year or
two of data, could then decide whether
the thresholds need to be modified and
whether additional simplified guidance
for smaller facility reporting is
warranted. As an alternative to
exempting small firms from reporting in
the first two years, SBA recommends
that EPA consider the option of
requiring small firms to report only the
production/use figures and to indicate
whether there are releases (above de
minimis levels) to air, land, and water.
-------
21158
Federal Register / Vol 52, No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
EPA is interested in obtaining
comment on these options but has not
adopted them at this time, because the
Agency believes that the data SBA
referenced are not sufficient to support
nationwide regulations. EPA believes
that, given currently available
information, any consideration of
modified thresholds would need to be
based upon the level of reporting
realized over the first few years of
implementation of this regulation. Such
data are needed so that EPA can assess
whether modifications of thresholds will
allow EPA to meet the statutory
requirement that a majority of release
data would be submitted.
B. Frequency of Reporting and
Reporting Deadlines
Section 313(a) establishes that the
first reporting deadline is July.l. 1988.
for releases of toxic chemicals that
occurred during calendar year 1987.
Also, section 313(a) establishes that
persons subject must report annually
thereafter on or before July 1 for
releases of toxic chemicals that
occurred during the preceding calendar
year. Proposed § 372.15 incorporates
these requirements without
modification.
VI. Form and Specific Reporting
Requirements
Section 313(g) requires EPA to publish
a uniform toxic chemical release
reporting form not later than June 1.
1987. If EPA had not published the form
contained in this proposed rule, owners
or operators of covered facilities would
have been required to report to EPA and
the appropriate State by letter and
include the information as required in
section 313(g)(l).
Section 313(g)(2) permits owners and
operators of covered facilities to use
readily available data (including
monitoring data) that were collected
pursuant to other provisions of law to
provide the information required by the
reporting form. When such data are not
available, reasonable estimates of the
quantities involved must be developed.
Section 313 does not require additional
monitoring or measurement of
quantities, concentrations, or frequency
of any listed chemical beyond that
monitoring and measurement required
under other provisions of law or
regulation.
In addition to the instructions in this
proposed rule. EPA has developed a
support document titled "Guidance For
Determining Releases And Waste
Treatment Efficiency For The Toxic
•Chemical Release Inventory Form." That
document contains detailed technical
guidance for calculating the amount of a
toxic chemical emitted into the
environment and the efficiency of the
treatment methods used in connection
with the chemicals being reported. EPA
is requesting comment on this document.
To obtain a copy of the guidance
document contact the address provided
under the heading "FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT."
In general, the form is designed for
multiple chemical submissions. Page 1 of
the form contains all the facility related
data and other common information
elements. The remaining pages of the
form are chemical-specific. Therefore, if
a company must report on more than
one chemical they will only have to fill
out one copy of the first page of the
form. They would then copy the already
completed first page and attach it to as
many sets of the remaining pages of the
form as are necessary to cover the
specific chemicals they are reporting.
In the event that the Agency does not
issue a final rule by December 31.1987.
the form and instructions published here
must be used for the purposes of
reporting 1987 data.
Subpart D of the proposed regulatory
text contains the reporting form and
instructions. The following is a general
discussion of the information that the
statute requires to be reported, how EPA
has interpreted the requirements for this
proposed rule, and how such
interpretation is reflected in the
proposed reporting form and
instructions.
A. Certification Statement
Section I of the proposed form
includes a statement that the
information provided is accurate and
complete. As required by the statute, the
statement is to be signed by a senior
official with management responsibility
for the person or persons completing the
form for that facility.
If the identity of a chemical or
chemical category being reported is
claimed a trade secret this certification
also applies to the trade secrecy claim
and the explanation that must
accompany such claim. See Unit Vn of
this preamble for a specific discussion of
trade secrecy claims and the required
explanation to be submitted with such
claims.
Regarding such senior management
official. EPA received a comment that
the term "official" is ambiguous and
could be interpreted to mean an officer
of the company, hi many large
corporations there are only a few
officers and actual management
authority may vary from corporation to
corporation. The commenter
recommends modifying the language to
read "an authorized representative with
management responsibility...." The
legislative history does not provide
significant direction on this issue other
than to state that the purpose of the
certification requirement is to assure
that a senior management official
review the report for accuracy and
completeness. EPA does not intend to
modify the terminology prescribed by
the statute. However, the report is
facility-specific. Therefore EPA
interprets that such official could be the
facility manager (rather than a corporate
officer) or, for example, the manager of
environmental programs for the facility
or for the corporation responsible for
certifying similar reports under other
environmental regulatory requirements.
B. Facility Identification'
Section II of the form would require
specific information about the reporting
facility.
1. Facility location. Each submission
would specify the facility's name and
address. In addition. EPA proposes to
require the facility's Dun and Bradstreet
Number and. if applicable, its EPA
identification number. This EPA
Identification number is also commonly
referred to as the RCRA I.D. number. It
is a facility-specific number (generally
based on the Dun's number) that is
assigned to the facility by EPA or the
State for purposes of reporting under
hazardous waste regulations. These
numbers can be used as geographic
locators. They would be required in part
so that EPA can verify the actual
physical location of the facility where
the releases of toxic chemicals occur
not the company's headquarters, its
administration building, or its post office
box. These identifiers will also aid both
regulatory authorities and the public in
cross-referencing and analyzing existing
data from the same facility.
2. Technical contact. The proposed
form would require the designation of a
technical contact who can clarify or
supplement the information in the
submission. This person's name.
address, and telephone number would
be provided. EPA believes that the
designation of a technical contact will
greatly facilitate follow-up by EPA.
States, or local governments, and by
members of the public.
3. Permit numbers. EPA proposes to
require inclusion of the facility's permit
number issued under the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES). Representatives of public
interest groups and State governments
commented that the availability of this
permit number in the data base would
enhance the public's ability to obtain
further information regarding the
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
21159
facility, particularly its emissions to
water. Industry representatives
indicated that the NPDES permit number
is a well known piece of information to
any potentially covered facility and that
there was generally only one such
permit number applicable to a facility.
While the Agency had some concern
about the duplicative nature of including
this reporting element. EPA believes that
it will be useful to the public and will
represent only a very minor incremental
increase in the reporting burden.
EPA is also proposing to ask for the
name of the receiving water body as
reported on the NPDES permit. This
should be the receiving stream that
directly receives the wastes and not
rivers or bodies of water that receive
wastes indirectly downstream. Having
the name of the receiving stream
enhances use of the data, for example,
by allowing EPA or States to model in-
stream concentrations of a chemical
from knowledge of the discharge point.
Communities could use the information
to determine whether a discharge is
upstream of drinking water intakes.
Another facility-specific permit
number that would be required is the
Underground Injection Control (UIC)
Identification number. This permit
number relates to Class 1 deep well
injection of hazardous or other wastes
under authority of the Safe Drinking
Water Act. Like the NPDES permit
number, this is a well-known facility-
specific permit number and providing it
on the form will give the public a direct
lead to valuable information about this
type of release to land.
EPA also considered requiring specific
air quality related permit number
information. However, there may be a
multitude of such numbers per facility
based on a variety of Federal, State, and
local government regulatory
requirements. The problem with air
permit numbers led the Agency to an
alternative approach. In the release
section of the form, EPA is proposing to
require a "yes" or "no" indication of
whether the chemical is specifically
covered by provisions of an air quality
permit. This information will at least
provide interested users of the data with
an indication that further information on
such release may be obtained by
reviewing such permits. As described in
Unit VI.G. below a similar approach to
permit indication is followed with
respect to releases to water and land.
As indicated above, the facility will
have effectively provided a permit
number for on-site land related
treatment and disposal of hazardous
wastes containing the toxic chemicals
by providing the EPA I.D. number and
the UIC Identification number.
4. SIC codes. To identify the principal
business activity at the facility, as
required by the statute. EPA proposes to
require the primary four-digit Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) code that
applies to the facility. Also, the facility
would, if applicable, supply up to two
additional four-digit manufacturing SIC
codes within the SIC 20 through 39 range
that relate to the facility's
manufacturing, processing, or use of the
chemicals being reported. These SIC
codes can. in a very basic sense, be used
to verify that the facility is subject to the
section 313 reporting requirements.
Moreover, classification by SIC code
will allow the data obtained from these
forms to be analyzed by industrial
activity.
5. Parent company name. Commenters
expressed the need to be able to identify
the parent company of the reporting
facility. In the view of the commenters.
such information would enhance the
public's knowledge about the facility,
especially in cases where the facility
name itself may give no indication of its
connection with a larger, national or
international corporate entity. EPA
agrees that such information could be
valuable to users of the data for
purposes of comparative analysis of
industry activities. EPA also sees this
element as a means of verifying the
"person" subject to reporting, i.e.. the
owner or operator of the facility as the
language of the statute prescribes.
Therefore, EPA proposes to require the
submitter to include the name of the
facility's parent company and that
company's Dun and Bradstreet number.
EPA believes that this will be
information readily available to the .
facility and will represent only a minor
incremental increase in the reporting
burden.
C. Identification of Off-Site Locations to
Which Toxic Chemicals are Transfered
EPA is also proposing to require the
submitter to provide the name and the
address of any off-site waste treatment,
storage, or disposal facility to which
wastes containing the chemical are sent.
This information would be entered on
the first page of the form (form section
HI). This information is placed on the
first page of the form so that
respondents will not have to repeat this
same information for each chemical they
may be reporting. When the actual
chemical-specific releases are reported
in a later section of the form (see Unit
VI.G.4. below) the submitter would only
need to provide a reference to that off-
site location as explained in the
Instructions.
EPA believes that this off-site location
information will greatly enhance the
public's understanding of the locations
of the toxic chemicals in a community
and will complete the picture of waste
related releases of a chemical from a
facility.
This information should be readily
available to the submitter, and EPA
does not believe that entering such
information on the form will pose a
significant additional burden. EPA is
requesting comment on this issue of
providing off-site location information.
For each off-site location, except a
publicly owned treatment works
(POTW), EPA proposes to ask whether
that location is under the management
or control of the reporting facility, or
under the management or control of that
facility's parent company. EPA believes
that this information will give users of
the data an important indication of the
relative level of responsibility for the
ultimate disposition of the chemical in
the environment. Again, such
information is likely to be readily
available to submitters.
EPA is also proposing to require
information on how such location is
handling the waste containing listed
chemicals (e.g.. deep well injection.
landfill), and, if known, how the waste
may be further treated at such locations.
EPA and other users of the data would
then be able to better evaluate whether
the chemical in the waste would end up
as a release, and the likely form of that
release. EPA realizes that treatment
information may not in some cases be
readily available to the submitter.
Therefore, the submitter would be
required to enter this information on the
form only if it is readily available
information known to the submitter. For
example, in contracting with such off-
site facility, such treatment information
may be included as part of the
agreement or may appear in other
correspondence with the company or in
promotional literature.
Included in the concept of transfers to
off-site locations would be quantities of
the chemical in wastes that are shipped
to or removed by a "broker," or
middleman. In such cases, the facility
owner or operator may not know the
actual location of the site to which the
waste is shipped or the waste treatment
or disposal methods to which the wastes
will be subject. Therefore, the location
information provided by the respondent
would be the name and address of the
waste broker.
There is a key criteria for determining
whether the transfer of a toxic chemical
to an off-site location is reportable. Thai
criteria is whether the chemical in the
-------
21160
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
waste is being removed from the facility
for ultimate disposal. For example, a
facility contracts with a commercial
waste disposal firm to remove a spent
solvent from the facility. The facility
would report the removal of the solvent
from the facility as a transfer to an off-
site location. If. however, the facility
sells this spent solvent to a reprocessor,
then the facility would not be required
to report this sale as a transfer of the
chemical to an off-site location. The firm
purchasing and reprocessing the solvent
would be covered by the reporting
provisions of this proposed rule as either
a manufacturer or a processor of the
solvent That reprocessor would then be
responsible for reporting their own
releases to the environment of the
chemical. This later case is consistent
with the overall distinction made
between "releases" from a facility and
the distribution in commerce of a
covered toxic chemical as part of a
product If the reporting facility does not
know whether the chemical being
removed from the facility is destined for
ultimate disposal, then EPA proposes
that the facility would err on the side of
caution and report this removal of the
chemical from the facility as a transfer
to an off-site location.
D. Chemical Identification
Section IV of the form requires
identification of the chemical or
chemical category to which all
subsequent data apply. The chemical Is
to be identified by the listed chemical
name and. if applicable, by the CAS
registry number. Chemical categories
listed do not have a CAS number
associated with them. Refer to proposed
§ 372.45 for the lists of chemicals and
chemical categories covered by this
reporting requirement.
The form would require the CAS
number in addition to the listed
chemical name. Such CAS numbers are
provided in the regulatory listing.
Inclusion of the CAS number on the
form will provide verification of the
chemical s identity. CAS numbers are
widely accepted and used for purposes
of chemical identification and chemical
reporting. EPA believes that their
inclusion in the data base will also
facilitate the retrieval of additional
information on the chemical from other
data bases or references.
1. Identifying individual chemicals
versus aggregate reporting under a
category. Any chemical specifically
listed (i.e.. listed in proposed 5 372.45 (a)
and (b)) must be reported individually
along with the associated CAS number.
A chemical on the list that has an
associated CAS number may also fall
into a covered category or be the parent
metal for one of the categories. Again if
the chemical is listed individually in the
rule, it would be reported on a separate
form. For example, a company makes
and sells the specific listed chemical 2.4-
dichlorophenol. The company would not
report the category "chlorophenols."
A chemical that fits the definition of
one of the listed categories and that is
not specifically listed in § 372.45(a) and
(b) would be reported using the category
name. For example, a company using
copper chloride, which is a chemical not
specifically listed, would enter "Copper
compounds" as the chemical
identification. If more than one such
unspecified category member is made.
processed, or used by the facility, then
the facility would aggregate those
chemicals for reporting. Aggregate
reporting allows a facility to report (on
one form) all the chemicals that fit a
category using the categorical name as a
label. For example, a facility may report
emissions of all the copper-containing
compounds on one form. In the chemical
identification section of the form, the
category name "Copper compounds"
would be entered.
2. Claiming the chemical identity as a
trade secret. Section 322 of Title ID
permits chemical identity to be claimed
as a trade secret Title III does not
authorize a claim of trade secrecy for
anything other than chemical identity. A
box in Section IV.B. of the form must be
checked when a claim of trade secrecy
is made. The submitter must also
provide EPA with an explanation of the
trade secret claim. Refer to Unit VII of
this preamble for a detailed discussion
of the required explanation.
The statute requires that the submitter
must supply a generic chemical class
identification on the form. EPA proposes
a list of generic classifications with
related codes in § 372.42 of the proposed
rule. EPA is proposing to predefine the
generic classification name for each
listed chemical and chemical category.
EPA has assigned a generic
classification to each list entry and has
placed the corresponding generic
classification code next to the chemical
or chemical category name in the
S 372.45 listings. Refer to the column
titled Generic Classification Code that
appears in the chemical lists. EPA
believes that this system will foster
consistency in reporting and improve
quality control related to data entry.
This approach should also reduce the
burden on respondents because they
will not be required to develop their
own generic identity for the submission.
EPA considers the classifications to be
general enough to satisfy the trade
secrecy concerns of industry. At the
same time, the classifications are
descriptive enough to give users of the
data base some indication of the type of
chemical or chemical category being
reported.
In relation to trade secrecy claims.
commenters stated that a facility
reporting a chemical category (e.g..
Antimony compounds) could not further
claim that reported identity as trade
secret. Their rationale is that the
identities of specific components being
reported under that category name are
already sufficiently masked. EPA does
not agree with the commenters
interpretation. A category such as
Antimony compounds is a toxic
chemical identity as listed in the
referenced Committee print for purposes
of reporting under section 313. Because
chemical identity may be claimed trade
secret and because there is no specific
exclusion from such claims for an
identitiy that is a category, EPA
concludes that such category
designations may be claimed trade
secret As a practical matter, however.
the Agency believes that a facility
would have difficulty justifying a trade
secrecy claim with respect to one of the
compound categories.
3. Identifying mixtures or trade name
products. Unit IV.C.4. of this preamble
discussed the problems of identifying
and reporting toxic chemicals within
mixtures or other trade name products.
Section IV.D. of the form provides space
for the reporting the name of a mixture
or trade name products. If provided by
the supplier, the generic classification
name associated with the actual toxic
chemical component would be entered
in Section IV.C. of the form. As
discussed, such importers, users, and
processors of these products may only
have a limited reporting responsibility
under this proposed rule depending
upon whether they reasonably can
determine the necessary percent
composition information.
E. Facility Activities and Uses of the
Chemical
The statute requires information about
whether the toxic chemical is
manufactured, imported, processed, or
otherwise used and the general category
or categories of use of that chemical.
EPA interprets this requirement to mean
activities and uses at the facility, not
uses for which the chemical is
distributed in commerce. EPA has
developed several proposed indicators
of facility activity or use related to the
chemical being reported (see Section V
of the form). EPA believes that these
indicators will give the users of the data
a sufficient idea of why the chemical is
present at the facility and, if applicable.
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. lone 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
21161
how it functions within the facility. EPA
attempted at the same time to keep
these indicators of use general enough
so as not to compromise process-related
trade secret information. A submitter
would be required to check all activities
and uses that apply.
F. Maximum Amount
The statute also requires an estimate
of the maximum amount (in ranges) of
(he chemical present at the facility at
any time during the reporting period.
EPA proposes, as the conference
committee report directs, that these
ranges be adapted from the ranges used
for development of the chemical
inventory under section 8(b) of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). The
TSCA 8(b) ranges relate, however, to
total annual production rather than
maximum on-site quantity at a point in
time. Therefore. EPA requests comment
on whether the magnitude of these
ranges are appropriate for purposes of
reporting under section 313.
C. Releases to Environmental Media
The statute requires information on
"the annual quantity of the toxic
chemical entering each environmental
medium." The conference committee
report elaborates upon this requirement.
stating that "Reporting on releases to
each environmental medium ... shall
include, at a minimum, releases to the
air. water (surface water and
ground water), land (surface and
subsurface), and waste treatment and
storage facilities." The transfer of
chemical-laden wastes to treatment or
storage facilities is not commonly
construed as a "release" to the
"environment." However, such transfers
are comparable to discharges from a
facility because they are wastes leaving
the facility, with the possibility that
some fraction of the chemical in the
waste may ultimately enter the
environment.
The statute defines release as "any
spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring.
emitting, emptying, discharging.
injecting, escaping, leaching, dumping.
or disposing into the environment
(including the abandonment or
discarding of barrels, containers, and
other closed receptacles] of any... toxic
chemical." EPA is proposing to require
reporting of total annual releases to
various media, including in each total
both accidental and routine or planned
releases. In connection with this total
release concept. EPA also proposes to
require a "yes" or "no" indication on the
form of whether the reported quantity of
release includes any accidental releases
reported under section 304 of Title III or
section 103 of CERCLA. This approach
ensures complete reporting of releases
from the facility without requiring
duplicative reporting on the specific
quantities of the accidental or
emergency portion of releases. Users of
the data can then go to the state or local
planning commission to review the
specific "release" reports.
The release information required on
the form is to be based on readily
available data [including monitoring
data and emissions measurements)
collected pursuant to other provisions of
law or as part of routine plant
operations. Where monitoring data or
emissions measurements are not readily
available, reasonable estimates of the
amounts released may be made using
published emission factors, material
balance calculations, or engineering
calculations. No monitoring or
measurement of the quantities,
concentration, or frequency of any toxic
chemical released into the environment
beyond that monitoring and
measurement required under other
provisions of law or regulation, is
required for the purpose of completing
the form.
EPA is proposing that respondents
estimate as accurately as possible the
quantities in pounds of the listed
chemical released annually to each
environmental medium. Respondents
would round off these figures to the
nearest pound. However, given the
annual aggregate nature of the data.
EPA is seeking comment on alternatives
for reporting release quantities. One
option would be to allow reporting in
ranges for all emissions or for emissions
below a certain threshold amount. A
concern expressed by one commenter is
the compliance implications, especially
for smaller firms, of having to certify to
a very specific release figure. Ranges
could be established as order of
magnitude or other appropriate
categories; for example. 0 to 10 pounds.
10 to 100 pounds. 100 to 1.000 pounds, or
0 to 10 pounds, 10 to 100 pounds. 100 to
250 pounds. 250 to 500 pounds. 500 to
1000 pounds. One potential drawback to
this approach is the difficulty of doing
analyses from the data base where
emissions are expressed in ranges rather
than single numbers. Another potential
problem is that neither the statute nor
the legislative history of section 313
provides for reporting the emissions
data as a range, such as is provided for
reporting the maximum quantity of the
chemical on site. Another option would
be to allow respondents to report to one
significant figure. For example, if a
respondent estimates that their release
of a toxic chemical to water is 1,120
pounds per year they would be allowed
to report 1.000 pounds per year. This
approach would allow for a consistent
degree of leeway in expressing the
accuracy of a single number for any
release.
As a third option. EPA could require
specific estimates within some specified
degree of precision. For example, in the
TSCA Inventory update rule. EPA
required reporting of production
volumes to two significant digits with an
accuracy of plus or minus 10 percent.
EPA asks for comment on whether this
approach should be applied in this
rulemaking.
For each annual release quantity. EPA
proposes to require a "basis of
estimate." This element will indicate
whether the quantity reported was
derived primarily based on monitoring
data for the wastes leading to release,
mass balance calculations of streams
entering and leaving process equipment,
emission factors (e.g., published data on
the amount of release to a medium as a
fraction of production volume for the
process/equipment leading to the
release), or other approaches such as
best engineering judgement. In addition
to providing some idea of the quality of
the estimate, this element will identify
situations in which monitoring data
might be obtained as part of follow-up
activities by EPA or states. Most release
quantities are likely to be aggregates of
estimates using different methodologies
(e.g., part of stack emissions based on
monitoring data, part based on emission
factors). Submitters would indicate the
single method accounting for the largest
portion of the release quantity. EPA
requests comment on this approach.
For metal compounds, EPA proposes
that the release quantities be reported
for only the metal and not the metal
compound. EPA recognizes that most
monitoring data available measures
only the metal portion of the compound.
Reporting of the amount of compounds
released would be complicated when
more than one substance contributes to
the metal content of the waste, when the
compound dissociates, and when the
compound is converted to a different
substance due to waste treatment or
other processes. It therefore appears
reasonable to require reporting of metal
released to avoid confusion over the
meaning of total compound released.
This section of the form also requires
a "yes" or "no" indication of whether
the toxic chemical released is
specifically covered by a environmental
permit. In general, a facility would
answer "yes" if the permit specifically
includes or cites the reported toxic
chemical.
-------
21162
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
Section VII of the proposed form is
organized by environmental media. It
would ask for information on releases to
(A) air. (B) water. (C) land, and (D)
transfers to off-site locations.
1. Emissions to air. The subsection on
air releases includes fugitive and point
air emissions. EPA proposes to
distinguish fugitive or non-point air
emissions from stack or point air
emissions for two reasons. First.
estimates of stack emissions are likely
to be more accurate than estimates of
fugitive emissions because stack
emissions can be directly measured.
Better overall information on air
releases can be obtained if fugitive
emissions are reported separately and
the accuracy of the data on stack
emissions is preserved. Second.
separate reporting of fugitive and stack
emissions will enable regulatory
agencies and other users of the data to
judge the relative significance of these
two sources of releases.
For each air release quantity.
submitters are to indicate whether the
release is covered by any applicable
permit controlling the chemical. Because
a facility may have many air permits
covering single pieces of equipment or
processes. EPA is not requesting permit
numbers. That a permit exists for the air
emissions of the chemical at the facility
provides a starting point for the
community to obtain permit information.
To answer "yes" to the permit
question, the facility must determine
that the permit specifically cites the
toxic chemical in that permit. For
example, a permit might set a numerical
emission limit to control quantities of
that specific toxic chemical released.
The facility would answer "no" if. for
example, the permit sets a performance
standard for the process equipment in
which the chemical is made or used but
does not cite the specific toxic chemical.
Some facilities may have several similar
emissions sources that treat the same
toxic chemical. If some but not all of
these emission sources specifically have
permits that specifically cite the
chemical, then it is still appropriate to
answer "yes" to the permit question.
2. Discharges to water. The subsection
on releases to water includes the
facility's direct releases to receiving
water bodies only. The facility would
enter the amount of the chemical
released to surface waters (e.g.. rivers.
lakes, streams, etc.) from all discharge
points at the facility. Quantities of a
toxic chemical in wastewater
discharged to a POTW or other off-site
treatment plant would be entered in
Section VII.D. of the form (see
paragraph G.4. of this unit).
EPA also proposes that the total
releases of a chemical to surface waters
include the contribution from
storm water if the facility's permit
includes stormwater sources. Given the
potential difficulty in estimating the
contribution of stormwater to the total
release of a chemical. EPA is
specifically asking for comment on the
inclusion of stormwater discharges and
how these releases should be estimated
and reported.
As discussed in B.3. of this unit. EPA
is proposing that facilities that directly
discharge wastes to surface waters
provide their NPDES permit number In
the release section the respondent
would also indicate whether the
chemical discharges being reported are
specifically limited by the NPDES
permit.
3. Releases to land. The subsection on
releases to land asks for the amounts of
a chemical disposed of within the
confines of the facility. Types of land-
based disposal are identified in the
instructions along with a code, which is
to be entered on the form. Specific land-
based disposal methods include
placement in surface impoundments and
subsurface disposal in landfills, septic
systems and infiltration lagoons, or
underground injection wells. Such
methods may result in the chemical
reaching groundwater. They are grouped
as methods of land-disposal to
emphasize that reported quantities are
to be amounts placed in each type of
disposal system. The respondent would
report the amounts that are placed in
infiltration and/or septic systems as one
total since both are designed to allow
wastes to percolate into near-surface
soil.
For the purposes of this reporting, a
surface impoundment denotes a "final"
disposal method, and quantities of a
chemical added to an impoundment that
is part of a wastewater treatment
process should generally not be reported
here. However, where the impoundment
accumulates sludges containing the
chemical, quantities should be entered
here, unless they are accounted for by
other totals (e.g.. impoundment
dredgings hauled to off-site disposal).
An impoundment would, in this regard,
mean a type of final disposal.
The respondent would check "yes" in
the permit column if the facility has an
EPA Identification Number and the
chemical is being disposed of as part of
a regulated hazardous waste.
4. Transfers to off-site locations. In
Section VII.D. of the form the
respondent would enter the actual
amount of the chemical in waste
transferred to off-site locations.
Addresses for these facilities will have
been provided in Section 111 of the form.
First, facilities would be required lo
estimate releases to POTWs. EPA's and
the community's ability to analyze data
on releases to water would be greatly
enhanced by knowing how much
chemical goes to a POTW. EPA and
other users would be able to make more
accurate assessments of environmental
concentrations of the chemical because.
for example, estimates of POTW
treatment effectiveness can be taken
into account.
The other lines in this section are to
be used for reporting releases of the
chemical to any of the other types of off-
site locations identified in Section III.B.
of the form. The respondent would also
indicate the basis of estimate for the
release and whether that release is
covered by the permit, i.e.. whether the
chemical is part of a hazardous waste
leaving the facility.
H. Waste Treatment Information
1. EPA's concept of wastestream for
the purpose of this reporting. Section
313(g)(i)(c)(iii) states that facilities must
report "for each wastestream. the waste
treatment or disposal methods
employed, and an estimate of the
treatment efficiency typically achieved.
. . ." EPA has proposed a list of codes in
the instructions from which facilities can
specify a treatment method (e.g.,
biological treatment, incineration) for
each wastestream.
EPA is proposing to consider a
wastestream as aggregate wastes
treated in a particular manner or the
influent stream to a single treatment
method. For example, aggregate waste
going to secondary wastewater
treatment on-site would be reported as a
wastestream. Estimates would not be
required for each of the numerous
waters from various process points that
are combined for treatment. EPA
recognizes the difficulties involved for a
submitter to estimate efficiences for
each separately.
If certain wastestreams containing the
chemical are treated separately, then
individual reporting of each treatment
process would be required. For example.
one process wastestream could go to
carbon adsorption, then be combined
with other process waters for secondary
treatment. Carbon adsorption would
then have to be reported separately as a
treatment method.
EPA considered an alternative
approach to defining wastestreams
which would classify them more
specifically by source. In particular, the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) D. F, and K waste codes
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday, ftine 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules 21163
could be used where applicable. For
example. RCRA code KOB3 refers to
"Distillation bottoms from aniline
production." Other source specific codes
could be developed for non-RCRA
wastestreams.
Knowing the source of each
wastestream or wastestream component
would allow EPA or other regulatory
agencies to link specific listed chemicals
and currently regulated hazardous
wastes. Such information would permit
belter identification of toxtcity hazards
and risks associated with hazardous
wastes and would be helpful in
decisions to list or delist specific
wastestreams under RCRA. In addition.
information on source-specific treatment
efficiencies could be used as a screening
tool for EPA and State programs that
regulate chemical releases and set
standards based on source-specific
control/treatment technologies.
Despite these potential uses, there are
a number of difficulties in requiring the
more detailed source-specific
information. First, in order to fully
evaluate waste treatment methods for
the purpose of regulatory development.
a considerable amount of more detailed
technical information would have to be
collected. Such data would include unit
design and operating features of the
treatment equipment, waste throughput.
waste composition and physical form.
waste pre-treatment, waste components
that can interfere with or enhance the
treatment process, and whether
recyclable materials or usable energy
are generated.
Second, companies may consider that
wastestream sources reveal trade secret
information by revealing specific
process or chemical information,
whereas Title III allows only chemical
name to be claimed trade secret. EPA's
program offices have other authorities
that would allow them to collect these
data while providing mechanisms for
protecting valid company trade secrets.
Finally, source-specific waste code
reporting would considerably increase
the reporting burden because of the
large number of wastestreams that must
be considered. Each waste treatment
process may be associated with multiple
source-specific streams, thereby
requiring multiple line entries and
efficiency estimates for each such
process. Given the broad coverage of
section 313 reporting, it may not be
appropriate to include this level of
detail.
Therefore. EPA believes that
identifying the specific source of a
wastestream (for example, absorber
effluent, distillation bottoms, or spent
catalyst) should not be included on the
proposed form for two major reasons: (I)
Without other more detailed information
that source wastestream data would
have limited usefulness, and [2] it raises
trade-secret problems. For the purpose
of this proposed form, the wastestreams
are being characterized as gaseous
emissions, waste water, non-aqueous
liquid wastes, and solid waste (including
sludges and slurries}.
2. Waste treatment efficiency.
Although treatment methods are
reported for the wastestream containing
the listed chemical, the conference
committee report states (hat the
treatment efficiency should refer to the
listed chemical as opposed to other
components of the wastestream. EPA
interprets the term "treatment
efficiency" to mean the mass percent by
which the treatment removes the
chemical from the wastestream. An
alternative interpretation is that only the
mass percent destroyed or chemically
converted be reported Of course, the
chemical removed may only be
transferred to another waste (e.g.. from
water to sludge) and release quantities
to various media must reflect these
transfers. The reporting envisioned for
this form would not allow EPA to track
sequential treatment processes and
subsequent disposal However, for most
treatment methods it will be possible to
determine, based solely on the treatment
code whether transfers to another
medium occurs.
It may be difficult for the facility to
ascertain the degree to which the
chemical is removed or destroyed. For
example, wastewater treatment may
treat a chemical waste by simultaneous
mechanisms: Evaporation, reaction with
other chemicals in the wastewater.
biological oxidation, and adsorption to
sludge. Treatment efficiency data
readily known to a facility represents
net removal by all these mechanisms
and it is not usually possible to
distinguish destruction from removal
Therefore. EPA proposes that
treatment efficiency be expressed as the
overall concept of percent removal.
whether the specific action taking place
is destruction, chemical conversion.
physical removal, or some combination.
3. Indication of influent concentration.
EPA is also proposing that the
concentration of the chemical in
wastestreams prior to treatment be
indicated. The effectiveness of most
treatment methods is concentration-
dependent and obtaining this
information will assist users of the data
in determining whether effective
treatment methods may be available for
wastes containing different amounts of a
given chemical. The ranges for reporting
are listed in the instructions. Each range
covers 2 or 3 orders of magnitude.
4. Indication of whether the efficiency
estimate is based on operating data.
EPA is also proposing that facilities
provide a "yes" or "no" indication of
whether the treatment efficiency
estimate is based on actual operating
data. For example, the facility would
check "yes" if the estimate is based on
monitoring-of influent and effluent
wastes under typical operating
conditions. The facility would check
"no" if the efficiency estimate is based
on published data for similar processes
or on equipment supplier's literature.
EPA believes that this indication will be
valuable to users of the data in the same
way that the "basis of estimate"
information is valuable in relation to
release estimates. It will provide users
of the data with an indication of the
relative quality and reliability of the
efficiency estimate figure.
/. Optional Information on Waste
Minimization
The final section of the form allows
the respondent to describe any action
taken at the facility in the past year
(other than the waste treatment methods
specified in Section VIII of the form) to
mimimize generation of waste related to
the chemical being reported Actions
may include process modifications,
changes in operating procedures,
product redesign, raw material
substitutions, or recycle/reuse which
have reduced or eliminated the
generation of wastes containing the
chemical being reported. This section
allows a facility to demonstrate that
progress is being made in waste
minimization, not just reduction in
releases.
For example, yearly reporting may
show that a facility has significantly
reduced releases of a chemical but the
reason for such reduction may not be
obvious from the reported data.
Alternatively, a great reduction in waste
generation may be hidden by the fact
that very efficient treatment has always
led to little release.
The form asks for The type of action
taken to reduce waste generation (by
code); pounds of the reported chemical
in the waste in the reporting year.
pounds of the reported chemical in the
waste in the previous year (or the
facility can enter a number for the
percent change); an index comparing
production level in the reporting year to
production level in the previous year.
and reasons for taking the action (by
code).
The index of production level figure
provides a means to sort out changes in
waste amount due to level of business
activity. For example, if the chemical
-------
21164
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
were used in coating appliances and
80.000 appliances were produced in 1987
compared to 100.000 in 1986. the index
would be 0.8. Any reported waste
reduction (or lack of increase) could
then be apportioned to the action taken
or to change in economic activity.
Companies can protect trade secret
information since actual production
levels would not be reported, nor would
"waste per unit production." The
production level indicator chosen should
most closely represent activities
involving the chemical. However, these
activities could range from production
volume of the chemical itself (or of
another chemical using the reported
substance) to the dollar value of all
products made at the facility. This latter
indicator might be most appropriate, for
example, in the case where the facility
substituted one general purpose solvent
with another solvent.
Facilities can use the narrative space
provided in this optional section of the
form to explain how the modification
caused the changes in waste
composition or changes in hazard. Such
information is expected to be highly
valuable to those citizens who are
attempting to understand industry
progress in reducing releases of
chemicals to the environment. It will
also permit regulatory agencies to
analyze the effectiveness and the extent
of use of various techniques for reducing
routine releases of toxic chemicals. Such
information will be essential to
understanding why reductions in
releases are observable in long-term
data from a facility. Completion of this
section is optional because actions that
reduce releases could in some cases
reveal trade secret information and
because the statute does not specifically
request information on reductions in
releapes.
VII. Trade Secret Claims and
Substantiation
Section 322 of Title III provides that
the specific chemical identity (including
the chemical name and other specific
identification] may be designated by the
submitter as a trade secret. To do so. the
submitter would check the box in
Section IV.B. of the form indicating that
the chemical identity is being claimed as
a trade secret. The submitter would also
have to enter the generic classification
name and code that is pre-assigned by
the regulation to that specific toxic
chemical. See proposed § 372.42 for
these generic classification names. Also.
the listings of covered chemicals and
chemical categories proposed in fi 372.45
of the regulation include a column that
contains the pre-assigned generic
classification code for that chemical.
If the submitter claims the specific
chemical identity as trade secret then a
second copy of that report must be
included with the submission. This
second copy would be a "sanitized"
version of the original submission. It
would contain all the same information
as the original submission except that
the space provided for the specific
chemical identity (including CAS
number, if applicable) would be left
blank. This non-trade secret version of
the form is the one that will be made
available to the public and is the version
to be submitted to the State.
Any submitter claiming trade secret
protection for a chemical identity must
also submit an explanation for this
claim in accordance with section
322(a)(2)(ii) of Title III. This explanation
must demonstrate: (1) That the submitter
has not disclosed the chemical identity
to any other person, other than a
member of a local emergency planning
committee, an officer or employee of the
United States or a State or local
government, an employee of such
person, or a person who is bound by a
confidentiality agreement; (2) that the
submitter has taken reasonable
measures to protect the confidentiality
of such information and will continue to
take such measures; (3) that the
information is not required to be
disclosed or otherwise made available
to the public under any other Federal or
State law: (4) that disclosure of the
information is likely to cause substantial
harm to the competitive position of the
submitter and (5) that the chemical
identity is not readily discoverable
through reverse engineering. Failure to
submit this explanation as part of the
submission will result in immediate
disallowance of the trade secrecy claim
without further notice to the submitter.
The explanation document itself will
be available to the public. However, the
submitter may further claim portions of
the explanation document as
confidential if that information would
reveal the chemical identity claimed as
a trade secret or would reveal other
confidential business or trade secret
information. To make this claim the
submitter would clearly designate those
portions of the explanation document to
be claimed as confidential. The
submitter would include a certification
that those portions of the explanation
document claimed as confidential
would, if disclosed, reveal the chemical
identity being claimed as a trade secret,
or would reveal other confidential
business or trade secret information.
This certification must be signed by the
same person that signs the certification
statement on the reporting form.
Under section 322(a)(2)(ii) of Title III.
a person who claims a specific chemical
identity as confidential is required to
include an explanation of the reasons
for the claim, including a specific
description of why the trade secret
factors in section 322(b) apply. This
explanation is to be included "in the
submittal referred to in [section
322(a)(l)J" which in this case is the
submittal of the report under section
313. Since the section 313 report is
required to be submitted to EPA and "to
an official or officials of the State
designated by the Governor." section
322(a)(2)(ii) could be read as requiring
that the explanation, including any
information in it which is trade secret or
otherwise confidential under section
322(f). must be submitted to the State as
well. However, EPA believes that this
reading of section 322(a)(2)(ii) is
inconsistent with the remainder of
section 322. Accordingly. EPA is
proposing that persons submitting
reports under section 313 in which the
specific chemical identity is claimed as
a trade secret would, in addition to
submitting a sanitized copy of the form
to the State, be required to submit a
sanitized copy of the explanation for the
trade secret claim to the State and EPA
as well. In this way. States and the
public at large would be in a better
position to determine whether a trade
secret claim appears to be valid and.
therefore, whether to petition EPA under
section 322(d) to review the trade secret
claim.
EPA received comments that the trade
secret provisions of Title III do not
require "up-front substantiation" of a
trade secret claim. EPA considers that
the statute is quite clear on the
requirement that the above-mentioned
explanation be provided as part of the
submission. That is, the required
explanation must be provided "up
front." The commenter may be referring
to additional, more detailed information
that must be submitted, in the event that
such trade secret claim is challenged
through the public petition process as
provided by section 322 of Title III.
Another commenter asserted that
emissions of specific chemical
substances that could be required under
section 104 of the Clean Air Act or
under section 304 of the Clean Water
Act are data that must be made
publically available. Therefore,
according to this argument, a submitter
of a section 313 report would not be able
to claim trade secret the chemical
identity associated with such emission.
In the commenter's opinion, the
submitter would not be able to attest to
the fact that such chemical-specific
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
21165
information is not public knowledge.
EPA is reviewing this comment and will
address it in connection with the
comprehensive Title HI trade secret
regulations to be proposed by the
Agency.
VIII. Recordkeeping
EPA proposes under the general
rulemaking authority of section 328 of
Title III to require submitters to retain a
copy of each report plus the supporting
documentation used to complete each
report. EPA proposes that these records
be retained for a period of 5 years from
the date of submission of the report
Such records"would be retained at the
facility for which the report is submitted
and would have to be readily available
for purposes of inspection. EPA is
requesting comment on the appropriate
length of the recordkeeping period.
IX. The Toxic Chemical Release
Inventory Data Base
The Toxic Chemical Release
Inventory will provide, for the first time.
information on toxic chemical releases
to all environmental media on a
nationwide basis. EPA expects that
users of the data base will include
Federal. State and local agency officials;
private citizens; industry: local and
national environmental and citizens
organizations; workers and labor
organizations; educators; researchers
and consultants; private physicians and
public health officials; members of the
legal community: and the media.
A. Development of a Data Base
Section 313(j) requires EPA to
establish and maintain in a
computerized data base a national toxic
chemical release inventory based on the
data submitted. (This inventory should
not be confused with the inventory of
chemical substances developed and
maintained under section 8{b) of the
Toxic Substances Control Act.) Further.
EPA is required to make this data base
accessible to the public by computer
telecommunications and other means on
a cost reimbursible basis. After the data
base has been established and the data
for the first reporting period has been
entered. EPA will issue a notice for
pubication in the Federal Register that
will instruct potential users regarding
access to the data base and procedures
for use. Also included in this notice will
be instructions on how to obtain
information from the data base through
means other than computer
telecommunications.
B. Identifying Adverse Health and
Environmental Effects Information in
the Data Base
Section 322(h)(2) of Title III requires
EPA to identify the adverse health and
environmental effects associated with a
toxic chemical that is claimed trade
secret and assure that such information
be included in the computer data base.
The Legislative history associated with
this provision further explains that the
adverse effects identified should be
described in general terms so as not to
provide a unique identifier of a
particular trade secret chemical.
EPA has identified several options for
meeting this requirement of providing
adverse effects Information relating to-
trade secret claims. One option would
be to develop a cumulative, worst-case
effects characterization for the
predefined generic class of the chemical.
For example, a person using the
database determines that a facility is
emitting certain quantities of a chemical
claimed trade secret. The generic class
identity available to the person is
"Hydrocarbons." Since such a chemical
as benzene, a known human carcinogen.
is included in this generic class then the
adverse effects characterization would
have to include this effect Chemicals
without this effect would be identified
as carcinogens if the chemical identity is
claimed trade secret One obvious
problem with this approach is that it can
overstate the adverse effect of any
particular chemical within a generic
class.
A second option would be a modified
generic identification approach. Rather
than the predefined generic
classification system proposed in this
rule, companies would be required to
develop and submit a generic identity
for the chemical. EPA would then
develop the associated adverse health
effects description that relates to the
general class or category of the
chemical. For example, a company
claims the listed chemical aniline trade
secret and gives it a generic identity as
an "aromatic amine." The adverse
effects would then be based on the
adverse effects of aromatic amines in
general. This approach would be a
variation on the first option but could
provide the data user with somewhat
more specific information. One problem
that this option would create is that EPA
would not be able to develop the toxic
effects for the database until the
submission is received, thus possibly
delaying the data availability.
A third approach would be to attempt
to develop individual adverse effect
profiles that would be substance
specific but would mask any particular
effect that is unique and that could
divulge its specific identity. For
example, if one of the metals has a
unique effect (e.g.. kidney toxicity) this
effect may have to be generalized to
"organ effect."
EPA requests comment on ways to
specify adverse effects information in
the data base in connection with trade
secrecy claims.
X. Economic Impact
EPA has prepared a Regulatory
Impact Analysis (RIA) in connection
with this proposed rule. The RIA
assesses the economic impact of the
proposed regulation on the affected
industry (manufacturing. SIC codes 20
through'39) and State and Federai-
governments. The following cost results
are presented in the analysis document
titled "Regulatory Impact Analysis in
Support of the Proposed Rulemaking
Under Section 313 of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986."
Four alternatives are considered in
the RIA for implementing section 313:
Alternative I—Facilities report by letter.
Alternative II—Facilities must report by
use of a form, with minimal
interpretation of the data elements
required by the statute.
Alternative III—Facilities report by
form, with additional data elements
required (proposed form).
Alternative IV—Facilities report by
form, with elements of Alternative III
above plus specific source
wastestream identification/
characterization required.
The population of facilities that would
be required to submit reports—forms or
letters—under section 313 is based on
Census data for facilities engaged in
manufacturing, a survey of toxic
substances use conducted by the State
of New Jersey involving a subset of the
substances contained in the list of 329
chemicals covered by section 313. and
the Toxic Substances Control Act
Inventory.
Section 313 will require reports from
an estimated 32.760 facilities. On
average. 5.0 toxic substances will need
to be reported per covered facility,
resulting in a total of 165,100 reports
each year.
Estimates of the costs per facility
(based on an average of 4 chemicals and
1 mixture per facility) for the proposed
form in the first year are $12,467 and
$9.426 in subsequent years of reporting.
The higher first year costs are expected
due to initial one-time costs associated
with compliance determination and
establishing a methodology for
-------
21166
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
estimating emissions. Estimates of the
cost per facility for each alternative are
as follows:
fint Second
S1 1.1 10
11.831
12467
1169O
18.132
8.891
9.428
B.8SO
In the first year of reporting.
industry's total compliance costs will
range from $427.6 million for Alternative
I (letters) to $480.1 million for
Alternative IV (version 3 of the form).
Over a 10-year projection period, the
present value of the costs will range
from S1.656 to S2.10a7 million at a
discount rate of 10 percent (real).
All the regulatory alternatives appear
to be somewhat more costly than if EPA
took no action to issue a form and
regulation implementing section 313.
However, the majority of the overall
costs associated with this proposed rule
are driven by the statutory provisions. If
the letter reporting is taken as a
baseline, the proposed form represents
approximately a 12 percent increase in
the overall costs for industry to comply
with section 313 requirements. As
explained elsewhere in this preamble,
EPA has chosen to develop a form and
regulation in order to provide for
uniform reporting so that a computerized
data base of high quality and utility can
be created and maintained.
There is some variability in the costs
of the regulatory options (Alternatives II
through IV) based on the quantity and
type of information required. The
proposed regulatory approach
(Alternative III) is somewhat more
costly than Alternative IL However,
EPA believes that this extra cost is
justified by the increased utility of the
data that this option provides.
The proposed regulatory option asks
for information that will improve the
ability of communities to track the flow
of releases in their areas, specifically
reporting on the disposition of
substances off-site in treatment, storage,
and disposal facilities. Use of the data
base is also enhanced by the
requirement for data on non-primary
manufacturing SIC codes, parent
companies, and applicability of section
304 and permits to particular releases.
Compared to Alternative IV, the
proposed option entails lower costs for
industry because it does not require
wastestream-specific reporting on
treatment methods and percent
destruction or conversion of the toxic
chemicals.
EPA will incur coats to process, check,
store, and make available the data
reported under section 313. EPA's costs
will vary depending upon its choice of
data management systems and policies
but are estimated to range from between
$4.0 and $13.8 million per year. Over a
10-year period, the present value of
EPA's expenses will be $21.0 to $74.0
million discounted at 10 percent States
will have expenses for processing,
storing, and distributing reports sent to
them. State costs are estimated at $1.0
million per year.
A draft RIA underwent a limited
public review and certain comments
received have been incorporated. EPA
requests comment on the methodology
employed, the unit costs, and the results
of the RIA. In particular, EPA requests
comment on the following issues:
1. How many toxic chemicals will be
reported by typical facilities overall?
2. How many additional reports will
be associated with the requirement to
report on mixtures and trade name
products?
3. What are the costs of preparing
estimates where information required is
not readily available?
4. Are the unit cost estimates
reasonable for both industry and
government?
5. Are there other activities associated
with section 313 that should be
considered? What costs are associated
with such activities?
XI. Rulemaking Record
The following documents constitute
the rulemaking record for this proposed
rule (docket control number OPTS-
400002). All documents, including the
index of this record, are available to the
public in the OTS Reading Room from 8
a.m. to 4 pjn., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The OTS
Reading Room is located at EPA
Headquarters, Rm. NE-G004.401 M SU
SW.. Washington. DC 20460. The record
includes the following information
considered by the Agency in developing
this proposed rule:
1. This proposed rule.
2. Summaries of individual meetings
held with representatives of industry.
public interest groups, and State
government officials.
3. Transcripts of public meetings held
January B and 9,1987.
4. A summary of comments received
at the above-referenced public meetings.
5. Written comments received in
connection with draft materials
distributed for review prior to the above
referenced public meetings.
6. The document titled "Regulatory
Impact Analysis in Support of the
Proposed Rtdemaking Under Section 313
of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1988." (May
1987).
7. Written comments on the above-
referenced regulatory analysis.
8. The technical guidance document
titled, "Guidance for Determining
Releases and Waste Treatment
Efficiency for the Toxic Chemical
Release Inventory."
9. Written comments received in
connection with the above-referenced
guidance document.
10. The support document titled.
'Toxic Chemical Release Inventory—
Glossary of Synonyms."
XII. Regulatory Assessment
Requirements
A. Executive Order 12291
Under Executive Order 12291, EPA
must judge whether a regulation is
"major" and therefore requires a
regulatory impact analysis. EPA has
developed a regulatory impact analysis.
This analysis shows that the
combination of impacts of the statutory
provisions of section 313 and the
interpretive provisions of this proposed
regulation may create a first year impact
of $472.7 million and a second year
impact of $311.8 million. However, the
incremental impact of EPA's form as
represented in this proposed rule
accounts for only 12 percent of the total
impact. As discussed elsewhere in this
preamble, facilities will have to report
the information outlined in section 313
by letter if EPA does not publish a
uniform reporting form. In any event,
EPA has determined that this proposed
rule, considered in combination with the
mandated provisions of section 313. is
"major" because it may have an effect
of $100 million or more on the economy.
EPA does not. however, anticipate that
this proposed rule will have a significant
effect on competition, costs, or prices.
This proposed regulation was
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review as
required by Executive Order 12291.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The proposed rule does not
specifically exempt small businesses,
nor does the statute. However, the
statute and this proposed rule do
exempt facilities with fewer than 10 full-
time employees or facilities whose
chemical manufacturing, processing, or
use activities do not meet certain
volume thresholds. EPA estimates that
Section 313 will require reporting from
approximately 3 percent (8,520 of
286.000) of all of the small
manufacturing facilities.
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
21167
Preliminary analysis of the impacts of
the proposed rule on small entities
(included in the RIA as an appendix)
indicates that for some segments of.the
manufacturing sector the compliance
costs may have a significant impact.
Specifically, the reporting costs are
estimated to be 2.0 to 3.0 percent of
median sales for facilities with 10 to 19
employees in SIC codes 25 (furniture). 27
(printing and publishing), and 30 (rubber
and miscellaneous plastics). The number
of facilities affected is estimated to be
635. which represents 0.2 percent of all
manufacturing facilities with lesn than
50 employees. The number of small
businesses affected is not known but
would be fewer than 635. Although this
represents a very small percentage of all
small facilities, the absolute numbers of
facilities affected is of concern.
Moreover, given the uncertainties in the
data upon which the RIA is based, other
reporting requirements of SARA Title III
that may affect the same facilities, and
concerns raised by the Small Business
Administration. EPA believes that it is
prudent public policy to assume that the
requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (Pub. L 96-354) have
been triggered
The RIA and appendix on small
facility impacts serves as the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis required
by the Regulatory Flexibility Act EPA
intends to revise this analysis prior to
promulgation of the final rule. EPA
requests comment on the methodology
employed in the analysis, the
breakdown of facility sizes, and the
results of the analysis. EPA is especially
interested in receiving comments from
small entities in SIC codes 25.27. and 30
and from members of the public who
might be affected by releases from small
entities. In particular. EPA requests
comment on the following issues:
1. Are there data to support
exemptions to the proposed rule on the
basis of facility size (number of
employees, sales, production volume).
SIC code, or quantity of release.
2. Which questions on the proposed
form are particularly burdensome?
3. What kind of guidance could EPA
provide to reduce the burden to small
entities?
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
OMB has reviewed the information
collection requirements contained in this
proposed rule under the provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Submit comments on
these requirements to The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs:
OMB: 726 Jackson Place. NW..
Washington. DC 20503 marked
"Attention Desk Officer for EPA."
The Final Rule will respond to any
OMB or public comments on the
information collection requirements.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372
Environmental protection. Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements. Toxic
chemicals.
Dated: May 27.1987.
Lee M. Thomas,
Administrator.
Therefore, it is proposed that Chapter
I of 40 CFR be amended by adding a
new Part 372 to read as follows:
PART 372—TOXIC CHEMICAL
RELEASE REPORTING; COMMUNITY
RIGHT-TO-KNOW
Subpart A—General Provisions
Sec.
372.1 Scope and purpose.
372.3 Definitions.
372.5 Persons who must report
372.10 Covered facilities.
372.12 Thresholds for reporting.
372.15 Reporting requirements and schedule
for reporting.
372.16 Recordkeeping.
37Z19 Compliance and enforcement
Subpart B—f Reserved!
Subpart C—Specific Toxic Chemical
Listings
372.42 Generic classification of listed
chemicals and chemical categories for
purposes of trade secrecy claims.
372.45 Chemicals and chemical categories to
which this part applies.
Subpart D—Reporting Forms and
Instructions
372.65 Toxic chemical release reporting
forms and instructions.
Authority: Pub. L 99-499.
Subpart A—General Provisions
9 372.1 Scope and purpose.
This part sets forth requirements for
the submission of information relating to
the release of toxic chemicals under
section 313 of Title III of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986. The information collected under
this part is intended to inform the
general public and the communities
surrounding covered facilities about
releases of toxic chemicals, to assist
research, to aid in the development of
regulations, guidelines, and standards.
and for other purposes.
§372.3 Definition*.
Terms defined in sections 313(b)(l)(c)
and 329 of Title III and not explicitly
defined herein are used with die
meaning given in Title III For the
purpose of this part:
"Act" means Title III.
"Article" means a manufactured item
which is formed to a specific shape or
design during manufacture, which has
end use function(s) dependent in whole
or in part upon its shape or design
during end use. and which has either no
change in chemical composition during
its end use or only those changes of
composition which have no commercial
purpose separate from that of the article.
and'that result from a chemical reaction
that occurs upon end use of other
chemical substances, mixtures, or
articles; except that fluids and particles
are not considered articles regardless of
shape or design.
"Customs territory of the United
States" means the 50 States, the District
of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.
"EPA" means the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
"Facility" means all buildings.
equipment, structures, and other
stationary items which are located on a
single site or on contiguous or adjacent
sites and which are owned or operated
by the same person (or by any person
which controls, is controlled by or under
common control with, such person).
"Import" means to import a chemical
substance into the customs territory of
the United States.
"Manufacture" means to produce.
prepare, import or compound a toxic
chemical. Manufacture also applies to
substances that are produced
comcidentally during the manufacture.
processing, use, or disposal of another
substance or mixture, including
byproducts and coproducts that are
separated from that other substance or
mixture, and impurities that remain in
that substance or mixture.
"Otherwise use" or "otherwise used"
means any use of a toxic chemical that
is not covered by the terms
"manufacture" or "process" and
includes use of a toxic chemical
contained in a mixture or trade name
product
"Process" means the preparation of a
toxic chemical, after its manufacture, for
distribution in commerce—
(1) In the same form or physical state
as, or in a different form or physical
state from, that in which it was received
by the person so preparing such
substance, or - -
(2) As part of an article containing the
toxic chemical.
Process also applies to the processing of
a toxic chemical contained in a mixture
or trade name product •
"Release" means any spilling, leaking.
pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying.
discharging, injecting, escaping.
leaching, dumping, or disposing into the
environment (including the
-------
21168 Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
abandonment or discarding of barrels.
containers, and other closed
receptacles) of any toxic chemical.
•Title III" means Title III of the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1986. also titled
the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-To-Know Act of 1986.
"Toxic chemical" means a chemical or
chemical category listed in § 372.45.
§ 372.5 Persons who must report
Owners and operators of covered
facilities described in §, 372.10 are
subject to the requirements of this part.
If the owner and operator of a covered
facility are different persons, only one
need report for each toxic chemical
required to be reported under this part.
However, if no report is submitted. EPA
will hold both the owner and the
operator liable under section 325(c) of
Title III.
§372.10 Covered facilities.
A facility that meets all of the
following criteria for a calendar year is
a covered facility for that calendar year.
(a) The facility has 10 or more full-
time employees.
fb) The facility is in Standard
Industrial Classification Codes 20
through 39 as in effect on January 1.
1987.
(c) The facility manufactured
(including imported), processed, or
otherwise used a toxic chemical in
excess of an applicable threshold
quantity of that-chemical set forth in
§ 372.12.
§ 372. t2 Thresholds for reporting.
The threshold amounts for purposes of
reporting under this Part for toxic
chemicals are as follows:
(a) With respect to a toxic chemical
manufactured (including imported) or
processed at a facility during the
following calendar years:
1987—75.000 pounds of the chemical for the
year.
1988—50.000 pounds of the chemical for the
year.
1989 and thereafter—25.000 pounds of the
chemical for the year.
(b) With respect to a chemical
otherwise used at a facility. 10.000
pounds of the chemical for the
applicable calendar year.
§372.15 Reporting requirements and
schedule for reporting.
A person subject to this Part must
submit lo EPA and to the State in which
the covered facility is located a
completed EPA Form R (EPA Form 7740-
20) for each toxic chemical
manufactured (including imported).
processed, or otherwise used m excess
of an applicable threshold quantity in
§ 372.12 for a calendar year. A report
must be submitted for releases of the
toxic chemical that occurred during that
calendar year at that facility on or
before July 1 of the next year. The first
such report for calendar year 1987 must
be submitted on or before July 1.1988.
§ 372.16 Recordkeeping.
(a) Each person subject to the
reporting requirements of this Part must
retain the following records for a period
of 5 years following the submission of a
report:
(1) A copy of the report submitted by
the person in response to the
requirements of this Part.
(2) All supporting materials and
documentation used by the person to
complete each report
(b) Records retained under this
section must be retained at the facility
to which the report applies. Such
records must be readily available for
purposes of inspection by EPA.
(c) If the facility closes permanently,
the records retained under this section
must be transfered to and retained by
the owner or operator of the facility. If
there is no separate owner or operator
then such records must be sent to EPA.
§ 372.19 Compliance and enforcement
Violators of the requirements of this
part are subject to the civil and
administrative penalties as provided fn
section 325(c) of Title in.
Subpart B—[Reserved}
Subpart C—Specific Toxic Chemical
Listings
§372.42 Generic classification of fisted
chemicals, and chemical categories tor
purposes of trade secrecy claims.
The following generic classification
names and codes are to be used when
the identity of a chemical or chemical
category listed in § 372.45 of this part is
claimed a trade secret. AH chemicals
and chemical categones listed in
S 372.45 have been assigned one of the
generic classifications as indicated by
the code that appears in the column
titled "Generic Classification Code."
The generic classification names and
codes are listed in the following Table 1:
TABLE 1.—CHEMICAL CLASSIFICATIONS
AND CATEGORIES
Generic classifications
I
Halogenated alkanes J
Halogenated alkenes
Hatogenated aromatics ...— -
Hydroxy compounds. ._« -
Aldehydes find ketones ..- -
Cartoxytic acids, esters, anhydrides.
lactones
Amines
Amine derivatives -.-._...-................_...
rnospnorus ano suffur cotnpounos — ...
Metal containing compounds
Non-metal containing rorgarac com-
pounds
Code
cot
C02
COS
C04
COS
C06
C07
C08
C09
C10
Clt
C12
C14
Ct5
C16
§372.45 Chemicals and chemical
categories to which thto part applies.
The reporting requirements of this
Part apply to the following chemicals
and chemical categories. This section
contains three listings. Paragraph (a) of
this section is an alphabetical order
listing of those chemicals that have an
associated Chemical Abstracts Service
(CAS) Registry number. Paragraph (b) of
this section contains e CAS number
order list of the same chemicals- listed rn
paragraph (a) of this section. Paragraph
(c) of this section contains the chemical
categories for which reporting is
required. These chemical categories are
listed m alphabetical order.
(a) Alphabetical listing.
Chemical name
Acetnldehyde _ _.„ ,.,,_.„....,
Acetamide . ,._._
Acetone - ....... . . . . _
Acetorntnle . .
2-Acetylarru*io|'iuQrene
CAS NO.
75-07-0
60-35-5
67-64-1
75-05-6
53-96-3
Generic
classification
code
O07
COS
C07
C11
CIO
Effective date
OT/OT/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
O1/01/87
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1967 / Proposed Rules
21169
Chemical name
CAS No.
Generic
classification
code
Effective date
Acrolein _ .t 107-02-8
Acrylamide 79-06-1
Acrylic acid _ 79-10-7
Acrytonrtnle 107-13-1
AWnn [l.4.5.8-Dimettianonaphthalene.1.2.3,4.10,10-hexachtoro-1.4.4a. 5.8.8a-nexahydro-
(1 .alpha.,4 alpha..4a.beta ,5 alpha .8 alpha..Ba.beta.)-l 309-00-2
Allyl chloride 107-05-1
Aluminum (fume or dust) _ _._ _ 7429-90-5
Aluminum oxide _ 1344-28-1
2-Aminoanthraquinone 117-79-3
4-Ammoazobenzene „ 60-09-3
4-Ammobiphenyl _ 92-67-1
1 -Amino-2-methylanthraquinone 82-28-0
Ammonia :. 7664-41-7
Ammonium nitrate (solution) 6484-52-2
Ammonium sulfate (solution) 7783-20-2
Aniline _ _ _ 62-53-3
o-Arusidtne _ 90-04-0
pAnisidine .'. 104-94-9
o-Anisidine hydrochlonde 134-29-2
Anthracene 120-12-7
Antimony _. _ _ 7440-36-0
Arsenic 7440-38-2
Asbestos (triable) _ 1332-21 -4
Auramine [Benzeneamme. 4,4'-carbonimtdoy1bts[N,N-dimethy»-J 492-60-8
Banum. _ 7440-39-3
Benzal chloride _ 98-87-3
Benzamido 55-21-0
Benzene _ _ 71-43-2
Benzidme _ _ 92-87-5
Benzoic trichlorides (Benzotnchlonde) 98-07-7
Benzoyl chloride...- _ 98-88-4
Benzoyl peroxide. _._..« - 94-36-0
Benzyl chloride 100-44-7
Beryllium _ 7440-41-7
Brphenyl _ 92-52-4
Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether _ 111-44-4
Bis(chloromethyl) ether .' 542-88-1
Bis(2-chloro-1-methvtethyl) ether 108-60-1
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) adipate 103-23-1
Bromoform (Tnbromomethane) 75-25-2
Bromomemane (Methyl bromide) 74-83-9
1,3-Butadiene _ 106-99-0
Butyl acrylate __ _ 141-32-2
n-Butyl alcohol _ _.: _ 71-36-3
sec-Butyl alcohol _ 78-92-2
tert-Butyl alcohol..- _ - 75-65-0
Butyl benzyl phthalate._ _ 85-68-7
1.2-8utytene oxide 106-88-7
ButyrakJehyde 123-72-8
C I. Acid Blue 9, diammonium salt 2650-18—2
C I. Acid Blue 9. disodium salt 3844-45-S
C.I Add Green 3 _ _ 4680-78-S
C.I Basic Green 4 _ 569-64-2
CI Baste Red 1 989-38-8
C I. Disperse Yellow 3 2832-40-8
C.I Food Red 5 _ 3761 -53-3
CI Food Red 15 - - - 81-88-S
C I. Solvent Orange 7 - 3118-97-t
C I. Solvent Yellow 3. _ 97-56-5
C.I Solvent Yellow 14 _ _ 842-07-J
CI Vat Yellow 4 - 128-66-S
Cadmium _ 7440-43-J
Calcium cyanamide.— - 156-62-1
Captan [1H-lso
-------
21170
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
Chemical name
CAS No
Generic
classification
code
Ellective date
CMordane [4.7-Methanomdan. 1,2.4.5.6,7.8.8-octachloro-2,3.3a.4.7.7a- hexahydro-1 57-74-9
Chlonnated lluorocarbon (Freon 1l3)[Ethane. 1.1.2-tnchlOfO-1,2. 2-tnMuoro-] 76-13-1
Chlorine - 7782-50-5
Chlorine dioxide - - 10049-04-4
Chloroacetic acid ............................................... ••«. 79—11^8
2-Chloroacetophenone"!!!!!!!" 'Z"ZZ"ZZ.Z! 532-27-4
Chtorobenzene - 108-90-7
Chlorobenzilate [Benzeneacetic acid. 4-chloro-.alpha.-(4-chlorophenyt)-.alpha-hydroxy-,
ethyl ester] _ — • •• 510-15-6
C^loroethar»e(Etr^"chiofide)™."..!....! — 75-00-3
Chloroform —••• 67-66-3
Chloromethane (Methyl chloride) 74-87-3
Chtoromethyl methyl ether _ — 107-30-2
ChloroDrGnc ................»...».......•........•>.>•• • 12o~99^o
Chlorothaloml [ 1,3-Benzenedicarbonitnle.2.4,5,6-tetrachlorc-] - 1897-45-6
Chromium 7440-47-3
Cobalt - 7440-48-4
Conner " " || _ 7440-50-8
*"^f*l"*" ••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••»«••••••••••••••••«••••••••«•••••••••••••••••""« • au% «« A
p-Cresidine 120-71-8
Cresol (mixed isomers) - - 1319-77-3
/n-Cresol —— 108-39-4
"""""""""' - 95-48-7
_.._ 106-44-5
98-82-8
Cumene hydroperoxide - -—• 80-15-9
Cupterron [Benzeneamme, N-hydroxy-N-nitroso. ammonium salt] - — 135-20-6
Cyanide compounds - 57-12-5
Cyctohexane - 110-82-7
2.4-D [Acetic'acd.72"4^ic^ 94-75-7
Decabromodiphenyl oxide _ 1163-19-5
DwHate [Carbamothioic acid, bis(l-methylethyl)-. S-(2.3- dichloro-2-propenyl) ester] 2303-16-4
2,4-Diarninoanisole - ................................. 615-05-4
2|4-Diaminoanisole sulfate 39156-41-7
4.4'-Diaminodiphenyl ether 101-80-4
Diaminotoluene (mixed isomers) 25376-45-8
2 4-Diarmnatoluene — _....._........ 95-80-7
t,f LSU1MI1IIUIVIWCI _ _ OQ_<>
Diazomethane « OJA—oo-o
Dibenzoturan...!!!!!".""!"""!!"!!"!"..! 132-64-9
1.2-Dibromo-£cnloropropane(DBCP) 96-12-8
1,2-Dibromoethane (Ethytene dibromide).... _ 106-93-4
Dibutyl phthalate - - 84-74-2
Dichlorobenzene (mixed isomers) 25321-22-*
1 2-Dtchlorobenzene _._.............. _. -.- ............. 95-50-1
i •&> t^vwi «\/« w»*«i»fcw« •«.•••••••••••••••••••••••«•••«•• ••••••"••••••••••••••••«««".««.—...... ....
1 3-Dichlorobenzene _ .__..-........: ... 541-73-1
*•** •*•*" "*"»*—**. »».• .WM...H................ _ ««fc^ *£ ^
1,4-Dichlorobenzene - 106-46-7
sls'-Oichlorobenzidine...... ............. - ... 91-94-1
Dichlorotaromomethane _.._............_. _._ . - 75-27-4
1,2-Dichloroethane (Ethytene dichlonde) 107-06-2
1 2-Dichloroethylene _...._..............._ —... •• 540-59-0
Dichloromemarie(Metn'yterw'chionde) 75-09-2
9 4.Diehlornnhennl . 120-83-2
^.^-L/KtlllUIUpllBIIUI —" .........M...*...... ••- .....
1 9.Diehlnrnnrnnane - _..........................._........................_...—••—••••••• 7B-B7-D
i (K-wn«i iiwi wfi *»^*wi "^ ............. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••«•-«•••—-"«" « f AH ^f &
1 3-Dtchtoropropylene - 54Z-75-*
bichlorvos [Phosphonc aad.'z^icriloroethenyl dimethyl ester] 62-73-7
Dicofol [Benzenemethanol. 4-chloro-.alpha.-(4-chlorophenyl).alpha.-(tnchloromethyl)-] 115-52-2
Dtepoxybutane - - 1464-53-5
Diethanoiamme _..... ..__ _.._....._.._.._.....——... 111-42-2
DH2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) 117-81-7
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2
Diethvl aullate _...._..._ _ __...._...—... 64-67-5
fc^WHIJI OW.IBIV . -*» MM .
S.S'-Dimethoxybenzidine '' 9-90-4
4-Dimethylaminoazobenzene _..- — • 60-11-7
3.3--Dimethylbenzidme(o-Tohdine) 119-93-7
Dimethylcarbamyl chloride 79-44-7
1,1 -Dimethyl hydrazine —- 57-14-7
2,4-Dimethylphenol — - — 105-67-9
Dimethyl ohthalate ..._ _...............™....- 131-11-3
h^»iiVM*f • |»» ••>!«••«•«• ...•*••.••......•••.....................™ ... ...... ........... ... ..
Dimethyl sulfate - - 77-78-1
4 6-Dinrtro^>-cresol - 534-52-1
-v(w~fe*" iiw **-**—*** ««»wr>.•••»••••••••••••••••««••••-«-««««««•«•«««—«««•«««•««« .n«... ... .
2,4-Dmitrophenol -—- - - - - 51-28-5
2|4-Dinitroto
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
21171
Chemical name
CAS No
Generic
classification
code
Effective date
2.6-Dinitrotoluene 606-20-2
n-Dioctyl phthalate !..'....!.!..! 117-84-0
1.4-Dioxane 123-91-1
1,2-Diphenylhydraane(Hydrazobenzene) 122-66-7
Direct Black 38 1937-37-7
Direct Blue 6 "'" 2602-46-2
Direct Brown 95 ™...!™.!™""™™.'. 16071-86-6
Epichlorohydnn \ ' 106-89-8
2-Ethoxyethanol _ 110-80-5
Ethyl acrytate !....".!!!... 140-88-5
Ethylbenzene 100-41-4
Ethyl chlorotormate "!""™"!"!!!!!""" 541-41-3
Ethylene "."""!!!!""""!!!!!!!"!!!!!" 74-85-1
Ethytene grycol 107-21-1
Etnyleneimme (Azindme) "„.. 151-56-4
Ethylene oxide '.....I!"""!!"!"""!! 75-21-8
Ethylene thiourea _ "!!!!!!"!!'."."!!!"!!"!!! 96-45-7
Fluometuron [Urea, N.N-dimethyl-N'-[3-(tnfluoromethyl)pheny1]0 ".....!!.!!!!!".!!."..!" 2164-17-2
Formaldehyde 50-00-0
Heptachlor [ 1.4.5.6.7.8.8-Heptachloro-3a.4.7.7a-tetrahydro-4.7- methane-1 Hnndene] 76-44-8
HexacMorobenzene 118-74-1
Hexachloro 1,3-butadiene ......'. 87-68-3
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene .'. 77-47-4
Hexachloroetnane ™™" 67-72-1
Hexachloronaphthalene 1335-87-1
Hexamethylphosphorarmde 680-31-9
Hydrazme ; 302-01-2
Hydrazine sulfate ;. 10034-93-2
Hydrochlonc acid 764-01-07
Hydrogen cyanide 74-90-8
Hydrogen fluonde 7664-39-3
Hydroqumone 123-31-9
Isobutyraldehyde '."".'.". 78-84-2
Isopropyl alcohol (mfg —strong acid processes) 67-63-0
4.4'-lsopropyhdenediphenol 80-05-7
Lead 7439-92-1
Undane [Cydohexane. 1.2.3.4.5.6-hexachloro-.(l.alpha..2.alpha.. S.beta.
4.alpha..5.alpha ,6.beta.)-] 58-89-9
Maleic anhydride 108-31 -6
Maneb [Carbamodithioic acid, 1,2-ethanediylbis-, manganese complex] 12427-38-2
Manganese 7439-96-5
Melamine 108-78-1
Mercury .' 7439-97-6
Methanol _ 67-56-1
Methoxychlor [Benzene. 1.1'-(2,2 2-tnchloroetnytidene)bis[4-methoxy-] 72-43-5
2-Methoxyethanol... 109-86-4
Methyl acrylate 96-33-3
Methyl te/r-butyl ether __ 1634-04-4
4.4'-Meth lenebis(2-chloro aniline) (MBCCA) 101-14-4
4,4'-Methylenebis(A//V-dimethyl) benzenamine 101-61-1
Methylenebis(phenylisocyanate) (MBI) 101-68-8
Methylene bromide _ 74-95-3
4.4'-Methylenedianiline 101 -77-9
Methyl ethyl ketone 78-93-3
Methyl hydrazme 60-34-4
Methyl iodide _ _ _ 74-88-4
Methyl isobutyl ketone 108-10-1
Methyl isocyanate _ , 624-85-9
Methyl methacrytate 80-62-6
Michler*s ketone 90-94-8
Molybdenum tnoxide _ 1313-27-5
Mustard gas [Ethane. 1.V-thiobis(2-chloro-] _ 505-60-2
Naphthalene _ 91-20-3
a/p/»a-Naphthylamine '"„"". '. '. 134-32-7
te/a-Naphthylamine...-..._ 91-59-8
Nickel 7440-02-0
Nitnc acid ...."".".! '. 7697-37-2
Nrtnlotnacetic acid 139-13-9
5-Nriro-o-anisidine 99-59-2
Nitrobenzene 98-95-3
4-Nrtrobiphenyl 92-93-3
C12
COS
C06
C11
C14
C14
C14
COS
C06
COB
C01
COS
C01
COS
C11
C06
C13
C09
C07
C03
C04
COS
C03
C02
C04
C13
C11
C11
C16
C16
C16
C07
C07
COS
COS
C15
C02
COS
C16
C15
C10
C15
COS
C03
COS
COS
C06
C10
CIO
C11
C02
CIO
C07
C11
C02
C07
C11
COS
C07
CIS
C13
C01
C10
C10
CIS
C16
COB
C12
C12
C12
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
-------
21172
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
Chemical name
CAS No.
Generic
classification
code
Effective date
Nitrofen [Benzene. 2,4-dich!oro-1-(4-mtrophenoxy)-] _ _ 1836-75-5
Nitrogen mustard [2-Chtoro-N-(2-chlofoethyl)-N-methylethanamine] 51-75-2
Nitrogtycenn _ - - - 55-63-0
2-Nitrophenol — — —•• 88-75-5
4-Nrtrophenol _ - _...........—. 100-02-7
2-Nitropropane — 79 46 9
p Nitrosodiphenylamine _ - 156-10-5
N /V-Dimethvtanilina .._._ _ 121-69-7
• V.£* h^lllfVtllJIWII.I. >w .•.•.•.•••••••....*..................................•.. . . ***».« • «« M
/V-Nitrosod>-n-butylamine _ - 924-16-3
/V-Nitrosodiethylamine _ — 55-18-5
fV-Nitrosodimethylamlne » ...——........ 62-75—9
/V-Nitrosodiphenylanwne 86-30-6
>V-Nitrosodi-/M>roDvlamine ............... _ _.........—....._.. - 621-64-7
*• • ^IM**«****«^«T« **•*/•••••••••»• ••»•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••«••—••«•«•« •
/V-Nitrosomethytvmylamine - 4549-40-0
/v-NitrosornorDholine — „—.................. 59-89-2
•* • «M»*wW"»W» f" r^fmmwrtf ••••(••••••••••••••••»•>•»•••••••••••••••••"•'-"'•»» "• ^ff\ ^M A
/V-Nitroso-»V-ethylurea - 759-73-9
/V-Nitroso-fV-methvlurea - - 684~!?"5
AMMitrosonomicotine — 16543-55-8
A&MrtrofiODinendinci •• —.—.—. 100-75-4
rV"1^IIU W9Wl/lfCT lull l» • •••••..•••••••••••••••••••.••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• . ...... . 4 n «
Octachloronaphthalene .—— 2234-13-1
Osmium tetroxide 20B16~12~°
Parathion [Phosphorothioic acid. 0.0-dwth 1-0-(4-nitrophenyl)ester] 56-38-2
Pentachlorophenol (PCP) 87-86-5
Peraeetie acid 79-21-0
Phenol " 108-95-2
" 106-50-3
90-43-7
Phosnene 75-44-5
•W0)j«ai iw ........••••••••...••.. ^COA 4O 4
Phosphoric acid.— - - 7oo4-jB-z
Phosphorus (yeliow'or white) - 7723-14-0
Phthalic anhvdnde - — _..............—. 85-44-9
Pnricaua ZZ"Z..._ 88-89-1
r>olychlorirated"wphen^sTroBs)~~:i.;..".! !^fj
Prnnane sullone ..............—..........—...——• 1120-71-4
f-ivfoiw awiwi •« .— . S7.57—A
Propk>naldehyde...."-.I!!Z-!ZJZ 123-38-6
Propoxur [Phenol. 2-(1-methylethoxy)-lmethylcarbamate] 114-26-1
Propytene (Propene) '15-07-1
Proovleneiinine .....H................. ......—• 75-55-8
py , oJJde 75-56-9
" 110-86-1
91-22-5
106-51-4
Ouintozene [Benzene, pentachtoronitro-1 82-68-8
Sacchann (manufactunng) [1^-Benzisothiazol-3(2HH>ne.1.1-dioxide] 81-07-2
94-59-7
7782-49-2
Silver and compounds 7440-22-4
Cnrlnim hwrirovide (solution) __......_ 1310-73-2
^wuiuin nywiw**ww |«»*II*M^*I if [[[" _j ^ ^
Qnrluim eiiHate (solution) .. . _ 7757-oZ-O
^^mmn Btjiicitv \owiwtn^ii/......••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••....................™...... .. .
Styrene — 100-42-5
Stvrene oxide.« .._.....»». ••••• ....—•——• 96^/9—3
Sulfurlc acid ..!i!ZZZ._- .". • • -•• 7664-93-9
Terephthalic 'acidZZZZI -» • 100-21-0
1.1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane.....™..— — -.. - _............_..-.—.—..... 79-34-5
Tetra'chloroethytene(Perchloroethylene) 127-18-4
Tetrachlorvinphos [Phosphoric acid, 2-chloro-1-(2,4,5-trichlorophenyr,ethenyl dimethyl
Thallium ZZZZZ-ZZZZZZ..Z... ._ -. . 7440-28-0
Thioacetamtde ..— 62-55—5
4,4'-Thiodianiline........— _......._..............._ _........—..._.—... 139-65-1
Thorium dioxide !!TZ"ZZZZZZZZZZZ - 1314-20-1
Ttonwmdto»deZ";" _ ~._ 13463-67-7
Titanium tetrachtoride - 7550-45-0
Toluene 108-88-3
Toluene 2.4 diisocyanate - - - 584-84-9
Toluene-2.6-diisocyanate 21"2»~I
7-Toluidino .••••• .« - -« ............— •• «...——••« 95—63-4
>.Toluidine hvdrochloride . 836-21-5
f l utuiuiira iiyuiwoinui tfa......—.—..._........._..._._ _.........._ _ anni ne n
Toxaphene , - — 8001-35-2
C15
C10
C12
C12
C12
C12
C12
CIO
C12
C12
C12
C12
C12
C12
C12
C12
C12
C12
C12
C04
C15
C13
C04
COS
COS
C10
COS
C09
C16
C16
COS
COS
C04
CIS
COS
C07
COO
C01
C11
COS
C11
C11
C07
C12
C09
C06
C16
C15
C16
C16
C01
C06
C16
COS
C02
COS
C13
C15
C13
C13
C13
C15
C15
C15
C01
C11
C11
C10
C10
C02
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. Tune 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
21173
Chemical name
Trtaziquone[2.5-Cyclohexadiene-1.4-dione.2.3.5-tris(1-azindinyl)-] _
Trichlorfon [Phosphomc aod. (2.2.2-tnchloro-l-hydroxyethyl)-.dimethyl ester]
1.2.4-Tnchlorobenzene
1.1 ,1-Tnchloroethane (Methyl chloroform) _
1.1.2-Tnchloroethane _
Tnchloroethylene • • '
2.4.5-Tnchlorophenol Z.ZZZZZ
2.4.6 Tnchlorophenol __ ZZ
Triflurahn [Benzeneamine. 2.6-dinitro-N.N-dpropyl-4-(tnfluoromethyl)-] ZZZZZZ™
1. 2. 4-Tnmethyl benzene .
Tns(2.3-dibromopropyl) phosphate Z.ZZZ! Z
Urethane (Ethyl carbamate) _
Vanadium (fume or dust)
Vinyl acetate
Vinyl bromide _
Vinyl chlonde _ _
Vmylidene chloride _
Xylene (mixed isomers)
/n-Xylene _. ..
o-Xylene _
p-Xylene
2.6-Xylidme _
Zinc (fume or dust) _ _ _
Zineb [Carbamodithioic acid. 1.2-ethanedtytbis-. zinc complex]
CAS No.
68-76-8
52-68-6
49A—A9 1
71-55-6
79-00-5
79-01-6
95-95-4
88-06-2
1582-09-8
95-63-6
126-72-7
51-7B-6
7440-62-2
108-05-4
593-60-2
75-01-4
75-35-4
1330-20-7
108-38-3
95-47-6
106-42-3
87-62-7
7440-66-6
12122-67-7
Generic
dassificatjon
code
C11
C13
fy\A.
C02
C02
COS
C04
C04
C12
C01
C13
raw
C15
COS
COS
COS
COS
C01
C01
C01
C01
C10
C15
CIS
Effective date
01/01/87
01/01/87
IM /ni /AT
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
O1/O1/A7
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
M/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
fb) CAS Number listing.
CAS No.
50-00-0
51-28 5
51-75-2
51-79-6
52-68-6
53-96-3
55-18-5
55-21-0
55-63-0
56-23-5
56-38-2
57-12-5
57-14-7
57-57-8
57-74-9
58-89-9
60-09-3
60-11-7
60-34-4
60-35-5
62-53-3
62-55-5
62-56-6
62-73-7
62-75-9
63-25-2
64-67-5
67-56-1
67-63-0
67-64-1
67-66-3
67-72-1
68-76-8
71-36-3
71-43-2
Chemical name
Formaldehyde _^. . . ....
2.4-Dinitrophenol
Nitrogen mustard [2-Chloro-N-(2-chloroethyl) -N-methylethanamine]
Urethane (Ethyl carbamate)
Tnchlorfon [Phosphomc acid. (2.2.2-tnchloro-l-hydroxyethyl)-. dimethyl ester]
2-Acetylaminofluorene ... _
/V-Nitrosodiethylamine
Benzarmde _._ ZZZZZZZZZ!!
Nitrogrycenn ... _
Carbon tetrachloride ...
Parathton [Phosphorothiotc acid. 0, 0-diethyl 1-0-(4-nitrophenyl) ester]
Cyanide compounds ..... „ .. ..
1.1 -Dimethyl hydrazine.....
6eta-Propiolactone ZZZ""Z"
Chlordane [4. 7-Methanomdan. 1A4.5.6.7.8.85-Cydohexadiene-ll4-dione. 2.3.5-tns (1-azmdinyl)-]
n-Butyl alcohol .«. . .
Benzene _
Generic
classification
code
C07
C12
C10
C09
C13
C10
C12
C09
C12
C02
C13
C16
C11
COS
COS
C02
C12
C10
C10
C11
C09
CIO
C13
C13
CIS
C12 •
C09
CIS
COS
ms
C07
C02
C02
C11
COS
C01
Effective date
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
O1/O1/R7
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
O1/O1/R7
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
O1/O1/R7
U I/O 1/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/O1 /B7
-------
21174
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday, June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
CAS No.
71-66-6
72-43-5
74-83-9
74-85-1
74-87-3
74-88-4
74-90-8
74-95-3
75-00-3
75-01-4
75-05-8
75-07-O
75-09-2
75-15-0
75-21-8
75-25-2
75-27-4
75-35-4
75-44-5
75-55-8
75-56-9
75-65-0
76-13-1
78-44-8
77-47-4
77-78-1
78-84-2
78-87-5
78-92-2
78-93-3
79-00-5
79-01-6
79-06-1
79-10-7
79-11-8
79-21-0
79-34-5
79-44-7
79-46-9
80-O5-7
80-15-9
80-62-6
81-07-2
81-88-9
82-28-O
82-68-6
84-66-2
84-74-2
85-44-9
85-68-7
86-30-6
87-62-7
87-66-3
87-86-5
88-06-2
88-75-5
88-89-1
9O-O4-0
90-43-7
90-94-8
91-O8-7
91-20-3
91-22-5
91-59-8
91-94-1
92-52-4
92-67-1
92-87-5
92-93-3
94-36-0
94-59-7
Chemical name
1.1.1-Tnchloroethane (Methyl chloroform)
Methoxychlor C Benzene, 1.1 '-(2.2. 2-tnchloroethylidene)bis [4-methoxy-]
Bromomethane (Methyl bromide) _
Chtoromethane (Methyl chlonde) _
Methyl iodide
Hydrogen cyanide _.... ,
Methytene bromide
Chloroethane (Ethyl chlonde)
Vinyl chlonde _
Acetonitnte
Acetaldehyde
Dichloromethane (Methytene chlonde)
Carbon disulftde _ _
Ethytene oxide -...
Bromo'orm (Tnbromomethane)
Dichlorobromomethane
Vinylidene chlonde _
Phosgene
Propyteneimine ......_
_ -
•-
—
Propytene oxide
/erf-Butyl alcohol............... — ...
Chlorinated fluorocarbon (Freon 113) [Ethane. 1.1.2-tnchloro-1.2.2-trifluoro-]
Heptachtor [1,4,5,6.7,8.8-Heptachloro-3a,4,7.7a-tetrahydro-4,7.metharto-1H-(nder>e] —
HexAchlorocyclopentadiene ..........
Dimethyl sulfate -
Isobutyraldehyde
1 2-Dichloropropane
sec-Butyl alcohol
Methyl ethyl ketone
1 .1 ,2-Trichloroethane _
Tnchloroethylene
Acrvlanude
Acrylic acid
Chloroacetic acid.......
Peracetic acid .........._ _
1.1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Dimethylcarbarnyl chlonde
2-Nrtropropane
4.4'-lsopropylidenediphenol
Cumene hydroperoxide „
Methyl methacrylate
Saccharin (manufacturing) [1,2-Benzjsothiazol-';
C.I. Food Red 15 . .
Ouintozene [Pentachloronitrobenzene] —
Diethyl phthalate
Dibutyl phthalate
Phthahc anhydride
Butyl benzyl phthalate »
/V-Nitrosodiphenylamine. ........................................
2.6-Xylidine _:
Hexachloro-1 ,3-butadtene
Pentachiorophenol (PCP)
2 4 6-Tnchlorophenol
2-Nitrophenol ........_.»__.._..._........... ....
Picric acid .
o-Anisidine . .
2-Phenylphenol ...........................................
Michler's ketone
Toluene-2,6-dnsocyanatn _
Naphthalene
Quinoline . . ..- ......._
S.S'-Dichlorobenzidine
Biphenyl __
4-Anrunobiphenyl
Benzidine -- _ _ ......
jUkll* K hABMjl
Saf rote . « . . _
—
(2H)- one 1 1 -dioxide]
»
...__._.........._.._... „...._...._........—.....
Generic
classification
code
C02
COS
C02
C01
C02
C02
C16
C02
C02
COS
C11
C07
C02
CIS
C06
C02
C02
COS
C09
C11
COS
COS
C02
COS
COS
CIS
C07
C02
COS
C07
C02
COS
C09
COS
COB
C09
C02
C09
C12
COS
COS
COS
C09
CIO
C10
C12
COS
COB
COB
COB
C12
CIO
COS
C04
C04
C12
COB
C10
COS
C07
C11
C01
C11
C10
CIO
C01
C10
C10
C12
C09
COS
Effective date
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/S7
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. Tune 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
21175
CAS No.
94-75-7
95-47-6
95-48-7
95-50-1
95-53-4
95-63-6
95-80-7
95-95-4
96-09-3
96-12-8
96-33-3
96-45-7
97-56-3
98-07-7
98-82-8
98-87-3
98-68-4
98-95-3
99-59-2
100-O2-7
100-21-0
100-41-4
100-42-5
100-44-7
100-75-4
101-14-4
101-61-1
101-68-8
101-77-9
101-80-4
103-23-1
104-94-9
105-67-9
106-42-3
106-44-5
106-46-7
106-50-3
106-51-4
106-88-7
106-69-8
106-93-4
106-99-0
107-02-8
107-05-1
107-06-2
107-13-1
107-21-1
107-30-2
108-05-4
108-10-1
108-31-6
108-38-3
108-39-4
108-60-1
108-78-1
108-88-3
108-90-7
108-95-2
109-86-4
110-80-5
110-82-7
110-86-1
111-42-2
111-44-4
114-26-1
115-07-1
115-32-2
117-79-3
117-61-7
117-84-0
118-74-1
Chemical name
2.4-D [Acetic acid. (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)-] _ „...
o-Xylene ___.... _ ....
oCresol _ _.„„
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene _ _.
o-Toluidine
1 ,2.4-Tnmethyt benzene _....... ...... -.
2,4-Oiammotoluene _
2.4,5-Tnchlorophenol ™
Styrene oxide «
1 ,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (OBCP)... .._..__... .......... ..........
Methyl acrylate _ . .
Ethylene thiourea !.........._._................................_._.............._
C.I. Solvent Yellow 3 _................. .._ .. „„_ _.._..... .......
Benzoic tnchlonde (Benzotrichlonde)
Cumene _ .. .
Benzal chloride
Benzoyl chloride.... _.............................
Nitrobenzene _ _ _
5-Nitro-o-anisidine _ .,,.,,,.,.,.......,......,..,,,,,..,.,.
4-Nitrophenol
Terephthalic acid _.......»__......„......_ _...
Ethylbenzene ...........................
Styrene „...........„............._..._.„.„........_.
Benzyl chloride _
/tf-Nitrosopipendine _
4.4'-Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline) (MBOCA)
4,4'-Methylenebis(/V,AMlimethyl)benzenarnine ................................ ^....~...~............................
Methylenebis(phenyliso cyanate) (MBI) ................
4.4'-Methylenediamline .' _
4,4'-Oiaminodiphenyl ether _..... .......
BiS(2-ethylhexyl) adipate . .....
p-Amsidine _............................._.._........„...«.....
2.4-Oimethylphenol _ ,
p-Xylene [[[ _....._................
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene _ „. ..........._...._„._.......:
Ouinone .....*....... ... . .~ . ........... «•.............•••.
1,2-Butylene oxide _ _..
Epichlorohydnn _...._ _ _.............................................«.......
1,2-Dibromoethane (Ethylene dibrornide) _ ... . _
1,3-Butadiene.._ _ .. _....._.....
Acrolein _._...
Ally! chloride „ . [[[
l,?-Dichloroethane (Ethylene dichlonde) -
Acrylomtrile _
Ethylene glycol _ , ................
Chtoromethyl methyl ether _.._ ...................... ...
Vinyl acetate _...„............_..._...._........._..„_..._._........_...:«.
Methyl isobutyl ketone ........... .
/n-Xylene _ _ . . .„..»
Bis(2-chloro-l-methylethyl) ether '. _._ _
Melamine [[[
Toluene
Chlorobenzene -
Phenol
2-Methoxyethanol _ _ ...................
2-Ethoxyethanol . . . ._ _..«
Cyclohexane - ...........................
Oiethanolamine _ .,- ,
Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether ."
Propoxur [Phenol, 2-(1 -methyletnoxy)-.methylcarbamate]
Propylene (Propene) ................................
Dicofol [Benzenemethanol. 4-chloro-.alpha.-(4
-------
21178
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4, 1987 / Proposed Rules
CAS No.
119-90-4
119-93-7
120-12-7
120-71-8
120-60-9
120-82-1
120-63-2
121-14-2
121-69-7
122-66-7
123-31-9
123-38-6
123-72-6
123-91-1
126-72-7
12699-6
127-18-4
128-66-5
131-11-3
132-64-9
133-06-2
133-90-4
134-29-2
134-32-7
135-20-6
139-13-9
139-65-1
140-88-5
141-32-2
151-56-4
156-10-5
156-62-7
302-O1-2
309-00-2
334-88-3
463-58-1
492-80-8
505-60-2
610-15-6
532-27-4
534-52-1
540-59-0
541-41-3
'541-73-1
542-75-6
542-88-1
569-64-2
564-64-9
593-60-2
606-20-2
615-05-4
621-64-7
624-63-9
636-21-5
680-31-9
684-93-5
759-73-9
642-07-9
924-16-3
961-11-6
989-38-8
1120-71-4
1163-19-5
1310-73-2
1313-27-5
1314-20-1
1319-77-3
1330-20-7
1332-21-4
Chemical name
3,3'-Dimethoxyt>enBdme._
3.3'-Oimeihylbenzidine (o-Tolidine)
Anthracene
p-Oesidine
Catechol _
1 ,2,4-Tnchlorobenzene
2.4-Dichlorophenol
2.4-Dinitrotoluene
At/V-Dimethylambne !!.!.™"
1.2-Diphenylhydrazine (Hydrazobenzene)
Hydroquinone . . .
Propionaldehyde
Butyraldehyde
1 ,4-Dtoxane .... .........
Tris-2,3-dibromopropyl) phosphate
Chloroprene ___ __ .
Tetrachloroethylene (Perchloroethylene)
C.I. Vat Yellow 4 _..
Dimethyl phthalata ,..„....„, . ""
Dibenzofuran
CaDtan f IM.IfiOinrinlA.1 1l9H\^imna 1o A 7 7a_tAtrahurirA_9 ritm*4«lM
Chlorarnben [Benzoic acid. 3-amino-2 5-dichlofo-]
o-Arusidine hydrochlonde ......
a/p/ia-Naphthylamne ...
Cupferron [Benzeneamine, N-hydroxy-N-nitroso. ammonium salt]....
Nrtnlotnacetic add
4.4'-Thiodianiline ......
Ethyl acrylate
Butyl acrylate __.«. _
Ethyieneimine (Azridme)
p-Nitrosodiphenytamine „..„„„
Calcium cyanamxle _ _ . .
Hydraane _. ._ _
•
rometnyl;thioj-j..........._
AWnnt 1 ,4:5,8-Dimethanonaphthalene. 1 .2.3.4.10,10-hexachloro-l ,4>4a,5,8,8a-nexahydn>
(i.alpha.,4.alpha.,4a.bota. 5 .alpha. 8 alpha. 8a beta.)-]'
Diazornethana '.,..„,........_ "„ ..,..,,.7.,,
CarbonyleuMida. ..„,..„.._ _.„. . ,
Auramine [Benzeneamine, 4 4'-cartxjnirmdoylbB[tN,r4- dimethyl-] ...
Mustard gas [Ethane. 1. 1'-thioba [2-chtoro-J
Chtorobenzilate [Benezeneacetic aod, 4-chlon>.alphB,-<4e .._
Bis(chloromethyl) ether . ..
C.I. Basic Green 4 ,.,.,......... ...,„.,„ _,
Tokjene-2,4-dusoeyBnate „..__ . .... „.
Vinyl bromide ,-,-.,... _..........,„
2,6-Dinrtrotoluene ,„.„....
ophenyl)-.alpha.hydroxy-,
.......
— «.
2 4-Diamincam$Qle
/V-Nitrosodi-n-propytamine .
Methyl isocyanatn . , .
0-Toluidme hydrocMonde ... „„
Hexamethylphosphorarrilde.._._
rV-Nitroso-A^methyturea.-
/W.Nitroso-/U.methyl||r0a _ , .„
C.I. Solvent Yflllow 1*..._._ , ,
A<-Nltrosodi-/M>utylamine
"*" " •"••• •
C.I. Basic Red 1
Propane suttone . , ,„ „
Sodium hydroxide (solution) _ ..
Molybdenum trioxide ^ .
Thorium dioxide .. _ L
Cresoi (mixed teomers) ._.__ .._
Xylene (mixed iSOfTWS)._. „ „.„.
Asbestos (friable) ..... ,„.,,„
• ..»••«••••> ••••••••••• •••»•»••••••••»•
Generic
classification
code
CIO
C10
C01
COS
COS
C04
C04
C12
CIO
C11
C07
C07
C07
C06
C13
C03
COS
C07
COS
C06
C13
C11
C10
C10
C12
COS
C13
COB
COB
C11
C12
C11
C11
COS
C11
CIS
C10
CIS
COS
C07
C12
COS
C09
C04
COS
COS
C10
C11
COS
C12
C10
C12
C11
C10
C13
C12
C12
C14
C12
CIS
C10
CIS
C04
C16
C15
C15
COS
C01
C16
Effective date
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/Q1/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52, No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
21177
CAS No.
1335-67-1
1336-36-3
1344-28-1
1464-53-5
1582-O9-8
1634-044
1836-75-5
1897-45-6
1937-37-7
2164-17-2
2234-13-1
2303-16-4
2602-46-2
2650-16-2
2632-40-8
3118-97-6
3761-53-3
3844-45-9
4549-40-0
4680-76-8
6484 52-2
7429-90-5
7439-92-1
7439-96-5
7439-97-6
7440-02-0
7440-22-4
7440-28-0
7440-36-0
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
7440-41-7
7440-43-9
7440-47-3
7440-48-4
7440-50-8
7440-62-2
7440-66-6
7550-45-0
7647-01-0
7664-38-2
7664-39-3
7664-41-7
7664-93-9
7697-07-2
7723-14-0
7757-82-6
7782-49-2
7782-50-5
7783-20-2
8001-35-2
10034-93-2
10049-04-4
12122-«7-7
12427-38-2
13463-67-7
16071-86-6
16543-55-6
20816-12-0
25321-22-6
25376-45-6
39156-41-7
Chemical name
Hexachloronaphihalene _ .. ..._
Polychlonnated biphenyls (PCBs) """!!"!""."
Aluminum oxide _ _ _ _. „„._.
Jiepoxytautane _ _ _
Methyl terr-butyl ether
Nitrofen [Benzene. 2,4-dichtoro-144-rttvo0henoxy)-] ....
CWofothalonil tl-3-8enzenecJ4cart>oortnte, 2.4,5,6-Uarachtoro-] _.
Direct Black 38 ._ _. .. _
Fluoneturon [Urea. N^I-dmetnyUM'- [3-0ntluoromethyl)phenyll-J .. __
Oetachlomnaphthalen* ._ _ „.„..„
Dialate [Carbamothioic aod, bisU-fnenyJelhydK S-(2£- dcnlorc-2-propenyQ «ster]
Dimcf Rli«fi
C.I. Aod Blue 9. diammoraum salt . „
C.I. Disperse Yellow 3
C.I. Solvent Orange 7 , _ _
C.I. Food Red 5.....
C.I. Acid Blue 9. disodium salt
AANitrosomethyivinylamine _
C.I. Acid Green 3
Ammonium nitrate (solution) __.
Aluminum (fume or dust) , .„..„,„„„,„„„..... „
Lead
Manganese ...... _
Mercury ,—,-,„.„.„.........
Nickel
Silver __ .
Thallium _.
Antimony.- ., .,_ „„.„..„......... . .
Arsenic _.......,...„ ., „ ,. ..
BATUMI , „„„„.„ ......_
Beryllium . .....
Cadmium _ ..
Chromium ••••••.•.••••••••••....».•».•.....•...................•• .. •••••
Cobalt _
Vanadium (fume or dust) -,--,-„,
7me (Jymfl or dust).... _ „
Titanium tetrachlonde
Hydrochloric acid _
Phosphoric aod _
Hydrogen fluoride ._ __ , „„ . ...t .^
Ammonia ,—„„-.„.,„„ _._ _._._
SwMunc aod....- ..„ . . ..
Nitnc flciri ... . . . . •••^•j
Phosphor^* (yellow or whrte) .
Socbum sutfate (aotutun) ,,.„
Salfinuim
ChlpRno ,,.,., . , _ .........._ >
Ammonivn) SVHate (SOhrflOn).-. .
Toxaphene . .,.„. _. _ _ _ _
nyd'anne svtfate _'
Chlome dioxide __ _ . _ ....
Zineb [Carbamodithiotc acid. 1,2-etnanediylbte-. me complex]
Maneb [Carbamodrthioic aod. 1^-ethanediylbis-. manganese complex]
Titanium dioxide... _
Direct Brown 95..._ __ .
At-Nitrosonornicotine ..
Osmium tetroxide _ __ . __ .._.„
Dichlorobenzene (mixed isomers) _.. ._.._. , ,.,,_ r
Diaminotoluene (mned tsomers) _._._ _.....
2,4-Diaminoanisale sulfale __...„!
Generic
classification
code
C04
CXM
CIS
coe
C12
006
C15
C09
C14
C09
C04
C13
C14
C13
C14
C14
C14
C13
C12
C13
C16
C1S
C15
C15
CIS
C15
C15
C15
C15
CIS
CIS
CIS
CIS
CIS
C15
C15
C1S
CIS
CIS
C16
C16
C16
cie
C16
C16
C16
C16
C16
C16
CIS
C02
C11
C16
CIS
C16
CIS
C14
C12
C1S
C04
C10
C«O
Effective date
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/67
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
-------
(c) Chemical categories in alphabetical order.
Category name
Antimony compounds-ncludes any un,oue chem,cal substance that center* anfmony as part of that
as
chemical's infrastructure.
Chtorophenots
H(5-x)
any unwue chemical substance that contains chromium as part of that
J,,,,....111.« HI -—••-••••••••••••••••••••'
;'I£^££m^"subsi^''thaTcoritons"cobit as part of that *™**^
*
R-(OCH2CH2)n
Where
n=1.2.or3
R
diss^alK>n
^^ ^^ Blyco1
when removed, ywld otycol ethers wrth the structure:
substance that eon^ns tead»
infrastructure....
Hiiia0uw*#M«i«>......—..-———
Potybrominated biphenyls (PBBs)
H(IO-x)
any un,Que chem,ca. substance ma, conta.ns seienium a, *****
P8rt
^
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
01/01/87
chemical's infrastructure
-------
FederaJ Regater / Vol BE "No. ICTT / Thursday. ]une 4. 1987 / ft-oposed Rules
Category name
, _
iinc compounds mckidcs any unique chemical substance that contains zinc as pan of mat chemicars
infrastructure ,._„._
„ J
Genenc
classification
oic
U13
Effective date
01/01/87
Subpart D—Reporting Forms and
Instructions
§ 372.65 Toxic chemical release reporting
form and Instruction*.
(a) EPA Form R, the Toxic Chemical
Release Inventory Form:
BILLING CODE CSW-60-M
-------
21180
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4j 1987 / Proposed Rutes ' '
Page
of
pages
Important: Read instructions before completing form
Form Approved OMB No.:_
Approval ExpIrM:.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
TOXIC CHEMICAL RELEASE INVENTORY
Section 313. Title 111 of The Superfund Amendments and Reauthortzatlon Act of 1966
EPA Form R
Report Number
Calendar Year
1. CERTIFICATION (Ktad and tlgii e/ltr eomplttiitg a,
I certify under penally of lew that I run* par*onally examined and am familiar wim tn* kitermatlen aubmnted to Me and an eneened dooumente. and mat baaed
moutry of moe* moMduai* mvnedieteiv mponalbi* lor omalnlng m* Mormation. I OBIIM mat tn* euvrttted Irrtortnatlon n BUB. accurate, end aempiete.
en my Inquiry o«
Name and official title of owner/operetar or aenle
,11. FACILITY IDENTIFICATION
A. Nam* and Location
B. Technical Contact
County.
SVM Aaome
Zip.
Oly.
State.
C. Fadtty Identifiers _____ ______
m-rm-rmn
Facility Primary SIC Code | | |
EPA ^fleat-n N-nbar I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Islam* ot Ra
r I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I
ng Stream or Body of Water __^— — ^_
U******* Nume. I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I
O. Parent Company Nam*
Dun a Br*d*tnwt Number
m-rrn-rrrn
III. OFF-SITE LOCATIONS TO WHICH ANY TOXIC CHEMICAL IS TRANSFERRED
A. Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW)
2. Other off-tlte location
Typa of traatmem/diapDMl (enter
Nemo.
B. 1. Other oil-site location
_J h location w«»*reoMrolof reporttoo faeinty | 1 J_J
Or psWril OOmpvVIJr * t^B» HA
jnsv •»»
Type of I
•» I I I I I
3. Other off-ill* location
. -
Typo of traatmem/dlcpoaai Jemer end*) I I I I
num*.
k loaatlen under control of reporting faculty
or parent company?
D D
leeatien under eontrol ot reporting faolMly | | |J
PanMepmpan,7 ^ m
Check If supplemental sheet Is attached
EPA Forrr 7740-20 (6/67)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules 21181
Page * of S pages Form R (continued)
IV. CHEMICAl IDENTITY ., V., ^ ,.-_.' ', ; M, '.* ... :~
A. CAS.| | | | | |-| 1 |-| 1 B- Tr.d.S~,
. D
(Provide tne generic daulflcauon code and name /n Section C Mov.
Atfacn tAe reauired explanation 10 inii JUDIHUJIOII.)
Chemical or Chemical Category Name
(Complete I/ tne cnemlcal or cnemlcal caugory Identity It claimed a trade jecret oz you are reportinf a mixture or iradename
product under C. oelotv, and tne juppller AOJ provided you vltn ine jeneric clattificailon. )
Illl ^
(Complete inn ttctlon only If you art rtpomnf a mixture or f radename product ai
Nwn* of product p^r
oar
the
kit
v.^ACTyrruMANJ>-uae«J?P,TO
(Cnec* all tnaf apply)
A. MANUFACTURE C. OTHERWISE USED
Impoft 1 1 f*"™n
.__ A* • manufacturing •«!__!
uao/proomlng|_J r— 1
*~ Ancuury or omer ino |__j
For »alo/dlitrlbutlon[ |
A« a byproduct [~|
Aa an ImpLnty | [
B. PROCESS
At a reaetam | |
** * ^sszisas* n
AiariarHei»| |
oo^oonvnt L™J
n
\ r
•
id you do not know tht ipecl/ic toxic chtmlcel component.;
you tviow the1 i^^l . __ _ _^ m
caettago ^^J
npoaltlon of »~M|
toxic Chemical I no - oomptote only ttnuBk eeettor. v ol
ha product? •— • «"• ••""
• . V1V .MAXIMUM AMOUNT OP THE CHEMICAL '
' -- .*' ON-arrEATANYTIMCDURINOTME ,; -
V.-J^; .REPORTWa,Pei»lOP;^m.- tJ^^,, ,.-.£,
Ch*oklh«
Reporting
That Appllee From"18"1 Rmn8* h Poundt Te
• n ° "
Q 100 "9
DO 000
1000 *-sw
DAA AOO
10.000 99-999
f»™»»^ 999 999
| I 100.000 •»».»»»
D. jukjh ju«* 9»999«999
1.000.000
Q 10.000.000 49.999.999
Q 60.000.000 99.999.999
__ aB9 999 999
[J 100.000.000 «••.•»•.» »
noag 999 ggg
500.000.000 »»».»»».»»»
j~1 i union moro than 1 bUllon
-------
211B2 Federal Register / VoL 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4.1987 / Proposed Rules
Page 3 of 5 pages Form R (continued)
VII. RELEASES TO THE ENVIRONMENT """ -
Total Release
(Ibs/yr)
A. Emission to th* Air
Fuallh* or non-ooleeatlen ^ f— 1
Em*r buck numMr [ \
4. Ottw oft-lit* location - |— •
Eni«r block numov 1 1
Chack M «upp»wiwn»al shMt Is attached. | |
Basis of
E«ttmato
(Entsr Coda)
D
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
Tills 111
See. 304
RslaaasT
Yes No
DD
DD
DD
Yes No
DD
DD
DD
DD
.•rvnij"* jgtf*% , ^P"P *~,
BA^BB^*
fVTnR
AppUai to
Rslsata?
Yes No
DD
DD
DD
Yes No
DD •
DD
DD
DD
Yes No
DD
DD
DD
DD
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday, June 4.1987 / Proposed Rules
21183
Page
of
pages
Form R (continued)
VIII. WASTE TREATMENT METHODS AND EFFICIENCY
General Wasteslream
Check the box corresponding to the general
wastestream.
G.
W « Wastewater
L • Uquld Waste (Non-Aqueous)
S B Solid Wasle (Including slurry/sludge)
G W L S
- nnnn
2. nnnn
3. nnnn
4. nnnn
5. nnnn
«. nnnn
7. nnnn
.. nnnn
9. nnnn
10. nnnn
n. nnnn
« nnnn
n. nnnn
M. nnnn
| | Check If supplemental sheet to attached
Treatment
Method
(Enter Code)
Range of Treatment
Influent Efficiency
Concentration Estimate
(Enter Code)
LD —
LD —
n —
CD —
n —
n —
LD —
n
CD
n
LD
CD —
LD
n
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Based on
Operating
Data?
yes no
CD CD
n LD
n CD
CD n
n a
[D'CD
CD LD
CD CD
CD LD
LD D
CD n
LD n
n n
LD n
IX.', OP
,#jto*&&^'&J&rt^«^^&fax&VM&&~ w .
Describe actions taken since the last report to reduce the amount of toxic chemicals being i
S«?M MnMto? lor cod^ems wKxplanatlon of what Information to Include, or provide a narrative explanation
In the space provided.
TypeoV"V^?^j ^.^niw^'ei^Wfiln^lti»w«iurtr^nu '.;-'&\'l^**-^.'- • "'.(toV,*B 'or**llon
' * f*c ^* * s"" ?»*'** j ^^GOrreRt ^PM*" J'^c'^Prtoi^v*^"**' >'»*OB perBOrt**** *> '*^rft * * ^* ^s***' •* *y * r *
'* '''' >t ff**f#'"vfy* •f.f^'** * ^ yeporllnO'-c'^ ^y* yeai^'w < E cnanQe ^j
-------
1987 />ropsedlbafe8
Federal R«8J8ter / Vol. 52, No. 107 / Thursday,
21184
•
(b) Instructions:
DESTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING EPA FORM R - THE TOXIC CHEMICAL
RELEASE INVENTORY REPORTING FORM
UNIT A — INTRODUCTION
These instructions and the regulation (40 CFR part 372) should be read carefully
before completing EPA Form R, the Toxic Chemical Reteaee Inventory '«?"• F"
additional assistance in performing calculations required to complete this form, please
consult EPA's guidance manual for toxic chemical release reporting titled Gu.dance^r
Estimating Releases and Waste Treatment Efficiency for The Toxic Chemical Inventory
Form." This document is available by contacting EPA at the address given in Unit B.10.
of these instructions.
The completion of the Toxic Chemical Release Inventory form is required J-nder
section 313 in Title III of the Soperfund Amendments and Re authorization Act of 1986,
Pub. L. 99-499. Title HI is itself called the "Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Act of 1986." Section 313 requires owners a ndoperators ' of certain I acil itu»
that manufacture, process, or otherwise use certain toxic chemicals to report their total
annual re"easeTor' emissions of these chemicals from the facility -to fthe environmeni
S^ch report is to be sent to both EPA and to the state in which the facility is located.
The purpose of this reporting requirement is to make available to
information about releases of toxic chemicals resultingfrorr ' actmt.es
facilities in a community. The information w wao aid the
agencies and researchers in gathering data and conducing research, as well as to aid the
development of regulations, guidelines, and standards.
The data in these reports will be maintained in a computerized data base as
required by section 3lX,0 in Title UL This data base will be ^™™*t
using computer telecommunications or similar means of access. ^*"'^a£°tnute
claimed as a trade secret, however, is protected under specific provisions in the statute
that are explained in these instructions,
IMT B - APPLICABILITY AND GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
(1) DEtErmination of Applicability. The decision flowchart in ^pllowing Figure
1 can be used to help determine whethe? your facility is reared to subnut Toxic
Chemical Release Inventory reports.
-------
Federal Restate! / VoL 52, No. 107 / Thursday, lane 4.. 1987 / Proposed Rules
Figure 1
Flowsheet for Determination of Applicability
Does your facility have
10 or more full-time
employees?
No
Reporting not required
Is your facility- classified
under SIC codes
20 through 39?
•
i
Does yo
manufacti
process, o
use any list
1
Yn
ur facility
ire, import.
r otherwise
ed chemical?
Manufacture,
Import
or
Process i
i
Calendar Year
1987
i
!
Calendar Year
1988
i
Calendar Year
after 1988
N« ,
Reporting not required!
•
Used ^ UJP more than. 10.000 pounds '
of the chemical in the No
Yes Did your facility manufacture, import
of the chemical in 1987? No^
k yes Did your facility manufacture, import
fr» ox process more than. SO.QQO pounds
of the chemfcal in 19887 *^
Did your facility manufacture* import ^
»«\r nrA^Acc mnrp thaiv 25 000 DOUndS
of the chemical in the past NO
Report must be filed
Reporting not required
Report must be filed
Reporting nor required
Report must be filed
Reporting not required
Report must be filed
Reporting not required
-------
• • - -
(2) Who Must Report. Reports must be filed by owners and operators of facilities
that meet" all three of the following criteria:
The facility has 10 or more full-time employees,
The facility is included in Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
Codes 20 through 39; and
The facility manufactured (including importation), processed, or
otherwise used any applicable chemical in greater than threshold
quantities (see (3) below) in the course of a calendar year.
(a) SIC cods determination. SIC codes 20 through 39 are those codes within the
SIC system Division D - Manufacturing. The reporting requirements «« generally
Sr^yl^^^
th« code that best describes the products made by the facility that ha.e the h,ghast
economic value.
A facility is also covered, if its primary SIC code is not in the 20 through 39 range
but itis engaged in manufacturing activities at that facility, and the products produced
correspond to those products as outlined in SIC codes 20 through 39.
If you are not familiar with the SIC codes that apply to your facility, contact your
trade association, Chamber of Commerce, or your legal counsel.
For a detailed description of 4-digit SIC codes, refer to '!»
Manual is PB87-1000012.
fb) Mo»..fa,.t-..r». nrncess or otherwise use. The term "manufacture" means to
produce, prepare. Xor^ °r compound a toxic chemical. It is important to note that the
term manufacture includes importation.
The term "manufacture" also Includes coincidental production of a toxic chemical
7^000 Ibs for 1987), chemical B and relevant emissions of chemical B from the facility
must be reported.
preparing such substance, or (b) as part of an -article containing the toxic chem.cal.
The term "process* also applies to the processing of a toxic chemical that is a
component of a mixture or other trade name product.
-------
Federal Haggler / Vol. 52. Mo. MP / Thursday, pone 4.1967 / Proposed Rutes 21187
The term "otherwise used" encompasses any use of a listed chemical at a facility
that is not specified by the defined actions of manufacture or process. For example, a
facility that incorporates toluene Into a mixture for distribution in commerce is
processing that chemical. A facility that cleans equipment with toluene is not processing
toluene but, nonetheless, is using toluene.
(3) Threshold Quantities for Reporting. Section 313 sets certain reporting
thresholds. These threshold quantities vary depending upon the activity (e.g.,
manufacture, process, or otherwise use) and the year for which, the report is submitted.
You must submit a report if the chemical is manufactured (including importation) or
processed at the facility:
For calendar year 1967, in quantities greater than 75,000 pounds.
For calendar year 1988, in quantities greater than 50,000 pounds.
FOP calendar year 1989 and subsequent years, in quantities greater
than 25,000 pounds.
You must submit a report if the chemical is otherwise used at the facility in
quantities greater than 10,000 pounds in the course of a calendar year.
(4) What Chemicals Must Be Reported? Chemicals and categories of chemicals for
which release data must be reported are ttsted in 40 CFR 372.45 (Subpart C of the
regulation).. There is an alphabetized list by chemical name of chemicals that have an
associated CAS number. There- to ateo a list of the same chemicals rrr CAS number
order. A third Fist gives the chemicaf categories for which reporting is required.
As an aid- in determining what chemicals must be reported, EPA has developed a
support document containing common synonyms and known trade names of the chemicals
covered by the rule titled "Toxic Chemical Release Inventory — Glossary of Synonyms.*
To obtain a copy of this document contact EPA at the address provided in paragraph (10)
of this Unit.
(5) Reporting Related to Mixtures or Trade- Name Products of Undetermined
Composition. Use or processing;of mixtures or trade name chemical products containing
a listed chemical can trigger reporting. A factftty rs subject to reporting releases of
toxic chemicals that result from the use or processing, of mixtures or trade name
products containing such toxic chemicals. However, your facility may use or processes
mixtures or trade name chemical products of undetermined composition. In such cases,
you must make a reasonable attempt to determine if the product contains one or more
report able toxic chemicals. The following Figure 2 outlines the steps for making this
determination..
-------
21188
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4.1987 / Proposed Rides
Figure 2
Reporting Mixture and Tradename Product Information
Do you use mixture/tradename product in amounts > 10.000 Ibs/yr
or process mixture/tradename product in amounts > threshold
for year of report?
I
Report not
required
Y»s - Conuct Supplier
Is a Section 313 chemical in the product?
*<"
Will supplier give specific Section 313 identity?
— No
Supplier
— Will Not
Confirm
Report not
required but
document the
contact
z
Will supplier provide you with
percentage by weight of chemical in
product?
z
I No
I
No
Will supplier give the Section 313
genenc classification identity?
Does the
amount of the
chemical meet
threshold (s)?
Yes
No
Enter specific
chemical name in
IV.B. Enter
product name in
IV.D. Complete
form only
through Section V.
Will the supplier give the
percentage by weight of
the chemicals in the
product?
Enter specific
chemical in
IV.B.
Complete
remainder of
form
Does the
amount of
the chemical
meet threshold?
I No
Report
not
required
I No
I No
Enter product
name in IV.D.
Complete form
ONLY through
Section V.
Yes
Enter generic
name and code in
IV.C.
Enter
product name
in IV.D.
Complete
form only
through
Section V.
Enter generic _
name and code in
IV.C.
Enter
product name
in IV.D.
Complete
remainder of
form
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 107 / Thursday. June 4.1987 / Proposed Rules 21189
To begin with, identify those chemical products otherwise used in excess of 10,000
pounds per year, or processed (e.g., used as a reactant, mixture component, or article
component) in excess of the applicable threshold for the year of reporting (e.gn 75,000
pounds for 1987). Then, contact the supplier of the product and ask whether the product
contains a reportable section 313 toxic chemical. If the response is "no" or if the
supplier will not, for other, reasons, tell you then you have no further responsibility
relative to that product. You must, however, keep a record of this contact. If the
answer is "yes" then follow the steps outlined in Figure 2 to determine what you must
report.
(6) How Many Reports to Submit. A separate report must be submitted for each
covered toxic chemical at each facility. However, the information to be supplied on
page 1 of the form (Sections I through III of the form) will be the same for all reports
from the facility. Therefore, page 1 needs to be completed only once. The remaining
pages of the form must be completed for each chemical. If you are reporting more than
one chemical, photocopy page 1 of the Form and attach it to the remaining, chemical
specific pages for each chemical being reported.
(7) Recordkeepinq. You must keep a copy of each submission. In addition you
must keep the supporting materials used to develop the information contained in the
submission. These records must be kept for a period of 5 years from the date of the
submission. The records are to be kept at the facility for which the report is submitted
and these records must be readily available for inspection by ERA. If the facility closes
permanently these records must be sent to the owner or operator or the facility. If there
is no other owner or operator of the facility such records must be sent to EPA.
(8) When the Report Must Be Submitted. The report for any calendar year must be
submitted on or before July 1 of the following year (e.g., the report for calendar year
1987 must be submitted on or before July 1, 1988).
(9) Where To Send The Report.: Submit reports to:
OTS Document Control Officer,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
Attn: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory
Also, you must forward a copy of the submission to the State in which the facility
is located. States will provide addresses to which the copies of the reports are to be
sent.
NOTE: The copy of the submission sent to the State should be the non-
trade secret version of the form.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4.1987 / Propo8ed_Ruie8_
(10) How to Obtain Forms and Other Information. Additional copies of this form
and guidance documents may be obtained from:
TSCA Assistance Office,
Office of Toxic Substances,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Room E-543,
401 M Street, SW,
Washington, D.C. 20460,
(202) 554-1404.
Attn: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory,
t MT C - SPECF1C INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING EPA FORM R
Report Number. Leave this space blank.
Calendar Year. All reporting is by calendar year. Enter the year in which the
reported releases occurred (not the year the report is submitted) in the
appropriate space.
SECTION I — CERTFICATION STATEMENT;
A senior official with management responsibility for the person (or persons)
completing the form must sign the certification statement. This person must certify the
accuracy and completeness of the information reported on the form by signing,•"?*««*
the certification statement. Print or type the name and title of the person who signs the
statement in the space provided. This certification statement applies to all information
S ti ^tSTlSSlSg claims of trade secrecy and the required explanation for such
claims. (See Unit D of these instructions for specfic instructions on trade secrecy claims
and the required explanation that must be included with the submission.)
SECTION II — FACILITY IDENTIFICATION;
A. FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION
Enter the'name of the facility (plant site name or appropriate facility designation),
street address, city, county, state, and zip code in the space provided. Do not use a P.O.
Box number as part of this location information.
B. TECHNICAL CONTACT
Enter the name, firm, title, street address, and telephone number (including area
code) of an individual whom EPA, State officials, or the public m«y COflt"ctK'" nep
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4.1987 / Proposed Rules 21191
C. FACILITY IDENTIFIERS
Dun and Bradstreet Number. Use the number obtained from Dun and Bradstreet for
your facility. If your facility has not been assigned a Dun and Bradstreet Number,
indicate this in the appropriate space by entering £NA .
EPA Identification Number. If your facility has been assigned an EPA
Identification Number, enter the number in the appropriate space. The EPA I.D. number
is a 12-digit number assigned to facilities covered by hazardous waste regulations of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and other regulations under Superfund
(CERCLA). Facilities not covered by these regulations are not likely to have an assigned
EPA I.D. number. If your facility does not have an EPA I.D. number, enter &NA in the
appropriate space.
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Codes. Enter the appropriate 4-digit
primary SIC codes for your facility. If applicable, enter any other 4-digit manufacturing
SIC code(s) (i.en codes in the 20 through 39 range). Enter up to 2 of these other SIC
codes for activities associated with the toxic chemicals being reported. If no other SIC
codes are applicable enter NA in these spaces.
NPDES Permit Number. Enter the permit number your facility holds under the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). This permit number is
assigned to your facility by EPA or the State under authority of the Clean Water Act.
Enter the name of the surface water body or receiving stream to which the chemical is
directly discharged. Report the name of the receiving stream or water body as it
appears on the NPDES permit for the facility.
UIC Identification Number. If your facility injects chemical-containing waste into
class 1 deep wells, enter the Underground Injection Control (UIC) identification number
assigned by EPA or by the State under authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act. If your
facility does not hold such a permit enter NA in this space.
D. PARENT COMPANY
If applicable, enter the name of the corporation or other business entity that owns
or controls the facility. Also enter the Dun and Bradstreet Number for that parent
company. If the facility is not owned or controlled by another corporation, enter NA in
these spaces.
-------
SECTION III - OFF-SITE LOCATIONS TO WHICH ANY TOXIC CHEMICAL IS
TRANSFERRED;
^
relates to chemical-specific release information in section VILD. of the form.
A. PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS (POTW)
WM^rZ^^^^^^
containing the reported chemicals to a POTW, enter NA.
B. OTHER OFF-SITE LOCATIONS '
needed attach a continuation sheet.
SECTION IV - CHEMICAL IDENTITY;
A. CAS REGISTRY NUMBER A"n CHEMICAL NAME
Enter the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) registry number for ^ chemical
being reported. If you are reporting one of the chemical categories (e.g. copper
eo^und. enterr oin U. ™™%»^ ^ ft ^ ^ ,
372.45 (the chemical listing section of the regulation?.
B. TRADE SECRET BLOCK
you must complete Section IV .C.
-------
Fedeial Register ./ VoL SZ. No. 187 / Thursday, f une V 7987 / Proposed Bales 21193
C. GENERiC CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE CHEMICAL OR CHEMICAL CATEGORY
Complete Section IV.C. if you are claiming the chemical identity as a trade secret
(also see D, below). For the purposes of trade secret claims, ail listed chemicals and
chemical categories are pre-ciassified under one of the fallowing generic groups:
Cl Hydrocarbons
C2 Halogenated Alkanes
C3 Halogenated Alkenes
C4 Halogenated Aromatics
C5 HydroKy Compounds
C6 Ethers and Epoxides
C7 Aldehydes and Ketones
C8 Carboxylic Acids, Esters, Lactones, and Anhydrides
C9 Other Carboxylic Acid Derivatives
CIO Amines
Cll Amine Derivatives
C12 Ntitro and NHtroso Compounds
C13 Phosphorus and Sulfur Compounds
C14 Azo and Hydrazo Compounds
C15 Metal Containing Compounds
C16 Non-Metal Inorganic Compounds
Enter both the Generic Classification code and the corresponding Generic
Classification name in the spaces provided. For example, a company makes styrene and
claims this identity as trade secret. The chemical list in 40 OFR 372.45 shows that
styrene has been assigned to generic classification code "Cl" -which corresponds to the
generic classification name "Hydrocarbon." The company woudd then enter "Cl"
"Hydrocarbon" in the spaces provided in Section IV.C.
D. MIXTURE OR TRADE NAME PRODUCT JDENTFICATION
Complete this section only if you are reporting based on the use or (processing of a
mixture or other trade name product and you do not know the specific listed toxic
chemical that is in the product. Again, refer to Figure 2 of these instructions to help you
determine the proper information to enter on the form.
Enter the name of the mixture or trade name product on the line provided.
Enter in Section IV.C. the generic classification name of the toxic chemical if the
supplier of the product provided this identity to you instead of a listed toxic chemical
name.
Finally, answer the question in Section IV JD. that relates to your having been able
to determine the percent by weight of the toxic chemical in the product. If your answer
is "yes" then you must complete the remainder of the questions on the form. If your
answer is "no" then you are only requtred to complete through Section V.of the fovn.
-------
21194 Federal Reeister / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4.1987 / Proposed Rules
SECTION V — ACTIVITIES AND USES OF THE TOXIC CHEMICAL AT THE FACILITY;
This section requires an indication of whether the chemical is manufactured
(including imported), processed, or otherwise used at the facility and the general nature
of such uses. Mark all the appropriate block(s) in this section that apply. Following is an
explanation of the activities and use indication terms:
A. MANUFACTURE
On-site use/processing. A chemical that is manufactured and then further
processed or otherwise used at that same facility.
Sale/Distribution. A chemical which is manufactured specifically for sale or
distribution outside the manufacturing facility.
Byproduct. A chemical produced without a separate commercial intent during the
production, processing, use, or disposal of another chemical substance or mixture, and
following its production, separated from that other chemical substance or mixture^
Impurity. A chemical that is unintentionally produced with another chemical
substance and not separated.
B. PROCESS
Reactant. A natural or synthetic chemical used in chemical reactions for the
manufacture of another chemical substance or product. Includes but is not limited to
feedstock, raw materials, intermediates, and initiators.
Formulation Component. A chemical added to a product or product mixture prior
to use or distribution that aids in the performance of the product in its use. Examples
include but are not limited to additives, dyes, reaction diluents, initiators, solvents,
inhibitors, emulsifiers, surfactants, lubricants, flame retardants, and Theological
modifiers.
Repackaging* Processing or preparation of a chemical or product mixture for
distribution in commerce in a desirable form, state, and/or quantity.
Article Component. A chemical substance that becomes an integral component of
an article for industrial, trade, or consumer use.
C. OTHERWISE USE
Chemical Processing Aid. A chemical that is added to a reaction mixture to aid in
the manufacture or synthesis of another chemical substance but the chemical does not
intentionally remain in or become part of the product or product mixture. Examples of
such chemicals include but are not limited to process solvents, catalysts, inhibitors,
initiators, reaction terminators, and solution buffers.
Manufacturing Aid. A chemical that, through its function, aids in a manufacturing
process. Examples include but are not limited to lubricants, metalworking fluids,
coolants, refrigerants, and hydraulic fluids.
-------
Federal Register J VoL S2. No. 1D7 / Thursday, loos 4,1987 J Proposed Rides 21195
Ancillary or Other Uses. A chemical that is used at a facility for purposes other
than a chemical processing aid or manufacturing aid as described above. Includes but is
not limited to cleaners, degreasers, lubricants, and fuels...
SECTION VI - MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF THE CHEMICAL AT THE FACILITY;
Check the box next to the range that covers the maximum quantity of the chemical
(in storage tanks, process vessels, on-site shipping containers etc.) at your facility at any
time during the reporting year. If the chemical is present at several locations within
your facility, use the maximum total amount present at any one time. Ranges of
quantities should be selected from the table on the form. You are not required to report
the maximum quantity itself on the form.
SECTION VII — RELEASES TO THE ENVIRONMENT?
In Section VII of the form you are to account for the total aggregate annual
releases of the chemical to each environmental medium. These total releases include
"routine" emissions plus any amount released "accidentally.1"
Under Title III a release is defined as any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring,
emitting, emptying, discharging, injecting, escaping, leaching, dumping, or disposing into
the environment (including the abandonment or discarding of barrels, containers, and
other closed receptacles) of any "toxic chemical" (i.e.» a chemical listed in Subpart C of
the regulation). Under this section of the form you are required to estimate both the
direct releases or emissions from your facility to the environment as well as your
transfers of the chemical to off-site treatment or disposal locations as part of waste.
To provide the release information required in this section of the form, you may
use readily available data (including monitoring data and emissions measurements)
collected pursuant to other provisions of law or as part of routine plant operations.
Where monitoring data or emission measurements are not readily available, reasonable
estimates of the amounts released may be made using published emission factors,
material balance calculations, or engineering calculations. Do not use emission factors
or calculations to estimate releases if more accurate data are available. No monitoring
or measurement of the quantities, concentration, or frequency of any toxic chemical
released into the environment, beyond that monitoring and measurement required under
other provisions of law or regulation, is required for the purpose of completing this form.
For releases to each media you must answer four questions: (1) How much of the
chemical was released (in pounds per year)?, (2) Was any portion of that release (except
releases to off-site locations) reported under the emergency notification provisions of
section 304 of Title HI?, (3) What is the basis of estimate (e.g., what -was the primary
estimation method used to determine the quantity released)? and (ft) Is the release
specifically covered by a relevant environmental permit held by the facility?
-------
21196
i^^^M
^^B*^^^^"1
Quantity Estimates
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / THursday. June 4.198» '/ Proposed Rules'
Estimate as accurately as possible the quantities in pounds of only the listed
chemical or chemical category that are released annually to each environmental
medium. Do not include in this estimate other components of the waste stream. If you
are reporting a listed category, combine the release data for all substances in the listed
chemical category (e-g., all glycol ethers) and report this aggregate on a single form. Do
not report releases of each individual chemical in that category on a separate form. In
all other cases a separate form is required for each listed chemical being reported.
For metal compound categories report releases of only the parent metal. For
example, a user of various inorganic nickel salts would report the total nickel released in
each waste regardless of the nickel's form (as the original salts, nickel ion, oxide, etc.;,
and excluding any contribution to mass made by other species in the molecule.
Basis of Estimate;
For each release estimate you are required to indicate the principal method by
which the quantity was derived. Enter the letter code which applies to the derivation of
the largest portion of the total quantity estimated. .
For example, if 40 percent of stack emissions were derived using monitoring data,
30 percent by mass balance, and 30 percent by emission factors, enter the code letter
"M" for monitoring.
The codes are as follows:
M - based on monitoring data or measurement for the chemical in the
wastestream as released.
B - based on a mass balance such as the amount of the chemical in streams
entering and leaving process equipment.
E - based on published emission factors such as those relating release to
throughput or equipment type.
O - based on other approaches such as engineering calculations (for example,
estimating volatilization using published mathematical formulas) or best
engineering judgment. This would Include applying an estimated removal
efficiency to a wastestrearn even if the stream before treatment were fully
characterized by monitoring data.
The monitoring data, mass-balance, or emission factor must be specific to the
chemical being reported. Otherwise, the estimate should be considered to be based on
engineering calculations or judgment. For example, if a mass balance yields the flow
rate of anlqueous waste but the quantity of chemical in the waste[»• b™* °" ^£*
data, report "O" because "engineering calculations" were used as the basis of estimate.
Alternatively, if the concentration of the chemical in the wastewater was measured,
then the primary basis of estimate is ''monitoring11 even though a mass balance^
calculation also contributed to the estimate. Use of mass balance should only be
indicated if it directly calculates the mass (weight) of chemical released. Use of
-------
^^^ ! .' Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June-4.1987 / Proposed Rules • 21197
monitoring data should be indicated as basis of estimate only if the chemical
concentration is measured in the wastestream being released into the environment as
opposed to measured in other process streams containing the chemical.
Title III. Section 304 Release;
Certain of the toxic chemicals subject to section 313 reporting are subject to
emergency notification provisions of Title III. If your facility has reported an emergency
release of the toxic chemical during the calender year under Title III Section 304 then
you must check the box "YES" in the column labeled 'Title III Section 304 Release?."
Section 304 is the emergency notification provision of Title III. Chemicals subject to this
notification are those "extremely hazardous chemicals" as listed under section 302 of
Title III and chemicals subject to section 103 of CERCLA.
Permit Applies To Release;
The last column in Section VII asks for a "yes" or "no" indication of whether the '
toxic chemical released is specifically covered by an environmental permit. In general, a
facility would answer "yes" if the permit specifically includes or cites the reported toxic
chemical.
A. EMISSIONS TO THE AIR
1. Fugitive or Nonpoint Air Emissions. Enter the total quantity of emissions of the
chemical to the air which is not released through stacks, vents, ducts pipes, etc or any
other confined air stream. Include (1) fugitive equipment leaks from valves, pump seals,
flanges, compressors, sampling connections, open ended lines, etc., (2) evaporative losses
from surface impoundments, (3) releases from building ventilation systems, and (4) any
other fugitive or nonpoint air emissions.
2. Stack or Point Air Emissions. Enter the total emissions of the chemical to the
air which are released through stacks, vents, ducts, pipes, etc. Include storage tank
emissions. Air releases from control equipment would generally fall in this category.
All air releases of the chemical from the facility should be accounted for. In case
of doubt about whether an air release 4s fugitive or stack in nature, it is more important
that the release be included as one or the other than be omitted. Do not enter
information on individual emissions points or releases on the form.
For both fugitive and stack point emissions, check the appropriate box in the.
column titled "Permit Applies To Release?" Indicating YES means that the facility has
determined that the permit specifically includes or cites the chemical being emitted.
For example, a permit may set a numerical emission limit to control quantities of on or
more specific chemical released. The facility would answer "NO" if a permit sets a
performance standard for process equipment in which a chemical is made or used but the
permit does not specify the chemical. Some facilities may have several similar emissions
controls that treat the same toxic chemical. If some but not all have permits that cite
the specific chemical, the the facility may still answer "YES" in the permit column.
-------
21198 fftedmai-Kagteter J Vo»- 5g »fo.' ifl^fniiirVday. frnie 4.19^7 f Pmpo*e4 hides
B. DISCHARGES TO WATER
Direct Discharges. Enter the total annual amount of the chemical released from
all discharge points at the facility to surf ace waters (rivers, lakes, streams,; etc 0 Include
both process outfalls such as pipes and open trenches and releases from on-site
wastewater treatment systems in this category. Include in the total any contribution
from stormwater if your permit includes stormwater sources. Do not include "indirect*
discharges to surface waters such as to a POTW or off-site wastewater treatment
facility. Check "YES" in the "Permit Applies To Release" column if the discharge of this
chemical is specifically covered by your facility's NPDES permit.
C. RELEASES TO LAND
Report quantities of the chemical that were disposed of within the confines of the
facility. Enter the appropriate disposal code from Unit E of these instructions In the
space provided. These types of disposal include placement in surface impoundments in.
addition to subsurface disposal in landfills, infiltration lagoons and septic systems, or
underground injection wells.
For the purposes of this form, a surface impoundment is considered "final
disposal." Quantities of the chemical released to impoundments which are merely part of
a wastewater treatment process generally should not be reported here. If the
impoundment accumulates sludges containing the chemical, include an estimate here of
the annual accumulation of the chemicaHn such sludges. If, however, the sludges were
removed from the impoundment during the year and disposed of in a different manner
(e-g- if the sludge is disposed of in a different manner at the facility or if it ts transfered
to an off-site location) then the amount of the chemical disposed should be reported
under a different code in this section or It should be reported in section VILD. as an off-
site release.
Report the amounts that are placed in infiltration lagoons and/or septic systems as
one total, since both are designed to allow wastes to percolate into near-surface soil.
For the purposes of this reporting, storage tanks are not considered to be a type of
disposal and are not to be reported in this section of the form.
Enter the quantitiy released in pounds per year. Four lines are provided in this
section of the form to accommodate various types of land disposal. If more space Is
needed, mark the box at the bottom of this section and attach a continuation sheet.
Check "YES" in the "Permit Applies To Release" column only if the chemical is
part of a RCRA-covered hazardous waste.
D. TRANSFERS TO OFF-SITE LOCATIONS
Report in this section the quantity of the chemical sent to any of the off-site
disposal, treatment, or storage facilities for which you have provided an address lr»
Section III of the form.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday, June 4.1987 / Proposed Rules 21199
Line D.I. is for releases to a POTW.
Lines D.2., D.3., and D.4. are provided for releases to other off-site locations,
including off-site private wastewater treatment. For these lines you must enter the
block number from Section III.B. of the form that corresponds to the off-site location to
which you are transferring the chemical. If you need additional space check the box at
the bottom of Section VII and attach a continuation sheet.
Check "YES" in the "Permit Applies To Release" column only if the chemical is
part of a RCRA covered hazardous waste.
SECTION VIII — WASTE TREATMENT METHODS AND EFFICIENCY;
In Section VIII, report waste treatment methods used on wastestreams containing
the chemical; the range of concentrations of the chemical in the influent to the
treatment method; the effectiveness of each treatment method in removing the
chemical; and indicate whether the treatment efficiency figure was based on actual
operating data.
General Wastestreamt
For each waste treatment method reported, indicate the type of wastestream
containing the chemical that is treated. Mark one box that corresponds to the general
wastestream:
G = Gaseous
W = Wastewater
L = Liquid waste (non-aqueous)
S = Solid waste (including sludges and slurries)
Waste Treatment Methods;
Codes for treatment methods are included in Unit E of these instructions. Enter
the code for each treatment method used in connection with wastes containing the
chemical being reported. *
Treatment methods are to be reported by type of waste being treated, i.e. gaseous
wastes (including gases, vapors, particulates), aqueous wastes, liquid non-aqueous, or
solids. Where a waste is a mixture of water and organic liquid, report it under aqueous
wastes unless the organic content exceeds 50 percent. Slurries containing water should
be reported as solids if they contain appreciable amounts of settlable or dissolved solids
such that the viscosity or density of the waste is considerably different from that of
process wastewater.
Wastestreams may have a single source or may be aggregates of many sources, as
when process water from several pieces of equipment is combined prior to treatment.
Report treatments that apply to the aggregate wastestream. However, if your facility
treats various wastewaters in different ways, then the different treatment methods must
each be listed.
-------
21200 Federal Renter / VoL 52. No. 107 /
For any given wastestream, waste treatment may be a single step or a multiple
step process. Where waste treatment consists of several of the methods, choose the
method listed in Unit E of these instructions that best describes the treatment applied to
that wastestream. You are not required to separately list each part of the process.
Note, however, that a wastewater treatment step and further incineration of the sludge
from wastewater must be reported separately: one treats the aqueous waste, the second
treats a distinctly different "solid" waste.
Your facility may have several pieces of equipment in similar service. It is not
necessary to enter four lines of data to cover four scrubbers, for examp e, if all four are
treating wastes of similar character (e^n gaseous emissions), have similar mflueni
concentrations, and have the same removal efficiency.
Range of Influent Concentration:
The form requires an indication of the range of concentration of the chemical in
the wastestream (i.e, the influent) as it typically enters the ^atment equipment. Enter
one of the following code numbers in the space provided that corresponds to the relative
concentration of the chemical in the influent:
1 = (for liquid or solid) Greater than 1 percent
(for gaseous) Greater than 10,000 milligrams per cubic meter
2 - (for liquid or solid) 100 parts per million (0.01 percent) to 1 percent
(for gaseous) 100 milligrams per cubic meter to 10,000 milligrams per cubic
meter
3 = (for liquid or solid) 1 part per million to 100 parts per million
(for gaseous) 1 milligram per cubic meter to 100 milligrams per cubic
meter
4 = (for liquid or solid) 1 part per billion to 1 part per million
(for gaseous) 1 microgram per cubic meter to 1 milligram per cubic meter
(for liquid or solid) Less than 1 part per billion
(for gaseous) Less than one microgram
Treatment Efficiency:
In the space provided enter a number for the percent removal of the listed
chemical (noTother waste constituents) from the wastestream. The treatment efficiency
expressed as percent removal represents any destruction, biological degradation,
comical reaction, or physical removal of the chemical from the, wastestream beino.
treated. This efficiency should represent the mass or weight percent of ^rmwl
destroyed or removed, and not just changes in volume or concentration of the comical
or Us wastestream. For some treatments, the percent removal will rePresent removal by
several mechanisms such as in secondary wastewater treatment where a chemical may
evaporate, may be biodegraded, and may be physically removed in the sludge.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday, June 4.1987 / Proposed Rules 21201
Percent removal should be calculated as follows:
where I = mass of the chemical in the influent waste
and E = mass of the chemical in the effluent waste
The mass or weight of chemical in the wastestream being treated should be
calculated by multiplying the concentration (by weight) of the chemical in the
wastestream times the flowrate. When calculating or estimating percent removal
efficiency for various was test reams, the percent removal should compare the gaseous
effluent from treatment, to the gaseous influent, the aqueous effluent from treatment to
aqueous influent, and likewise for organic liquid and solid waste. However some
treatment methods may not result in comparable form of effluent wastestreams. Such
an example would be incineration of wastewater, where the percent removal of the
chemical from the influent wastestream would be reported as 100 percent.
Some of the treatments listed in Unit E do not destroy, chemically react, or
physically remove the chemical from its wastestream. Some examples of these include
fuel blending or encapsulation. For these treatments, an efficiency of zero should be
reported. The facility should report the concentration of the chemical in the waste
before treatment.
All available 'data should be utilized to calculate treatment efficiency and influent
chemical concentration. If such data are lacking, then estimates will have to be made
using best engineering judgment or other methods. Methods for calculating releases and
treatment efficiencies are further discussed in the technical guidance document cited at
the beginning of this Unit.
For metal compounds, the reportable concentration and treatment efficiency
should be calculated based on the weight of the parent metal and not the weight of the
metal compound(s). Metals are not destroyed but can only be physically removed or
chemically converted from one form into another. Therefore, the treatment efficiency
reported should only represent physical removal of the parent metal, not the percent
chemical conversion of the metal compound. If a listed treatment method converts but
does not remove a metal, the method should be reported but the treatment efficiency
should be reported as zero.
Based on Operating Data?
This column requires you. to indicate "yes" or "no" whether the treatment efficiency
estimate is based on actual operating data. For example, you would check "yes" if the
estimate is based on monitoring of influent and effluent wastes under typical operating
conditions. If the efficiency estimate is based on published data for similar processes or
on equipment supplier's literature, you would check "no."
-------
21202 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4.1987 /
SECTION IX - OPTIONAL INFORMATION ON WASTE MINIMIZATION;
Information provided in Section IX of the form is optional. This section allows the
facility to describe waste minimization efforts involving the chemical. The facility may
choose to provide a narrative of its waste minimization projects. EPA would prefer,
however, for ease of data entry, that the following elements be included as shown on the
form.
Type of modification!
Enter one code from the following list that best describes the type of waste
minimization activity:
Ml recycling/reuse on-site
M2 recycling/reuse off-site
M3 equipment/technology modifications
M4 process procedure modifications
M5 reformulation/redesign of product
M6 substitution of raw materials
M7 improved housekeeping training, inventory control
Quantity of chemical in the wastestream prior to treatment/disposal!
Enter the pounds of the reported chemical in the waste(s) in the reporting year and
the pounds in the wastes) in the year prior to implementing waste minimization.
Alternatively, to protect confidential information, you may wish to enter only the
percent by which the weight of the chemical in the waste has changed.
Index;
Enter the ratio of reporting year production to production in the base year. This
index should be calculated to most closely reflect activites involving the chemical.
Examples of acceptable indices include:
chemical produced in 1987/chemical produced in 1986.
paint produced in 1987/paint produced in 1986.
appliances coated in 1987/appliances coated in 1986.
sq.ft. of solar collector fabricated in 1987/sq.ft. of solar collector
fabricated in 1986.
value of sales in 1987/value of sales in 1986.
For example, a company manufactures 200,000 pounds of a chemical in 1986 and
250,000 pounds of the same chemical in 1987. The index figure to report would be 1.3
(1.25 rounded). The index provides a means for users of the data to sort out the effect of
change in business activity from the waste minimization project proper. It is not
necessary to indicate the units on which the index was based.
-------
Federal Register / VoL 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4.1987 / Proposed Rules 21203
Reason for action:
Finally, enter the code(s) from the following list that best describe the reason for
initiating the waste minimization effort:
Rl regulatory requirement for the waste
R2 reduction of treatment/disposal costs
R3 other process cost reduction
Narrative description;
Use the space provided to describe your waste minimization activities as a
supplement to, or in lieu of information provided in the coded part of this section.
LIMIT D - TRADE SECRECY CLAIMS AND THE EXPLANATION
Section 322 of Title III provides that the specific chemical identity (including the
chemical or chemical category name and other specific identification) may be designated
by the facility as a trade secret. To do so, check the box in Section IV.B. of the form
indicating that the identity of the chemical is being claimed as a trade secret. As
explained in Unit C.IV.C. of these instructions, enter the appropriate code number and
the assigned generic classification name in the space provided.
If you claim chemical identity as trade secret you must submit two copies of the
form to EPA. One copy will be the complete submission including the chemical name and
CAS number. The second copy will be a "sanitized11 version in which the CAS number and
chemical name is left blank in Section IV.A. and B. of the form. This sanitized version is
the form that will be made available to the public. Also this non-trade secret copy is the
copy of the form to be submitted to the State.
Any facility claiming trade secret protection for a chemical identity must also
submit an explanation of this claim at the time the form is submitted. This explanation
must demonstrate that all of the following statements are true for the chemical or
chemical category being reported:
1. That the facility has not disclosed the fact that the chemical is
manufactured, processed or otherwise used at the facility to any other
person, other than a member of a local emergency planning committee, an
officer or employee of the United States or a State or local government, an
employee of such person, or a person who is bound by a confidentiality
agreement.
2. That the facility has taken reasonable measures to protect the
confidentiality of such information and will continue to take such
measures.
3. That the information is not required to be disclosed or otherwise made
available to the public under any other Federal or State law.
4. That disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to the
competitive position of the facility.
-------
Federal Reister / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987 / Proposed Rules
5. That the chemical identity is not readily discoverable through reverse
engineering.
This explanation must be submitted with the copy of the form that contains the
specific chemical identity to EPA. Otherwise the trade secret claim will be disallowed
without further notice to you.
The submission should be sent by registered mail, return receipt requested.
The facility may claim parts of the explanation document as confidential if that
information would reveal the chemical identity claimed as a trade secret or would reveal
other confidential business or trade secret information. To make this claim the facility
should clearly designate those portions of the document that are claimed as
confidential. The facility must include a certification that those portions of the
substantiation document claimed as confidential would, if disclosed, reveal the chemical
identity being claimed as a trade secret, or would reveal other business confidential or-
trade secret information. This certification must be signed by the same senior
management official that signs the form certification statement.
The facility must submit sanitized copies of this explanation to EPA and the State
because this explanation must also be made available to the public. Information claimed
as trade secret or otherwise confidential business in the explanation should be omitted
from this version of the explanation document.
-------
Federal Register /• Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4.1987 / Proposed Rules 21205
UNIT E - DISPOSAL AND WASTE TREATMENT CODES
DISPOSAL CODES
ID Landfill
2D Land treatment
3D Surface impoundment (to be closed as a landfill)
4D Underground injection
3D Infiltration lagoon or septic system
6D Transfer to waste broker
WASTE TREATMENT CODES
(a) Incineration/thermal treatment
II Liquid injection incineration
21 Rotary kiln incineration
31 Fluidized bed incineration
41 Multiple hearth chamber incineration
51 Pyrolytic destruction
61 Other incineration/thermal treatment
(b) Reuse as fuel
1RF Cement kiln
2RF Aggregate kiln
3RF Asphalt kiln
4RF Other kiln
5RF Blast furnace
6RF Sulfur recovery furnace
7RF Smelting, melting, and refining furnace
8RF Coke oven
9RF Other furnace
10RF Industrial boiler
11RF Utility boiler
12RF Other reuse as fuel
(c) Fuel blending
1FB Fuel blending (general)
(d) Solidification
IS Cement-based processes
2S Pozzolanic processes
3S Asphaltic processes
45 Thermoplastic techniques
55 Organic polymer techniques
65 Macro-encapsulation
7S Other solidification
-------
Federal Regfartei / VoL^2^No. tQ7-/. Thnraday.>aa4.1987 / Proposed Rotes
(e) Recovery of solvents and other organic chemicals
1SR Fractionation
2SR Batch still distillation
3SR Solvent extraction
4SR Thin film evaporation
5SR Other solvent recovery
(f) Recovery of metals
1MR Activated carbon (for metals recovery)
2MR Electrodialysis (for metals recovery)
3MR Electrolytic metal recovery
4MR Ion exchange (for metals recovery)
5MR Reverse osmosis (for metals recovery)
6MR Solvent extraction (for metals recovery)
7MR Ultrafiltration (for metals recovery)
8MR Other metals recovery
(g) Wastewater treatment
i. Cyanide oxidation
1WT Alkaline chlorination
ZWT Ozone
3WT Electrochemical
AWT Other cyanide oxidation
ii. Chemical precipitation (pH adjustment, Speculation, and
settling (see Note 1)
5WT Lime
6WT Sodium hydroxide
7WT Soda ash
8WT Sulfide
9WT Other precipitation
iii. Chromium reduction
10WT Sodium bisulfite
11WT Sulfur dioxide
12WT Ferrous sulfate
13WT Other reduction
iv. Complexed metals treatment
14WT High pH precipitation
15WT Other complexed metals treatment
v. Emulsion breaking
16WT Thermal
17WT Chemical
18WT Other emulsion breaking
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4.1987 / Proposed Rules 21207
vi. Adsorption
19WT Carbon adsorption
20 WT Ion exchange
21WT Resin adsorption
22WT Other adsorption
vii. Stripping
23WT Air stripping
24WT Steam stripping (Note 2)
viii. Filtration
25WT Diatomaceous earth
26WT Sand
27WT Multimedia
28WT Other filtration
ix. Dewaterinq operations
29WT Gravity thickening
30WT Vacuum filtration
31WT Pressure filtration (belt, plate and frame, leaf)
32WT Centrifuge
33WT Other dewatering
x. Air flotation
34WT Dissolved air flotation
35WT Other air flotation
xi. Oil skimming
36WT Gravity separation
37WT Coalescing plate separation
38WT Other oil skimming
xii. Aerobic biological treatment
39WT Activated sludge
40WT Rotating biological contactor
41 WT Trickling filter
42WT Waste stabilization pond
43WT Nitrification
44WT Other aerobic treatment
xiii. Anaerobic biological treatment
45WT Anaerobic digestion
46WT Denitrification
47WT Other anaerobic treatment
-------
Federal Register / VoL 52, No. 107 / Thursday. June 4,1987 / Proposed Rales
xiv. Other wastewater treatment
A8WT Wet air oxidation
49WT Neutralization
50WT Other wastewater treatment
51WT Primary wastewater treatment system
52WT Secondary wastewater treatment system
53WT Tertiary wastewater treatment system
(h) Treatment of air emissions
1AT Thermal oxidizer
2AT Catalytic incineration
3 AT Flare
4AT Condenser
5 AT Scrubbers
6AT Absorbers
7AT Filters
BAT Electrostatic Precipitations
9AT Carbon adsorption
10AT Other adsorption
HAT Mechanical separation
12AT Other air emission control
NOTES:
1. Chemical precipitation is a treatment operation whereby the pH of a waste is
adjusted to the range necessary for removal (precipitation) of contaminants. For
purposes of this reporting flocculation and settling are considered part of the
system. NOTE: if the pH is adjusted solely to achieve a neutral pH THE
OPERATION IS NEUTRALIZATION.
2. As a treatment operation, steam stripping is the removal of organic
contaminants from a waste using direct or indirect contact steam for the
primary purpose of complying with publicly owned treatment works (POTW) or
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) wastewater discharge
limitations.
[FR Doc. 87-12588 Filed 6-3-87; 8:45 em]
BIUJNO CODE tMO-60-C
-------
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 133 / Monday. July 13. 198?- / Reposed Rules
Field Office, Office of Surface Mtaing
Reclamation and Enforcement. 340
Legion Drive. Suite 28. Lexington.
-mtucky 40504: Telephone: (606) 233-
27.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On December 30.1981. Kentucky
resubmitted its proposed regulatory
program to OSMRE. On April 13.1982.
following a review of the proposed
program as outlined in 30 CFR Part 732.
the Secretary approved the program
subject to the correction of 12 minor
deficiencies. The approval was effective
upon publication of the notice of
conditional approval in the May 18.
1982. Federal Register (47 FR 21404-
21435).
Information pertinent to the general
background, revisions, modifications.
and amendments to the proposed
program submission, as well as the
Secretary's findings, the disposition of
comments and a detailed explanation of
the conditions approval of the Kentucky
program can be found in the May IB.
1982. Federal Register notice.
Subsequent action concerning the
conditions of approval and program
amendments are identified in 30 CFR
917.11.917.15.917.16 and 917.17.
• 1. Submission of Amendment
On December 10.1985. OSMRE
^ublished in the Federal Register (50 FR
50293) the approval of the Kentucky
Administrative Regulations (KAR) at 405
KAR 7:070 concerning the blaster
certification program.
By a letter dated June 17.1987.
(Administrative Record KY-739).
Kentucky submitted to OSMRE pursuant
to 30 CFR 732.17. an amendment to the
Kentucky regulatory program. The
amendment modifies the program
procedures for certification of persons
responsible for blasting operations
incident to coal exploration and surface
coal mining.
Therefore, the Director is seeking
public comment on the adequacy of the
proposed program amendment
Comments should specificially address
the issues of whether the proposed
amendment is in accordance with
SMCRA and no less effective than its
implementing regulations.
III. Public Comment Procedures
In accordance with the provisions of
30 CFR 732.17. OSMRE is now seeking
comment on whether the amendment
proposed by Kentucky satisfies the
••quirements of 30 CFR 732.15 for the
proval of State program amendments.
. the amendment is deemed adequate, it
will become part of the-Kentacky
program.
Written Comments
Written comments should be specific.
pertain only to the issues proposed in
this rulemaking. and include
explanations in support of the
commenter's recommendations.
Comments received after the time
indicated under "DATES" or at
locations other than the Lexington Field
Office, Lexington. Kentucky, will not
necessarily be considered in the final
rulemaking or included hi the
Administrative Record.
Public Hearing
Persons wishing to comment at the
public hearing should contact the person
listed under "FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT' by the
close of business on Jury 28.1987. If no
one requests an opportunity to comment
at a public hearing, the hearing will not
be held.
Filing of a written statement at the
time of the hearing is requested as it will
greatly assist the transcriber.
Submission of written statements in
advance of the hearing will allow
OSMRE officials to prepare adequate
response and appropriate questions.
The public hearing will continue on
the specified date until all persons
scheduled to comment have been heard.
Persons in the audience who have not
been scheduled to comment and who
wish to do so will be heard following
those scheduled. The hearing will end
after all persons scheduled to comment
and persons present in the audience
who wish to comment have been heard.
If only one person requests an
opportunity to comment at a hearing, a
public meeting, rather than a public
hearing, may be held. A summary of the
meeting will be included hi the
Administrative Record.
Public Meeting
Persons wishing to meet with OSMRE
representatives to discuss the proposed
amendment may request a meeting at
the OSMRE. Lexington Field Office
listed under "ADDRESSES" by
contacting the person listed under "FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT." All such meetings will be
open to the public and. if possible.
notices of meetings will be posted in
advance in the Administrative Record.
A written summary of each public
meeting will be made a part of the
Administrative Record.
IV. Procedural Determinations
1. Compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act The
Secretary has determined that pursuant
to section 702fd) of SMCRA. SO OAC
1292(d). no environmental impact
statement need by prepared on this
rulemaking.
2. Executive Order No. 12291 and the
Regulatory Flexibility Act: On August
29.1981. the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB] granted OSMRE an
exemption from sections 3.4.7. and 8 of
Executive Order 12291 for actions
directly related to approval or
conditional approval of State regulatory
programs. Therefore, this action is
exempt form preparation of a Regulatory
Impact Analysis and regulatory review
by OMB.
The Department of the Ulterior has
determined that this rule would not have
a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) This rule would not
impose any new requirements; rather, it
would ensure that existing requirements
established by SMCRA and the Federal
rules will be met by the State.
3. Paperwork Reduction Act: This rule
does not contain information collection
requirements which require approval by
the Office of Management and Budget
under 44 U.S.C. 3507.
List of Subjects hi 30 CFR Part 917
Coal mining. Intergovernmental
relations. Surface mining, Underground
mining.
Dated: July 1.1987.
Albert E. WUtehoiue,
Acting Assistant Director. Eastern Field
Operations.
[FR Doc. 87-15770 Flted 7-10-67; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 43KW6-M
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part* 305 and 306
(FRL-3230-2]
Withdrawal of Arbitration Procedures
and Natural Resource Claims
Procedures for the Hazardous
Substance Super!und
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule; Withdrawal of
regulations: Request for comments.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA or Agency) is requesting
comments on its proposal to withdraw
two procedural rules promulgated
pursuant to the Comprehensive
Environmental Response. Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). The
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62. No. 133 / Monday. July 13, 1987 / Proposed Rules
2B1B1
rules concern: (1) The submission and
evaluation of natural resource claims
against the Hazardous Substance
Superfund (Superfund) (40 CFR Part
306). and (2) the arbitration of both
natural resource and response claims
(40 CFR Part 305]. EPA proposes to
withdraw these two regulations because
they have been superseded by
provisions of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1988. (SARA).
DATES: Comments concerning thin
request for comments must be submitted
on or before August 12,1987.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted in triplicate to Henry L
Longest. 0. Director. Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response
(WH-548). Environmental Protection
Agency. 401M Street. SVV, Washington.
DC 20460.
Docket The public docket for the NCP
revisions and the claims procedures is
available for public inspection at the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Waterside Mall. Lower Garage. 401M
Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20460. The
docket is available for viewing by
appointment only. (202) 382-3046, from
9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p jn. Monday through
Friday, excluding holidays. As provided
in 40 CFR Part 2. a reasonable fee may
be charged for copying services.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. CONTACT:
William O. Ross. Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response (WH-548).
Environmental Protection Agency. 401M
Street. SW, Washington. DC 20460 (202)
382-4645. or the RCRA/CERCLA
Hotline, (800) 424-9346 (or 382-3000 in
the Washington, DC metropolitan area).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Natural Resource Claims Procedures
Rule
The Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). 42 U.S.C. 9601 et
sec;.. Pub. L. 96-510. authorized the
assertion of two types of claims against
the Superfund: Response claims
authorized by section lll(a)(2) of
CERCLA and natural resource claims
authorized by section lll(a)(3) of
CERCLA. Response claims are to
reimburse private parties for at least
part of their costs in responding to a
release, or threat of a release, of a
hazardous substance, pollutant or
contaminant. Natural resource claims
are submitted by Federal State, or
Indian tribe trustees for reimbursement
of the costs of assessing damage to a
natural resource, or for the restoration.
rehabilitation, replacement or acquiring
the equivalent of a natural resource that
has been injured, destroyed or lost The
submission and evaluation of natural
resource claims was the subject of a rule
promulgated by EPA on December 13,
1985.50 FR 51196 el seq.. 40 CFR Part
306. The Agency today announces its
intention to withdraw this rule because
CERCLA. as amended by SARA, does
not authorize the appropriation of funds
for the payment of natural resource
claims.
SARA treats natural resource claims
in different ways. Section lllfcHH of
SARA amends section lll(b) of
CERCLA to prohibit payment from the
Superfund of a natural resource claim
unless the President determines mat the
claimant has exhausted aD
administrative and judicial remedies for
recovering such claims from parties
liable under section 107 of CERCLA.
This restriction applies only to claims
for restoration, rehabilitation.
replacement or acquiring the equivalent
of an injured natural resource'—not to
claims for damage assessments. Another
provision, section lllfe) of SARA.
amends section lll(e)(2) of CERCLA to
prohibit payment from the Superfund hi
any fiscal year where the President
determines that such funds are needed
for response to threats to public hearth.
However, the above provisions are
mooted by section SlTfa) of SARA,
which amends the Internal Revenue
Code as follows:
Amounts in the Superfund shall be
available, as provided in the
appropriation Acts, only for purposes of
making expenditures—
(A) To carry out the purposes of—
(i) Paragraphs (1). (2), (5). and (6) of
section lll(a) of CERCLA as in effect on
the date of the enactment of the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986.
(ii) Section lll(c) of CERCLA fas so in
effect), other than paragraphs (1) and (2)
thereof * *
It can be seen that section 517(a) of
SARA prohibits Superfund expenditures
to carry out the purposes of section
lll(a)(3). (b). (c)(l). (c)(2) of CERCLA:
The authorizing provisions for natural
resource claims. Therefore, even though
the programmatic sections regarding
natural resource claims still exist, the
authority to spend money far those
claims has been specifically revoked,
The legislative history is dear that
Congress intended that natural resource
claims not be paid. The conference
report to SARA holds that "[t]he
conference agreement follows the House
bill in deleting natural resource damage
and assessment claims as a Superfund
expenditure purpose." H.R. Rep. No. 962.
99th Cong. 2d Seas. 321 (Oct 3.1986); see
H.R. Rep. No. 253.99th Cong. 2d Sesa,
pt. 2. at 54 (1985) House Report
Because of section 517(8) of SARA,
EPA is today proposing to withdraw the
regulatory procedures for natural
resource claims. The Agency requests
comment, however, on the advisability
of suspending the regulations. One
rationale for suspending the natural
resource rule would be to have the
program in place in the event that
Congress restores funding. Despite that
possibility, EPA is inclined to withdraw.
rather than suspend the natural resource
rule. This is because, until Congress acts
otherwise, there is no statutory basis for
a natural resource claims program.
Suspension on the basis of what
Congress may do in the future would be
unduly confusing, and could give rise to
the unwarranted conclusion that the
Superfund will award natural resource
claims in the future.
IL Arbitration Rule
Section 112 of CERCLA outlines
procedures for asserting either a
response or a natural resource claim
against the Superfund. Prior to the
enactment of SARA, section 112(b)(4) of
CERCLA required the creation of a
Board of Arbitrators to review contested
claim determinations by EPA.
implementing tKia statutory mandate.
the Agency promulgated a rule that
formally established an arbitration
board and set forth procedures for the
consideration of contested claims, 50 FK
51196 et seq. (December 13.1985). 40
CFR Part 305.
Section 112(b) of SARA revokes the
statutory authorization for an arbitration
board. In its place, the amended section
112(b)(2) of CERCLA allows a claimant
to request an administrative hearing if
all or part of his claim is denied.
Paragraphs (3) through (5) of the revised
subsection 112(b) outline the general
parameters of the administrative
hearing. EPA intends to replace the
arbitration procedures currently
contained in Part 305 with procedures
for conducting such an administrative
hearing.
EPA proposes to withdraw the
CERCLA arbitration rule. There appears
to be tittle basis for a suspension action
since: (1) All authority for arbitration
was specifically revoked, and (2) the
arbitration procedures were replaced by
an alternative administrative procedure.
However, the Agency requests
comments from those who believe that
suspension of the rule would be more
appropriate.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9601 et teg. and
Executive Order 12580 sections 4 and ft.
-------
28162
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 133 / Monday. July 13, 1987 / Proposed Rules
Dated: July 6.1987.
Lee M. Thomas,
Administrator.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 305
Administrative practice and
procedure. Air pollution control
Chemicals. Claims. Hazardous
substances. Hazardous waste,
Intergovernmental relations. Natural
resources, Oil pollution, Superfund.
Water pollution control. Water supply.
40 CFR Part 306
Air pollution control. Chemicals,
Claims, Hazardous substances,
Hazardous waste. Intergovernmental
relations. Natural resources, Oil
pollution. Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements. Superfund.
Water pollution control Water supply.
PARTS 305 AND 306-4REMOVED AND
RESERVED]
Chapter L Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is proposed to be
amended by removing and reserving
Parts 305 and 306.
[FR Doc. 87-15673 Filed 7-10-87; 8:45 am]
BtLUNO COK eSMMO-H
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 73 and 76
[Gen. Docket Not. 87-24 and 87-25]
Program Exclusivity In the Cable and
Broadcast Industries
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Order Granting Motions for
Extension of Time in Gen. Docket 87-24
and Gen. Docket 87-25.
SUMMARY: On June 15,1987 (released
June 16,1087), in response to four
requests for extension of time and for
good cause shown, the Chief of the
Office of Plans and Policy granted
extension of time for Comments and
Reply Comments in Gen. Docket 87-24
(Amendment of Parts 73 and 78 of the
Commission's Rules relating to program
exclusivity in the cable and broadcast
industries) and Gen. Docket 87-25
(Compulsory Copywright License for
Cable Retransmission).
ADDRESS: Federal Communications
Commission. Washington. DC 20554.
EFFECTIVE DATES: Comments and Reply
Comments in Gen. Docket 87-24 are
extended to July 22,1987 and September
8,1987. respectively, and in Gen. Docket
87-25 to August 8,1987 and September
21.1987 respectively.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James A. Hudgens. Office of Plans and
Policy. (202) 653-5940.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Notice of Inquiry and Notice of
Proposed Rule Making in Gen. Docket
87-24 was published in the Federal
Register on April 30.1987 (52 FR15738)
and the Notice of Inquiry in Gen. Docket
87-25 was published in the Federal
Register on April 30,1987 (52 FR 15765).
with Comments in both proceedings
originally due June 22.1987 and Reply
Comments due August 6,1987.
Order Granting Motions for Extension of
Time in Gen. Docket 87-24 and Gen.
Docket 87-25
Adopted: June 15.1987.
Released: June 16.1987.
By the Chief, Office of Plans and
Policy.
1. On February 12.1987. the
Commission adopted a Notice of
Inquiry and Notice of Proposed Rule
Making in Gen. Docket 87-24 (released
May 23.1987. FCC Record 87-65).
referred to as the "syndicated
exclusivity" proceeding, and a Notice of
Inquiry in Gen. Docket 87-25 (released
May 23.1987, FCC Record 87-66).
referred to as the "compulsory license"
proceeding. Due dates for Comments
and Reply Comments in both
proceedings were set for June 22,1987
and August 6,1987, respectively. The
Commission has received four requests
for extensions of time in connection
with the above-entitled proceedings,
three supporting statements, and three
oppositions.
2. On May 27.1987. the Community
Antenna-Television Association, Inc.
("MCAT). submitted a "Motion for
Withdrawal and Redesignation of
Notice and Extension of Time To Allow
Adequate Comment" directed to Gen.
Docket 87-24. CATA requests that the
Commission "withdraw and
redesignate" the proceeding "as solely a
Notice of Inquiry." In addition and in the
alternative, it seeks a substantial
extension of time until all parties who
are likely to be "adversely affected" by
the potential adoption of new rules may
be adequately notified. CATA states
that the subject Notice "poses over 40
highly complex and interrelated
questions, yet it proposes no specific
rules upon which commenting parties
can base their judgments and
conclusions." CATA argues that
commenting parties are being asked to
discuss very complex economic theories
within a very short time frame. In
support CATA cites the "adequate
notice" requirements of the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553(b)J and the requirements of notice
and potential effects of a new rule on
small business entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603).
With respect to compliance with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, it alleges that
the Notice does not as required, contain
a description and estimate of the
number of small entities to which the
proposed rule will apply as well as the
expected impact of that rule on those
entities (5 U.S.C. 603 (b) and (c)).
Instead, it continues, the Notice
determined (Par. 75) that although the
proposal would "* * * have no known
significant deleterious effect on small
entities." the proposal could have such
an effect upon thousands of rural cable
companies which would lose
"independent national or regional
microwave or satellite delivered
television programming."
3. On June 2.1987. the Tribune
Broadcasting Company ("Tribune")
submitted its Motion urging that both
proceedings are complex and require a
complete and thorough record. Although
it has diligently begun to gather
extensive ratings and other information
for its submission, the breadth and
complexities of the issues involved have
rendered it impossible for Tribune to
complete the necessary data collection
and analysis by the prescribed comment
date of June 22.1987. Grant of a 45-day
extension of time in both proceedings.
Tribune states, will enable it and other
interested parties to complete their
gathering and analysis of data and to
refine their positions on the difficult
legal and policy issues raised in the
proceedings. Further, Tribune adds, the •
National Association of Broadcasters.
the Association of Independent
Television Stations, and the National
Cable Television Association have
authorized Tribune to state that "they
will interpose no objection to the grant
of the instant request"
4. On June 4.1987. United Video. Inc.
("United") requested a 90-day extension
for filing comments in both proceedings
and further requested that Gen. Docket
87-24 be designated solely as a Notice
of Inquiry. United States that it is a
common carrier which distributes
"superstations" (principally WGN-TV)
to cable television systems throughout
the country and needs more time to
ascertain whether syndicated
exclusivity rules would render cable
systems carriage of superstations
"technically and economically
infeasible", adding that "[s]uch a result
would moot the compulsory license
inquiry and terminate the basis for
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 134 / Tuesday. July 14. 1987 / Proposed Rules
2C357
by the eligible veteran, or on a housing
uni: being or to be constructed or
remodeled for the eligible veteran, and
such initial amount o: ir^u;cnce may be
diijusted upward, si'./iec! to U.e
maximum insurance a\ silsble to the
eligible veteran, or dow.-.ward.
depending upon.'J.e amoun. of the
mortgage loans outstanding or. the date
of full disbursement of trt grant, or on
the date of final setllemer.1 of the
purchase, construction, or remodeling
egreement. whichever ap.'e IK the later
date.
(4) Where an eligible veteran ceases
to own the housing unit purchased or
adapted in part with a grant or
subsequently acquired housing unit
which was subject to a mortgage loan
that resulted in his or her life being
insured under Veterans Mortgage Life
Insurance, and becomes obligated under
a mortgage loan on another housing unit
occupied or to be occupied by the
eligible veteran, the amount of the
unpaid principal outstanding on the
mortgage loan on the newly acquired
housing unit on tht date insurance
hereunder is placed in effect.
(5} Where an eligible veteran incures
or refinances a mortgage loan, subject to
the provisions of paragraph (a) of this
section, the amount cf the incurred or
refinanced mortgage loan.
(6) Where the title to a housing unit is
or will be vested in an eligible veteran
and his or her spouse, the amount of
insurance shall not exceed the principal
amount of the outstanding mortgage
loans. If title to an undivided interest in
a housing unit is or will be vested in a
person other than the spouse of an
eligible veteran, the amount of Veterans
Mortgage Life Insurance or his or her We
shall be computed to be such part of the
total of the unpaid principal of the loan
outstanding on the housing unit as is
proportionate to the undivided interest
of the veteran in the entire property.
(7) All claims, arising out of the deaths
of insured veterans occurring prior to
October 1.1976. shall be subject to the
$30.000 lifetime maximum amount of
insurance then in effect
(8) All claims, arising out of the deaths
of insured veterans occuring prior to
(date of final publication), shall be
subject to the provisions of paragraph
(a) of this section then in effect which
limited the amount of Veterans
Mortgage Life Insurance coverage to a
lifetime maximum per eligible veteran.
(c) Any eligible veteran who prior to
October 1. VJ76. was covered by $30.000
Veterans Mortgage Life Insurance and
who on that date became eligible to
have his or her coverage increased may
elect to retain the lesser amount of
coverage lie o- she had in effect prior to
that date.
(38 U.S.C. r.o.
2. In C ivj 4 paragraphs (b) and the
first seme:i~e of par&grapii (cl) are
revised (c read et fol'ows:
§ 8a.4 Coverage.
• • • • •
(b] The Emeum of Veterans Mortgage
Life Insurance in force on his or her life
at any one tinie shall be reduced
simultaneously (l) with the reduction in.
the principal of the mortgage loan,
whether or not the mortgage loan is
amortized. and (2) in addition, if the
mortgage loan is amortized, according to
the schedule for the reduction of the
principal of the mortgage loan whether
or not the schedule payments are timely
made. (38 U.S.C. 210. 606)
• • • • •
(d) Subject to the $40,000 maximum
amount of insurance, and to the reduced
maximum amount of insurance available
to the eligible veteran, he or she is
entitled to be insured under Veterans
Mortgage Life Insurance or to apply for
such insurance as often as he' or she
become obligated under a mortgage loan
or a refinanced mortgage loan on a
housing unit or a' successor housing unit
owned and occupied by the eligible
veteran. * * *
(38 U.S.C. 210. BOS]
[FR Doc. 87-15900 Filed 7-13-87: B.-4S am]
BILLING CODE «32(M>1-U
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 370
[FRL-3230-6]
Hazardous Chemical Reporting;
Emergency Planning and Community
RighMo-Know Programs; Public
Meeting and Reopening of Comment
Period
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of public
meeting and reopening of comment
period.
SUMMARY: Sections 311 and 312 of the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorizetion Act of 1988 (SARA)
establish local and State reporting
requirements for facilities required to
prepare or have available a material
safety data sheet (MSDS) under the
Occupational Safety and Health Act
(OSHA). EPA will hold a public meeting
to discuss several issues raised during
the initial n:le»nakin£ for sectionr 3V.
and 312 and has reopened th" n.-n-Dfrst
period en those issues.
DATES: Written comir-ents shonV1 L.-
suhrr.iiied OP. or before August 10 1SCT.
"iiii meeti.'g will be held on Mo'.:i.-y.
July 27.19S7. from 9:00 a.m. tc <.'^i L'-.I.
ADDRESSES: Written comments or. :ne
issue? discussed in today's notice
shouid be submitted in triplicate on or
before August 10.1967. to Preparedness
Staff. Superfund Docket Clerk.
Attention: Docket Number 300 PQ-1F,
Superfund Docket Room. Lower Garage,
U.S. Environmental Protection AReicy.
401 M Street SW.. Washington DC
20460.
The meeting will be held in the EPA
Auditorium. 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathleen Brody or Chemical Emergency
Preparedness Program Hotline. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. WH-
562A. 401 M Street SW.. Washington.
DC 20460. Telephone: (800) 535-0202,
202-479-2449 (Washington, DC end
Alaska).
SUPPLEMEKTARY INFORMATION: On
January 27.1987, EPA published a
proposed rule setting out a fonr. for
inventory reporting and regulations to
implement sections 311 and 312 of Til1'
III of the Superfund Amendments
-------
7:6358
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 134 / Tuesday. July 14. 1987 / Proposed Rules
remaining hazardous chemicals would
be reported.
A large number of commenters
.addressed the issues of the appropriate
••length of the phase-in and the
appropriate threshold quantities for
each year. Most comments favored the
phase-in approach, with more
commenters suggesting alternative
- quantities or lengths of time. The phase-
in and reporting thresholds will allow
time for planning and development of
information management systems and
will alleviate the administrative burden
on government and industry.
In the final rule. EPA is considering
establishing a threshold for the second
year of 10.000 Ibs. instead of 500 pounds
and a permanent threshold of 500
pounds beginning in the third year.
In the proposed rule. EPA exempted
the list of extremely hazardous
substances from the threshold, requiring
submission of MSDS or inventory
information for any amount of these
substances. EPA is now considering
establishing a one-pound reporting
threshold for such substances.
The changes being considered would
not eliminate the provision for public
access to information below the
threshold through requests to the local
emergency planning committee or State
commission, as appropriate.
EPA requests comment on any of
these issues. It should be noted that
hese Section 311 and 312 requirements
under Title III would be applicable, not
only to manufacturing and other sectors
currently covered under OSHA's Hazard
Communication Standard, but also to
non-manufacturing facilities which may
be required to prepare or have available
an MSDS under the forthcoming
expansion of the OSHA Hazard
Communication Standard. Hence, EPA
is interested in comments from the non-
manufacturing sectors on these
threshold provisions.
Modification of Hazard Categories
Under section 311. a facility may meet
reporting requirements by submitting an
MSDS for each hazardous chemical or a
list of all such chemicals grouped in
hazard categories as defined by the
Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1370 and regulations promulgated under
that Act [OSHA). Under section
31!{:!(b) of SARA, the Administrator
may modify the categories of health and
physical hazards as set forth unner
CS'KA by requiring information 'u be
reported in terms of groups of hazardous
chemicals that present similar hazards
n an emergency. Under section 312. Tier
1 information is also submitted by
ho-iiird category. EPA's proposed rule
Jid not modify use of the OSHA lia/.ard
classification, a scheme of 23 categories.
but solicited comments on alternative
classification systems.
Based on the numerous comments
requesting modification of the categories
in the proposed rule. EPA is considering
consolidation of the 23 OSHA hazard
categories into five categories defined
below:
(1) "Immediate (acute) health hazard"
including highly toxic, corrosive, toxic,
irritant, sensitizer. and other hazardous
chemicals which cause an adverse effect
to a target organ (as defined by
1910.1200 of Title 29 of the Code of
Federal Regulations) which manifests
itself within a short period of time
following a one-time, high exposure to
the substance.
(2) "Delayed (chronic) health hazard"
including carcinogens and other
hazardous chemicals which cause an
adverse effect to a target organ (as
defined by 1910.12CO of Title 29 of the
Code of Federal Regulations) which
manifests itself after a long period of
time following or during repeated
contacts with the substance.
(3) "Fire hazard" including flammable,
combustible pyrophoric. and oxidizer as
defined under 1910.1200 of Title 29 of the
Code of Federal Regulations:
(4) "Sudden release of pressure
hazard" including explosive and
compressed gas as defined under
1910.1200 of Title 29 of the Code of
Federal Regulations: and
(5) "Reactive hazard" including
unstable reactive, organic peroxide, and
water reactive 03 defined under
1910.1200 of Title 29 of the Code of
Federal Regulations.
EPA requests comment on this
reclassification.
Household Product Exemption
Section 311 (e) exempts from the
definition of "hazardous chemical" any
substance to the extent it is used for
personal, family, or household purposes.
or is present in the same form and
concentration as a product packaged for
distribution and use by the general
public. Because the public is generally
familiar with such substances, their
hazards, and their likely locations, the
disclosure of such substances is
unnecessary for nght-to-know purposes.
. EPA received numerous requests for
clarification of this exemption. Although
the clearest examoie of KS application is
ordinary household products stored in a
home or located on a retailer's shelf,
EPA believes 'hat this exemption may
also apply to such products prior to
distribution to the consumer when
packaged in a iimiiar .-nmner and
present in the the =>Kme concentration as
a consumer product whether or not they
are used for the same purpose as the
consumer product. Thus, the term
"form" would refer to the packaging
rather than any physical characteristic
of the product. EPA solicits comments
on this approach to defining the scope of
this exemption.
If you are planning to participate in
the meeting or present oral comments,
please contact the Chemical Emergency
Preparedness Hotline at the telephone
number listed under "For Further
Information." Time slots of
approximately 10 minutes for each
presentation will be allocated on a First
come, first served basis.
J.W. McGraw,
Acting Assistant Administrator. Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
[FR Doc. 87-15674 Filed 7-15-87: 8:45 am)
BtLUNQ COM BMO-60-M
Federal Communications Commission
47CFRPart73
[MM Docket No. 87-233, RM-5841]
Radio Broadcasting Services;
Melbourne and Jupiter, FL
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: This document requests
comments on a petition for rule making
filed by Silicon East Communications
Corporation, licensee of Station
WVTIiFM). Melbourne, Florida, which
seeks to substitute Channel 296C2 for
Channel 296A at Melbourne, and to
modify its Class A license, accordingly.
To provide for channel 296A at
Melbourne, petitioner has also
requested that Channel 258A be
substituted for Channel 298A at Jupiter,
Florida, and the license for Station
WKSY(FM) modified to specify the new
Class A channel. -
DATES: Comments must be filed on or
before August 24,1987. and reply
comments on or before September 8,
1987.
ADDRESS: Fedsal Communications
Commission. Washington. DC 20554. In
addition to filirg comments with the
FCC, interested parties should serve the
petitioner, or :t3 counsel or consultant.
as follows. Michael J. Wilhelm. Vemer.
Liipfert. Itpmhard. McPherson and
Hand. Chdctared. 1660 L Street NW..
Washington. DC 20038 (Attorney for
petitioner).
FOR ?UftTV«a '^FORMATION CONTACT:
Montrosd H. Tyrf e. Mass Media Bureau.
(202) 334-35.10.
sup^-iMSNTA^y INFORMATION: This is a
summary of ;h° Commission's Notice of
-------
27226
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 138 / Monday. July 20. 1987 / Proposed Rules
nt and Certification ./ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Economic' Ai
These proposed regulations are
considered to be non-major under
Executive Order 12291 on Federal
Regulation and non-significant under the
Department of Transportation regulatory
policies and procedures (44 FR 11034;
February 26. 1979).
The economic impact of this proposal
is expected to be so minimal that a full
regulatory evaluation is unnecessary.
We conclude this because the
regulations exempt tugs with tows.
Since the economic impact of this
proposal is expected to be minimal, the
Coast Guard certifies that, if adopted, it
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
Proposed Regulations
In consideration of the foregoing , the
Coast Guard proposes to amend Part 117
of Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations,
as follows:
PART 117— DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 117
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499: 49 CFR 1.46: 33
2. Section 117.911(d) is revised as
follows:
B) Waterway!
§117.911 Atlantic Intrae
UWe River to Savannah River.
(d) SR171/700 bridge across Wappoo
Creek, mile 470.8 at Charleston. The
draw shall open on signal; except that
the bridge need not open from 6:30 a jn.
to 9 a.m. and from 4 p.m. to 6:30 pjn.,
Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. From April 1 to November 30,
from 9 a jn. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except federal holidays, the
bridge need not open except on the hour
and half-hour. From April 1 to
November 30. from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m..
Saturdays. Sundays and federal
holidays, the bridge need not open
except on the hour and half-hour.
• • • • •
Dated: July 2.1987.
M.J. O'Brien.
Captain. US. Coast Guard. Commander*
Seventh Coast Guard District Acting.
(FR Doc. 87-16405 Filed 7-17-67:8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4»10-M-M
40 CFR Part 372
[OPTS-400006; FRL-3213-7]
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting;
Community Rlght-To-Know
AGENCV> Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is granting a petition by
proposing to delete the substance butyl
benzyl phthalate from the list of toxic
chemicals under section 313 of Title III
of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986. EPA
proposes to amend the proposed rule
codifying the list of chemicals published
on June 4.1987 (52 FR 21152). Section
313(e) allows any person to petition the
Agency to modify the list of toxic
chemicals for which toxic chemical
release reporting is required.
Comments: Written comments should
be submitted on or before October 19,
1987.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be submitted in triplicate to: Section 313
Petition Coordinator. CTS Docket Clerk,
OTS Reading Room NE-G004,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Stop TS-793,401 M St.. SW.,
Washington. DC 20460. Attention:
Docket Control Number OPTS-400007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edward A. Klein, Director, TSCA
Assistance Office (TS-799). Office of
Toxic Substances. Environmental
Protection Agency. Rm. E-542,401 M St.,
SW., Washington. DC 20460, (202) 554-
1411.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
The response to the petition and
proposed deletion are issued under
section 3l3(e)(l) of Title ni of the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-
499. "SARA" or "the Act"). Title III of
SARA is also referred to as the
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act of 1986.
B. Background
Title ni of SARA is intended to
encourage and support emergency
planning efforts at the State and local
level and to provide the public and local
governments with information
concerning potential chemical hazards
present in their communities.
Section 313 of Title III requires owners
and operators of certain facilities that
manufacture, process, or otherwise use a
listed toxic chemical to report annually
their releases of such chemicals to the
environment. Only facilities that have
manufacturing operations (in Standard
Industrial Classification Codes 20
through 39) and have 10 or more
employees must report. Such reports are
to be sent to both EPA and the State in
which the facility is located. The basic
purpose of this provision is to make
available to the public information
about total annual releases of toxic
chemicals from industrial facilities in
their community. In particular. EPA is
required to develop a computer data
base containing this toxic chemical
release information and to make it
accessible by telecommunications on a
cost reimbursible basis.
For reporting purposes, section 313
establishes an initial list of "toxic
chemicals" that is composed of 329
entries, 20 of which are categories of
chenicals. This list is a combination of
lists of chemicals used by the States of
Maryland and New Jersey for emissions
reporting under their individual right-to-
know laws. Section 313(d] authorizes
EPA to modify by rulemaking the list of
chemicals covered either as a result of
EPA's self-initiated review or in
response to petitions under section
313(e).
Section 313(e)(l) provides that any
person may petition the Agency to add
chemicals to or delete chemicals from
the list of "toxic chemicals." EPA issued
a statement of policy and guidance in
the Federal Register of February 4.1987
(52 FR 3479). This statement provided
guidance to potential petitioners
regarding the recommended contents
and format for submitting petitions. The
Agency must respond to petitions within
180 days either by initiating a
rulemaking or by publishing an
explanation of why the petition is
denied. If EPA fails to respond within
180 days, it is subject to citizen suits. In
the event of a petition from a State
governor to add a chemical under
section 313(e)(2), if EPA fails to act
within 180 days. EPA must issue a final
rule adding the chemical to the list.
Therefore. EPA is under specific
constraints to evaluate petitions and to
issue a timely response.
State governors may petition the
Agency to add chemicals on the basis of
any one of the three toxicity criteria
Hsted in section 313(d) (acute human
health effects, chronic human health
effects, or environmental toxicity). Other
persons may petition to add chemicals
only on the basis of acute or chronic
human health effects. EPA may delete
substances only if they fail to meet an,
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 138 / Monday. July 20. 1987 / Proposed Rules
27227
of the criteria contained in section
313(d).
Chemicals are evaluated for inclusion
on the list based on the criteria in
section 313(d) and using generally
accepted scientific principles or the
results of properly conducted laboratory
tests, or appropriately designed and
conducted epidemic-logical or other
population studies, that are available to
EPA.
II. Description of Petition
The Monsanto Company has
petitioned the Agency to delete butyl
benzyl phthalate (BBP). CAS No. 85-68-
7, from the list of toxic chemicals. The
Agency received the petition on January
12.1987. and under the statutory
deadline must respond by July 10,1987.
Monsanto submitted extensive
documentation to support its claim that
BBP fails to meet any of the statutory
criteria in section 313(d).
III. EPA's Review of Butyl Benzyl
Phthalate
A. Chemistry Profile
Monsanto submitted documentation
of the physical/chemical properties of
BBP. The Agency was able to verify
certain of these properties, including
vapor pressure and solubility (Ref. 3).
B. Toxicity Evaluation
There is a considerable amount of
data available concerning the health
and environmental effects of butyl
benzyl phthalate. EPA reviewed data on
the following effects that may be
associated with this chemical: Acute
toxicity. carcinogeniciry, mutagenicity
(i.e.. heritable gene and chromosome
mutations), developmental toxicity.
reproductive toxicity. neurotoxrciry,
other chronic health effects (including
hepa to toxicity), and acute and chronic
ecotoxicity. These data consist of
documents provided by Monsanto.
documents obtained from the National
Toxicology Program (NTP) of the
National Institutes of Hearth and other
Government agencies, and articles
retrieved from a search of recent
available literature (over the last 10
years). A more comprehensive
discussion of the various toxicities and
supporting documentation can be found
in the document titled "Hazard
Assessment of n-Butyl Benzyl
Phthalate" in tfae public docket (Ref. 7).
1. Acute toxicity (human health). BBP
has very low acute toxicity. as shown by
rat oral and rabbit dermal acute toxicity
values, and is practically nonirritating to
rabbit eyes and skin.
2. CorcinogenJdty. An NTP bioassay
was conducted in female rats and in
mice of both sexes. Female rats bad
increased incidences of leukemia at the
high dose only (low-dose females and
untreated controls had the same
incidence of leukemia), and male and
female mice showed no carcinogenic
response. The Agency agrees with the
conclusion reached by the International
Agency for Research on Cancer that
these results, taken together, are
equivocal evidence of carcinogenicity.
The Carcinogen Assessment Group has
preliminarily placed BBP in EPA's
weight-of-evidence category D (i.e.,
available evidence inadequate to
determine human carcinogenic
potential). EPA further concludes that.
for purposes of section 313. the available
evidence does not indicate that BBP
causes or can reasonably be anticipated
to cause cancer in humans.
3. Mutagenicity. BBP was negative in
a variety of genotoxicity tests available
for review. The available evidence is
insufficient to establish that BBP causes
or can reasonably be anticipated to
cause heritable genetic mutations in
humans.
4. Developmental/reproductive
toxicity. The only data on
developmental toxicity available to EPA
is a Monsanto-sponsored teratology
study of BBP by Industrial Bio-Test
Laboratories. Inc. (Ref. 7]. At the dose
levels used (0,3. and 10 mg/kg/day). no
signs of maternal or developmental
toxicity were seen, which indicates that
the dose levels used were too low.
However, given the reputation of
Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories and the
suspicion with which their data are
regarded, it can be concluded that
essentially there are no data to assess or
predict the potential developmental
toxicity of BBP at this time.
Although BBP has been shown to
cause adverse effects on testicnlar
tissue as well as other organs of the
male reproductive system, these effects
are only seen at very high doses (>1 g/
kg/day) and are not seen at lower
levels.
5. Neuntoxicity. Available data
indicate that BBP is no* significantly
neurotoxic in animals in that the effects
seen were not severe or irreversible.
B. Other chronic health effects. Effects
on the liver and other organs, if elicited
at att. seem to occur only at very high
doses (> 1 g/kg/day). Blood-related
effects noted in two studies are viewed
as biologically insignificant.
7. Eoatoxiaty. Baaed on the
information discussed below. EPA has
concluded that BBP is moderately b«t
not highly ecotoxx.
All aquatic acate toxicity values were
> 100 ppb (in fact. 4 ovt of ft fish species
were >1 ppn): all mammalian acute
LDaoS were >5 mg/kg: alt aquatic
chronic toxicity Maximum Acceptable
Toxicant Concentrations (MATCs) were
>10 ppb (in fact. 3 out of 5 algae species
were >100 ppb): and all mammalian
chronic MATCs were >2 mg/kg food.
The toxicity of BBP is expected to be
lower for fish ingesting sediments
containing BBP than for organisms
exposed to BBP in the water column.
because the fish will metabolize BBP by
hydrolyzing it to a less toxic form.
There is low concern for potential
bioconcentration because
bioconcentration factors for aquatic
organisms are all below 1.000. This
value is an approximate demarcation
between a low concern level and the
beginning of a range of values of
moderate concern for bioconcentration.
The half-life for primary
biodegradation (deesterification) of BBP
(a diester) is approximately 2 days,
which indicates that the substance
should have low persistence in the
environment
C. Use, Release, and Exposure Analysis
Because the Act provides EPA with
broad discretion to deny section 313
petitions, the Agency has undertaken to
confirm Monsanto's documentation of
the production, use, release, and
environmental exposure scenarios for
BBP(Refs.l.4.and5).
1. Production. The Agency has
confirmed that Monsanto is the sole U.S.
manufacturer of BBP. The chemical is
produced exclusively at a plant in
Bridgeport N]. EPA's estimate of the
1988 U.S. production volume for BBP is
64 to 65 million pounds, which
represents an average growth per year
of 1.5 percent from 1984. Annual imports
of BBP. primarily from Western Europe.
are believed to be approximately 1
million pounds.
EPA's market analysis indicates that
more than half of all BBP (perhaps as
much as 90 percent, according to
Monsanto) is used as a plasticizer in
resilient vinyl flooring. Other major
applications for BBP are as a plasticizer
in polyvinyl acetate foams and adhesive
emulsions, as an inert pesticide
ingredient and in a variety of coatings.
2. Release. The releases of BBP to air
and land from the mannfactnring facility
are quite low based on data supplied by
Monsanto. The aqueous effluent levels
from the plant have also been found to
be low. with values of <5 ppb. 1.9 ppb.
and 1£ ppb recorded as a result of EPA
and/or Monsanto monitoring daring the
three years 1977 to 1979. Monitoring by
EPA and Monsanto hi 1984 found all
effluent levels to be below detection
limits that ranged from 10 to SO ppb.
-------
27228
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 138 / Monday. July 20. 1987 / Proposed Rules
While sufficiently specific and
quantitative data were not available on
processing and use operations to permit
a clear and comprehensive release
estimate, EPA's limited analysis
indicates that it is possible that cleanup
operations during processing and after
snipping of water-based products, as
well as migration of the plasticizer from
discarded articles, may contribute to the
very low levels of BBP found in the
environment. Certain sources of release,
such as migration of BBP from end-use
articles, would not be reportable under
section 313. In monitoring studies of
effluents from the plastics molding and
forming industry (which would be
covered by this requirement), BBP was
sought, but not detected (Ref. 2). For this
reason, the chemical is not regulated
under EPA's Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and Standards for this
industry.
3. Exposure. While unable to estimate
the potential releases of BBP from
processing and use, EPA was able to
quantify the levels at which BBP is
present in the environment. When BBP
is detected in surface waters, it is
usually found at concentrations of less
than 1 ppb to 10 ppb. Additionally, when
BBP is found in surface waters, sediment
concentrations are about 50-fold higher
than surface water concentrations.
These conclusions are based on
monitoring data from the STORET
database maintained by EPA on the
levels of environmental pollutants in
aquatic systems. Monsanto cited less
extensive environmental monitoring
studies in their petition (Ref. 6) which
indicated geometric mean BBP
concentrations of <0.5 ppb in surface
water and <200 ppb in sediment The
petitioner also stated that BBP has been
found in small sample of fish (3 of 62
samples), but indicated that
contamination through handling might
have led to erroneous results.
Monsanto's own sampling of the
Delaware River found BBP
concentrations of less than 1 ppb.
In a study using 1983 data from the 10
EPA Regional Offices, BBP was found at
47 out of 358 sites (13.1 percent) covered
by the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). These sites are a
statistically representative subset of
National Priority List (NPL) and
CERCLA sites.
D. Summary of Technical Review
The hazard evaluation shows that
human health effects from BBP are not
expected to be significant for purposes
of section 313. BBP does have moderate
aquatic toxicity, with acute and chronic
effects values generally greater than 1
ppm and 100 ppb, respectively.
However, the very low monitored
concentrations of BBP in the aquatic
environment (typically not more than 1-
10 ppb), coupled with the low concern
for persistence and bioconcentration.
indicate that BBP's moderate toxicity
does not represent a significantly high
level of risk for the purposes of section
313.
IV. Butyl Benzyl Phthalate's
Relationship to Other Environmental
Lists
A. State Environmental Lists
BBP emissions are generally not
regulated at the state level. The Agency
is aware of one regulation by the State
of New York to limit air emissions of
BBP. Furthermore. Monsanto has had
petitions to remove BBP granted by
three State community right-to-know
programs: California, Illinois, and New
Jersey. The inclusion of BBP initially on
many states' lists resulted from BBP's
inclusion on the section 307(a) list under
the Clean Water Act (also known as the
water priority pollutant list).
B. EPA Environmental Lists
BBP was included on the initial
section 307(a) list under-the Clean
Water Act. Monsanto has petitioned the
Agency twice (in 1980 and in 1988) to
remove BBP from the section 307(a) list
The Agency denied the 1980 petition; the
decision regarding the 1988 petition is
still pending.
Although the Agency believes that its
review of the available data on BBP
justifies a decision not to impose a
continuing reporting obligation on
manufacturers, processors and users
pursuant to SARA section 313, the
Agency also believes that listing under
section 307(a) may continue to be
appropriate. The SARA section 313 list
contains a broad range of chemicals
which may cause human health and/or
environmental effects from a variety of
pathways. SARA directs the Agency
that substances listed solely for
environmental toxicity should be
restricted to 25 percent of the total list
The section 307 list is more narrow.
focussing entirely on substances which
pose a risk to human health or the
environment by exposure from water.
The legislative history of the Clean
Water Act of 1977 directs the Agency
that "no pollutant listed in Committee
Print Numbered 95-30 should be deleted
without a clear finding that delisting will
not compronise adequate control over
the discharge of toxic pollutants" (Cong.
Rec. Daily ed. S. 19649). Particularly
where BBP continues to be present in
sarface waters, sediments and fish, the
Agency believes that continued section
307 listing may be appropriate. However
the Agency has not made a final
decision on the section 307(a) petition.
The Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). considers BBP a
hazardous substance for purposes of
requirements for reporting all releases
over 100 pounds to the National
Response Center. (See CERCLA section
103).
V. Explanation for Proposed Action To
Delete
A. General Policy
EPA has broad discretion in
determining whether to grant or deny
petitions from the general public under
section 313. When granting petitions, the
Agency has a clear obligation to show
how the granting of the petition fulfills
the statutory criteria the Agency is to
use in section 313(d) when modifying the
list of toxic chemicals. However, in the
Joint Conference Committee Report, the
conferees made clear that EPA may
conduct risk assessments or site-specific
analyses in making listing
determinations under section 313(d). In
cases of petitions to dehst substances,
EPA believes that such analyses are
important factors in determining
whether removal of a substance from
the list would serve the public's right to
know. These analyses might show that
while the toxicity of the substance is not
of high concern, exposures to humans
and the environment are significant
enough to warrant maintaining the
substance on the list.
B. Reasons for Proposing Deletion
EPA is granting the petition submitted
by the Monsanto Company by proposing
to delete butyl benzyl phthalate from the
list of toxic chemicals subject to toxic
chemical release reporting.
The decision to grant the petition and
to propose rulemaking to modify the list
is based on the toxicity evaluation and
confirmed by the Agency's review of
other factors including ambient
exposure levels. The Agency believes:
(1) That there is insufficient evidence to
establish that BBP causes significant
adverse effects to humans, and (2) that
BBP, while moderately toxic in the
environment, is not of sufficient concern
in the environment to warrant listing
under section 313.
Although EPA believes BBP is
aquatically toxic, based on available
monitoring data, the ambient
concentrations are not expected'to
exceed Maximum Acceptable Toxicant
Concentration (MATC) levels for
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 138 / Monday. July 20. 1987 / Proposed Rules
27229
chronic aquatic toxicity. The
appearance of BBP even at these low
levels is inexplicable because the
available monitoring data at the sole
manufacturing site and at plastic
forming facilities have shown extremely
low releases of BBP. However, our data
on processing facilities is limited.
Based on our data, the Agency does
not anticipate that facilities reporting
under section 313 will provide
significant information on releases of
BBP. However, because of the presence
of the chemical in the environment, and
the uncertainty surrounding processors'
releases, the Agency believes that it
would be prudent to review the first-
year reports from facilities that
manufacture, import, process, or use
BBP in order to confirm that there are no
substantial releases of BBP from
covered facilities. The Agency plans to
promulgate the deletion of BBP only
after the 1987 reports have been
reviewed by the Agency.
VI. Rulemaking Record
The record supporting this proposed
rule is contained in docket control
number OPTS-400008. All documents.
including an index of the docket, are
available to the public in the OTS
Reading Room from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The OTS Reading Room is
located at EPA Headquarters. Room
NE-G004,401 M St.. SW.. Washington.
DC 20460.
VII. Request for Public Comment
The Agency requests comment on all
the analyses conducted for this review,
and on the Agency's proposal to delete
butyl benzyl phthalate from the list of
toxic chemicals. EPA also requests that
any pertinent data on BBP be submitted
to the address at the front of this notice.
VIII. References
(1) Delpire. L. SARA Title III Section 313:
Petition on Butyl Benzyl Phthalatge—
Exposure Assessment. USEPA. 1987.
(2) Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Development Document for Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards for
Plastics Forming and Molding Point Sources
Category EPA 440/1-84/069.1984.
(3) Israel. R Title III. Section 313: Petition
lo Delist Butyl Benzyl Phthalate—Chemistry
Report. USEPA. 1987.
(4) Kumar. V. Butyl-Benzyl Phthalate
Environmental Release Analysis. USEPA.
1987
(5) Long. | W. Economic Report on
Production. Uses. Substitutes and Cost
Analysis—Benyzl Butyl Phthalate (BBP).
USEPA. 1987.
(6) Monsanto Company. Petition for
Deletion of Butyl Benzl Phthalate from the
List of Toxic Chemical Subject to
Requirements of Section 313 of Title III.
January 12.1987.
(7) Randecker. UM. Hazard Assessment of
n-Butyl Benzyl Phthalate. USEPA. 1987.
IX. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
This proposed rule would decrease
the impact of the section 313 reporting
requirements on covered facilities and
result in a moderate cost-savings to both
industry and EPA. Therefore, under
Executive Order 12291, this is a minor
regulation.
This proposed rule was submitted to
the Office of Management and Budget
under Executive Order 12291. Monsanto
is the only U.S. producer of BBP.
Estimates of the number of processors/
users that will be required to report
range from 41 to 999 facilities. The
estimated cost savings for industry
range from $65 thousand to $1.5 million,
while the savings for EPA are estimated
to be $5 thousand to $120 thousand.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
of 1980 the Agency must conduct a small
business analysis to determine whether
a substantial number of small entities
will be significantly affected. Because
the proposed rule results in cost savings
to facilities, the Agency certifies that
small entities will not be significantly
impacted by this rule.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
OMB has reviewed the information
collection requirements contained in this
proposed rule under the provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Submit comments on
these requirements to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs;
OMB; 726 Jackson Place. NW..
Washington. DC 20503, marked
"Attention: Desk Officer tor EPA."
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372
Environmental protection. Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements. Toxic
chemicals.
Dated: July 10.1987.
Lee M. Thomas,
Administrator.
Therefore, it is proposed that
proposed Part 372 of Chapter I of 40 CFR
be amended as follows:
PART 372—(AMENDED]
1. The authority citation would
continue to read as follows:
Authority: Pub. L 99-499.
§372.45 [Amended]
2. Proposed i 372.45 (a) and (b) are
amended by removing the entire entry
for butyl benzyl phthalate under
paragraph (a) and removing the entire
CAS No. entry for 85-68-7 under
paragraph (b).
[FR Doc. 87-18322 Filed 7-17-87. 8.45 am]
BILLING CODE 6MO-50-M
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Threatened Status for
Clrsium pitched
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service.
Interior.
ACTION; Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The Service proposes to
determine a plant, Cirsium pitcher!
(Pitcher's thistle), to be a threatened
species under the authority contained in
the Endangered Species Act of 1973. as
amended (Act). The species occurs on
the shores of the Great Lakes in Indiana,
Michigan, and Wisconsin in the U.S..
and Ontario. Canada. Development,
loss, and disturbance of dunelands by
the public are the principal threats to the
species. This proposed rule, if made
final, will extend the Act's protection to
Cirsium pitcheri. Critical habitat is not
proposed for this plant. The Service
seeks data and comments from the
public on this proposed rule.
DATES: Comments from all interested
parties must be received by September
18.1987. Public hearing requests must be
received by September 3,1987.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials
concerning this proposal should be sent
to the Endangered Species Division, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal
Building. Fort Snelling, Twin Cities,
Minnesota 55111. Comments and
materials received will be available for
public inspection, by appointment.
during normal business hours at the
above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James M. Engel (see ADDRESSES section)
at 612/725-3276 or FTS 725-3276.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Cirsium pitcheri (Pitcher's thistle) was
discovered by Z. Pitcher in the 1820's
and first described by Torrey as Cnicus
pitcheri (Eaton 1829); the first use of the
current binomial was by Torrey and
Gray ca. 1841. Cirsium pitcheri. a
member of the composite or sunflower
family. Asteraceae. possesses dense
white-wooly and deeply divided leaves
-------
Wednesday
July 22, 1987
Part III
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 300
National Priorities List for Uncontrolled
Hazardous Waste Sites; Final Rule and
Proposed Rule Concerning Federal
FacHlty Sttes
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
(FRL-3187-6)
National Priorities List for
Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA") is amending the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Contingency Plan ("NCP"). which was
promulgated on July 16.1982. pursuant
to section 105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response.
Compensation, and Liability Act of I960
("CERCLA"), as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1986 (SARA).
and Executive Order 12580 (52 FR 2923.
January 29.1987). CERCLA requires that
the NCP include a list of national
priorities among the known releases or
threatened releases of hazardous
substances, pollutants, and
contaminants throughout the United
States, and that the list be revised at
least annually. The National Priorities
List ("NPL"). initially promulgated as
Appendix B of the NCP on September 8.
1983. constitutes this list and is being
revised today by the addition of 67 sites
to the final NPL and 32 Federal facility
sites to the Federal section of the NPL
EPA has reviewed public comments on
the listing of these sites and has decided
that they meet the eligibility
requirements of the NPL
EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date for
this amendment to the NCP shall be
August 21.1987. CERCLA section 305
provides for a legislative veto of
regulations promulgated under CERCLA.
Although INS v. Chadha. 462 U.S. 919.
103 S. Ct. 2764 (1983). cast the validity of
the legislative veto into question. EPA
has transmitted a copy of this regulation
to the Secretary of the Senate and the
Clerk of the House of Representatives. If
any action by Congress calls the
effective date of this regulation Into
question, the Agency will publish a
notice of clarification in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: Addresses for the
Headquarters and Regional dockets
follow. For further details on what these
dockets contain, see Section I of the
"Supplementary Information" portion of
this preamble.
Tina Maragousis. Headquarters. U.S.
EPA CERCLA Docket Office.
Waterside Mall Subbasement. 401 M
Street SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
202/382-3046
Peg Nelson. Region 1. U.S. EPA Library.
Room 1500. John F. Kennedy Federal
Bldg.. Boston. MA 02203.617/565-3308
Carole Petersen. Region 2. Site
Investigation and Compliance Branch.
26 Federal Plaza. 7th Floor. Room 737,
New York. NY 10278. 212/264-8677
Diane McCreary. Region 3. U.S. EPA
Library. 5th Floor. 841 Chestnut
Streets. Philadelphia. PA 19106.215/
597-0580
Cayle Alston. Region 4. U.S. EPA
Library. Room C-6. 345 Courtland
Street NE.. Atlanta. CA 30365.404/
347-4216
Lou Tilley. Region 5. U.S. EPA Library.
16th Floor. 230 South Dearborn Street.
Chicago. IL 60604. 312/353-2022
Barry Nash. Region 6.1445 Ross Avenue.
Mail Code 8H-ES. Dallas. TX 75202-
2733. 214/655-6740
Connie McKenzie. Region 7. U.S. EPA
Library. 726 Minnesota Avenue.
Kanasa City. KS 66101.913/236-2828
Dolores Eddy. Region 8, U.S. EPA
Library. 99918th Street. Suite 500.
Denver. CO 80202-2405. 303/293-1444
Linda Sunnen. Region 9. U.S. EPA
Library. 8th Floor. 215 Fremont Street.
San Francisco. CA 94105.415/974-
8082
David Bennett. Region 10. U.S. EPA. llth
Floor. 1200 6th Avenue. Mail Stop
HW-113. Seattle. WA 98101.206/442-
2103
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Trudi J. Fancher. Hazardous Site
Evaluation Division. Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response
(WH-648A). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460. Phone (800) 424-
9346 (or 382-0000 in the Washington.
DC metropolitan area).
SUmaHNTARV INFORMATION:
TaUeofCoaleals
1. Introduction
IL Purpose and Implementation of the NPL
III. Process for Establishing and Updating
the NPL • r— ••
IV. Eligibility
V. Disposition of All Proposed Sites/
Federal Facility Sites
VL Disposition of Sites In Today's Final
Rule
VII. Contents of the NPL
VIII. Regulatory Impact Analysis
IX Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
L Introduction
Organization of the Preamble
Section I of the preamble to this final
rule, which adds 67 sites and 32 Federal
facility sites to the National Priorities
List (NPL). provides a guide to
information in this preamble, explains
the historical background of the NPL
and provides information on the public
docket for sites included in this rule.
Sections II through IX are self-
explanatory.
Background of the NPL
Pursuant to section 105 of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980. 42 U S.C. 9601 through 9657
("CERCLA" or the "Act"), and Executive
Order 12316 (46 FR 42237. August 20.
1981). the Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA" or "Agency")
promulgated the revised National
Contingency Plan ("NCP"). 40 CFR Part
300. on July 16.1982 (47 FR 31180) and
amendments to the NCP on September
16.1985 (50 FR 37624) and November 20.
1985 (50 FR 47912). The NCP and its
amendments implement responsibilities
and authorities created by CERCLA to
respond to releases and threatened
releases of hazardous substances.
pollutants, and contaminants.
Section 105(B)(A) of CERCLA requires
that the NCP include criteria for
determining priorities among releases or
threatened releases throughout the
United States for the purpose of taking
remedial action and. to the extent
practicable, take into account the
potential urgency of such action for the
purpose of taking removal action.
Removal action involves cleanup or
other actions that are taken in response
to releases or threats of releases on a
short-term or temporary basis (CERCLA
section 101(23)). Remedial action tends
to be long-term in nature and involves
response actions which are consistent
with a permanent remedy for a release
(CERCLA section 101(24)).
Criteria for determining priorities for
possible remedial actions financed by
the Fund established under CERCLA are
'ncluded in the Hazard Ranking System
C'HRS"). which EPA promulgated as
Appendix A of the NCP (47 FR 31219.
July 16.1982).
Section 105(8)(B) of CERCLA required
that the criteria provided by the HRS be
used to prepare a list of national
priorities among the known releases or
threatened releases of hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants
throughout the United States, and that to
the extent practicable, at least 400 sites
be designated on this National Priorities
List (NPL). An onginal NPL of 406 sites
was promulgated on September 8.1983
(48 FR 40658). The NPL has been
expanded since then (see 49 FR 19480.
May 8.1984:49 FR 37070. September 21.
1984: 50 FR 6320. February 14.1985: 50
FR 37630. September 16.1985. and 51 FR
21054. June 10.1986). On March 7.1986
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Rules and" Regulations
27621
(51 FR 7935). EPA published a notice to
delete eight sites from the NPL The
Agency has also had a number of
proposed rulemakings regarding site
listing (see 48 FR 9311. March 4.1983; 48
FR 40674. September 8.1983: 49 FR
40320. October 15.1984: 50 FR 14115.
April 10.1985. 50 FR 37950. September
18.1985. 51 FR 21099. June 10.1986: and
52 FR 2492. January 22. 1987).
Section 105 of CERCLA has been
amended by the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthonzation Act of 1086 (SARA)
by the addition of subsection (c). This
subsection requires that the Agency
promulgate amendments to the hazard
ranking system in effect as of September
1.1984. The effective date for the
amended hazard ranking will be no later
than 24 months after the enactment of
SARA. The amended hazard ranking
system shall be applied to any site or
facility to be newly listed on the NPL
after the effective date for the amended
hazard ranking system. Until such
effective date of the regulations, the
hazard ranking system in effect on
September 1.1984. shall continue to be
used to evaluate sites for the NPL. In
addition, section 105(c) specifies that the
Agency will not be required to
reevaluate. after the date of enactmenf
of SARA, the hazard ranking of any site
which was evaluated in accordance
with the existing criteria required by
section 105(c) and which was assigned a
national priority under the NCP.
The Agency will continue to use the
existing MRS until the revised HRS
becomes effective. The 67 sites and 32
Federal facility sites added to the final
NPL today were ranked with the
existing HRS. These additions bring the
total number of final NPL sites to 802. In
addition. EPA has proposed to add 149
sites to the NPL. making the total
number of proposed and final NPL sites
to 951.
This final rule addresses sites
proposed m NPL Update «2 (October IS.
1984). Update »3 (April 10.1985).
Update =4 (September 18.1985). Update
«5 (June 10.1986). and Update »6
(January 22.1987). EPA has carefully
considered public comments submitted
for the sites proposed in Updates *2, #3.
and 94. and made some modifications in
this final rule in response to those
comments. For this final rule. EPA also
considered only those sites proposed as
part of Update =5 and Update «6 for
which the Agency received no
comments.
Responses to site-specific HRS
comments are presented in the "Support
Document for the Revised National
Priorities List—Final Rule *3/«4."
which is a separate document available
in the EPA dockets in Washington. DC.
and the Regional Offices (see
Addresses).
Information Available to the Public
The Headquarters and Regional public
dockets for the NPL will contain HRS
score sheets for each final site, a
Documentation Record for each site
describing the information used to
compute the scores, a list of document
references, comments received, and the
"Support Document for the Revised
National Priorities List—Final Rule »3/
«4." The Regional public docket will
also include the documents referenced
in the Documentation Record which
contain the background data EPA relied
upon in calculating or evaluating the
HRS scores. In addition, documents with
some relevance to the scoring of each
site, but which were not used as
references, are also retained by the
appropriate Regional offices. All of
these documents will be available when
this notice is published in the Federal
Register.
The Headquarters public docket is
available for viewing by appointment
only from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 pjn.. Monday
through Friday excluding holidays.
Requests for copies of HRS score
sheets, documentation records.
background documents, and the Support
Document should be directed to either
the Headquarters or appropriate
Regional docket (see Addresses). An
informal written request, rather than a
formal request, should be the ordinary
procedure for obtaining copies.
A statement of EPA's information
release policy, describing what
information the Agency discloses in
response to Freedom of Information Act
requests from the public, was pnnted in
the Federal Register (52 FR 5578.
February 25.1987);
md Implementation of the
ILPurpm
NPL
Purpose
The primary purpose of the NPL is
stated in the legislative history of
CERCLA (Report of the Committee on
Environment and Public Works. Senate
Report No. 96-648.96th Cong.. 2d. Sess.
60 (1980)):
The NPL serves primarily informational
purpose*, identifying for the States and the
public those facilities and sites or other
releases which appear to warrant remedial
actions. Inclusion of a facility or site on the
list does not in itself reflect a judgment of the
activities of its owner or operator, it does not
require those persons to undertake any
action, nor does it assign liability 10 any
person. Subsequent govemmeni action in the
form of remedial actions or enforcement
actions will be necessary in order to do so.
and these actions will be attended by dll
appropnate procedural safeguards.
The purpose of the NPL therefore, is
primarily to serve as an mformatio- "
tool for use by EPA in identifying i
that appear to present a significant
to public health or the environment. The
initial identification of a site for the NPL
is intended primarily to guide EPA in
determining which sites warrant further
investigation, to assess the nature and
extent of the public health and
environmental nsks associated with the
site, and to determine what CERCLA-
financed remedial action(s). if any. may
be appropnate. Inclusion of a site on the
NPL does not establish that EPA
necessarily will undertake response
actions. Moreover, listing does not
require any action of any private party.
not does it determine the liability of any
party for the cost of cleanup at the site.
A site need not be on the NPL to be the
subject of CERCLA-financed removal
actions, actions brought pursuant to
sections 106 or 107(a)(4)(b) of CERCLA.
or remedial investigations/feasibility
studies.
Federal facility sites are now eligible
for inclusion on the NPL pursuant to
9 300.66(e)(2) of the NCP. However.
section lll(e)(3) of CERCLA as
amended by SARA limits the
expenditure of Superfund monies at
Federally-owned facilities. Federal
facility sites are subject to the
requirements of section 120 of SAR,
Implementation
EPA's policy is to pursue cleanup of
hazardous waste sites using the
appropriate response and/or
enforcement actions which are available
to the Agency, including authorities
other than CERCLA. Publication of sites
on the NPL will serve as notice to any
potentially responsible party that the
Agency may initiate Fund-financed
response action. The Agency will decide
on a site-by-site basis whether to take
enforcement or other action under
CERCLA or other authorities, or whether
to proceed directly with Superfund-
fmanced CERCLA response actions and
seek recovery of response costs after
cleanup. To the extent feasible, once
sites are listed on the NPL. EPA will
determine high-priority candidates for
either Superfund-financed response
action or enforcement action through
both State and Federal initiatives. These
determinations will take into account
which approach is more likely to most
expeditiously accomplish cleanup of the
site while using the Super-fund's limited
resources as efficiently as possible.
Funding of response actions for site*
will not necessanly take place in the
-------
27822
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No 14U / Wednesday. )uiy 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
same order as a site's ranking on the
NPL In addition, although the HRS
scores used to place sites on the-NPL
mav be helpful to the Agency in
determining priorities for cleanup and
c:her response activities among sites on
•he NTL. FJ>A does r-.nl reK on the scores
•is the jole means of determining sucn
1 he information culi'.-cicJ ;o develop
HHS scores is not &ufricie:it in itself to
ci-in-Tine the appropriate re ned;. for a
particular site. EFA relics on further.
rrore detailed studies to determine what
resounse. if any. is appropriate These
studies will take into account the extent
und magnitude of contaminants in the
environment, the risk to affected
populations and environment, the cost
to correct problems at the site, and the
response actions that have been taken
by potentially responsible parties or
others. Decisions on the type and extent
(if action to be taken at these sites are
made in accordance with the criteria
contained in Subpart F of the NCP. After
conducting these additional studies.
EPA may conclude that it is not
desirable to conduct an Agency
response action al some sites on the
NPL because of more pressing needs at
other sites, or because an enforcement
dc.tion may instigate or force private
party cleanup. Given the limited
resources available in Siiperfund. the
Agency must carefully balance the
relative needs for response at the
numerous sites it has studied. It is also
possible that EPA will conclude after
further analysis that the site does not
warrant response action.
Revis'ons to the NPL such as today's
rulemaking may move some previously
listed sites to a lower position on the
.NPL If EPA has initiated action such as
d remedial investigation/feasibility
study (RI/FS) at a site, the Agency does
not intend to cease such actions in order
to determine if a subsequently listed site
should have a higher priority for
funding. Rather, the Agency will
continue funding site studies and
remedial actions once they have been
ir.it .ited. regardless of whether higher-
sn.rir.g sites are later added to the NPL
T'-ie NPL does not determine priorities
For removal actions: EPA may take
r> rnuval actions at any site, whether
listed or not. that meets the criteria of
5 § 300 65 through 300 67 of the NCP.
l.i'-.e.vise. EPA may take enforcement
.(lions under applicable statutes
a Sri mst responsible parf.es regardless of
whether 'he site is on the NPL although.
as a practical matter, the focus of EPA's
enforcement actions has been and will
continue to be on NPL sites.
A site cannot undergo Superfund-
fnar.ced remedial action until it is
niriced on the final NPL. However, an
RI/FS can be performed at proposed
s.tes pursuant to the Agency s removal
authority under CERCLA. as outlined in
§ 300 58(a)(1) of the NCP Section 101(23)
of CF.RCLA defines "remove" or
"removal" to include "such actions as
may be necessary to monitor, assess
and evaluate the release or threat of
release The definition of
"removal" also includes "action taken
under section 104(b) of this Act
Section 104(b) authorizes the Agency to
perform studies, investigations, and
other information-gathering activities.
The Agency may elect to conduct an
RI/FS at a proposed NPL site in
preparation for a possible Superfund-
financed remedial action in a number of
circumstances, such as when the
Agency believes that delay in
commencing the studies may create
unnecessary risks to human health or
the environment. In making such a
decision, the Agency assumes the risk
that after consideration of public
comments and the consistent
application of the MRS. it is possible
that the proposed site might not qualify
for the NPL In assuming this risk, the
Agency has determined that the
desirability of expediting remedial
action through the initiation of the
mvestigational stage prior to placing a
site on the NPL outweighs the risk of
expending a limited amount of
Superfund monies for the RI/FS. In
addition, information obtained from an
RI/FS can assist the Agency in
determining whether to conduct a
removal action at the site.
ID. Process for Establishing and
Updating the NPL
There are three mechanisms for
placing sites on the NPL The principal
mechanism is the application of the
HRS. The HRS serves as screening
device to evaluate the relative potential
of uncontrolled hazardous substances to
cause human health or safety problems.
or ecological or environmental damage.
The HRS takes into account "pathways"
to human or environmental exposure in
terms of numerical scores. Those sites
that score 28.50 or greater on the HRS.
and which are otherwise eligible, are
proposed for listing.
In addition. States may designate a
single site as the State top priority. In
ra--e instances. EPA may utilize the
listing provision promulgated as
§ 300.6fi(b)(4) of the NCP (50 FR 37024.
September 16.1S85).
Section 300 66(b}(4) of the NCP allows
certain sues with HRS scores below
:8 30 to be eligible for the NPL These
sites may qualify for the NPL if all of the
following occur:
• The Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry of the U.S.
Department of Health and Human
Services has issued a health advisory
which recommends dissociation of
individuals from the release.
• EPA determines that the release
poses a significant threat to public
health.
• EPA anticipates that it will be more
cost-effective to use its remedial
authority than to use its removal
authority to respond to the release.
States have the primary responsibility
for identifying sites, computing HRS
scores, and submitting candidates sites
to the EPA Regional Offices. EPA
Regional Offices conduct a quality
control review of the States' candidate
sites, and may assist in investigating.
sampling, monitoring, and scoring sites.
Regional Offices may consider
candidate sites in addition to those
submitted by States. EPA Headquarters
conducts further quality assurance
audits to ensure accuracy and
consistency among the various EPA and
State offices participating in the scoring
The Agency then proposes the new sites
that meet the criteria for listing and
solicits public comment on the proposal.
Based on these comments and further
review by EPA. the Agency determines
final scores and promulgates those sites
that still qualify for listing.
Contents of This Final Rule
This final rule includes 67 sites and 32
Federal facility sites from several
proposed rulemakings. Of the 67 sites
promulgated in this final rule. 5 were
proposed in Update *2.12 in Update -3.
11 in Update «4.16 in Update «5 and 23
in Update «8. The 32 Federal facility
sites promulgated in this rule are
discussed in section IV of this rule
These sites and Federal facility sites are
listed in Table 1.
BILLING CODE 65W-M-M J
-------
Table I
Cr
10
10
I
'
National Prlontltl List
Haw llnal Sllai (by Rank)
luly 1911
UPL
.
. Rank St Sit* Name Cltv/C..,.f. «"l-onse 01. jr. p
1 City/County Cat.gory? iuius,
101 IL Parson. C.ak.t nardwar. Co B.I.IJ.,. „
111 VA Creanuood Ch.mlcal Co Navtovn .
119 NY Jonsa Sanitation Hyda Park
I" " ?*"'» *«lt.tlon Sarvlca U. Kant County o
1** HI Rockwall International (Allagan) Allagaa D
170 IN Uaata. Inc . Undllll Nlchlun Cltv V r *
110 PA Butla, Nino Tunn.1 Mtt.t^l U R f 0
204 MB Uoodlavn County Undllll Uoodlavn
11* NC Charles Nacen Ugoon 4 Drum I cor Cordova R r n
"• * ? * • »""'' «• - 1- Cheatarf ,.,d County . ?
141 ON Ora*t Corp Hannibal V p §
1*4 RJ Dayco Corp /L I Carpenter Co Uhorton Borough V s 0
1JJ CA Flr.it on. Tlr. (S.I In., plant) Sellnea s o
in s jpi.kf.rSnd,:!, "—"•"- u 5^" T—h" v « D •>
lit PA Route 940 Drum Dump Pocono Summit n
111 PA C4DRacvcling Footer Tovnshlp R o
110 AZ Haasayampa Undllll Haea.ya.pa 0
161 CT Revere ToEtllo Prlnta Corp Sterling n
1/0 NH Noctolo fig Fan Raymond R F » o
111 SC Golden Strip Septic Tank Service Slapaonvlllo n
». ™ '"""•- '«*•"• Corp Peaorok. Park v F S 0
1*1 UI Algoaa Municipal Undflll A 1 gome 0
410 TH Arlington Blandlng 4 Packaging Arlington 1 w «
»1. Of NCR Corp (Hlllabtr. Plant) N.llabo™ „
4*1 PA Bally Ground Water Contamination Bally Borough V F
?.l ~ UC"n* *•"'«•«» Landfill UGrand rounstilp g
67» «T Ho-. V.ll.y Undtlll »„. „.,,., P „
Site* era placed In groupe (Cr) corresponding to groupe of JO
V - Voluntary or negotiated raaponao I - Fadaral and State reapon.a
P * Fadaral anlorcaaant g _ state •nforcom.nt
D - Category to be dataralnad
1 - Implementation activity underway, one or more oporebl* unlta
O - One or more operable unite completed, otbare may be underway
C - Implementation activity completed for all operable unlta
i.dMt.
I oont'd.
National Piloiliisa List
Nav Final Sllaa
Ihy Rank)
F.bruary nil
Cr
:o
10
II
II
II
II
11
II
II
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
1)
II
11
11
11
11
II
14
14
14
14
14
14
.-
1)
IJ
IS
It
1)
IS
Hue
I.PL
, Rank
-80
417
Ml
VM
»l»
M6
Ml
;it
»*1
»i»
»ol
i7l
106
U7
»9I
i«6
198
601
609
611
614
619
»»
6*7
6M
65»
6>f
67)
691
641
701
711
711
716
710
7»
716
711
ibar of
Si
PA
U
PA
FL
CA
CA
uE
CA
NY
i-A
Nl
Hi-.
HI
HN
NY
PA
NC
PA
KY
HI
US
HT
UI
VA
UI
NY
PA
CA
PA
UI
OK
PA
VA
IA
HN
AR
AR
SC
Site Name
Ullllam Illrk Uguons
Dutchtovn Trcitmant Plant
Aladdin Plating
Harrl. Coip (P.I. Bay Pl.nt)
Monolithic Memoriae
National Semiconductor Corp
St.nd.rd Chlorln* ol Delaware. Inc
Trladyne Semiconductor
Richardson Hill Road fcndll|,Pond
Ujsta Dlspoaal. Inc
Curclo Scrap Metal. Inr
C«p« l*.r Uood Pi.s*rvliig
Cosd«n Ch*mlcal Coatlnga Coip
Si Augusta San Lndf ll/tngen Dump
C.nt.l. P|*c|ng Co
K*ystone Sanitation Undllll
Caroline Tranetoimer Co
B.ndl. Flight Iyet»s Division
Halt* Rockat Fu*l Ar«*
K*nt city Hoblle Horns Park
Oboe Roed
Hontena Pole and Treating
Tonah Palrgrounda
Uyckoff Co /Ugla Harbor
Hagen Fern
Row* Induatrlee Ground v*t*r Cont
H*b*lk* Auto Salvag* Yard
Appll.d H*t«rlals
R.v.ra Oi.oUsI Co
Hunts Disposal Undflll
Tsnth Street Dump/Junkyard
Toman Ansory
Raeaer'e Undflll
Flrat Piedmont Quarry (Route 719)
Shaw Avenue Dump
Rltarl Poet 4 Pole
Jacksonville Municipal Undllll
Rogara Road Municipal Undllll
Palmetto Recycling. Inc
City/Count i
u*.l Tain Iwwnkliip
At on. Ion P.rlsh,
Volt r.iwiiihlp
Sunnyv* I *
Sam* il.r.
Mountain Vl»
Sldnsy C.nl.t
Saul* F* Spilnga
Saddle Brook Tup
l.yatt.vlll.
B*v.||y
St August* Township
Franklin Square
Union Township
fayattrvllle
Brldgiu.isr Township
Malta
Kant City
Hutch Inson
Buna
Toman
Balnbrldga Island
Stoughton
Noyack/Sag Halbor
U.la.nb.rg Toxiuhlp
Santa Cl.ra
NockuUon Township
Cal.dunia
Oklahoma City
Tomah
I'ppar Hai.ungla Twp
Plttsylvanla County
Ch.rl.s City
S.b.ks
Jacksanvllle
Jark.onvll |*
Columbl.
N.w Final Sltae 67
•rtpons* Cl**nup
Category, Stilus.
D
D
V S , 0
D
D
D
D
D
b
D
R 0
D
D
D
D 0
R F 0
D 0
D°
D
R 1
D
F
j
R o
R
D O
R o
O
R P 0
D
I
D
D
0
s o
I
i
93
1
£_
cn
f\)
f
g-
ra
w
Q.
CD
J
K
r*
I-S
yt
5"
OS
co
O.
«
5T
Cf.
o
3
1
-------
Table I coin'a.
NPL
01 1
?
1
7
1
i*
i«
14
t
tl
t.
t
6
1
)
i
;
V
»
10
10
1?
)?
1?
1?
11
11
11
u
Sl
CA
to
HO
TH
CA
HI
NJ
UT
CA
1L
nt
w
CA
IA
OK
UA
CA
CA
AL
NJ
HV
PA
VA
UA
1L
IW
80
OR
Federal Facility Sltea H
July IVg/
Site Hmm*
NcClnlliii AFB 1)6 Areei)
Rucky Mountain Areenal
U.I don Spring quart/ (USDOE/Any)
Hll«n Aiay Aaaunlllon Plant
Robins A»B (Lntlll at/Sludge Lag)
Cornhulker Aray Aaaunlllon Pl*ut
N«v«l Air En|lM«rln( Ctnt*r
Hill Air Foic* 6>l« (10 Ar»i(
Sacruwnio Amy Depot
S«n*up/Crab Orchtid NUR (USDOI>
BrutuHlck IUv.1 Air Sot loo
0(itan Otlmtt Dtfof
L>ur>iic« llv.i.or* Ub (USbOEi
Chop* A»y Depot
Tlnk.r «»1 iSoldUr Cr/tld( lOOIl
McChottf AF6 (U»«h a>ck/Tr«cMni )
C«||U Air Forcl SMI* (( AIMI)
Norton Air totem tmmm (Lndlll •}>
Alibu* A»y AMuiilclon Pluil
Fore Oil (Landfill Slta)
Grlfflu Air Fore* ta»(ll Ar»at)
Ultarkanny Aray Dtpol (tl Ai*«)
Dafaiu* Ctturil Supply Ctnlat
Fort Uwli (Untfflll H« i)
Jollal Atcy Aoau Plant (Hfg Ar«a|
Kin CltUl Air Forca(SAR Lndlll)
Laki City Any Plane (MV Ufoon)
Uucllla Aray D,pot (U|ooni)
m Final (by Croup)
R
Cliy/(.uunty (.
Sa«taa»nlo
Adaai County
Si Charlaa Count*
Milan
Houilon County
Hall County
Lakahurtt
0(dan
Soaraaanto
CartorrllU
InnavUk
Ogdan
Llwranra
Lathrap
OklahoM Ul»
TacoM
Narcad
San BomarJIno
Chlldaraburi
Paabarton Tonuhlp
ROM
Chaattaraburg
Chaatarf lal* Count*
Tacom*
Jollac
•Innaapolla
IndapandMM*
Haralnon |
ponfa Cleanup
agory^ Statuij
0
O
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
I tltea are placed la groupa (Gr) correapondlng co (toupa of JO
mi Uie final WL
V - Voluntary or negotiate* raepaiuo
F • Federal aniorceaanc
D - Category to bo dateralned
R - Federal and Sfato raiponae
S - State eaferceaant
I. I - lapleaanutlon activity underway, one or aore operable unit)
0 - One or aore operable unite coaplacod. othata aay bo undaraay
C - laploaeniMlea activity coaBleted for all operable unite
ToMe I opntM.
National Priorities Lilt.
Federal Facility Sltei. Neu Final (by Croup)
July HI7
"l
Ik
1)
IS
It
St Site Naaa
n lone Star any Aaaunlclon Plant
CA Noffetc Naval Air Station
UA langor Ordnance Olepoial
CA Mather AF5 (ACtU Disposal Site)
City/County
Tesarkana
Sunnyvale
•reaerton
Saeraaento
•••iponio Cleanup
latfgvry. Statue.
/ I
,
I
R
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Rules and''Regulations
27825
Update *2. proposed on October IS.
1984 (49 FR 40320). consisted of 208 sites
and 38 Federal facility sites. On
February 14.1985. two-New Jersey sites.
the Glen Ridge Radium Site and the
Montclair/West Orange Radium Site.
were added to the NPL On September
18.1985. the Pratt & Whitney Aircraft/
United Technologies Corp. Site in West
Palm Beach. Flonda. was reproposed in
Update =4. On June 10.1986 (51 FR
21054). EPA added 149 Update «2 sites
to the NPL. dropped 6 sites from
consideration because their MRS scores
were below the 28.50 cutoff, and
continued to propose 50 sites pending
resolution of technical or policy issues.
Today's rule promulgates 5 Update «2
sites. Four sites previously identified as
related to the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) were
discovered to have no RCRA
relationship and are being promulgated
because technical issues have been
resolved. One additional site is being
promulgated because all technical issues
have been resolved, leaving 45 Update
-2 sites proposed.
Update »3. proposed on April 10.1985
(50 FR 14115) consisted of 26 sites and 6
Federal facility sites. One of these sites.
the Landsdowne Radiation Site, in
Unsdowne. Pennsylvania, was added to
(he NPL on September 16.1985 (50 FR
3?630). Of the remaining 25 Update «3
.sites. 7 received no comments and were
added to the NPL on June 10.1986 (51 FR
21054). Of the 18 remaining Update *3
sites. 12 sites are being added to the
NPL in this final rule. The remaining 6
sites continue to be proposed because of
their RCRA status.
Update *4. proposed on September
18.1985 (50 FR 37950). consisted of 38
sites and 3 Federal facility sites. Of the
38 Update »4 sites. 13 sites received no
comments and were added to the NPL
on June 10.1986 (51 FR 21054). Of the
remaining 25 Update *4 sites. 11 sites
are being added to the NPL in this final
rule. One Update *4 site, the Silver
Creek Tailing Site in Park City. Utah.
Mas removed from the NPL on October
17. 1986 as required by section I18(p) of
SARA Of the 13 remaining sites. 10 sites
remain proposed because of the in
RCRA status, and 3 sites remain
proposed pending resolution of technical
issues.
Update *5. proposed on June 10.1986
(51 FR 21099), consisted of 43 sites and 2
Federal facility sites. The comment
period closed on August 11.1986. Of the
43 sites 16 sites received no comments
and are being added to the NPL as part
of this final rule. The remaining 27 sites.
plus the two Federal facility sites.
continue to be proposed pending review
of comments received.
Update «6. proposed on January 22.
1987 (52 FR 2492). consisted of 83 sites
and 1 Federal facility site. The comment
penod closed on March 23.1986. Of the
63 sites. 23 sites received no comments
and are being added to the NPL as part
of this final rule. No comments were
received for the Federal facility site, and
so it is included as well. The other 40
sites remain proposed.
All sites that remain proposed.
including Federal facility sites, will be
considered for future final rules.
Although these sites remain proposed.
the comment periods have not been
extended or reopened.
To the extent practicable. EPA
considered late comments received after
the close of the comment periods. For
this final rule. EPA considered all
comments received by June 12,1987.
Based on the comments received on the
proposed rules, as well as further
investigation by EPA and the States.
EPA recalculated the HRS scores for
individual sites where appropriate.
EPA's response to site-specific public
comments and explanations of any
score changes made as a result of such
comments are addressed in the "Support
Document for the Revised National
Priorities List—Final Rule *3/*4".
IV. Eligibility
CERCLA restricts EPA's authority to
respond to certain categories of releases
of hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants by expressly excluding
some substances, such as petroleum.
from the response program. In addition,
as a matter of policy. EPA may choose
not to use CERCLA to respond to certain
types of releases because other
authorities can be used to achieve
cleanup of these releases. For example.
EPA has chosen not to list sites that
result from contamination associated
with facilities licensed by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC). on the
grounds that the NRC has full authority
to require cleanup of releases from those
facilities (48 FR 40661. September 8.
1983). Where such other authorities
exist, and the Federal Government can
undertake or enforce cleanup pursuant
to a particular established program.
using the NPL to determine the priority
or need for response under CERCLA
may not be appropriate. Therefore. EPA
has chosen not to consider certain types
of sites for the NPL even though
CERCLA may provide authority to
respond. If. however, the Agency later
determines that sites not listed as a
matter of policy are not being property
responded to. the Agency may consider
placing them on the NPL
The NPL eligibility policies of
particular relevance to this final rule-
Federal facility sites. RCRA sites, and
mining waste sites—are discussed
below. These policies, as well as other
NPL eligibility policies, have been
explained in greater detail in earlif
rulemakings (51 FR 21054. June 10.
Releases From Federal Facility Sites
Prior to today's final rule. 48 Federal •
facility sites were proposed for the NPL
Today's final rulemaking adds 32 of
these sites to the Federal section of the
NPL leaving 18 sites proposed. Of the
32.28 sites were proposed on October
15.1984 (49 FR 40320). 2 were proposed
on Apnl 10.1985 (50 FR 14115). 1 site
was proposed on September 18.1985 (50
FR 37950). and 1 site was proposed on
January 22.1987 (52 FR 2492).
On June 10.1986. the Agency
announced final and proposed
components of a listing policy for non-
Federal. RCRA sites (51 FR 21057). The
policy was intended to reflect the
broadened corrective action authorities
of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). As
explained in greater detail below, the
policy generally allows placing sites
subject to RCRA Subtitle C corrective
action authorities on the NPL if one or
more of three criteria is met: (1) The
owner/operator is bankrupt: (2) the
owner/operator has lost authorization to
operate and has exhibited probable
unwillingness to perform corrective
action: or (3) in cases other than lot
authorization to operate, the owner/
operator has exhibited probable
unwillingness to perform corrective
action. When promulgating this policy.
the Agency reserved for a later date the
question whether this or another policy
would be applicable for Federal facility
sites. The Agency explained that this
issue would be considered along with
other issues relating to Federal facility
sites (51 FR 21059. June 10.1986).
Since that time, the Agency has
considered the issue of placing Federal
facility sites on the NPL As part of its
deliberations. EPA considered pertinent
sections of SARA and the proposed
policy regarding RCRA Subtitle C
corrective action at Federal facilities
with RCRA operating units (51 FR 7722.
March 5.1988). Specifically, that policy
stated that: (1) RCRA section 3004(u)
subjects Federal facilities to corrective
action requirements to the same extent
as privately-owned or privately-
operated facilities and (2) the definition
of a Federal facility boundary is
equivalent to the property-wide
definition of facility at privately-owned
or privately-operated facilities. This
policy was of particular interest beer
the Agency has determined that the
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
majority of Federal facilities that could
be placed on the NPL have RCRA
operating units within their boundaries.
The Agency has interpreted SARA
and its legislative history to Indicate
that Congress clearly intended that
Federal facilities be placed on the NPL
and that, if appropriate, cleanup should
be effected at those sites. In the floor
debates. Senator Robert T. Stafford
explained section 120 as follows
Second, the amendments require a
comprehensive nationwide effort to identify
and assess all Federal hazardous waste sites
that warrant attention . .. The legislation
requires that any Federal facility that
meets (he criteria applied to private sites
listed on the national priorities list (NPL)
must be placed on the NPL — Cong. Rec.
S 14902 (daily ed.. Oct. 3.1986)
Specifically, section 120 of SARA
includes requirements for the
assessment of releases at Federal
facilities, placement on the NPL and if
appropnate. implementation of remedial
action. Sections 120(a) and 120(d) also
require that Federal facility sites be
evaluated for the NPL based upon the
same guidelines, rules, regulations, and
criteria that are applicable to other sites.
dven that Congress clearly
contemplated that Federal facility sites
be on the NPL the Agency interprets
these provisions of section 120 to mean
that the criteria to list Federal facility
sites should not be more exclusionary
than the criteria to list non-Federal sites
on the NPL Key elements of the current
policy for listing non-Federal sites
subject to RCRA Subtitle C corrective
action authorities include whether the
owner or operator has Hied for
bankruptcy or has clearly demonstrated
unwillingness to comply with applicable
RCRA requirements or regulations.
Since bankruptcy proceedings are not
applicable to Federal agencies and
unwillingness to comply with Federal
laws is unlikely, application of the non-
Federal NPL/RCRA policy would have
the incongruous effect of listing few
Federal sites. The Agency believes that
this result would be inconsistent with
the spirit and intent of section 120.
In order to prevent the Agency from
being more exclusionary in placing
Federal facility sites on the NPL the
Agency has proposed a policy for
Federal facility sites that would allow
such otherwise eligible Federal facility •
sites to be on the NPL regardless of
whether RCRA Subtitle C corrective
action authorities are applicable (52 FR
17991. May 13.1987). This proposed
policy does not restrict the use of either
RCRA corrective action or enforcement
authorities to achieve cleanup at Federal
facility sites. EPA is in the process of
developing regulations for corrective
action under RCRA Subtitle C and for
cleanup of CERCLA sites under the
NCR The cleanup goals established in
those regulations will be consistent with
each other, within the limits of each
statute, and EPA expects that remedies
selected and implemented under
CERCLA will generally satisfy the
RCRA Subtitle C corrective
requirements, and vice versa.
In the mtenm period before a new
policy is promulgated the important
process of including Federal facility
sites on the NPL should continue. As
stated earlier, the Agency believes that
this is clearly the intent of Congress.
Of the 32 Federal facility sites
included in today's rule. 26 have areas
subject to the Subtitle C corrective
action authorities of RCRA within the
facility boundaries but not within the
MRS site itself. These 26 sites were
proposed and are being promulgated
according to the RCRA policy
announced on September 8.1983. which
stated that non-regulated units of active
facilities could be included on the NPL
(48 FR 40662). In accordance with that
policy, land disposal units that received
hazardous waste after the effective date
of the RCRA Subtitle C land disposal
regulations, are not included in today's
listings. This policy remains applicable
to Federal facility sites until the Agency
promulgates a new policy. Consistent
with the policy proposed on May 13.
1987 (52 FR 1799). placing these 26 sites
on the NPL will not preclude these sites
from being addressed by the corrective
action authorities of Subtitle C of RCRA.
The Agency believes that placing
RCRA-related Federal facility sites on
the NPL is consistent with the intent of
Section 120 of SARA and will serve the
purposes originally intended by
{ 300.66(e)(2) of the NCP—to advise the
public of the status of Federal
government cleanup efforts (50 FR 47931.
November 20.1985). In addition, listing
will help other Federal agencies set
priorities and focus cleanup efforts on
those sites that present the most serious
problems.
Of the 32 Federal facility sites in
today's rule. 6 do not include any RCRA
regulated units within the facility
boundaries.
They are:
• Alabama Army Ammunition
Plant—Childersburg. AL
• Moffett Naval Air Station-
Sunnyvale. CA
• Twin Cities Air Force Reserve
Base—Minneapolis. MN
• Weldon Spring Quarry (USDOE/
Army}—St. Charles County, MO
• Cornhusker Army Ammunition
Plant—Hall County. NE
• Naval Air Engineering Center—
Lakehurst. N)
Of the 16 Federal facility sites that
remain proposed. 7 are being reproposed
today in a separate Federal Register
notice because it appears that the areas
within the boundaries of these Federal
facility sites evaluated for the NPL
included areas subject to the corrective
action authorities of Subtitle C RCRA.
Although these sites are being
reproposed consistent with the proposed
RCRA/Federal facilities policy
published in the Federal Register on
May 13.1987 (52 FR 17991). the Agency
believes that it is appropnate to solicit
additional public comment on the MRS
scores for these sites. In today's
separate Federal Register notice, the
Agency also solicits comments on the
proposed expansion of the Rocky
Mountain Arsenal Site in Denver.
Colorado. All 16 Federal facility sites
remaining proposed will be considered
in future final rules.
Releases From Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) Sites
On June 10.1986 (51 FR 21057). EPA
announced components to a final policy
for placing on the NPL sites subject to
the corrective action authorities of
Subtitle C of RCRA. At the same time.
the Agency requested comment on
several proposed components of the
NPL/RCRA policy (51 FR 21109). Under
the final policy, sites not subject to
RCRA Subtitle C corrective action
authorities will remain eligible for the
NPL Examples of NPL-ehgible sites
include:
• Facilities that ceased treating.
storing, or disposing of hazardous
wastes prior to November 19.1980 (the
effective date of Phase I of the Subtitle C
land disposal regulations).
• Sites at which only materials
exempted from the statutory or
regulatory definition of solid waste or
hazardous waste are managed.
• Hazardous waste generators or
transporters not required to have
Interim Status or a final RCRA permit.
Sites with releases that can be
addressed under the RCRA Subtitle C
corrective action authorities generally
will not be placed on the NPL However.
RCRA sites may be listed if they meet
all of the other criteria for listing (e.g..
an MRS score of 28.50 or greater), and if
they fall within one of the following
categories:
(1) Facilities owned by persons who
are bankrupt
(2) Facilities that have lost
authorization to operate, when Interim
Status is terminated under RCRA
section 3008(h). by permit denial under
-------
Federal Register / Vd. 52. No. „„ / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulation,
27627
RCRA 3005(c). or by operation of RCRA
section 300S(e): and for which there are
additional indications that the owner or
operator wiU be unwilling to undertake
corrective action.
i (3) Sites, analyzed on a c.ise-by-case
.uisis. whose owners or operators have
*.-0'.%n .151 FR21109!
Cosed on the final NPL/RCRA policy
dusi.ri!ied above EPA is dddmg two
RCRA related sites to the N'PL. The
owner/operators of bo'h facilities are
'Mukruot. thus meeting the eligibility
requirements of the first component of
the final policy Documentation
supporting the Agency's decision to list
these RCRA sites is available in the
docket. The two sites are-
• Parsons Casket Hardware Co —
Belvidere. IL
• Palmetto Recycling. Inc.—Columbia.
oL«.
The four sites listed below were
proposed on October IS. 1984 (19 FR
40320). They remained proposed
because the Agency believed that they
were subject to the subtitle C authorities
of RCRA (51 FR 21054. June 10.1986).
Subsequent investigation revealed that
these sites are not subject to the Subtitle
C authorities of RCRA. These sites met
the requirements of the MRS. and the
Agency received no information which
precluded placing the sites on the NPL
Documentation describing the RCRA
status of these sites is available in the
appropriate Superfund dockets.
• Applied Materials—Santa Clara.
C»f\.
• Monolithic Memories. Inc—
Sunnyvale. CA.
• National Semiconductor Corp.
Santa Clara. CA.
• Teledyne Semiconductor-
Mountain View. CA.
Releases of Mining Wastes
The Agency's position, as discussed in
the preambles to previous final NPL
rulemakings (48 FR 40658. September &
'. might be addressed
satisfacior:!) pursuant »o the Surface
M.nsng Control ar.d Reclamation Act of
1177 (S-MCRA) The Agency intends to
crnumup with this apprised until a final
policy regarding mining sites has been
adopted.
The Agency added six mining sites to
the final NPL (51 FR 21054. June 10.1986)
because they were neither regulated by
SMCRA nor eligible for SMCRA's
Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation
program.
This final rule announces decisions
related to two mining sites, the Silver
Bow Creek Site, and the Silver Creek
Tailings Site.
The Silver Bow Creek Site, in Deer
Lodge and Silver Bow Counties.
Montana, was added to the NPL on
September 8.1983 (48 FR 40658). At that
time, the site was characterized as
approximately 28 stream miles.
Subsequent investigations indicated that
sources in Butte. upstream of the
original Silver Bow Creek Site, are
contributing to contamination in the
creek. In the June 10.1986 (51 FR 21099)
proposed rule. EPA solicited comments
on the appropriateness of adding the
Butte area to the original Silver Bow
Creek Site in order to include the
upstream sources of contamination.
The Agency received comments from
two interested parties. After reviewing
the comments. EPA decided that they
presented no new information to
indicate that the site should not be
expanded as proposed. Consequently;
for the purposes of the NPL the Silver
Bow Creek Site now Includes the Butte
area. The site name has been changed to
"Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area Site".
One commenter concurred with the
position to include the Butte area and
recommended that the site be expanded
further downstream to encompass other
affected areas. The commenter has not.
however, provided data to support the
further expansion of the site
downstream. The Agency believes that
the data currently available indicate
that the site should be limited to the
Silver Bow-Creek/Butte Area. However.
if additional studies suggest that the site
should be further expanded, the Agency
will consider such a decision at that
time.
The second commenter agreed that
the Butte area should be combined with
the existing Silver Bow Creek »ite. but
disagreed that the two areas should be
studied under one comprehensive RI/FS
The commenter slated that by
combining the two areas, the overa'
complexity of the combined site is
tremendously expanded and would
require a regional environmental study
Mirier ihan in investigation of a single
ivjs'e site. T.ie commenter disagreed
w:-r. F.P \ s contention that the addition
of he Buttn area would not greatly
e-.pcind the Silver Bow Creek Sue
In response, i-forma lion provided by
the commenter indicates that the Butte
arrii contnoutes only 5% to 10% of the
total site area, which is consistent with
EPA's original understanding. Although
the addition of the Butte area to the
original Silver Bow Creek Site is likely
to increase the complexity of the
combined site somewhat, the fact
remains that (he Butte area is a source
of contamination for the affected
downstream areas. The Agency will
review the appropriateness of various
study options to determine the best
approach to define the nature and extent
of contamination and tu develop options
for remedying the problems at the site.
In addition, the commenter stated (hat
the Agency should exclude the operating
mine in Butte from CERCLA
consideration. The commenter stated
that.the mine is currently operated and
bonded under the Montana Hard Ro<-
Mining Act. which, according to the
commenter. includes regulations whi>.
address many, if not all of the same
environmental issues covered by
CERCLV
In response, no provisions of CERCLA
preclude EPA from exercising the
authority to take response action under
CERCLA in mining areas covered by
state actions under the Montane Metal
Mine Reclamation Act (Montana Hard
Rock Mining Act). EPA intends to
coordinate closely with the Montana
Department of State Lands in exercising
CERCLA authority in the State-
permitted mining areas in order to avoid
duplication of effort or inconsistent
results.
A decision has also been reached on
the Silver Creek Tailings Site. Park Cly.
Utah. This site, proposed for listing on
September 18,1985 (50 FR 37950). was
evaluated using information provided by
the State of Utah. The Agency has
determined that some of the information
is not appropriate to substantiate an
HRS score of 28.50 or above, in similar
situations in the pasL such sites have
continued in proposed status until EPA
could determine if the appropriate data
could be obtained to substantiate an
MRS score of 28 50 or above (see 48 FT
-------
27628
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
40658. September 8. 1983: 49 FR 37070.
September 21.1984: and 51 FR 21054.
June 10.1986).
In the case of Silver Creek Tailings
Site, the Agency is in the process of
collecting additional data to determine
whether or not the site should be
proposed to the NPL. However, section
H6(p) of SARA specified-that the site be
removed from the NPL unless the
Agency determines that site-specific
data not used to propose this site
indicate that the site meets the
requirements of the HRS or any revised
Hazard ranking system.
Consequently, the Silver Creek
Tailings Site was removed from
proposed status on October 17.1986. the
dale SARA was enacted. This action
does not indicate a change of the
existing policy to continue to propose
sites until the appropriate decision can
be made.
V. Disposition of all Proposed Sites/
Federal Facility Sites
To date. EPA has proposed six major
updates to the NPL (Table 2).
TABLE 2 —SUMMARY or NPL PROPOSALS
Update
No.
i
2
3
4
Date/FEDERAL
REGISTER
atanon
9/8/83. 48 FR
40674
10/15/84. 49
FR 40320 .......
4/10/85. 50
FR 14115
9/18/85.50
! FR 37950
5
6
6/10/86. 51
FR 21099
1/22/87.52
FR 2492
Total
Number of sites/
Federal facility
sites
Pro-
posed
133/0
208/36
26/6
38/3
43/2
63/1
511/48
Re-
pro-
posed
2/0
45/8
6/4
13/2
27/2
40/0
133/16
Of the 133 sites and 16 Federal facility
sites in proposed status. 66 sites and 14
Federal facility sites are from proposed
Update «1 through 4 and continue to be
proposed pending resolution of issues
involving the Federal Insecticide.
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FTJFRA).
RCRA. and mining wastes (Table 3).
These policies are explained in detail in
the June 10.1986 final rule (51 FR 21054).
The remaining 67 sites, and 2 Federal
facility sites from proposed Updates »S
and =6. continue to be proposed
because EPA has not completed review
of comments. They will be considered in
future final rules.
The formal comment periods have
closed for all proposed rules. Proposed
Updates #1 through 4 sites are listed
first in Table 3 according to categories
representing policy and technical issues.
Update #5 and Update «18 sites are
listed at the end of Table 3.
TABLE 3.—PROPOSED SITES/FEDERAL
FACILITY SITES
Category/site
name
UPDATES #1-4:
Pestade-
ApplKatootK
KureaWeltel —
Kunia WeUa II
Mrtilara Wells.
Waiawa Shaft
Waipahu Wells...
Waipw Heights
Wells II.
RCRA ('Not
previously
identified as a
RCRA site):
Motorola, Inc.
(52nd Street
Plant).
Farchild
Camera A
Instrument
Corp.
(Mountain
View Plant).
Fairchrid
Camera*
Instrument
Corp. (South
San Jose
Plant).
FMCCorp.
(Fresno
Plant).
U^Ma^aM
nuwMni
Packard.
IBM Corp. (San
Jose Plant).
Lorentz BarraJ
A Drum Co.
Martoy Cooling
Tower Ca
Rhone-
Poutenc.
Inc/Zoecon
Corp.
Stgnetjcs, Inc......
Southern
Pacrfic
Transports*
fconCo.
Van Waters A
Rogers, Inc.
Martin Marietta
(Denver
Aerospace).
City Industries,
iflC>
Location
Oahu. HI ._
Oahu,HI_.
Oahu, HI....
Oahu. HI ....
Oahu, HI ....
Oahu, HI ..„
Phoena.
AZ
Mountain
view.
CA.
South San
Jose,
CA.
Fresno.
CA.
Pate Alto.
CA.
San Jose,
CA.
San Jose.
CA.
Stockton,
CA,
East Palo
ArtO. CA.
Sunn^slo,
CA.
Rosewfts.
CA.
San Jose,
CA.
Waterton.
CO.
Orlando.
FL
Date of
proposal
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/64
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
09/18/85
10/15/84
TABLE 3.—PROPOSED SITES/FEDERAL
FAOUTV SITES—Continued
Category/site
name
Pratt A Whitney
Aircraft/
United*
Technologies
Corp.
OlmCorp
(Areas 1. 2.
A 4).
Sheffield (U.S.
Ecology. Inc.)
Firestone
Industnal
Products Ca
ProstoMe
Battery
Division.
A.Y McDonald
Industries,
Inc.'
ChempkH Co —
Fnt Industries
(Humboldt
Plant).
John Doofo
(Dubuque
Works).
I 1 4 ItlnmfMilntn
U.O. NamGplaw
Ca
.
National
Industnal
tal Services.
Union Chemical
Ca. Inc.
E.I. DuPont De
Nemours A
Co, me.
(Montague
Plant).
Hooker
(Montague
Plant).
Kysor industrial
Corp.
Lacks
Industries.
me.
rindett Corp__.
Conservatjon
ChemcaICa
Burtingfon
Noftnotn
Rawoad
(SomersTle-
Treamg
Plant).
Lindsay
Manufactur-
ing Co.
Location
West Palm
Beach.
FL
Augusta.
GA.
Sheffield,
IL
Nobles-
vine. IN.
Vinconnes*
IN.
Dubuque.
IA.
Clinton/
Ca-
IA.
Humboldt,
IA.
Dubuque.
IA.
Mount
Vemon,
IA.
Furtey. KS.
South
Hope.
ME.
Montague,
Ml.
Montague.
Ml.
Cadillac.
Ml.
Grand
Rapids.
Ml.
SL
Charles.
MO.
Kansas
City, MO.
SovnofSi
MT.
Lindsay.
NE.
Date of
proposal
09/18/85
09/08/83
10/15/84
09/18/85
09/18/85
'
09/18/85
10/15/84
04/10/85
09/18/85
10/15/84
10/15/84
04/10/85
10/15/84
09/18/85
09/18/85
10/15/84
10/15/84
04/10/85
10/15/84
10/15/84
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Rules ancf Regulations
27629
TABLE 3 —PROPOSED SITES/FEDERAL
FACILITY SITES — Consnued
Category/site j
name • <-oca»on
Date- of
i proposal
Monroe Auto ' Cozad. NE .1 09/18/85
Eq-jiomeni , . '
Co :
Maiiack. inc wootwien
Town-
ship. NJ
National Starch Salisbury.
& Chemical .' NC
Corn * '
wip. .
General Coshoc-
Electric Co ton. OH
(Coshocton
Plant) '
Rohm & Haas
Co. Landfill *
Cuipeper Wood
Preservers.
Inc
IBM Corp
(Manassas
Plant Spill).
Love's
Container
i
Bnstol
Town-
eh in DA
only. ff\
Cuipeper.
VA.
' Manassas,
VA.
1 Bucking-
ham
Service County.
Landfill VA
Mobay
Chemical
Corp. (New
Mamnsville
Ptantl
• ittnij.
Mining Wastes:
Oison/Neihart
Reservoir.
Sharon Steel
Corp.
(Midvale
Tailings).
Technical Issues.
Arkwood Inc
J.H Baxter Co ...
Montrose
Chemical
Montco
Research
Products. Inc.
HOD Landfill ...
Kerr/McGee
(Kress
Creek/West
Branch of
DuPage
n __.
niver)
Kerr-McGee
(Reed- i
Keppler Park)
New
Martins-
ville. WV
Wasatch
County.
1 IT
UT.
Midvale.
UT.
Omaha,
AD
An.
Weed.CA...
Torrance.
CA.
Hollister,
FL
Anuoch. IL..
Dupage
County,
IL
West
Chicago.
IL
Kerr-McGee West
(Residential Chica-
Areas)
go/
DuPage
County.
'• IL
09/18/85
i
04/10/85
10/15/84
04/10/85
10/15/84
10/15/84
04/10/85
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
09/18/85
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
09/18/85
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
TABLE 3 —PROPOSED SITES/FEDERAL
FACILITY SITES— Continued
Category/site . „..,-_ Date of
name Locatlon proposal
Kerr-McGee ; West i 10/15/84
(Sewage Chicago.
Treatment ' IL
Plant !
Michigan Kaiama-
Disposal
Service (Cork
Street
Landfill)
Ouail Run
Mobile
Manor.
Lodi Municipal
Well
Warwick
Landfill
Bno Refining
Co. inc
Sol Lynn/
Industnal
Transformers.
Federal Facility
Cltr*^
sites
Anniston Army
Depot
(Southeast
Industnal
Area)
Rocky Rats
Plant
(USDOE).
Dover Air Force
Base.
Joliet Army
Ammunition
Plant (Load-
Assembry-
Packing
Area).
Savanna Army
Depot
Activity.
Louisiana Army
Ammunition
Plant
Aberdeen
Proving
Ground
(Edgewood
Area).
Aberdeen
Proving
Ground
(Michaelsville
Landfill)
Naval Weapons
Station Earte
(Site A).
Letterkenny
Army
Ammunition
(Property
Disposal
Office Area)
Air Force Plant
#4 (General
Dynamics)
zoo. Ml
I
i
10/15/84
I
Gray
Summit.
MO.
Lodi. NJ ....
Warwick.
NY.
Fnends-
wood.
TX.
Houston.
TX.
Anniston.
AL
Golden.
CO.
Dover. DE...
Jotaet IL
Savanna.
IL
Doytene.
LA.
Edgewood.
MD.
Aberdeen.
MD
Colts
Neck.
NJ.
Franklin
County.
PA.
Fort
Worth.
TX
09/08/83
10/15/84
09/18/85
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
10/15/84
04/10/85
10/15/84
10/15/84
04/10/85
04/10/85
10/15/84
04/10/85
10/15/84
TABLE 3 —PROPOSED SITES/FEDERAL
FACILITY SITES— Continued
Category/site
name
Tooele Army
Depot (North
Area)
Naval Air
Station
Location
Da" '
P»
i
Tooele. UT 10/13/84
Whidbey ' 09/18/85
Island. '
Whidbey | WA
island (Auit i
F^eld) :
Naval Air
Station-
Whidley
. Whidley 09/18/85
Island. :
WA.
Island
(Seaplane)
UPDATE ItS
(Proposed 06/
10/86).
Apache Powder
Co.
Mesa Area
Ground
Water
Contamina-
tion.
i
i
Benson.
AZ.
Mesa. AZ
i
Tyler Smyrna.
Refrigeration DE.
Pit
Piper Aircraft
Corp./Vero
Beach Water
& Sewer
Department
Sydney Mine
Sludge
Ponds.
Tn-County
Landfill Co /
Waste
Management
of Illinois.
Inc.
Douglass
Road/
Uniroyal. Inc..
Landfill.
Southside
Sanitary
Landfill.
Red Oak City
Landfill.
Combustion.
Inc.
American
Folkertsma
Refuse.
J&L Landfill
BioClmical
Laboratories.
inc
Conkhn Dumps...
TRW. inc.
(Minerva
Plant).
Vero
Beach.
FL.
Brandon.
FL.
South
Elgm. IL
Mishawaka.
IN
Indianapo-
lis. IN.
Red Oak.
IA
i^.
Denham
Spnngs.
LA.
lonia. Ml ...
Grand
Rapids.
Ml.
Rochester
Hills. Ml.
Bohemia
NY
Sonklin
NY
Minerva.
OH
-------
27630
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 3.— PROPOSED SITES/FEDERAL
FACIUTY SITES— Continued
Category/sue
name
CryoChem, Inc. .
Delta Ouames
& Disposal.
Inc /Stotter
LandfiH
Eastern
Diversified
Metals.
Medley Farm
Drum Dump.
Rochester
Property
Shendan
Disposal
Services.
Midvale Slag —
Atlantic Wood
industries,
Inc.
Hidden Valley
Landfill (Thun
Field).
Old Inland Pit.
Tpmah
•Municipal
Sanitary
Landfill.
Federal
(Proposed OB/
10/86):
Naval A*
•^ *
ueveiopmeni
Center (8
Waste Areas).
Naval
Undersea
Warfare
Station (4
Waste Areas).
UPDATE *6
Proposed 01/
22/87) "
RCRA Sites)-
Southern
California
Edison Co.
(VisaUa
Poleyard).
Watkms-
Johnson Co.
(Stewart
Division
Plant).
Nutmeg valley
Road.
Chem-Sotv. Int
**.
Dover Gas
UghtCo.
Locaton
. Worman,
PA.
Anns/ -
Logan
Town-
ships.
PA.
town.
PA.
Gaffney.
SC
Travelers
Best.SC
Hemp-
stead.
TX
Midvale.
LTT.
Ports-
mouth.
VA.
Pierce
County.
WA.
Spokane.
WA.
Toman, Wl..
V¥aim»
ster
Town-
sr»p. PA,
Keyport.
WA.
'
Visal*.CA..
Scotts
Valley.
CA
Wotcott.
CT.
CheswoW.
DE.
Dower. DE-
Dataot
proposal
TABLE a— PROPOSED SITES/FEDERAL
FACIUTV SITES— Continued
Category/sue
name
E.I. DuPont de
Nemours &
Co.. inc.
(Newport
Pigment
Plant Landfill)
Landfill.
Dvmond
Shamrock
Corp. Landfill.
Malms Brothers
LandMl
(South
Marble Top
Road).
Stauffer
Chemical Co.
(Cheago
Heights
Plant).
McCarty's Bald
Knob LandMl.
Barrels. Inc.
Ford Motor Co.
(Sludge
Lagoon).
Metal Wortung
Shop.
Kem-Pest
Laboratories.
Wheeling
Daposal
Service Co..
Inc.. LandNL
LlM— ••^BAAM'A
riorsimann s
Dump.
tebpMuntapal
Sanrtary
LandfUL
Atxudoen
Pesbode
Dumps.
Allied Plating,
Inc.".
American
Electoraca
Laboratones.
Inc.
Ametek. Inc.
(Hunter
Spring
Division).
Avco Lycoming
(WiUiamsport
Division).
Commodore
Semiconduc-
tor Group.
Locaton
Newport.
DE.
^ inill
New
Castle.
DE.
Cedar-
towrv
GA.
Kensng*
ton.GA.
Chicago
i In nfcll —
neigrns.
IL.
ML
Vemon,
IN.
Lansing.
Ml.
Ypsilano.
Ml.
Lake Ann.
Ml.
Cape
Girar-
deau.
MO.
Amazonia.
MO.
East
Hano-
ver. MJ.
tekp.NY
AtaMtaen.
NC.
Portand.
OH.
Montgo-
nwcyvilto.
PA.
Hatfiekt
PA.
Writtams.
port,PA.
Lower
Provt-
dence
Towrv
ship. PA,
Date of
proposal
1_ ---,„„,-,
TABLE 3.— PROPOSED STTES/FEDERAL
FAOLITY SiTEa-Conanued
Category/site
name
Gentle
Cleaners
loc./Granrte
Knmng Mills.
Inc.
Hellertown
Manufactur-
ing Co.
J.W Rex Co./
AHwdPavit
Manuiactur-
ry Co.. Inc./
Keystone
Hydraulics.
Novak Sanrtary
Landfill.
PaobRejl
Yards.
River Road
Landfill
(Waste
Management,
Inc.).
Sartwd. Quarry....
Spra-Fm, Inc. —
Transwori, mc._
Sangamo-
m— _ *— _ i_ -JL j
wotion, me./
TwfihfO MLto
Creek/Lake
HartweU PCS
Contamina-
tion,
MaHory
Capacitor Co.
Wasatch
ChamcalCo.
(Lot 8).
Dcoe Caverns
County
LandNL
H4H,lnc..
Bum Pit
FientokM, Inc.
(Wgna
ta«^.— ^
WOOD
Division).
Saunders
Supply Co.
Locaton
Souderton,
PA.
Hefler-
tOWTL
PA.
Lansdale.
PA.
South
White-
ha«
Town-
ShB). PA.
Pad. PA
Hermitage.
PA,
Satfofd
Town-
ship. PA.
North
Wales,
PA.
woroaster.
PA.
Pfckens.
SC.
Waynea-
boro.TN.
Salt Lake
Oty. UT.
SatenxVA...
VA.
nicnmona,
VA.
Cnucka-
tuck,VA.
Das* of
proposal
VI. Disposition of Sites in Today Find
Final Sites With MAS Score Changes
For 15 of the 87 sites and 32 Federal
facility sites promulgted today. EPA has
revised the HRS scores based on its
-------
Federal Register / VoL 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Role, and" Regulations
review of comments and additional
information (Table 4). Some of the
changes have placed me sites in
different groups of SO site*.
TABLE 4.—SITES WITH HRS SCORE CHANGES
Sw» and MI nun*
CA Monolithic Memories; Inc
CATeledyne Serraconductor
IL Sangamo Electnc/Crab Orchard"
National WiWlrfe Refuge (USOOa
Ml Rockwell International Corp. (Alto-
gan Plant).
NJ Dayco Corp./LE. Carpenter Co
NJ Naval Air Engineering Center
(NAEC).
OH Ormet Corp
OR umstuia Army Depot (LagoorS":Z
PA York County Sobd Waste and
Refuse Authority Landfill.
VA Defense General Supply Center
VA First Piedmont Corp. Rock Quarry
(Route 719).
WA Bangor Ordnance Disposal
WA Fort Lewis (Landfill No. 5)
WA McChord A* Fore* Base (Wasli"
Rack/Treatment Area).
W4HaaanF*r«
Sunnyvale
Mountain View J!~1T_'."_..".
Cartennlle
Allaaan
Warton Borough .
Lakehurst
Hannibal
1 in •••! ii -i*—.
noriTitsion •...••....»».- 1 mn
HopeweU TownshB)...__.._~~"""
Chesterfield County
PittsytMm Caunly
Bremerton. — .-..,
TaCQflM l
ar*n**n~
MMS
42.24
42.24
59.80
H.29
48.12
49.48
52.29
31.74
4a72
33.86
3751
9OM9
42.78
4X24
30 07
More
35.57
35.35
43.70
*9 1*
AK IS
50.53
48.44
31.31
44.27
33.89
3O.1A
1A49
33.71
*t??ei
32.06
A summary of me comments received
on these sites and EPA's responses are
recorded in the "Support Document for
the Revised National Priorities List-
Final Rule #3/*4."
Name Revision*
The names of three sites and one
Federal facility site promulgated in this
final rule have been changed in
response to information received during
the comment period (Table 5). The
changes are intended to reflect more
accurately the location or nature of the
problems at the site.
TABLE 5.—CHANGES m SITE NAMES
Nafneon proposed NPL Nam on mm
Hams Corp./Generat
Development
Utilities. Palm Bay.
FL
Robins Air Force
Base Houston
County. GA.
St. Augusta Sanitary
LandfiN/SL Cloud
Dump. St. Augusta
Township. MN.
First Piedmont Corp.
Rock Quarry.
Prttsyrvanm County.
VA.
Hams Con. (Pate
Bay Plant).
Rooms Ar Force
Base (Landfill f 4/
Sludge Lagoon).
SL Augusta Sanrtary
LandM/Engm
Dump.
Rrst Piedmont Corp.
Rock Quarry
(Route 719).
VTL Contents of the NPL
The NPL, with the Federal facility
sites in a separate section, appears at
the end of this final rule as Appendix B
to the NCP. The 770; sites on the NPL are
arranged *""*"tting to their scores on
the MRS. The NPL is presented in groups
of 50 sites to emphasize that min^>
differences in HRS scores do not
necessarily represent significantly
different levels of risk. Except for the
first group, the scon range within the
groups, as indicated in the list, is \ftt
than 4 points. EPA considers the sites
within a group to have approximately
the same priority for response actions.
For convenience, the sites are
numbered.
The 32 Federal facility sites IB the
separate Federal section of the NPL are
arranged in groups correspondiag to the
groups in the NPL.
Each entry on the new NPL and
Federal section contains the name of the
facility and the State and city or county
in which it is located.
For informational purposes, each
entry is accompanied by one or more
notations reflecting the status of
response and cleanup activities at these
sites at the time this list was prepared.
Because this information may change
periodically, these notations may
become outdated.
Five response categories are used to
designate the type of response
underway. One or more categories may
apply to each site. The categories are:
27631
Federal and/or State response (R).
Federal enforcement (F). State
Enforcement (S). (4) Voluntary or
negotiated response (V). and Category
to be determined (D).
EPA indicate* the status of sign!
Superfund-financed or private party
cleanup activities underway or
completed at proposed or final NPL
sites. Three cleanup status codes are
used. Only one is necessary to designate
the status of actual cleanup activity at
each site since the codes are mutually
exclusive. The codes are:
Implementation activities are underway
for one or more operable units (I).
Implementation activities are completed
for one or more (but not all) operable
units (O). and Implementation activities
are completed for all operable units (Q.
These categories and codes are
explained in detail in earlier
rutemakings, the most recent of which
was June 10,1988 (51 FR 21075).
The 67 new sites added to the NPL
(Table 1) are incorporated into the NPL
in order of their HRS score, except
where EPA modified the order to reflect
top priorities designated by the States.
as discussed in previous rulemakings.
the most recent of which was June 10.
1986 (51 FR 21075). The Lansdowne
Radiation Site in Lansdowne.
Pennsylvania, has an HRS score less
than 2&50, and appears at the end (•' "
list This site was placed on the N"
because it met the requirements o
§ 300.66(b){4) of the NCP as explain
Section ID of this rule.
Vffl. Regulatory Impact Analysis
The costs of cleanup actions that may
be taken at sites are not directly
attributable to listing on the NPL. as
explained below. Therefore, the Agency
has determined that this rulemakmg is
not a "malar" regulation under
Executive Order 12291. EPA has
conducted a preliminary analysis of
economic implications of today's
amendment to the NCP. EPA believes
that the kinds of economic effects
associated with this revision are
generally similar to those effects
identified m the regulatory impact
analysis (RIA) prepared in 1982 for the
revisions to the NCP pursuant to section
105 of CERCLA and the economic
analysis prepared when the
amendments to the NCP were proposed
(50 FR 5882. February 12.1985). The
Agency believes the anticipated
economic effects related to adding 99
sites to the NPL can be characterized in
terms of the conclusions of the earlier
regulatory impact analysis and the most
recent economic analysis.
-------
27632
federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
Costs
EPA has determined that this
rulemaking is not a "major" regulation
under Executive Order 12291 because
inclusion of a site on the NPL does not
itself impose any costs. It does not
establish that EPA will necessarily
undertake remedial action, nor does it
require any action by a private party or
determine its liability for site response
costs. Costs that arise out of site
responses result from site-by-site
decisions about what actions to take.
not directly from the act of listing itself.
Nonetheless, it is useful to consider the
costs associated with responding to all
sites included in this rulemaking. This
action was submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget for review. The
major events that follow the proposed
listing of a site on the NPL are a search
for responsible parties and a remedial
investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) to
determine if remedial actions will be
undertaken at a site. Design and
construction of the selected remedial
alternative follow completion of the RI/
FS. and operation and maintenance
(O&M) activities may continue after
construction has been completed.
Costs associated with responsible
party searches are initially borne by
EPA. Responsible parties may bear
some or all the costs of the RI/FS.
remedial design and construction, and
O&M. or the costs may be shared by
EPA and the States.
The State cost share for site cleanup
activities has been amended by section
104 of SARA. For privately-owned sites,
as well as at publicly-owned but not
publicly-operated sites. EPA will pay for
100% of the costs of the RI/FS and
remedial planning, and 90% of the costs
associated with remedial action. The
State will be responsible for 10% of the
remedial action. For publicly-operated
sites, the State cost share is at least 50%
of all response expenditures at the site.
including the RI/FS and remedial design
and construction of the remedial action
selected. After the remedy is built costs
fall into two categories:
• For restoration of ground water and
surface water. EPA will share in startup
costs according to the cntena in the
previous paragraph for 10 years or until
a sufficient level of protectiveness is
achieved before the end of 10 years.
• For other cleanups. EPA will share
for up to 1 year the cost of that portion
of response needed to assure that a
remedy is operational and functional.
After that, the State assumes full
responsibilities for O&M.
In previous NPL rulemakings, the
Agency estimated the costs associated
with these activities (RI/FS. remedial
design, remedial action, and O&M) on
an average per site and total cost basis.
At this time, however, there is
insufficient information to determine
what these costs will be as a result of
the new requirements under SARA.
Until such information is available, the
Agency will provide costs estimates
based on CERCLA pnor to enactment of
SARA; these estimates are presented
below. EPA is unable to predict what
portions of the total costs will be borne
by responsible parties, since the
distribution of costs depends on the
extent of voluntary and negotiated
response and the success of any cost-
recovery actions.
Cost category
Rl/FS
Remedial design
Remedial action
Net present value of O&M
(over 30 years) •
Cost par
site1
$875.000
850.000
8.600.000 •
3.770.000 •
1986 US. dollars.
1 includes State cost share.
»Assumes cost of O&M over 30 years.
$400.000 for the first year, and 10% discount
rate.
Source: Hazardous Site Control Division.
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response.
U.S. EPA.
Costs of States associated with
today's amendment anse from the
required State cost-share of: (1) 10% of
remedial action and 10% of up to 1 year
of costs to ensure the remedy is
operational and functional at privately-
owned sites, and sites which are
publicly-owned but not publicly-
operated: and (2) at least 50% of the RI/
RS. remedial design, remedial action.
removal, if any, and first-year startup
costs at publicly-operated sites. States
will assume all of the cost for O&M after
EPA's period of participation. Using the
assumptions developed in the 1982 RIA
for the NCP, EPA has assumed that 90%
of the 67 non-Federal sites added to the
NPL in this amendment will be
privately-owned and 10% will be State-
or locally-operated. Therefore, using the
budget projections presented above, the
costs to States of undertaking Federal
remedial actions at all 67 non-Federal
sites would be approximately $2 billion.
of which approximately $200 million is
attributable to the State O&M cost As a
result of the changes to State cost-share
under SARA, however, the Agency
believes that State O&M costs may
actually decrease. When new cost
information is available, it will be
presented in future rulemakings.
Listing a hazardous waste site on the
final NPL does not Itself cause firms
responsible for the site to bear costs.
Nonetheless, a listing may induce firms
to clean up the sites voluntarily, or It
may act as a potential trigger for
subsequent enforcement or cost-
recovery actions. Such actions may
impose costs on firms, but the decisions
to take such actions are discretionary.
and made on a case-by-case basis.
Consequently, precise estimates of these
effects cannot be made. EPA does not
believe that every site will be cleaned
up by a responsible party. EPA cannot
project at this time which firms or
industry sectors will bear specific
portions of the response costs, but the
Agency considers: the volume and
nature of the waste at the sites: the
strength of the evidence linking the
wastes at the site to the parties: the
parties' ability to pay; and other factors
when deciding whether and how to
proceed against potentially responsible
parties.
Economy-wide effects of this
amendment are aggregations of effects
on firms and State and local
governments. Although effects could be
felt by some individual firms and States.
the total impact of this revision on
output, prices, and employment is
expected to be negligible at the national
level, as was the case in the 1982 RIA.
Benefits
The real benefits associated with
today's amendment to list additional
sites on the NPL are increased health
and environmental protection as a result
of increased public awareness of
potential hazards. In addition to the
potential for more Federally-financed
remedial actions, expansion of the NPL
could accelerate privately-financed.
voluntary cleanup efforts to avoid
potential advene publicity, private
lawsuits, and/or Federal or State
enforcement action. Listing sites as
national priority targets may also give
States increased support for funding
responses at particular sites.
As a result of the additional NPL
remedies, there will be lower human
exposure to high-risk chemicals, and
higher-quality surface water, ground
water, soil, and air. The magnitude of
these benefits is expected to be
significant although difficult to estimate
In advance of completing the RI/FS at
these sites.
Associated with the costs are
significant potential benefits and cost
offsets. The distributional costs to firms
of financing NPL remedies have
corresponding "benefits" in that funds
expended for a response generate
employment, directly or indirectly
(through purchased materials).
-------
Fedeal Register / VoL 52. No. 140 / Wednesday, July 22. 1H87 / Rule, and Regulations
IX. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
requires EPA to review the impacts of
this action on small entities, or certify
thai the action will not have a
c "iificant impact on a substantial
nber of small entities. By small
entities, the Act refers Jo small
I'usip.esses. small scvemmem
lu.-isdictions. and nonprofit
organizations.
While modifications to the i\'PL are
considered revisions to the NCR. they
•*.e not typical regulatory changes since
»ne revisions do not automatically
impose costs. The placing of sites on the
\PL does not in itself require any action
ot any private party, nor does it
determine the liability of any party for
the cost of cleanup at the site. Further.
no identifiable groups are affected a* a
whole. As a consequence, it is hard to
predict impacts on any group. A site's
inclusion on the NPL could increase the
likelihood that adverse impacts to
responsible parties (in the form of
cleanup costs) will occur, but EPA
cannot identify the potentially affected
business at this time nor estimate the
number of small businesses that might
be affected
The Agency does expect that certain
industries and firms within industries
that have caused a proportionately high
percentage of waste site problems could
be significantly affected by CERCLA
actions. However. EPA does not expect
the impacts from the listing of these 67
sites and 32 Federal facility sites to have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small businesses.
In any case, economic impacts would
only occur through enforcement and
cost-recovery actions, which are taken
at EPA's discretion on a site-by-site
basis. EPA considers many factors when
determining what enforcement actions
to take, including not only the firm's
contribution to the problem, but also the
firm's ability to pay.
The impacts (from cost recovery) oa
small government* and nonprofit
organizations would be determined on a
smiliar case-by-case basis.
27633
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Air pollution control. Chemicals.
Hazardous materials. Intergovernmental
relations. Natural resources. Oil
pollution. Reporting and recordkeepi
requirements. Superfund. Waste
treatment and disposal. Water pollution
control. Water supply.
40 CFR Part 300 is amended as
follows:
PART 300—(AMENDED!
1. The authority citation for Part 300
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U S-C. 9605(B|(B)/CERCLA
105(8)(B)
2. Appendix B of Part 300 is revised to
read as set forth below.
Dated July 16.1987.
Jack W. MeCraw.
Deputy Auistant Administrator. Off ice of
Solid Wmtu and Emergency Response.
-------
M*L EPA
l«nk lag St Mr. Nue
National Prlotltlee Llet (hy lank)
July I9SI
City/County
Rti%pon..»
Croup I (IBS Scoree IS 40 • SS 41)
,
10
n
u
u
14
IS
16
II
IS
19
10
21
72
?1
2*
IS
24
11
IS
19
10
11
11
11
14
IS
14
II
»
19
40
41
41
41
44
4S
44
47
41
49
SO
01
01
01
02
01
02
01
01
01
01
01
Ol
OS
01
02
01
OS
06
01
OS
OS
04
01
OS
0)
01
04
OS
OS
06
04
09
01
04
02
01
04
01
OS
04
02
02
OS
01
04
02
OS
10
OS
04
NJ
DC
PA
NJ
HA
NJ
NT
IA
OK
NJ
HA
NJ
Ml
HA
NJ
NN
MH
AN
KH
NT
SO
TX
KM
HI
PA
PA
TX
OH
NT
TX
AL
CA
NK
TX
NJ
CO
TX
MA
MM
PL
NJ
NJ
MM
NT
PL
NJ
HT
UA
HI
PL
Llperl Undflll
Tyboute Comer Undflll a
Iruln Ugoon
Helen Kroner Undflll
Induatrl-Plai
Price Landfill a
Pollution Ahaceaoac Service* e
Utouncy Sice
Any Creek Undflll
CPS/Hadleon Induetrlee
Nyenia Chaalcal Hut* Duap
CPJU Landfill
Berlin 4 Parre
laird 4 McOuIre
Lone Pine Undflll
Soaarmrch Sanitary Undflll
PNC Corp (Prldlay Plane)
Varcac. Inc
laefe tnvlronaonlel Service*
Sliver Bov Creek/Butco Araa
VMtevood Creek e
Pronch. Led
Sylveeter e
Liquid Dlepoeal. Inc
Tyeona Duoo
NcAdao Aaeecletee e
Hocco. Inc. e
Arcanun Iron 4 Hotel
Uec Helen* lite
Slkee Dlepoeel Pice
Trlena/Tannaiaea liver
ScrlngfellM a
NcKIn Co
Cryatet Chealcel Co
Bridgeport lental 4 Oil Service*
Send Creek Induitrlel
Geneve Induitrlaa/Fuhraaim Inergy
V. I Grace 4 Co (Acton Plant)
Nan Irlghtan/Arden Hill*
Schuylklll Motel* Corp
Vlnelend Chealeal Co . Inc
Surnt Ply log
lellly Tar (Sc. Louie Park Plane) a
Old Bochpoga Undflll
leovoe SK Galvanising Corp
Shleldelloy Corp.
Anaconda Co SaolCai
Vectem Proceeelng Co . Ine
Onega Hill* North Landfill
Aaorlcan Creoeoce (Penaaeola Pic)
Pltaan
Hen Caetle Court y
Iruln lorough
Hantua Tomehlp
tlohurn
Pleecencvllle
Ojwogo
Charlaa City
New Ceetle County
Old fridge Tomahlp
Aehland
Cloueeecar Tounahlp
Svaru Crack
Holhrook
Proohold Tomehlp
Soaartvarth
Prldley
Jeckaanvlll*
Ipplng
Sll low/Door Lodge
Uhltouood
Croeby
Naahu*
Otic*
Upper Merlon Tvp
HcAdoo lorough
U Narqu*
Darka County
Uet Helena
Croeby
Uneicone/Horgen
Clen Avon Height*
Cray
Houston
Irldgeport
Coaaarco City
Houaten
Ac con
Men Brighton
Plane Clcy
Vlnelend
Marlboro Tounahlp
Sc. Louie Park
Oyecer lay
Taapa
Nevflald lorough
flnernnrte
Kent
Camantom
PeneacoU
v
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V 1
1
r
p
p
s
p
F
P
0
S
p s
p
F
P
1
P
S
P
P
P
r
p
p
p s
p
p
p
r s
D
S
P S
f
0
s
p
P S
g
p
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
o
1
0
o
0
0-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
Appendix B ocnfd.
Netlonel Prlorlclee Llet (by lank)
July 1911
NPL SPA
lank leg Sc Site Neao
Croup 1 (MRS Scoree SI 10 - SS fl. eicept
SI 01 NJ Celevell Trucking Co
SI 02 NT Cl Noreau
SI 04 PL Peek Oil Co /ley Drua Co
S4 01 OH United Scrap Uad Co . Inc.
SS 04 OX Tar Creek (Octeva County)
S4 07 M Cherokee County
SI OS IN Seyaour lacycllng Corp a
SI 02 NJ grlck Tomehlp Undflll
S9 OS Ml Northeroalre Placing
40 10 HA Premier Herd Chroae. lac.
41 OS HI Janeavllle Old Undflll
61 04 SC Independent Nell Co
41 04 SC Kalaaa Specialty Chealoele
44 OS VI Janeavllla Aeh lade
4S 04 PL Devlo Undflll
44 OS ON Hlaal County Inclnereur
41 04 PL Gold Coaat Oil Corp
41 OS IN International Hlnerale (I Plane)
49 OS HI Wheeler Pic
10 09 AZ Tucaoa Intl Airport Aree
II 09 CA Operetlng Induetrlee. lac Indfll
12 01 NT Vide loach Davolopaant
71 09 CA Iran Mountain Mine
74 01 NJ Scientific Chealeal Proceeding
IS OS CO Cellfornle Gulch
14 01 NJ 0* leper lo Property
II OS NN Oakdela Duap
IS OS Ml Cratlac County Undflll a
19 01 II Plclllo Para a
SO 01 HA New Bedford Sice a
SI 04 U Old Inger Oil leflnery •
12 OS OH Chan-Dyne •
11 04 SC SCUII Huff load a
•4 01 CT Uural Perk. Inc a
SS OS CO Rarehell Landfill e
14 OS IL Outboard Marina Corp •
(1 04 NN South Valley *
II 01 VT Pin* Street Canal •
19 01 UV Veet Vlrglnle Ordnance •
90 07 HO glllovlllo Site e
91 OS NO Araanlc Trlailda Slta a
91 01 VA Natchai.* tloctropletlng a
91 07 14 Aldan Carp a
94 09 AZ Mountain View Habile Hoaoe •
9S 04 IN North Hollywood Duap a
94 04 n 4.L. Taylar (Valley of Dnau) a
97 09 en Ordoe Undflll a
91 04 HS Plouood Slta •
99 OS OT laee Perk Sludge Pit e
100 07 U Arkanaaa City Ouap *
City/County
leaponee
Category,
Cleonup
Statue.
for State top priority eltee)
Pelrfleld
South Clen Pelle'
Teepa
Trey
Octeve Councy
Cherokee Councy
Seyaour
Irlck Tomehlp
Cadillac
Janeevlll*
Beaufort
Beaufort
Jenoevllle
Oevle
Troy
Hlanl
Terre Heuta
U Prelrle Tomehlp
Tuceon
Honterey Perk
•rent
leading
Cerletedt
Uedvllle
Meal 1 ton Tomehlp
Oakdala
It Louie
Coventry
Nev Bedford
Derrow
Null ton
Coluahla
Neugatuck Borough
Boulder County
Heukegen
Albuquerque
Burlington
Point Pleeaant
Clllavllle
Soulheeatarn NO
loenoka Councy
Council lluffa
Globe
Heaphle
Irook*
Cuaa
Plonood
Sale Lake City
Arkanaa* City
I S
V PS
1
1
I
I
VIP
v s
I
g.
p
1
p g
y
V 1 P 1
p
K
0
S
1
p
I
I
V S
1
V
VI S
I s
VI S
1
VI 1
V 1
V S
1
I
D
V
1 g
1
1
1
§ y
VI g
• p
p,
v
V
O
o
• C
1
0
o
1
A
o
0
1
o
o
1
A
Q
1
o
o
0
1
C
l\
V
p
2
•a]
i
9
£
I
«
«•.
a*
_
gm
K
*T
"2
o
*
fc>
A
e
•*<•.
3
I
n
u
C
a
X
•*••
E
<<
P
(U
tf
g
X
^
7
£
S
I
90
1
-------
A|4«i«Jix B cunt '
11 0.
Rank
101
102
101
101.
lot
106
10;
101
109
110
III
112
II)
114
111
116
u;
in
119
120
121
122
12)
124
I2S
121
12;
121
129
110
111
112
111
114
IIS
116
1)7
111
119
140
141
142
14)
144
us
146
Ul
141
149
ISO
brn
Rag Si Site Name
Croup 1 (KBb Scorae
OS IL Paraone Cesket Hardware Co
Ot IL A f. F Hetarlal Reclelalng. Inc
01 PA Oouglesavllla Dlepoeal
02 NJ Kryeowaty Para
Ot HN Koppere Coke
01 HA Plyamith Harbor/Cannon Cngnrng
10 10 Bunker Hill Hlnlng 6 Net el [urg
02 NY Hudaon liver Kla
02 NJ Universal Oil Producta(Ctiem Dlw)
09 CA Aerojet Central Corp
10 WA Coa Bay. South Tecooe Channel
0) PA Oabome Undflll
01 UT Portland Cement (Kiln Dual 241)
01 CT Old Southlngton Undflll
02 NY Syoeeet Landfill
09 AZ Nineteenth Avenue Undrill
10 OR Teledyne Uah Chang
10 WA Midway Landfill
02 NY Sinclair Refinery
04 AL Howbray Engineering Co
OS Ml Splegelberg Landfill
04 PL Miami Dru» Sanlcaa
02 NJ Reich Parma
10 10 Union Pacific Railroad Co
02 NJ South Irunavlck Undflll
04 AL Clba-Calgy Corp (Nclnroah Plant)
04 PL Keessuf-Kleerllng Battery
OS IL Uauconda Sand 4 Gravel
06 TI Bailey Uaata Dispose!
01 NM Ottatl 4 Coee/Klngaten Steel Onai
OS HI Ott/Story/Cordova
OS HI Tharmo-Chaaj. Inc
01 VA Greenwood Chemical Co
02 HJ NL Induatrlaa
OS HN St Regie Papar Co
07 NJ Rlngwood Nlnoa/Undfll!
04 PL Uhltehouae Oil Pica
O4 CA Itarculae 009 Undflll
Oi NY Jonea Sanitation
OS HI Velelcol Chemical (Michigan)
01 OH Suaalt National
07 NY Low Canal
01 DI Coksr-s Sanitation Service Lfe
OS HI Rockwell International (Allagan)
Ot HN Pine land Sanitary Undflll
07 U Uwranco Todu Para
OS IN Flsher-Celo
04 PL Pioneer land Co
OS HI Springfield Township Duap
01 P* Hranlca Landfill
Response t Irani p
Clly/Louiuy tetegory, it.uui
1* •>» • tl 94)
lelvldera u
Vraenup r Q
Dauglaaavllle R
Nlllaborough R 0
SI Paul v g
Plymouth VIS 0
Smaltarvllla F S
Mudaon liver 1 i
Eaac lutherford V s
Rancho Cordova F |
Tacoma V R p s 0
Crow City v s
Salt Uka City v s
South Ingtom S
Oyster lay V F
Phoenix, s
Albany v
Kent s 0
Uallevllla
Greenville o
Green Oak Township o
Miami f A
Pleesent Plalna
Pecatelle o
South Irunsvlck V P o
Nclntoab D 1
Tampa V s 1
Uauconda
Bridge City
Kingston V F S O
Oelton Township VPS 0
Huakegon o
Hewtown |
Psdrlcktown . v F
Caaa Uka s 1
Rlngwood Borough V F
Uhlteboueo I O
Inmawlck D
Hyde Perk O
ll Louie V S 1
Deerfleld Towmehlp 1 o
Nlegara Felle I P 1 o
Kant County D
Allegan D
Dakota County S
Camancha D
UPorte F
Harrington I S
Devleburg I
Buffale Township VPS O
'.PL
Hank
Itl
Ii2
Itl
li*
its
Ii6
it;
iii
It9
160
161
162
16)
164
lei
166
16;
161
169
i;o
IM
172
i;i
i;t
i;6
i;;
i;i
no
in
112
in
114
us
116
u;
in
119
190
191
192
191
194
19S
196
I9F
191
199
200
FPA
Reg
04
04
Ot
Oi
02
01
01
02
06
01
04
07
07
Oi
Ot
Oi
OS
07
02
OS
Ot
02
Oi
02
01
02
07
Oi
01
01
04
02
OI
02
02
04
OS
06
02
OS
OS
02
06
07
09
06
OS
OS
07
04
Si
NC
FL
HI
Ul
NY
PA
CO
NJ
FL
Rl
SC
NJ
NJ
OH
OK
Ml
HH
NY
NJ
IN
OH
NJ
HI
NJ
PA
NJ
NY
KM
Rl
PA
FL
NJ
PA
NJ
NJ
PL
Ml
NC
HJ
Ul
HI
NJ
n
NJ
CA
LA
IL
HI
NY
•C
July IVI/
Site Naue
Cioup 4 diR» bcuret
Martin Merlette. Soilyeco. Inr
Zelluood Ground Ualer Contain
Packaging Corp ol AMI Ira
Huekego Senltery landfill
Hooker (S Area)
Llndane Duap
Central City Clear Creek
Ventron/Velslcol
Taylor load Undflll
Ueetern Sand 6 Gravel
Koppere Co . Inc (Florence Plain)
Haywood Chanlcel Co
Naacellte Corp
Industrial Eaceee Undrill
Hardaga/Crlner
Roee Township Dusp
Uaale Disposal Engineering
Liberty Industrial Finishing
Kln-luc Undflll
Ueeta. Inc . Undflll
•overs Undflll
Ctbe-Colgy Corp
lutcerverth o2 Undrill
American Cyanaald Co
He lava Undflll
Ewan Property
Batavla Undflll
Bolea Ceecada/Onan/Medlronlce
L6M. Inc
Sutler Mine Tunnel
NW Sllh Street Undflll
Delilah load
Mill Creak Due?
Clan Ridge Radlua Site
Honcclelr/Veet Orange Radium Site
Slaty-Second Street Due?
C6H Undflll
Celenaee(Shelby Fiber Operations)
Hotel toc/Aerosysteaj
Schmali Due?.
Motor Uhael. Inc
Ung Property
Stewco. Inc
Sherkey Undflll
Selaa Treating Co
Clave Reber
Velalcol Chemical (Illinois)
Tar Laka
Jobnatown City Undflll
NC State U (Lor 16. Fan Unit el)
llly/loum/
*l 11 IB li.)
(.her lot le '
Ztllwood
Iller City
.luskrgo
Niagara Fall.
Harrison TuwmMu
Ideho Spilngt
Wood Ridge Boiout.li
•urrlllvllle
Florence
Haywooil/Ro<.hello Pk
Hlllvllle
Unlontown
Crlner
Roee Township
Andover
FernlngJale
Edison Township
Michigan City
Clrclevllle
Tow River
Grand Replds
Bound Brook
North Uhlcohell Twp
Shaanng Township
•atavla
Frldley
North Seillhrisld
Plltecon
Hleleeh
Egg Harbur Townthiu
Erie
Clen Ridge
Hontclalr/U Orange
Tampe
Ullca
ihelby
Franklin Borough
Harrleon
Unelng
Peeberton Township
Uaskoaj
Paretppeny/Troy His
Set oa
Sorrento
Marshall
Mancalena Township
Town of Johnstown
f' • punt* Iv.ll. .
••!• «••!., 4I.IH...
r i
v r
F
w 1 S
ll 0
R
V R i
V F o
R S 0
e.
k o
R
» 5 1
1
II
V K 1 S
V •,
V R F 0
V F S
V F
V F
F
v s
V R F 0
R
v r
s o
s
V R F 0
V R F S |
R
«A
0
R o
• o
u i
g
« i
R
a.
0 0
F
KB A
• O
p.
f
* 1
R C
P
R
D
i!
CO
I
*
*
3
0
I. 52. No. 140 / Wednesda
EL
2
03
5
50
(D
0»
0>
g.
yt
I,
or
sr
0
a
09
-------
ArrjenUx B ccnt'd.
KPL CFA
lUnk I*| tt Site HIM
Nellonil Prlorlllii LI it (by Rink)
July 1411
City/County
litponie CU.nup
Ceteiorr| SiJtut.
NFL [FA
Rank ••* Si SIC* HUM
Hlllonil Prlorlllil LUl (by link)
July lltl
Clty/Counly
Rct.pon*« Cleanup
Cjt<.(ory. Scatcut,^
Croup J (MRS Scorn 41 )» • 4» »!)
Croup » (MRS Scorn 4J 91 4> /I)
JOl
Ml
JCI
104
lot
10*
107
101
10*
110
111
111
111
214
m
11*
211
211
21*
210
III
111
211
114
JJJ
11*
111
111
11*
IM
IM
111
211
2M
!»
114
117
111
21*
140
241
241
241
24*
24}
24*
2*1
141
14*
IM
M
0»
0]
01
02
01
02
0*
02
0*
O*
01
OJ
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
OS
01
01
04
ot
01
Of
01
0*
M
n
01
01
02
01
01
01
0*
01
0}
01
OS
01
0*
02
01
01
01
0*
CO
MM
PA
KB
HJ
HA
HJ
TH
HV
PL
SC
HJ
HI
RS
HJ
•1
HA
HJ
VA
OH
00
M
HJ
SC
OH
HI
HO
CT
AL
HI
HI
•1
PA
n
pt
•A
VA
TH
IH
IH
OH
OH
IB
PL
HI
M
PA
IH
PL
lavry Undllll
RecClllll 4 Clbbl/Bell Lueber
HuntentoMi Reed
Voodlaun County Undllll
Coebo Pill Horrh Undllll
Re-Solve. Inc.
Gaeie Para
ViliUol Chen (Hirdenen County)
York Oil Co
Sepp lottery Salvage
Venchea. Int
CheBlaal Lan*an Tank Lima. Ine
Heater Blepoiol Service Undllll
Doepka Dlipooel (Hellldey)
Florence Und lecontaurlni Lndfll
Devli liquid Voice
Otirlii-Ceorii Reclenetlon Lndlll
Ring of Prviila
China* Crook
Hoeeo Chonlcel
title RIM
• I Creee 4 Co (VeyM Pleat)
Ohenleel Control
Uonird Chonlcel Co . IM
Allied Owaleel 4 Iranian Cake
Verona Veil Field
Loo Chonlcel
Beano* Height* Landfill
Stauffar Chon (Cold Creek Flint)
Burlington northern (Inloord)
Torch lake
Control Undftll
nelvera TCI
Fecit Bnterprliil. IM
Oolamre Send 4 Crevol Uodf III
M HMMfoeturlng
C 4 R Battery Co . Ine
Hurrey-Ohla Du*p
Cnvlrocha* Corp.
HIDCO t
Omot Corp
lout* Point Plont
Uhlcnoyor Uboretorlei
Colenea-tveni Voed Proiervtfig Co
Deyco Corp /I • Cerpontor Co
thrlver'e Comer
Oomoy Rood landfill
Horthald* teal ten Undllll. IM
nartde Stool Car*.
Arepjhoi County V
Hov Brighton
Streban Tounohlp V
Woodlewn
Mount ollvo.Twp
Dercaouth
Plunetoed Tewnahlp V
Team
Holre
Cottondele
Burton V
Bridgeport V
•rocCfleld
Johneon County
Florence Tounahlp
Bnlthflald
Tyn|lborough
•lailou Taevtfhlp V
tort County
Solon v
Hlncurn/Redcllit
Vayne Tounahlp
Illtabeth
tack Hill
Iron tan
Battle Crook
liberty
Beacon Fill! I
Bucka V
Brelnerd/Baiter V
Houghton County
JohMton V
Helve rn
flair* *
Hou Ceitlo County
Valley Tounihlp 1
Chaicerflald County 1
levraaeeburg t
llovevlllo «. 1
dry
ReiaUbel V
South Palm
Jeckeon Tounehlp 1
Miltobouaa 1
Vherton Borough •
ItTAban Tevmahlp V 1
Opper Hacvnglo Tup 1
tlonevtlle
Indlantovn V
r
r
p
r
p
p
p
p
r
i
p
p
i
i
i
i r
r
p
r
i
i r
i p
i
r
s
D
S
S
s
1
1
1
t
0
0
1
0
1
1
B
1
B
»
0
1
O
|
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
I
1
0
0
0
0
0
I
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
o
>M
1J1
in
IM
J»
IM
Ml
IM
1»»
7*0
Itl
1*1
141
>*4
!*»
it*
w
1*1
>«»
no
>M
III
171
II*
111
lit
171
III
17*
110
III
>M
Itt
>M
J»J
lit
III
III
11*
1*0
»l
HI
1*1
It*
l*>
»t
1*7
HI
I**
MO
OJ
04
OJ
0*
o*
01
0*
0*
0*
0*
0*
01
0}
02
01
01
01
OJ
01
01
02
01
0*
02
0*
o*
02
04
02
O4
OJ
01
0)
o*
01
04
0>
07
M
OJ
10
01
02
02
OJ
0*
0*
01
0*
02
It
MM
m
At
CA
Kl
A*
m
CA
CA
n.
MY
IH
HI
MJ
rr
r*
OH
CT
CO
•I
HA
rr
n
CA
CA
inr
n.
w
n
n
M
VI
CO
FA
n.
PA
NO
HT
Ml
OR
CO
HJ
M
m
CA
CA
W
n.
Kl
Piiei-i PII
0 ol HIiiMiote Rooonount Rei Cint
ftoeuey Sinltery Undllll
Utchlleld Airport Arn
Plriifene Tiro (Sillnoi flint)
Sponci Fir*
Hit-South Hood Product!
••veon Irotheri/Old Rolchhold
Atlu Aibeitoi Hlno
Coollngi Alboitoi HIM
Bromi Uood Prenrvlni
Fort Veehlnitoa Undllll
Coluobue 014 Hunlclpll Lndfll ol
Caobe Pill South Undllll
Jll Undlltl
Tronic Platlna, Co . Ine
Contro County Ripono
Ptelda •rook
Solvonta Recovery Sirvlco
Voodbury Chemical Co
Veldlik Aoroipoco Device*. Ine
Recoeonco Fond
Olitlor Brickyard
Ronepo Undllll
Cooit Hood Priiirvlnt
South toy Alboitoi Arn
Hireury Rif Intng. Ine
Holllnaouorcb loldetloii ToratMl
Olion Qoll Flold
•ereel Spill
Jolly* Henuleccurliuj 4 Supply Co
fork County Solid Uiili/Rofun U
Spleklor Landfill
Denver Redlun SI to
lout* »4* Bra tun
Tomr Choalcil Co
C » 0 iMyctlnt
Irntoi foclllty
HllltoMi Rooorvolr SodUonto
Arrouhood RoflMry Co
Hortto-Hirlitto Aluslnu* Co
Omon Orooluoi (Onion Corbldi)
FIJok r«roj
lyncon feoilno
Ooh Orowo Sinltory Undllll
Utjul« Cold Oil Cora
Purity Oil Solot, Ine
Tlnkhoa Cn»t»
Alpha Ckoalcol Corp
•o* CrMk tn*
Rock lord
Roioaounl < ,
•umivlllc
Coodynr/Araiidili
Sillnoi
Fluojitood Townihlp
HOM
Coluwlo
Frnno County
Coollrujo
Llvo Oik
Port U»hln|ton
Coluocuo
Choitir Townihlp
Joooibuig/S Brniwck
Foralnfdilo
Stito ColloAO Bore
Alhtobul*
fouthln|ton
COBMKO City
Will Totnuhlp
Uniboroucli
Unt feint
RoMpo
Uklih
A|»|IO
Colonlo
Port Uudirdilo
Olion
Nlooi
Brooklyn Conur
Mopowoll Tevnihlp
Sponcor
Donvor
Pecono Suoalc
Cloraent
Pooler To«Mhlp
Viron*
HllltOMI
ttirvontotfo
Tho Dolloi
Or oven
riuntiod Towuhlp
South (oorny
Oik Cro«o Toimihlp
RlehMnd
Meloio
Londonderry
Cellovoy
•oooll Tomihlp
D
s
0
r
s
VI S
r
i
i
R
v r
R P
D
R
S
V P
S
R
r
i
R S
R
i r
V R S
S
R
V S
R
v i r
R
« 1
V S
D
R
D
R P
1
» r
i
R
•
D
* R S
1
R
S
R
P 1
V
1
O
.0
1
o
o
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
o
z
p
i
B
•
B)
g
o.
ff.
-------
NPL tPA
Rank lag St Slta Mana
National Prlorltlaa Llat (by lank)
July 1411
City/County
Arv.nl LX B confd.
latponia Claanup
Catagory
Croup I (MI Scoraa *! 19 • «} 00)
lot
Mi
161
10*
101
101
II)
101
IM
III
• •4
111
111
II*
111
III
111
III
119
lit
III
111
111
11*
111
11*
111
111
lit
111
114
lit
111
111
111
MO
Ml
Ml
Ml
IM
Ml
Ml
Ml
M9
Ito
01
01
6*
01
61
61
61
61
04
6*
• I
oi
Ol
01
01
61
oi
ot
61
10
4J
•t
61
01
01
ot
01
M
to
01
61
01
M
01
01
04
07
09
09
09
09
09
09
09
10
o>
Ot
04
HI
PR
PI
6r)
N*
r*
i!
u,
Al
M
IU
HI
•i
Ml
MR
HI
HI
I*
MR
•A
f*
IR
III
•*|
M
HI
IR
A
It
14
Hi
ft
M
Ml
Mi
tk
n
n
AZ
OA
CA
In
C4
OA
CA
VA
11
IL
K
laea Tannery tfaae* Pita
Frontara £ra*t
PlckaetvtlU R6ad LaMflll
41 l«o AnacoM*
ir«n Mdral PiPk
PllMrtM Zinc Pile
Raal'i Uadllll (lloo*ln|ton)
Rohllr C4. UMllll
IntCtlUt* U*d C*. (tl/Ot
nalla»**p« Undllll
fllMlln Cnaaldal Cefp.
tfalla Otfl
Chanaol. Int.
tauar 1 Sanitary UMllll
Pttoatay Munlcl*al Wall Field
IMIon Scrap
Radiation Technology. Inc
Pair Uan «, (Area 1)
tan Cebrlal tallay (Area 1)
Ian Parhendo Vlllgy (Aria t)
In Feritando Valley (Araa I)
ta» ParnaMJo Valley (Area 1)
T M Agriculture 4 Nutrition Co.
Cae) lay. Rear Shore/Tide Plat*
Ulalla llactrlc Utllltlaa
CPMi Rrothat. pan (peabtokal
4*dee-RugnM Pacllltv
lac*
Rid Abaja
4nad«nnaltaa
P*i*nllaa
ItoMIBatan
(otllr
Utit
HMMfahpi
I4n.ll
lokura
Plaea(a«*y
IMnaMM* Palla
Pltdlkay
MIMeepolU
RoCkdoay foVnahlp
fair Lain
Ilkiurc
Uhllllar/Hankato
Vlltlana tdbnaklp
»*tt ttym
Onllaeba
ton Olalr*
Monroe Townahlp
Idtkakay tcMMnlp
CbtunVl* City
IkiMtna
fMatello
*•• M*lnaa
Mrkley Tovnahlp
veltdl
•eg* 41 1*
leuPfli
UU lino
AdlaM
•oadl*
keatlngi
tcbttadala/Tnpa/Phna
tl rime*
RaloVIn Patk Are*
Lai Angela*
U* *nlal*./atendal*
eUrtdaTa
Preane
Plerca Caunt*
Ulall*
f*dbt*fcd Tanuhlp
Mlnant
1JL
*
o
r"
nf 9 1
" f 1
0
«f*
w
v r
vl p t «
D
R 1 0
*•»
r
V S
r
s
v s
»A
p
•
i 2
• 0
• p
•
VI 0
R
ir
v r
P O
• 1
1
R
V 1
P
R
1
g
g
V P
ft |
R
0
0
0
n
• PI
g i
i :
0
NPL
lank
m
iti
ill
11*
in
114
It*
146
1*1
lit
111
IM
141
)M
1*1
IM
)I9
110
IM
in
!;i
/'
i/l
Iff
116
)||
114
111
Ml
111
111
lit
»1
19]
194
191
191
191
199
400
IP*
R«l
01
ol
ot
OI
oi
16
3
ot
01
01
01
Oi
01
01
0*
JJ
61
Oi
01
04
ot
ol
07
Ot
Ot
si
01
01
Ot
04
61
64
61
6)
61
01
61
61
69
I1
61
oi
01
6*
0*
St
Hi
PI
C4
FA
rt
tu
U
Hi
PR
m
Mfl
CT
HI
HI
PI
n
HI
MA
•T
M
Ml
N*
NO
M)
PA
M
HI
HI
HI
(II
tt
IU
tt
Al
It
Rl
Itt
Ml
MR
III
MM
Ci
tt
HA
Ml
n
n
AL
AlivndLx B conf d.
National Prlorlllet Lilt (by lUiih)
July I'll!
Site Nana
Croup 1 (HIS Seoma
Monitor Ravlcea/lnterclrculta Inc
Upjohn Facility
NcColl
nookei Chanlcal/luca Polynar Corn
Colbart Undflll
Patro-Procaaaoia
Appllad tnvlromunlal Sarvlcee
Rarcalonata Undllll
Tlbbata Road
Sand. Craval 4 Stono
•avara faitlla Prlnta Corp.
Spartan Chaalcal Co
loabllng Staal Co
last Mount Zlon
Aanlcola Ounp
Vlnaland llata School
Crovalaad balla -
Caaaral Hotdra (Cant Foundry Dlv)
Hottolo tig Para
SOD! DUIana
Rota-FlMch Co . lite
OUated <«unty Sanitary Undflll
Quality Plating
Pulbrlght Undflll
Preeaua fala
VlltfaM Property
Ranata. lot.
Danaar i tcnafer J(-««y Co
Barculaa. In* (Clbnaum Plant)
Rlntn AVanua Dunp
Coldan Ittlp laptlc tank lar.Ua
totcdaht 6ruaa
taiarkana Head Piaaarvlng Co
6utla« Pit
Ktroleua fraducta Corp
fetereon/rurltan. IM.
Tina* Ranch Slta
Uaah ling Uundry
Uhlcukar Carp
Algana Municipal Landfill
ftl Induatrlaa/taracarp/Coldan
Boallnghouaa (Sumyvala Plant)
kellogg-taerlng Wall Pi. Id
Cannon engineering Corp (CK>
fe Rroun Co . Inc
Repera Cnanlcal Co . Inc
Rlagara County gafuaa
Shamed Hadlcal Induatrlaa
01 la Carp. (Nclncoah Plant)
Response Cluainip
'1 11 • IV Ml
Wall Towiuhlp ' g
l4icalonrta V r 0
rullarlon g f , |
Uppar rlnrlon Twp V p
Hlckivlll. D
COItMTC V R Q
Scotlandvllle V r
Clanwood Undliig 5 O
Florida Aluar* p
larrlngton R o
C Ik ton V R r o
Stalling D
Uyoalng v t
Floranca g
Sprln|ati»bury Twp g
Chattanooga g
Vlnaland V s 1
Crovaljnd V g 5
Naaiana V p o
layaond ' R P 1 0
J^T" IPS 0
Kalaaaroo 0 0
Oranoco Q
Slkaiton D
Iprlngflald D
trla g
Svalnlon (
Idleoo Tounahlp V p a
larvm. * ,
Clbbatown D
Cary g
Slapaonwllla D
Iruah Prairie I g
Taiarkana g 0
Idnondion r
Paobroka Park VPS o
Llncoln/Cuabarland D
tlaaa laach g Q
Plaaiant Plalna Twp g
Hliinaapolla |
Algoaa D
SI Lou It Park s |
Sunnyvale n
Norvalk g
Irldg avatar g |
Grand liplua p
Naybroak y
t/haatflald g
Da land g
Halntoih 6
1
0
i
R-*
S
^"^
n
Q.
B)
<<
"gl
•<"
p
!
50
I
i
f
D>
I
-------
Appendix Boont'd.
B oont'd.
EPA
Rag st si» i
National Prlorltlai Lite (by Rank)
July IMI
City/County
Raapanaa Claanup
Catagory. Scatua.
NPL tPA
lank Rag St lit*
National Prlotlllai Lilt (by Rank)
July 19BI
Cicy/Councy
Rrfponsa Cleanup
Category. Slac«.»
Croup 9 (MRS Scora. }« 44 . 17 I?)
Croup 10 IMS Scora. )7 69 - )) «>)
401
401
401
404
40)
404
407
40S
409
410
411
411
41)
414
4IJ
414
417
4lt
419
410
411
411
411
414
411
414
411
411
419
4)0
411
411
4)1
4)4
4)J
4)4
4)7
4)1
4)9
440
441
441
441
444
44}
441
447
441
449
4M
01
01
01
01
04
04
0)
04
Ot
04
01
0)
10
Oi
04
01
Ot
01
01
04
01
Ot
0)
0)
01
0)
OJ
0)
0}
Ot
Ot
01
Ot
Ot
10
Ot
Ot
01
Of
01
01
01
01
04
01
0?
09
01
01
Ot
HI
m
NY
NJ
icy
At
OH
PL
OB
TC
•1
PA
WA
III
n
HA
Ml
PA
NH
1C
IL
•1
PA
Ot
HT
Ot
M
IL
MI
Ml
m
NJ
IL
•1
UA
NN
Ml
NJ
W
NJ
NT
NT
M
NC
HO
U
CA
n
BJ
n
Southmil Ottava County Landfill
Kentucky Avanua Uall Field
Paalay Solvent* 4 Cbulcala. Inc
Aabeatoi Ounp
Lea-a tana Landfill
frit Induatrlai
rulti Landfill
Trl-Clty Oil Conaarvatloolat. Inc
Coahocton Landfill
Arlington Blending * Packaging
Davli (CSB) Uadflll
Lord-Shopo Landfill
INC Corp (TakUa tit)
Northarn Ingravlng Co
South Cavilcad* Itraac
PSC Raaourcaa
Foreet Waata Product a
Oraka Chaolcal
Kaareerge Metallurgical Carp.
Peloatto Hood Praaarvlni
Pataraan Sand 4 Or*«*l
Clara Watar Supply
Havertovn PCP
New Caatla Spill
Idaho Pola Co
NCB Corp (Nllliboro flam)
Laka Sandy Jo (MM Landfill)
Johna-Hanvllle Corp.
Choa Cantral
Novoco Induacrlal
Wlndon Dunp
Jaekaon ToMiahlp Landfill
NL Induatrlii/Taracorp Lead Snail
UL Avenue Landfill
Kaleer Aliaalnun Maad Worka
Porhaa) Araanlc Slta
Charlevola Municipal Wall
Hentgunoii Tovnahlp Moualng Oavol
locky Hill Municipal Wall
Clraianluan Ground Uatar Contanlo
traveler Uall Plaid
Vaatal Hour Supply Hall l-l
tally Crouod Uatar Contamination
lypaaa 401 Ground Ualar ContaaUn
Solid Stato Circuit!. Inc
Hamrly Ground Uatar Coataoila
Advanced Micro Device! . Inc.
Nutting Track 4 Caatar Co.
0 S Radium Corp.
Hlghlanda Acid fit
Park Totmahlp
Horaahoada
Hempeteed
NIlllngtOD
Loulavllla
Ualnut lidg*
Jaekaon Tonuhlp
Tempo
Pranklln Tomuhlp
Arlington
Clocaatar
Olrard Tomahlp
Taklma
Sparta
Rouitoo
PaUar
Otla*lll*
Lock Havao
Cotvay
Dlalana
Ubartyvlll*
Clara
Havarford
Nav Caatla County
toiaaan
Nil liter*
Gary
Haukagan
Wyoming Tomuhlp
Tonparanco
Wlndoai
Jackaoa Towiahlp
Cranlta City
Oahtaov Tounahlp
Maad
Parhu
Charlovoli
Nontgaawry Tomuhlp
•ocky Hill larouch
Clonanlnaoo Tomahlp
Putnaaj County
Vaital
tally torough
Concord
ta public
Waoorly
Surmyoala
Parlbault
Oranga
NlKblaada
V S
t
0
v r
v r
V P
B
1 F S
r
t r
t
V 1
r
V P
v r
s
p
r
s
f
T
v r
0
0
0
1
r
s
t
0
D
V PS
p
V
• r
r t
0
s
r
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
4)1
4)1
41)
414
45)
4)4
4)7
411
419
440
441
441
441
444
44t
444
44>
411
449
470
471
471
471
474
47}
47*
471
471
479
410
411
411
44)
444
41)
414
417
414
419
4«0
4(1
491
491
494
49>
49«
4»7
49S
499
MO
01
Ot
04
0)
04
01
0}
0}
0)
01
Ot
04
01
OS
01
Ot
04
01
01
01
Ot
01
01
07
04
01
01
04
01
01
01
01
04
01
Ot
01
04
01
01
0)
Ot
0)
Ot
01
OS
09
01
01
01
04
PA
HT
n
PA
PL
NB
N*
IN
PA
NT
Ml
n
NT
WT
NT
HI
n
BJ
NH
NT
Wl
NJ
NJ
MO
n
CT
uv
n.
NJ
PA
PA
PA
OK
MJ
IN
NT
LA
PA
•M
UV
NN
OH
ON
U
Wl
CA
M
PA
BJ
GA
toaln Dlapoaal
Ubby Ground Uatar Contamination
Mauport Dunp
Hoyori Landfill
Parranora Surplua
Savago Municipal Uatar Supply
LaCraod Sanitary Landfill
Poor fmtm
Irovn'a tattary traaklng
SMS Inatrunania. Inc
Hadblua, Induatrlal
Unltad Crooaotlng Co
tyron Ba/ral 4> Drun
lutar/Unlon Pacific Tla Treating
Anchor Chaatlcala
Uaat* Hanaganant-Hlch (Holland)
North Cavalcada Straat
Sayravlllo Landfill
Dovar Municipal Landfill
Ludlou Sand 4 Craval
City Dlipoaal Corp Landfill
Tabarnacla Oruai Ounp
Coopar toad
Nlnkar/Slout/Ionalna Craak
Bow Vallay Landfill
Taworakl Uaata Lagoon
Laotoun Panic Ida
Catet/Koppari
Ivor Phllllpa Laaalng
Ullllan Dick Lagoona
Uada (ABB)
Lackavanna tafuaa
Coapail Induatrlaa (Avary Orlva)
HannhaU Avanua Duap
Naal'a Dunp (Spancar)
Pulton Tarajnala
Dutchtom Traauant Plant
Waitlngbouao Ilavatar Co. Plant
Auburn 'load Landfill
riko Cbanlcal. Inc
Canaral Nllli/Hankarcorp
Uakln/Poplar Oil Co
Old Hill
Jobna' Sludga Pond
Stoughtan City Landfill
Dal NOICI Natlcldo Storaga
D* taval Cbanlcal Co
Nlddlatotm Air Plaid
Svopa Oil 4 ChMlcil Co
MooMnto Corp. (Auguata Plint)
Jaffaraon Borough
Llbby ' >
Nanporl
taglavllla
Hount Plaaaant
Mil ford
LaCrand Towiuhlp
Hancock County
Shoaoakaravllla
Oaar Park
Oacoda
Conroo
Byron
Laranla
Hlckavllla
Holland
Houalon
Sayravllla
Dovar
Clayvllla
Dunn
Tabarnacla Tovnshlp
Voorhaaa Townihlp
laparlal
Howa Vallay
Cantarbury
Laatoun
Calnaavllla
Old Irldgt Townihlp
Uaat Cain Tovnahlp
Chatcar
Old Forga Borough
Tulaa
Galloway Townahlp
Spancar
Pulton
Aacanalon Parlih
Cattyaburg
Londondarry
Hlcro
Hlnnaapolla
Jaffaraon Tomuhlp
Rock Craak
Ulchlta
Sloughlon
Craacant City
Klngvood Townahlp
Hlddlatoun
Pannaiukao
Auguata
D
P
R
t
0 •
P
S
R
1
D
t
t
V S
D
0
R
D
R
V S
F S
V R P
V S
R
D
R S
V R
R F S
R
D
R F S
R
R
V F
r s
V 1
D
V R F
F S
F
S
V R F
R
v r
D
t
P
D
V R F
V S
o
0
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
0
0
o
0
o
1
0
o
0
o
0 '
0
1
0
0
0
1
(D
2.
so
O
n
f
u
n.
B>
-
g
I
P>
O.
•m
a.
§
-------
Appendix a oonfd.
B ooal'd.
m. tr«
B.nk l.( It Sit. Mu.
Nttioiul ttlnttlH Lift (by Kuik)
July IW
Clty/Cnunty
Nttloiul filoiltl.t Lilt (by
July lfl>
H..pans.
C.t.gery.
Hflr lPfc
Rank *.| It SIM I
City/Count jr
Croup II (MBS SCOKI IJ M • U 44)
Ml
Ml
M)
10*
Ml
Mt
Ml
Mt
110
111
111
II)
114
111
lit
11»
111
in
in
»?»
Mi
«»
i|»
in
in
»M
111
II*
»H
111
*M
M*
MO
Ml
Mt
Ml
M»
Ml
M«
Ml
Mt
Mt
IM
01 m South Municipal Uat*r Supply Will
01 HE Hlnthrop Undflll
01 W Ordnoncl *»rU 6tlpo.ll AroM
06 Ml Melt Unitay
01 OH tW*«IIU Uall flald .
oi n fuffaA vnitp toil n*i«
01 VT ladlcbtt Vllligo Mil UiU
0) r* *l«Mln ri.tlnf
0* fl. Bartla Car* (Pain lay Plant)
01 m RMMf ttnlttfy UrtHlll
01 OH SaMtary UMftll C6 fife)
M •! Mi Clalrf MJnlclpal Hall flald
0? M> *all«y Pack TCI
0* C» Ian nrtmofe (allay (araa 4)
Ot CA »>«*llthlt Mo-tltt
•* C* Mtlohtl Mttonductoi Corf
0* M rcMftvlllo Sit*
ni elm* TtMlrM MAtall Supply Co.
Ill Hlntat* Uttltll
HI MltahfU MAUlpal V.ll*
•I StanMra miorlnt of D.U».r«,Inc
UN l«nta Anoabai III*
•J Ma*oM alkali to
»» Mt«t Plk*M. Ifte
UMIIll
Illnthnp
riaiuntem
Slfia
Wtjin el tul(*n
VllUj* *i tadleott
P S
t rt
r
v i
i
i
t
IMI4II
Wytdn
I*, tl.lr.
«atl«y P.rk
los wlkal*a
01
01
01
01
•1
»»
•»
01
«*
01
•I
Ot
00
01
o*
01
Ot
01
n
01
n
at
o»
ETfe
tr.UUWltU
i r
r
n 010 tprthftlkU UKafllt
W PfrilAaC VlPVfw
n t.i tiu«iit>
u
•2Y Rioter
SSI M* IkatpioWM iJWttll
Ip.l U.U
T.UBTn* ItolcMucCtt
riboti PuBllc IHpply UalU
MtlM (tl«U> *W
T«l*tlM. Inc
Rll-SUtl tl.poial. Inc Unotlll
(Mllun Cr.aaota (Jackioa riintl
MooVIMH *M4 Ifodotli
l»aH»l (MIootttaa
|y>«MI«4 rUttna Cora
•M-(col*|f Itltla,. fat
MMlMlia Ul et Ttanipori t (.cycling
I II Ichllllna, Landllli
Cl(ll/t>o4> 6>H>
Cl«tk(«i Alt>e»l
AtbUr aabaitol Plla>
Qutoh City Pana
Cafele (clap Matat. Inc
L i Cllrka A Ion
Sttat »ltc**iln| Co . (nc
SoalkotA lUfyland Hood Trtitln*
HoMltak* Hlnlni Co
fa^bafi InltnMnd (Parc.nl I la I
00*411 Oil M64ucU Co
IU*o« I
MAptln. P.r.
>ta*(iU Mill). Inc
«n>illl.
(tndlanapolla PUnt
Yl>< L*nJ>
nt*r* PiroMity
pi>««.»r '
•rtUniMt TtaiufoiWr
CaHllla PlatlRf C*
flMiMak lUrior t Ilrnr
Oltldat* Otkunt W.t.t Contanln
lottafcAot n>
Spot»yl«.nla County
n.dlord
Hollywood
Hllan
Port.rvlll*
C.ntona.nt
P*r* N.rqu.tt. TVp
•o*. C«nt.r
Pluaulaad Tomihlp
riy.ltavlll.
IKctb SalthlUld
Hhlt.la>
Indl.napall.
U.ihburn
I
i r
v i r s
v
B r
i
v p
i P
i
p
•
V P
PluMla.d TovnaMp
S.«.n Vallay*
Uwar blndaor 1wp
»rro«
Itfonaon
Kl
-------
Appendix B oont'd.
Arr«rrlii B oont'd.
NFL IPA
St Sit* Mane
Rational Prioritise Llet (by Bank)
July I9IF
City/County
Baeponse Cleanup
Category Scetua-
HFL CPA
Bank Beg St Sit* Nina
national Priorities List (by Bank)
July 1917
City/County
Response Cleanup
(.•(.agory. Status.
Croup 11 (HU Scam 11 61 • » 02)
Croup I* (HIS Scor.. 11 00 10 16)
401
Ml
Ml
40*
«0»
•0*
M7
Ml
M9
6io
611
611
611
6U
61)
616
61?
6lf
61*
610
621
611
6»
61*
61)
616
HI
611
61*
610
611
611
611
6M
ill
616
4»
6)1
6)«
64O
6*1
6*2
6*1
6*4
6*1
6*6
647
6*1
6*1
6M
0)
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
o»
01
06
01
01
01
02
0*
01
01
0*
01
02
01
01
01
04
01
01
01
01
01
04
01
0)
OS
10
0*
04
Of.
06
04
01
01
10
01
01
01
01
04
07
01
Ml
Ml
n
HJ
HJ
n
n
n
HI
101
M
U
U
•J
n
n
HI
n
n
n
n
Ha
OH
NT
n
HI
n
n
HI
MA
n
n
u
IH
U*
ft
AL
Ml
n
1C
HI
HI
«
n
HH
HI
HI
sc
u
n
South Nacoob Disposal (U t 4 M>
U S Avlem,
Halih Landfill
Landfill 4 Dovelopsient Co
Upper Dssrflsld Tovuhlp San Lndf
Hartal Landfill
Hnlland Couples
Malta lockot Fuel Are*
Ion City Mobil. How Perk
Adrian Municipal Hall Hold
At A sr (ClovU)
Itrotbar Plaid Industrial fart
Obo* load
mod Industries
Aoorlcan Thermostat Co.
Lsvlsburg Duop
RcCrav Idlaoa Corp
Ooldlae locardlngi. Inc
Alrca
Natal lanka
Sarnay fan
loao Dlapoiol fit
Van Dal* Junkyard
Itentaaa tola and Treating
• I Coodrlcb
Or|*nlc Chanlcals, Inc
Volnay Municipal Landfill
INC Corp (Dublin load Landfill)
Toaah Fairground*
Sullivan'* Udge
InltlTe ran
Juncoo Landfill
llf Blver Sand Co
Dennett Stona Quarry
Wyckaff Co /lasla Harbor
Nunloporc Undflll
Stauffar Chan (laHoyno riant)
H6T Dollia Landfill
Cryatal City Airport
Calgar (C 4 M Oil)
Na**-A*»rlc*n(RaiT-NcC** Oil Co )
Hut* loiMrch 4 Baclanatlon Co.
Could. Inc.
Cart*** Undflll
St Louie Blvor SI to
Auto Ion Chonlcala. Inc
H*g*n P*m
Carolovn. Inc.
Nldiwit Manufaccurlns/Nortb Fara
Sorka Sand fit
lUconb Township
Hoiiard Tounihlp
Honaybrook Tomublp
Mount Holly
Oppor Doaiflald Tvp
Fleueklll
Tom of ttyd* r*rk
Malta
Kant City
Adrian
Clovl*
Covloy County
Hutchlnaon
Cut Sruoaulck Tup
South Cairo
LmUburg
Albion
Holbrook
Celvort City
Phllodolpblo
Aoonla
L*n**boro
Harlatta
Dull*
Calvart City
Crandvllla
Tom of Volnay
Torn of Shelby
tonab
M** Bedford
•rook*
Juncaa
Ulchlu
BlooDlngtoa
Belnbrldg* laland
Harth Mloal
All*
Aabury Park
Cryatal City
Baatauloe
MIlMukM
lau Clalr*
Portland
VII of Marrowsburg
St. Loula CeuDty
BeloBaSOO
Stoughton
r.rt Lam
(allogg
lnn|iirmi Tamablp
V
I
I
I
I
B
1
I
I
V
V •
V
I
•
V
I
V
V
V
I
•
I
V
V
I
V
V I
1
D
r
r
s
r
o
D
D
r
s
D
s
s
r
r
r s
0
s
s
I
D
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
s
s
r
s
r
D
0
0
o
i
0
i
i
0
0
0
o
o
1
0
0
0
411
611
611
61*
611
6*6
411
6M
61*
6M
661
6(1
661
66*
66)
666
661
46S
669
610
6M
671
6M
414
47)
674
477
47S
679
640
6SI
6S2
661
644
41)
616
647
6SS
669
690
691
492
691
69*
691
696
497
49S
499
700
0)
0)
02
01
0)
0*
0)
0)
09
09
09
0*
01
0)
0)
02
01
0*
OS
01
0)
01
07
01
01
0)
06
OS
01
0)
01
0)
0)
02
Of
0)
01
0)
10
0)
01
0)
06
01
01
01
0*
0)
06
02
Ml
IL
HJ
Ht
•A
n.
m
MM
CA
CA
CA
n
Ml
HI
Ml
n
•A
n
HT
MY
OH
•A
IA
Hi
•A
HI
n
CO
CO
IH
n
HI
OH
HJ
n
MM
•A
HI
01
Ml
HI
Ml
OK
M
M
DI
n
OH
Al
n
Sputa Landfill
ACM Salvant (Morrlitovn Plant)
Poanna Oak* laaldantlal Halla
Iowa Industrial Ground Ifatar Cant
Habolk* Auto Sal«a|* Yard
Hlppa load Landfill
Long Pralrlo Ground Hatar Cancan
Halca Park Halla
Appllod Hatarlal*
Inlal Magnatlca
Intel Corp (Santa Clara III)
rapper Steel 4 Alloy*. Inc
O'Connor Co.
OCOIKMJOWOC Blectroplatlns Co Inc
Baaauioon'* Dunp
Remark fait lie Corp
Heetllno Site
Maiay flat* Huclaar Olapoaal
Mouat Induatrlaa
Claraaonl Polychanlcal
Powll Bead Landfill
Croydon TCI
Volel Paint 4 Hal Co
Burl Manufacturing Co
Bovaro Chanlcal Co
loala City Landfill
tapper* Co . Inc. (TaurUna Pit)
Lincoln Park
Snu||l*r Mountain
Uadiab InterprlM*. Inc.
Cl Hiring Oavlcta
Avenue •!• Oround Hater Contanln
Ma* Lyno Landfill
Hoodland Boute 72 Ounp
BCA Del Carlo*
Koch Bet loin, Co /N-Ban Corp
Brodhcod Crook
Padromkl On* Dlapoaal
United Corona Products. Inc
Andareoo Oanlopaent Co
Hunt* Disposal Landfill
SblaMaaeee Blver
Tenth Street Dunp/Junkyard
Taylor Borough Duop
Halby Chenlcel Co
Harvey 4 bolt Drun. Inc
Gallaitay Pit*
Sis D Coapground
Midland Product*
Boblntocb. In* /Rational Pipe Co.
Sparta Township
Norrlstotm , V
Galloway Township
Noyack/Sag Harbor
Halsanbarg Township
Duval County V
Long Prairie
Helta Park
Santo Clara
Santo Clara
Sante Clara
Hadley
Auguata V
Aahlppln
Green Oak Township
Panlngdalo V
Heat line
Hlllsboro V
Colunbua
Old Bathpaga V
Dayton
Croydon
Oran|o City
Prldley
MockanlEon Township
Ionia V
ToEarkana V
Canon City
Pltkln County V
Lebanon
Juan* Diet V
Travaree City
Hen Lyne
Uoodland Township *
•arcalonal*
Pin* Sand V
Stroudsburg
Frenklln
Co rvallla
Adrian
Caledonia
Hovel 1
Oklanona City
Taylor Borough
Hev Cast la
Klrkvood
Callavay
Klngsvllla
Ola/Blru
Tom of Veatal
S
1
O
0
F 'Q
D 0
D
D
P 0
0
1
0
F S
D
S
1
S
s
B 0
I
S 1
S
B
B S
D
S
It 0
0
•
t
D
D
1 0
i O
1 0
I 0
1
i r
£
i
IV
I-
I
I
I.
-------
B oonfd.
*n*7
Ml
It9
ISO
711
161
166
761
116
767
761
769
710
Nuab.
0)
02
02
OJ
07
09
09
10
10
10
06
O6
OJ
06
02
01
0)
Ot
01
01
ar at
VI
NJ
NJ
VI
NO
CA
CA
VA
VA
UA
OK
T»
NN
n
NJ
FA
FA
IL
NO
FA
NFL
Veu.au Cround Vatar Contamination
Dover Municipal Veil 4
Rockavay Tovnahlp Vail.
Dalavan Municipal Wall «*
North-U Drive Veil Centanlnatlon
San Cebrlel Valley (Area )>
Sen Cebrlel Valley (Aree 4)
Anorlcen Uke Cardana
Creenacrae Undflll
•or t ha Ida Undflll
Send Spring. Fetrochenlcel CopU
feeeee Chenlcel Co
Reet Rethel Oenelltlon Undflll
Triangle Chenlcal Co.
PJF Undflll
Craig Farei Orua
Voorcnan Fern
talvtdero Municipal Undflll
tee Coo Manufacturing Co
Urudovne Radiation Site
Site. 170
for health advliary »lt»)
Dover Tovnthlp
Rockavay
0* 1 even
Alhubia
U fuonto
Spokane County
Send Springe
Fort Worth
Uat telhal Tovnihlp
•rldga City
Jeriey City
Parker V
Upper Saucon Tvp
eelvldorv
0 u
r e
F 0
D
0
> 0
t 0
0
Ma loan D
Unadavna R o
01
9
g
is
o
' - State tap priority elta
V - Voluntary or negotloted roeponao
F - faderel enfeiconent
D - Category to be determined
R - Fadaral and liar. r..aon.
s . State enforcaatmc
2. I - UplaMntatlon activity undervey. one or -ore oparabla unlta
O - One ar euro operable unlta completed, other* aay be undorvey
C . laploMntatlen activity co^leted for ell epereble unlta
National Ftlorltloe Llat.
Federel Section (by Croup)
July 1911
NFL
Cr.
St Slta I
City/County
Reaponaa Cleanup
Categoryj Stetua.
TN HI Ian Any Amualtloo Plant
CO Rocky Nounuln Araenel
CA HcClalleo AT* (Cround Vecer Cent)
HO Maiden farlof Quarry (USDOI/Any)
HI lao
*•* County
Secrenante
Si Charl** County
-------
It
N*( loiml I ri ii II |«. lib'
July I IB'
NPL
Cr. kt Sue l*4*a < 111. > 0.11.1»
i. I.A Rub 1.11 All .Indlll .b.-.ludi.r I ,(l H.uii. i. . „ .1 .
IP NC Coinhukktr Amy Aauuiiiiion Plant Hall I ouni <
* HJ Naval Alt Ingineerlne, Center ItkthuMf
' I'T Hill Air Fone Batr Ojil./i <
I UT Oiden "eleiifcv Dtfpu' .jgj..n
6 IA »*crao.riito Ar«v Uv,oi %«ri4n»riiu
t IL San|rao/Ciab uriurJ IUK a>uul. CaitaKil.r
t HI Brunautck V.val All ttaliun Eruii^l^k
I UA IfoChord AlB i.a>h R^iU'TriatMiif I I^.^j
I OX Tinker AFB Ituldlvr Cr/Blug IJOli OkUhua >.iiv
' CA Uuranea Llvciowr* Lab (USObEl Llvcrnoi*
•' CA Sharp* Aroiy Depot Lachiup
» LA Norton Air lor^-e But sun Beinjrllno
4 LA Castle Air Foiiv Bali Mer>.eJ
10 11 leu OU iLai«lfl!l Sltel Pr«berl..i 'oiniihlp
10 AL Alabau Araiy Amunlllon Plant CMUei>>.MIg
If PA Letterkeiiiv Am Depot ISE Ateal (liaoliti ^ n (
II Iff Crlfflit Air line* bate ROM
II VA Defenie General Supply Center Ctiaitarl UIJ Count i
II UA Fort Lovlt (Landfill No t) lacaa*
II MM Tvln Cltltl Alt Forc.dAR Lndlll) Niniieauolit
II HO L*k> City Ar«y Plant (Ml Uguon) Indtpendti we
II IL Jollet Ai>y Aeou Plant >H(g Ar.al Joli.f
U TI Lara Star Araiy Aovunltlon Plant Toiarken.
K. al Site)
«( NPL reoaial raclllly llt*f 1}
Breojertor
Sunnyvel*
Sacroawnto
I flt«l ar« placttf In |tou|| ;Crl curmponoli.g to |toi.|i> ul .•<
•n to* final «PL
/ V - Voluntary or Mgatlatoa' raaponit R - rraaral «r.rt >tutr c»^
f - ftdaial (nfor'taoM S - Stata •ului.«o«ut
P - Cat(tory u b« dat
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Proposed Rules 27643
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
(FRL-3187-5)
National Priorities List for
Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites;
Federal Facility Sites
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA"] is reproposmg seven
Federal facility sites that were
previously proposed for the National
Priorities List ("NPL") and proposing to
expand the boundanes of an eighth
Federal facility site. The NPL is
Appendix B to the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Contingency
Plan ("NCP"), which EPA promulgated
pursuant to section 105 of the*
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1880 ("CERCLA") as amended by
the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1988 ("SARA").
and Executive Order 12580.
These sites are being reproposed to be
consistent with EPA's recently proposed
policy for placing on the NPL sites
located on Federally-owned facilities
that may be subject to Subtitle C
corrective action authorities of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act ("RCRA") (see 52 FR 17991. May 13.
1987). This notice solicits comments on
the Hazard Ranking System score for
seven previously proposed Federal
facility sites which include areas that
are subject to RCRA corrective action
authorities. In addition. EPA solicits
comments on the expansion of one
Federal facility site to include an area
previously identified as a-RCRA land
disposal unit. This site is one of 32
Federal facility sites being promulgated
elsewhere in today's Federal Register.
DATE: Comments may be submitted on
or before August 21.1987.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed
to Stephen A. Lingle. Director.
Hazardous Site Evaluation Division.
Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response (WH-648A). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
Street SW., Washington. DC 20480.
Addresses for the Headquarters and
Regional dockets are provided below.
For further details on what these
dockets contain, see Section III of the
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION portion of
this preamble.
Tina Maragousis. Headquarters. U.S.
EPA CERCLA Docket Office.
Waterside Mall Subbasement. 401 M
Street, SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
202/382-3046
Peg Nelson. Region 1. U.S. EPA Library.
Room E121, John F. Kennedy Federal
Building. Boston. MA 02203.617/565-
3300
Carole Petersen. Region 2. Site
Investigation and Compliance Branch.
26 Federal Plaza. 7th Floor. Room 737.
New York. NY 10278. 212/264-8677
Diane McCreary. Region 3. U.S. EPA
Library. 5th Floor. 841 Chestnut
Building. 9th & Chestnut Streets,
Philadelphia. PA 19107. 215/597-0580
Gayle Alston. Region 4. U.S. EPA
Library. Room G-6.345 Court land
Street. ME., Atlanta. GA 30365. 404/
347-4216
Lou Tilley. Region 5. U.S. EPA Library,
16th Floor. 230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago. IL 60804. 312/353-2022
Barry Nash. Region 6.1445 Ross Avenue.
Mail Code 6H-ES. Dallas. TX 75202-
2733. 214/655-6740
Connie McKenzie, Region 7. VS. EPA
Library. 728 Minnesota Avenue.
Kansas City. KS 68101.913/236-2828
Dolores Eddy. Region 8. U.S. EPA
Library. 99918th Street. Suite 500.
Denver. CO 80202-2405. 303/293-1444
Linda Sunned. Region 9. U.S. EPA
Library. 6th Floor. 215 Fremont Street,
San Francisco. CA 94105.415/974-
8082
David Bennett. Region 10. U.S. EPA. llth
Floor. 1200 6th Avenue. Mail Stop 525.
Seattle. WA 98101.208/442-2103
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ann B. Sarno. Hazardous Site
Evaluation Division. Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response
(WH-548A). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street. SW.,
Washington. DC 20460, Phone (800) 424-
9348 (or 382-3000 in the Washington.
DC. metropolitan area).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Tabl* of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Update Process
01. Public Comment Period. Available
Information
IV. Eligibility
V. Contents of This Proposed Rule
VI. Regulatory Impact Analysis
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
I. Introduction
In 1980. Congress enacted the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act 41 U.S.C. 9801. et sea... ("CERCLA"
or "the Act") in response to the dangers
of uncontrolled hazardous waste sites;
CERCLA wss amended in 1986 with the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act (SARA). To
implement CERCLA. the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
promulgated the revised National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Contingency
Plan. 40 CFR Part 300. on July 16.1982
(47 FR 31180). pursuant to section 105
CERCLA and Executive Order 12580 (.
FR 2923. January 29.1987). The National
Contingency Plan (NCP), further revised
by EPA on September 16.1985 (50 FR
37624) and November 20.1985 (50 FR
47912). sets forth the guidelines and
procedures needed to respond under
CERCLA to releases and threatened
releases of harardous substances.
pollutants, or contaminants.
Section 105(B)(A) of CERCLA requires
that the NCP include criteria for
determining priorities among releases or
threatened releases for the purpose of
taking remedial or removal action.
Removal action involves cleanup or
other actions that are taken in response
to emergency conditions or on a short-
term or temporary basis (CERCLA
section 101(23)). Remedial actions tend
to be long-term in nature and involve
response actions that are consistent
with a permanent remedy (CERCLA
section 101(24)).
Section 105(8)(B) of CERCLA requires
that the criteria be used to prepare a list
of national priorities among the known
releases throughout the United States.
These criteria are included in Appendix
A of the NCP. Uncontrolled Hazardous
Waste Site Ranking System: A User's
Manual (the "Hazard Ranking Syste
or "HRS" (47 FR 31219. July 16.1982).
The list which is Appendix B of the
NCP. is the National Priorities List
{"NPL"). Section 105(8)(B) also requires
that the NPL be revised at least
annually. EPA proposes to include on
the NPL sites at which there have been
releases or threatened releases of
hazardous substances, or of "pollutants
or contaminants." The discussion below
!r.ay refer to "releases or threatened
releases" simply as "releases."
"facilities." or "sites."
Under S 300.68(a) of the NCP. a site
must be on the NPL if a remedial action
Is to be financed by the Hazardous
Substances Superfund established under
SARA. Federal facility sites are eligible
for the NPL pursuant to 9 300.66(e)(2) of
the NCP (50 FR 4793. November 20,
1985). However. CERCLA section lll(e).
as amended by SARA, limits the
expenditure of Fund monies at
Federally-owned facilities. Federal
facility sites are subject to the
requirements of section 120 of SARA.
In this notice. EPA is reproposmg
seven Federal facility sites originally
proposed for the NPL on October 15.
1984 (Update *2) or Apnl 10.1985
-------
27644
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. )uty 22. 1987 / Proposed Rules
(Update *3) (see 49 FR 40320 and 50 FR
11115). and requesting comment on the
i-\pdnsion of an eighth Federal facility
•.ile proposed for the NPl. on October 15.
10W (49 FR 40320) This site along with
;il oiher Federal and 67 non-Federal
stirs are promulgated elsewhere in
lodav s Federal Register. Since this rule
is reproposmg sites, the current number
o! sites proposed for or on. the NI'l.
docs not change as a result of this
,,:-.jon. Currently. 149 sites are proposed
for the NPL and 802 sites are on the final
\PL
II. NPL Update Process
1'here are three mechanisms for
placing sites on the NPL. The principal
mechanism is the application of the
IJRS. The HRS serves as a screening
device to evaluate the relative potential
of uncontrolled hazardous substances to
cause human health or safety problems.
or ecological or environmental damage.
The HRS takes into account "pathways"
lu human or environmental exposure in
terns of numerical scores. Those sites
iii.il score 28.50 or greater un the MRS.
ri.-iJ which are otherwise eligible, are
pn.posed for listing. The eight sites
discussed in today's rule were proposed •
liusiud on HRS scores greater than 28.50.
SARA, enacted on Octolier 17.1986.
direct!) EPA to revise the MRS. The
Agency will continue to es.e (he enisling
HRS until the revised HRS becomes
elective. Sites included on the NPL
prior to the effective date of the revised
I IRS iv.ll not be Devaluated
'I he second mechanism alums States
to designate a single sue. regardless of
its snore, as the State lop priority A
S'.ite tup priority site will be listed on
the \'PL even if it does not qualify due
itb score. In rare instances. EPA may
utt'txc § 300.66
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Proposed Rules
27645
IV. Eligibility
CERCLA restricts EPA's authority to
respond to certain categories of releases
of hazardous substances, pollutants or
contaminants and expressly excludes
some substances, such as petroleum.
from its response authority. In addition.
as a matter of policy. EPA may choose
not to respond to certain types of
releases because other authorities can
be used to achieve cleanup. Where such
other authorities exist and the Federal
government can undertake or enforce
cleanup pursuant to a particular
established program, using the NPL to
determine the priority or need for
response under CERCLA may not be
appropriate. If. however, the Agency
later determines that sites not listed as a
matter of policy are not being properly
addressed, the Agency may consider
placing them on the NPL.
The NPL eligibility policies of
particular relevance to this proposed
rule are discussed below. These policies.
as well as other NPL eligibility policies.
have been explained in greater detail in
earlier rulemakings (51 FR 21054. June
10.1986).
Releases From Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) Sites
When the initial NPL was
promulgated. EPA announced cert am
eligibility policies relating to sites that
might qualify for the NPL One such
policy was that units regulated under
RCRA—i.e.. land disposal units that
received hazardous waste after the
effective date of the RCRA land disposal
regulations (48 FR 40662. September 8,
1983]—would not be included on the
NPL On June 10.1986 (51 FR 21057).
EPA announced several components of
a revised policy for placing non-Federal
RCRA-relaled sites on the NPL This
policy was developed as a result of
authorities enacted in the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984.
which expanded RCRA's authority to
enforce cleanup. The Agency stated
that in general, it would defer listing
non-Federal sites with releases that can
be addressed under the expanded RCRA
Subtitle C corrective action authorities.
However, the policy states that RCRA
sites which fall into one of the following
categories would remain eligible for the
NPL:
(1) Facilities owned by persons who
are bankrupt;
(2) Facilities whose owners/operators
have lost inlenm status under RCRA
and there are indications that the
owners/operators will be unwilling to
undertake corrective action:
(3) Facilities whose owners/operators,
determined on a case-by-case basis.
have shown an unwillingness to
undertake corrective action.
On June 10.1986 (51 FR 21059). EPA
announced that it would consider
whether this policy should be applied to
Federal facilities in the future.
Federal Facility Releases
CERCLA section lll(e)(3) limits the
expenditures of Fund monies for
remedial actions at Federally-owned
facilities. However CERCLA. as
amended by SARA, requires that
Federal facilities be subject to. and
comply with, the Act in the same
manner as any non-governmental
facility. Section 120(a) of SARA
provides that:
All guidelines, rule*, regolationa, and
cntena which are applicable to... incluuan
on the National Priorities Lul. . . shall abo
be applicable to facilities which are owned or
operated by a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the United States In the
same manner and to the extent as such
guideline*, nilea. regulation*, and criteria are
applicable to other facilities.
Section 120 of SARA also contains
requirements for assessing releases at
Federal facilities, placing them on the
NPL and effecting remedial actions at
those sites that qualify for the NPL
The Agency considered the effects of
applying the non-Federal RCRA policy
discussed above to Federal facility sites
and determined that a separate policy
should be adopted. The majority of
Federal facility sites that would be
considered for the NPL have RCRA
operating units within the Federal
facility property boundary. Therefore.
applying the current non-Federal RCRA
policy to Federal facilities would result
in placing very few Federal facility sites
on the NPL Given that Congress
anticipated that Federal facility sites
would be placed on the NPL EPA
interprets the provisions of section 120
to mfeari that the cntena to list Federal
facility sites should not be more
exclusionary than the criteria to list non-
Federal sites. In addition, the Agency
believes that placing Federal facility
sites on the NPL informs the public of
potential hazards and Federal
government cleanup efforts.
On May 13.1987 (52 FR 17991). the
Agency proposed that Federal facility
sites that may be subject to the
corrective action authorities of Subtitle
C of RCRA be eligible for the NPL (see
the Federal Register for more details on
the development of this policy). The
Agency stated that placing these sites
on the NPL does not. however, restrict
the use of either RCRA corrective action
or enforcement authorities to achieve
cleanup at Federal facilities. EPA is in
the process of developing regulations for
corrective action under RCRA and for
cleanup of Superfund sites under the
NCP. The cleanup goals established in
those regulations will be consistent with
each other, within the limits of each
statute, and it is EPA's expectation \
remedies selected and implemented
under CERCLA will generally satisfy the
RCRA corrective action requirements.
and vice versa.
Federal facility sites are placed in a
separate section of the NPL Currently.
32 Federal facility sites are on. and 16
are proposed for. the NPL
V. Coolants of This Proposed Rule
The seven Federal facility sites being
reproposed today were originally
proposed for the NPL on October 15.
1984 or April 10.1985. At that time, the
Agency's policy was to include only
non-regulated land disposal units in the
area scored by the MRS when there
were RCRA-regulated units located
elsewhere on the Federal facility. The
Agency has since determined that the
HRS scores for these seven Federal
facility sites include areas that are
regulated under RCRA. As a result of
the recently proposed policy for placing
Federal facility sites that may be subject
to RCRA Subtitle C corrective action
authorities on the NPL the Agency has
decided to retain the RCRA units in the
HRS score for those sites. This is
consistent with the proposed policv
HRS documents for these sites are
available for review in the public c.
(see Section III. Public Comment Penuu,
Available Information). Five Federal
facility sites being reproposed were first
proposed on October 15.1984:
• Anmston Army Depot (Southeast
Industrial Area). Anmston. Alabama
• Dover Air Force Base. Dover.
Delaware
• Savanna Army Depot Activity.
Savanna. Illinois
• Louisiana Army Ammunition Plant.
Doyline. Louisiana
• Air Force Plant *4 (General
Dynamics). Fort Worth. Texas
Two were first proposed on Apnl 10.
1985:
• Joliet Army Ammunition Plant (Load-
Assembly-Packing Area). Joltet.
Illinois
• Letterkenny Army Depot (Property
Disposal Office). Franklin County.
Pennsylvania
The Federal facilities listing policy on
which this reproposal is based is
currently proposed. The Agency will
consider the comments submitted on the
proposed policy, along with the
comments submitted on this reproi
-------
27646
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Proposed Rules
before placing these Federal facility
sites on the NPL
The eighth Federal facility site
discussed in today's proposed rule is the
Rocky Mountain Arsenal (RMA) site in
Adams County. Colorado. This site was
proposed for the NPL on October IS.
1984 (49 FR 40336). and is promulgated
elsewhere in today's Federal Register. In
this rule, the Agency is proposing to
expand the RMA site to include a
surface impoundment known as Basin F.
Basin F is an approximately 93-acre
asphalt-lined lagoon located in the
northern half of Section 26 of RMA. and
includes all associated liquid, sludge.
overburden, liner, soils, and
groundwater found within the Basin F
fenced area.
EPA omitted Basin F from the MRS
score in the earlier proposal because the
Agency believed that Basin F received
hazardous waste after the effective date
of the RCRA Subtitle C land disposal
regulations. Consistent with the
September 8.1983 policy (to list only
non-regulated units), the Agency is now
proposing to add Basin F to the NPL site
for the following reasons: (1) The
Agency learned that Basin F did not in
fact, receive hazardous waste after the
effective date of the RCRA land disposal
regulations, and (2) a significant portion
of the plume of groundwater
contamination to which Basin F
contributes appears to come from "non-
regulated" units at RMA (48 FR 40674.
September 8.1983). The Agency also
believes that Basin F would be
appropriately included as part of the
RMA site under the new policy recently
proposed for RCRA-regulated Federal
facilities.
EPA is soliciting comments on this
proposal to add Basin F to the RMA NPL
site. (The MRS documentation package
for RMA. including Basin F. is available
in the public docket. EPA will only
consider comments pertaining to the
Basin F expansion. The remainder of the
site is promulgated elsewhere in today's
Federal Register).
VI. Regulatory Impact Analysis
EPA has determined that this
proposed rulemaking is not a "major"
regulation under Executive Order 12291
because inclusion of a site on the NPL
does not itself impose any costs. It does
not establish that EPA will necessarily
undertake remedial action, nor does it
require any action by a pnvate party or
determine its liability for site response
costs. Costs that arise put of site
responses result from site-by-site
decisions about what actions to take.
not directly from the act of listing itself.
In addition, today's proposed rule
involves only Federally-owned sites.
and section lll(e)(3) of CERCLA
prohibits use of the Fund for remedial
actions at Federally-owned facilities. In
addition, since these sites were
previously proposed for the NPL no
additional costs are incurred by today's
rulemaking. This action was submitted
to the Office of Management and Budget
for review.
VIL Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
requires EPA to review the impacts of
this action on small entities, or certify
that the action will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. By small
entities, the Act refers to small
businesses, small governmental
jurisdictions, and nonprofit
organizations.
While proposed modifications to the
NPL are considered revisions to the
NCP. they are not typical regulatory
changes since the revisions do not
automatically Impose costs. In today's
proposed rule, only Federally-owned
facilities are affected. Therefore, this
proposal will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Air pollution. Chemicals. Hazardous
materials. Intergovernmental relations.
Natural resources. Oil pollution.
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Superfund. Waste
treatment and disposal. Water pollution
control. Water supply.
It is proposed to amend 40 CFR Part
300 as follows:
PART 300-4 AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 300
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9605(8)(B)/CERCLA
105(81(8).
2. It is proposed to add the following
sites by Croup, to Appendix B of Part
300.
Note*—In proposed rules, the number in the
left column corresponds to the Croup number
in Appendix B.
Jock W. McGnw.
Deputy Assistant Administration. Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response*.
July ia 1987.
HLLMO COOC W40-CO-4I
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 140 / Wednesday. July 22. 1987 / Proposed Rules
27647
NPL
National Prioricies List,
Federal Facilities Sites. Proposed July 1987
(By Group)
LA Louisiana Army Ammunition Plant Doyline
Number of Federal Facilities Sites Proposed for Listing:
Response Cleanut
ui. ok ailts name \*i.\.y/ t/uuiik. y N"*w«i6*'*' y i/ Ji-ucua, .
. *• ? tf'
3
7
8
9
10
10
AL
IL
TX
PA
DE
IL
Anniston Army Depot (SE Ind Area)
Savanna Army Depot Activity
Air Force Plant *& (Gen Dynamics)
Letterkenny Army Depot (PDO Area)
Dover Air Force Base
Joliet Army Ammu Plant (LAP Area)
Anniston
Savanna
Fort Worth
Franklin County
Dover
Joliet
R
R
R
R
R
R
0
0
I
1: Sites are placed in groups (Gr) corresponding to groups of 50
on the final NPL
2: V - Voluntary or negotiated response R - Federal and State response
F - Federal enforcement S - State enforcement
D - Category to be determined
3:1- Implementation activity underway, one or more operable units
O - One or more operable units completed; others may be underway
C - Implementation activity completed for all operable units
|FR Doc 87-16677 Filed 7-21-67. MS am|
MLUNaCOOE IMP «0 C
-------
27902
Corrections
Federal Rqgbtar
VoL Si No. 142
Friday. July 24. 1987
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains editorial corrections of previously
published Presidential. Rule, Proposed
Rule, and Notice documents and volumes
of the Code of Federal Regulations.
These corrections are prepared by the
Office of the Federal Register Agency
prepared corrections are issued as signed
documents and appear in the appropriate
document categories elsewhere m the
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
48 CFR Part 215
tment of Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement;
Contracting by Negotiation
Correction
In proposed rule document 87-15848
appearing on page 26363 in the issue of
Tuesday. July 14.1987. make the
following correction:
215.804-1 [Amended]
In the third column, in section 215.804-
1. following the seventh line, insert
"shall request only that data which the
contracting officer".
BILLING CODE 150S-Ot-O
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 53
[FRL-3141-9(e)]
Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and
Equivalent Methods
Correction
In rule document 87-13711 beginning
on page 24724 in the issue of
Wednesday. July 1.1987, make the
following correction:
On page 24725. in the third column, in
the second complete paragraph, in the
second line ".05"should read "0.5".
BILLING CODE ISOS-01-0
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[OPT5-40000S; FRL-31B7-8]
Emergency Planning and Community
Rlght-To-Know Programs; Denial of
Toxic Chemical List Petition
Correction
In notice document '87-12348 beginning
on page 20142 in the issne of Friday.
May 2a 1987, make the following
corrections:
1. On page 20143. in the first column.
in the fourth paragraph, in the 16th fine.
"to" should read "of.
2. On the same page, in the third
column, in the first complete paragraph,
in the 16th line, insert a comma after
"flimroris".
3. On page 20145. in the table, in the
second rffluip". the last entry should be
followed by a footnote reference "5".
•LLJM CODE 1BOS-OV*
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[PP 4G3039/T543; FRL-3219-7]]
Renewal of Exemptions From
Requirement of Tolerances
Correction
In notice document 87-13926
appearing on page 23718 in the issue of
Wednesday. June 24.1987. make the
following correction:
On page 23718. in the third column, in
the date line, "June 9" should read "June
8".
BILLING CODE 15OW)1-O
Executive Office of the President
Office of Administration
3 CFR PART 1«2
Office of Personnel Management
5 CFM PART 729
Merit Systems Protection Board
S CFR PART 1207
Office of the Special Counsel
S CFR PART 1262
Federal Labor Relations Authority
5 CFR MUTT 2416
National Aeronautics and Space
AdmkuetnrtioB
14 CFR PART 1X31
Securities and Exchange Commission
17 cm PAST 200
Overseas Private Investment
Corporation
22 CFR PART 711
African Development Foundation
22 CFR PART 1S«O
National Labor Relations Board
20 CFR PART tOO
National Archives and Records
Administration
30 CFR PART 1208
Veterans Administration
38 CFR PART 10
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR PART 10
Enforcement of Nondiscrimlnation on
the Basis of Hapd|g*p hi Federally
Conducted Programs
Correction
to proposed rule document 87-14491
beginning on page 25124 in the issue of
Thursday. July 2.1987. make the
following corrections:
-------
-------
-------
33446 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 171 / Thursday. September 3. 1987 / Proposed Rules
40 CFR Part 300
cRL-32S5-9]
national Priorities List (NPL) for
Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites;
Deletion of Sites
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of intent to delete sites;
request for comments.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) announces its intent to
delete three sites from the National
Priorities List (NPL) and requests public
comment. The NPL is Appendix B to the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA
promulgated pursuant to section 105 of
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA).
DATES: Comments may be submitted on
or before October 5,1987.
ADDRESSES: Comments may mailed to
Russel H. Wyer, Director, Hazardous
.Site Control Division (Attn: Design and
Construction Management Branch),
Office of Emergency and Remedial
Response (WH-548E). Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street. SW..
Washington. DC 20460. The
ieadquarters Docket clerk will maintain
aome background information on each
site. Comprehensive information on
each site is available through the EPA
Regional docket clerks.
The Headquarters public docket is
located in EPA Headquarters, Waterside
Mall subbasement, 401 M Street. SW..
Washington, DC 20460, and is available
for viewing by appointment only from
9:00 a.m to 4:00 p.m.. Monday through
Friday excluding holidays. Requests for
copies of the background information
from the Headquarters public docket
should be directed to the EPA
Headquarters Docket Office. Requests
for comprehensive copies of documents
should be directed formally to the
appropriate Regional Docket Office.
Addresses for the Headquarters and
Regional Docket Offices are:
For background information on all
three sites: Tina Maragousis, (WH-
548D). U.S. EPA CERCLA Docket Office,
Waterside Mall. Subbasement, 401 M
Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20460. 202/
382-3046.
For the Middletown Road Dump,
Annapolis. Maryland site: Diane
McCreary. Region III, U.S. EPA Library,
5th Floor. 841 Chestnut Bldg.. 9th &
Chestnut Streets. Philadelphia. PA
19107. 215/597-0580.
For the Harris (Farley Street),
Houston, Texas site: Leticia Lane.
Region VI. U.S. EPA Library, 12th Floor.
Mail Code 6M-IR. 1445 Ross Avenue.
Dallas, TX 75202-2733. 214/655-6444.
For the Mountain View Mobile Home
Estates, Glove, Arizona site: Jean
Circiello. Region IX, U.S. EPA Library.
6th Floor. 215 Fremont Street. San
Francisco. CA 94105. 415/974-8076.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Paul Nadeau. Chief, Design and
Construction Management Branch.
Hazardous Site Control Division. Office
of Emergency and Remedial Response
(WH-548E). Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street. SW., Washington.
DC 20460. Phone (800) 424-9346 (or 382-
3000 in the Washington, DC.
metropolitan area).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Critena
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletions
I. Introduction
The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) announces its intent to delete
three sites from the National Priorities
List (NPL), Appendix B, of the National
Oil and Hazardous Substances
Contingency Plan (NCP). and requests
comments on these deletions. The EPA
identifies sites that appear to present a
significant risk to human health or the
environment and maintains the NPL as
the list of those sites. Sites on the NPL
may be the subject of the Hazardous
Substance Response Fund (Trust Fund)
financed remedial actions. Any sites
deleted from the NPL remain eligible for
Fund-financed remedial actions in the
unlikely event that conditions at the site
warrant such action.
The three sites EPA intends to delete
from the NPL are:
1. Middletown Road Dump,
Annapolis. Maryland
2. Hams (Farley Street). Houston,
Texas
3. Mountain View Mobile Home
Estates. Globe, Arizona
The EPA will accept comments on
these three sites for thirty days after
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register.
Section II of this notice explains the
criteria for deleting sites from the NPL
Section III discusses procedures that
EPA is using for this action and those
that the Agency is considering using for
future site deletions. Section IV
discusses each site and explains how
each site meets the deletion criteria.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
Amendments to the NCP published in
the Federal Register on November 20.
1985 (50 FR 47912) establish the criteria
the Agency uses to delete sites from the
NPL. Section 300.66(c)(7) of the NCP
provides that:
. . . sites may be deleted from or
recategonzed on the NPL where no further
response is appropriate. In making this
determination. EPA will consider whether
any of the following criteria has been met:
(i) EPA. in consultation with the State, has
determined that responsible or other parties
have implemented all appropriate response
actions required:
(n) All appropriate Fund-financed response
under CERCLA has been implemented, and
EPA. in consultation with the State, has
determined that no further cleanup by
responsible parties is appropriate: or
(in) Based on a remedial investigation,
EPA. in consultation with the State, has
determined that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the
environment and. therefore, taking of
remedial measures is not appropriate.
Before deciding to delete a site. EPA
will make a determination that the
remedy or decision that no remedy is
necessary, is protective of human health
and the environment, consistent with
section 121(d) of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1988.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does
not preclude eligibility for subsequent
Fund-financed actions if future
conditions for subsequent Fund-
financed actions if future conditions
warrant such actions. Section
300.66(c)(8) of the NCP states that Fund-
financed actions may be taken at sites
that have been deleted from the NPL.
HI. Deletion Procedures
Deletion of sites from the NPL does
not itself create, alter, or revoke any
individual rights or obligations. The NPL
is designed primarily for informational
purposes and to assist Agency
management. As mentioned in Section II
of this notice. § 300.66(c)(8) of the NCP
states that deletion of a site from the
NPL does not preclude eligibility for
future Fund-financed response actions.
For the deletion of this group of three
sites. EPA's Headquarters Office will
accept and evaluate public comments
before making the final decision to
delete. Comments from the local
community surrounding the sites
considered for deletion are likely to be
the most pertinent to deletion decisions.
The following procedures were used for
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 171 / Thursday. September 3, 1987 / Proposed Rules 33447
the intended deletion of these three
sites:
1. EPA Regional Offices recommended
deletion and prepared relevant
documents.
2. EPA Regional Offices provided a
two to three week public comment
period on the deletion package for the
Hams (Farley St). TX and the Mountain
View Mobile Home Estates. AZ sites.
both of which had undergone remedial
measures. A public meeting for
discussion of the Remedial Investigation
and No-Action alternative (no remedial
action was necessary) was provided
instead of a public comment period on
the deletion package for the Middletown
Road site where an Emergency Removal
preceded a No-Action Decision. For all
three sites, notifications were provided
to local residents through local and
community newspapers. The Region
made all relevant documents available
in the Regional Offices and local site
information repositories. Notice was
also given at the time of public meetings
if they were determined to be necessary.
3. Comments received during the
notice and comment period were
evaluated and a Responsiveness
Summary prepared before the tentative
decision to delete was made.
A deletion occurs when the Assistant
Administrator for Solid Waste and
Emergency Response places a notice in
the Federal Register, and the NPL will
reflect those deletions in the next final
update. Public notices and copies of the
Responsiveness Summary will be made
available to the local residents by the
Regional Offices.
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletions
The following summaries provide the
Agency's rationale for intending to
delete these sites from the NPL.
Harris (Farley Street) Site, Houston, TX
The Harris (Farley Street) site is a
2.07-acre site located in southeast
Houston. Texas. In early 1958 the site
was used as a disposal site for chemical
wastes. In 1959 the trenches were
backfilled with native soil. The waste
was uncovered in 1981 in the process of
installing a swimming pool. The site was
listed on the NPL in December 1982
based on potential ground water
contamination.
In June 1983. one of the site's
potentially responsible parties (PRP)
signed an Administrative order on
Consent with EPA to perform the
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study (RI/FS) for the site. The Remedial
Investigation Report was submitted to
EPA in November 1983 and the Field
Study was submitted in May 1984. The
RI indicated that wastes consisting of
styrene tars and their degradation
products were present. Ground water
monitoring wells installed next to the
trenches and down-gradient of the site
showed no sign of ground water
contamination. As a result of these
findings the Enforcement Decision
Document was signed by the Regional
Administrator on September 27.1985
and a second Administrative Order on
Consent was signed with the PRP in
September 1985 for the Remedial Design
(RD) and Remedial Action (RA) to be
conducted and funded by the PRP.
The waste materials were chemically
characterized as alkanes, substituted
benzenes, substituted biphenyls,
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons and
non-aromatic cyclics. Measurement of
total extractable organics was employed
as a surrogate for quantification of total
contamination. Initial laboratory tests
indicated that the total extractable
organics (TEO) test adequately
measured to total amount of
contamination. Background level was
defined as from 0 to 10 parts per million
(ppm) TEO with a detection limit of <2
ppm.
A series of four removals was
initiated by the PRP in April 1986 and
completed in July 1988 with disposal of
contaminated soils in a Class I. RCRA
landfill. Subsequent soil sampling
indicated wastes had been removed to
background levels in 54 of 57 samples.
with three samples with TEO levels
slightly elevated above background, and
the environmental threat presented by
the site had been effectively mitigated.
Because the action was a complete
removal of the contamination source, no
ground water monitoring was done after
the removal and no operation or
institutional controls were found to be
necessary for the site. All activities and
decisions are consistent with those
outlined in the Enforcement Decision
Document and comply with current
standards.
The property will be turned over to a
disposal company once the site has been
deleted from the National Priorities List
and will become a part of a private
construction material. Class IV landfill
(a non-hazardous materials landfill),
which now bounds the site on two sides.
A sandpit which lies to the south of the
site is also scheduled to become a
landfill cell once the useable sand has
been removed.
A three week public comment period
concerning the proposed deletion was
held from August 27 to September 17.
1988. No written comments were
received. Oral comments were received
from the Assistant Director of the
Department of Health and Human
Services for the City of Houston. Three
concerns were raised: (a) Why was the
test for total extractable organics
(TEOs) used as the indicator parameter
for completion of the clean-up; (b) is the
TEO test applicable to the types of
waste found at the Harris (Farley Street)
site: and (c) what about small patches of
stained soil left at the site after
completion of removal. Subsequently.
the State reviewed a summary of EPA/
PRP data documenting the analytical
relationship between the TEO test and
the site contaminants and determined
that the TEO test was indeed
appropriate. The State also agreed that
the small amount of remaining material
posed an insignificant threat to human
health and the environment and
continuation of removal was not
justifiable. These concerns and their
resolution are detailed in the
Responsiveness Summary.
EPA. in consultation with the State of
Texas, has determined that the site is
protective of human health and the
environment, that responsible parties
have implemented all appropriate
response actions required and that no
further cleanup by responsible parties is
appropriate.
Mountain View Mobile Home Estates,
Globe, AZ
Mountain View Mobile Home Estates
was a 17-acre mobile home subdivision
located in Globe. Arizona.
approximately 75 miles east of Phoenix.
The subdivision was developed in 1973
on the site of the Metate Asbestos
Corporation chrysotile asbestos mill
after the mill ceased operation by order
of the Gila County Air Quality Control
District. Metate Asbestos mill tailings
and contaminated soil were used as fill
to level the site. Forty-seven mobile
homes were eventually placed on the
subdivision's 55 lots and the site was
occupied by approximately 130
residents.
Asbestos contamination of the soil in
the subdivision was discovered in
October 1979 by State and local health
officials. Subsequent sampling of air and
soil in the subdivision confirmed the
presence of asbestos fibers. Mountain
View Mobile Homes Estates was added
to the National Priorities List in July
1982.
The Remedial Investigation/
Feasibility Study commenced on April 4.
1983. The final draft Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study Report
(RI/FS) was published in May 1983.
During the RI/FS activity. EPA and the
Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) offered to temporarily
relocate Mountain View residents on a
-------
33448 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 171 / Thursday. September 3. 1987 / Proposed Rules
voluntary basis pending a decision on
the permanent remedy for the site.
The RI/FS found that residents of
Mountain View Mobile Home Estates
were being exposed to significant
quantities of asbestos fibers both from
contaminated soil on-site and from
airborne fibers from a nearby mill.
Direct contact with asbestos by children
was of the greatest concern because
their life expectancy exceeds the latency
periods for asbestos related disease.
Polarized light microscopy was the
analytical method used to identify and
quantify asbestos for all samples
collected at the site.
A Record of Decision was signed on
June 2.1983 selecting Site Abandonment
by Permanent Relocation as the
remedial action. Permanent relocation of
residents was completed in March 1985
and ownership of the purchased
property was transferred to the State of
Arizona. Following relocation of the site
residents, remediation of the site was
completed.
The homes and other structures were
crushed and buried on-site in two
natural depressions. Drainage culverts
and enclosed pipes were installed to
reduce the potential for erosion of the
cover. A non-woven filter fabric was
placed over the entire site to act as a
physical barrier to upward movement of
asbestos fibers and as an indicator of
erosion. Twenty-one inches of
uncontaminated soil was placed over
the Tilter fabric in lifts and compacted.
Three inches of crushed rock was added
to complete the cover. The site was
fenced to protect the integrity of the
cover.
Analytical results from 107 post-
closure soil samples of the site cover are
non-detectable for asbestos or show
only traces <1% consistent with
background readings. Twenty-five final
cover samples were also non-detectable.
Physical inspections of the site found no
problem with integrity of the site other
than minor settling and erosion. The
State of Arizona has committed to
maintenance of the site for a minimum
of twenty years. All actions taken are
consistent with those outlined in the
Record of Decision and comply with
current standards.
The Region provided a three week
public comment period from August 29th
to September 19.1986 on the proposed
deletion. No written or oral comments
were received.
All appropriate Fund-financed
response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and EPA. in consultation
with the State of Arizona, has
determined that no further cleanup by
responsible parties is appropriate and
that the site is protective of human
health and the environment.
Middletown Road Dump, Annapolis.
MD
The Middletown Road Dump site is
located off Maryland Route 50 near
Annapolis. Anne Arundel County.
Maryland. This 2.3 acre site was
operated as a dump, primarily for rubble
and construction debris, over several
decades without proper state permits.
The owner accepted drums of
unidentified industrial wastes and
marine paints which were discovered
during an October 1982. EPA Field
Investigation Team (FIT) Investigation
of the property. As a result of the FIT
Investigation, based on potential ground
water and surface water contamination.
the site was placed on the National
Priorities List (NPL) in December 1982.
A site assessment in April 1983.
revealed that emergency conditions
existed on-site, threatening ground and
surface waters. Stream sediments and
surface soils showed significant heavy
metals contamination. Immediate
removal measures were initiated.
contaminated on-site materials were
removed, plus additional soils until
background levels were achieved.
A Remedial Investigation (RI) was
initiated on January 2.1985. Evaluation
of possible routes of contaiminant
migration included water quality
assessment from existing data from on-
site and off-site wells and surface
waters: and soils and sediments
evaluation by site sampling and analysis
for priority metals, volatile organics and
base/neutral extractables. All air,
water, soil and sediment contaminant
levels were very close to naturally
occurring background levels, based on
previously collected State data.
The RI determined that there was no
significant threat to public health or the
environment via direct contact,
inhalation or ingestion and that No-
Action is the proper alternative for the
Middlefown Road site. A No-Action
Record of Decision was signed by the
Acting Regional Administrator on March
17.1986.
The State will monitor the on-sile
wells at least annually as a part of its
existing closed waste site inspection
schedule. Uncontaminated tires remain
on site. However, the State has entered
into a Consent Order with the owner to
have them removed and disposed of
properly.
A public meeting was held on August
27.1985. to discuss the final RI and No-
Action alternative. No written or
verbal comments from the public were
received.
Based on the remedial investigation.
EPA. in consultation with the State of
Maryland, has determined that the site
poses no significant threat to human
health or the environment and remedial
measures are not appropriate.
Dated. August 25.1987.
Thaddeus L. Juszczak. Jr..
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator.
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response
|FR Doc. 87-20297 Filed 9-2-67. 8:45 am)
BILLING CODE 6S60-50-M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
46 CFR Part 25
(CGD 87-016]
Emergency Position Indicating Radio
Beacons for Uninspected Fishing, Fish
Processing, and Fish Tending Vessels
AGENCY: Coast Guard. DOT.
ACTION: Noice of proposed rule making.
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing
to amend the uninspected vessel
regulations by requiring emergency
position indicating radio beacons
(EPIRBs) to be carried on uninspected
fishing, fish processing, and fish tender
vessels operating on the high seas.
Congress amended the shipping laws of
the United States by requiring those
vessels to have the number and type of
EPIRBs prescribed by regulation. By
implementing the law, the regulations
will ensure rapid and effective search
and rescue during emergency situations.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before: October 19.1987.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be
submitted to the Commandant (G-CMC/
21). U.S. Coast Guard. 2100 Second St..
SW.. Washington. DC 20593-0001.
Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 3.00
p.m.. Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays, comments may be
delivered to. and are available for
inspection and copying at. the Marine
Safety Council (G-CMC) Room 2110 U.S.
Coast Guard Headquarters. 2100 Second
St.. SW.. Washington. DC 20593-0001.
(202) 267-1477. The Draft Evaluation
may also be inspected or copied at the
Marine Safety Council.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
LCDR William M. Riley. Survival
Systems Branch. Room 1404, U.S. Co
-------
33812 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 173 / Tuesday, September 8. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
{167.3 Geographic coordinate*
Geographic coordinates expressed in
terms of latitude or longitude, or both.
are not intended for plotting on maps or
charts whose referenced horizontal
datum is the North American Datum of
1983 (NAD 83). unless such geographic
coordinates are expressly labeled NAD
83. Geographic coordinates without the
NAD 83 reference may be plotted on
maps or charts referenced to NAD 83
only after application of the appropriate
corrections that are published on the
particular map or chart being used.
PART 177-{ AMENDED]
25. The authority citation for Part 177
is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 4302:49 CFR 1.48.
28. Section 177.08 introductory text is
revised to read as follows:
§177.08 Regulated boating area*.
For the purpose of this part, the
following are regulated boating areas.
Note: Geographic coordinates expressed in
terms of latitude or longitude, or both, are not
intended for plotting on maps or chart*
whose referenced horizontal datum is the
North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83),
unless such geographic coordinates are
expressly labeled NAD 83. Geographic
coordinates without the NAD 63 reference
may be plotted on maps or charts referenced
to NAD 8B only after application of the
apuiupriate oorrectiona that are published on
•» particular map or chart being used.
• • • " • •
Dated: August 3,1987.
Martin H. Darnell.
Rear Admiral, US. Coast Guard Chief. Office
of Navigation.
[FR Doc. 87-20332 Filed 9-4-87; 8:45 am]
BlUJNa CODE 4S10-M-M
33 CFR Part 117
[CG05 87-035]
Drawbridge Operation Regulations;
Christina River, Wilmington, DE
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION; Final rule; revocation.
SUMMARY: This amendment revokes the
regulations for Conrail's Christina River
drawbridge, mile 5.4, because the swing
bridge has been removed. Regulations
for the other bridges on the Christina
River remain unchanged. Notice and
public procedure have been omitted
from this action due to the removal of
the bridge concerned.
EFFECTIVE DATE: These regulations
become effective September 8,1087.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William C. Heming. Bridge
Administrator. First Coast Guard
District, Bldg. 135A. Governors Island,
New York 10004 (212) 868-7994.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
action has no economic consequences. It
merely revokes regulations for a swing
bridge that no longer exists.
Consequently, this action is considered
to be non-major under Executive Order
12291 on Federal Regulation, and
nonsignificant under the Department of
Transportation regulatory policies and
procedures (44 FR 11034: February 26,
1979). Since there is no economic
impact, a full regulatory evaluation is
unnecessary. Because no notice of
proposed rulemaking is required under 5
U.S.C. 553. this action is exempt from
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
605(b)). However, this action will not
have significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Drafting Information
The drafters of these regulations are
Sylvia L. Bowens, project officer, and
Cdr. Robert J. Reining, project attorney.
List of Subjects In 33 CFR Put 117
Bridges.
Regulations
In consideration of the foregoing. Part
117 of Title 33, Code of Federal
Regulations, is amended as follows:
PART 117-DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 117
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C 499; 49 CFR 14* 33
2. Section 117.237(c) is revised to read
as follows:
8117.237 Christina River.
• • • • •
(c) The draws of he Conrail bridges, at
miles 4.1 and 4 .2, both at Wilmington,
shall open on signal from 6 a jn. to 8 pan.
if at least 24 hours notice is given. From
8 p.m. to 6 a.m., the draws need not be
opened for the passage of vessels.
• • • • •
Dated: August 18, 1987.
RJM. Polant.
Captain, US. Coast Guard. Acting
Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
(FR Doc. 87-20539 Filed 9-4-87; 846 am)
B*UJN
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 305 and 308
[FRL-3249-2J
Withdrawal of Arbitration Procedures
and Natural Resource Claims
Procedures for Hazardous Substance
Superfund
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule; removal of
regulations.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA or Agency) is withdrawing
two procedural rules promulgated
pursuant to the Comprehensive
Environmental Response. Compensation
and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). The
rules concern: (1) The submission and
evaluation of natural resource claims
against the Hazardous Substance
Superfund (Superfund) (40 CFR Part
308). and (2) the arbitration of both
natural resource and response claims
(40 CFR Part 305). EPA is withdrawing
these two regulations because the
authority for financing natural resource
claims and for arbitrating claims has
been revoked by provisions of the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1988 (SARA).
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 8.1987.
ADDRESS: Docket—The public docket
for the arbitration and claims
procedures is available for public
inspection at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Waterside Mail
Lower Garage. 401M Street SW*
Washington, DC 20460. The docket is
available for viewing by appointment
only, (202) 362-3046, from 9:00 a jn. to
4:30 p JB, Monday through Friday.
excluding holidays. As provided in 40
CFR Part 2, a reasonable fee may be
charged for copying services.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William O. Ross, Office of Emergency
and Remedial Response [WH-548).
Environmental Protection Agency, 401M
Street SW., Washington. DC 20460 (202)
382-4645, or The RCRA/CERCLA
Hotline, (600) 424-0346 (or 382-3000 in
the Washington, DC metropolitan area).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Natural Resource Claims Procedures
Rule
The Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). 42 U.S.C. 9601 et
sea.. Pub. L 96-610, authorized the
assertion of two types of claims again
the Superfund: Response claims
-------
' • I • .
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 173 / Tuesday. September 8. 1987 / Rulea and Regulations 33813
authorized by section lll(a)(2) of
CERCLA and natural resource claims
authorized by section lll(a)(3) of
CERCLA. Response claims are to
reimburse private parties for at least
part of their costs in responding to a
release, or threat of a release, of a
hazardous substance, pollutant or
contaminant Natural resource claims
are submitted by Federal. State, or
Indian tribe trustees for reimbursement
of the costs of assessing damage to a
natural resource, or for the restoration.
rehabilitation, replacement or acquiring
the equivalent of a natural resource that
has been injured, destroyed or lost The
submission and evaluation of natural
resource claims was the subject of a rule
promulgated by EPA on December 13.
1985.50 FR 51196 et aeg., 40 CFR Part
306. The Agency is today withdrawing
this rule because CERCLA. as amended
by SARA, does not authorize the
appropriation of funds for the payment
of natural resource claims.
SARA treats natural resource claims
in different ways. Section lll(c)(l) of
SARA amends section lll(b) of
CERCLA to prohibit payment from the
Superfund of a natural resource claim
unless the President determines that the
claimant has exhausted all
administrative and judicial remedies for
recovering such claims from parties
liable under section 107 of CERCLA.
This restriction applies only to claims
for restoration, rehabilitation,
replacement or acquiring the equivalent
of an injured natural resource—not to
claims for damage assessments. Another
provision, section lll(e) of SARA.
amends section lll(e)(2) of CERCLA to
prohibit payment from the Superfund in
any fiscal year where the President
determines that such funds are needed
for response to threats to public health.
However, the above provisions are
mooted by section 517(a) of SARA.
which amends the Internal Revenue
Code as follows:
Amounts in the Superfund shall be
available, OB provided in the appropriation
Acts, only for purposes of making
expenditures—
(A) To cany out the purposes of—
(i) Paragraphs (1). (2). (5). and (8) of section
lll(a) of CERCLA as In effect on the date of
the enactment of the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1988,
(ii) Section lll(c) of CERCLA (as so In
effect), other than paragraphs (1) and (2)
thereof * • '.
It can be seen that section 517(a) of
SARA prohibits Superfund expenditures
to carry out the purposes of sections 111
(a)(3). (b). (c)(l). (c)(2) of CERCLA.
These are the authorizing provisions for
natural resource claims. Therefore, even
though the programmatic sections
regarding natural resource claims still
exist the authority to spend money for
those claims has been specifically
revoked.
The legislative history is clear that
Congress intended that natural resource
claims not be paid. The conference
report to SARA holds that: "[t]he
conference agreement follows the House
bill in deleting natural resource damage
and assessment claims as a Superfund
expenditure purpose." H.R. Rep. No. 982.
99th Cong. 2d Sess. 321 (Oct 3.1986); see
H.R. Rep. No. 253,99th Cong. 2d Sess..
pt 2. at 54 (1985) (House Report).
Because of section 517(a) of SARA. EPA
is today withdrawing the regulatory
procedures for natural resource claims.
IL Arbitration Rule
Section 112 of CERCLA (as amended
by SARA) outlines procedures for
asserting all claims against the Fund for
response costs. Prior to the enactment of
SARA, section 112(b)(4) of CERCLA
required the creation of a Board of
Arbitrators to review EPA's claim
determinations if either the claim was
denied or the claimant contests the
amount of an award. Implementing this
statutory mandate, the Agency
promulgated a rule that formally
established an arbitration board and set
forth procedures for the consideration of
contested claims. 50 FR 51196 et seq.
(December 13.1985), 40 CFR Part 305.
Section 112(b) of SARA revokes the
statutory authorization for an arbitration
board. In its place, section 112(b) of
SARA amended section 112(b)(2) of
CERCLA to allow a claimant to request
an administrative hearing if all or part of
his claim is denied. Paragraphs (3)
through (5) of the revised subsection
112(b) outline the general parameters of
the administrative hearing. In
furtherance of this statutory mandate,
EPA is currently drafting rules for such
administrative hearings. Because all
statutory authority for arbitration was
specifically revoked, and the arbitration
procedures were specifically replaced
by an alternative administrative
procedure, the Agency is withdrawing
its rules for arbitration, currently found
at 40 CFR Part 305.
m. Response to Public Comments
In the 30-day period after this rule
was proposed on July 13.1987 (52 FR
26160), the Agency received two public
comments: One favoring the withdrawal
of the regulations over suspension: the
other opposed withdrawal of the
regulations, questioning EPA's authority
to do so in light of section 112 of
CERCLA. The latter commenter stated
that the filing of claims should be
allowed given the strict time limit for
such filings, and concluded that it would
be less confusing to notify trustees that
they may may "file such claims if they
want to preserve them for possible
future funding" (emphasis supplied).
Executive order 12580 delegates to
EPA the President's authorities under
section 112, including the responsibility
to prescribe appropriate forms and
procedures for response and natural
resource claims. EPA takes seriously its
responsibilities under section 112(b)(l)
and will propose procedures for filing
response claims in the near future. It is
EPA's position, however, in view of the
section 517 provision limiting the use of
Fund monies, that it is inappropriate to
maintain the regulation establishing
natural resource claims procedures.
Since no Fund monies may be used to
pay natural resource claims, EPA sees
no reason to expend resources in
processing such claims, against the
uncertain prospect of future
Congressional authorization. In
addition, in order to process those
claims, the Agency would need to
develop procedures to determine the
requirements for exhausting
administrative and judicial remedies
(CERCLA section lll(b)(2)(A)). EPA
does not believe that such a use of
governmental resources is now
warranted.
To be aura, the 3-year period for filing
natural resource claims may be running
at some sites. However, that is of no
significance so long as authorization to
pay claims is lacking. Should Congress
decide in the future to authorize the
payment of Fund monies for natural
resource claims, any necessary
adjustments in the statute of limitations
may be made at that time.
IV. Regulatory Status and Required
Analysis
Final rules issued by Federal agencies
are governed by several statutes and
executive orders. These include
Executive Order 12291, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and the Paperwork
Reduction Act
A. Executive Order 12291
Executive Order 12291 requires that
proposed regulations be classified as
major or non-major for purposes of
review by the Office of Management
and Budget A regulatory impact
analysis is required for a major rule.
According to Executive order 12291,
major rules are regulations that are
likely to result in:
(1) An annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or more; or
(2) A major increase in costs or prices
for consumers, individual industries.
-------
33814 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 173 / Tuesday. September 8. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
federal, state, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions: or
(3) Significant adverse effects on
competition, employment investment
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of the United States-based
enterprises to compete with foreign-
based enterprises in domestic or export
markets.
Both the arbitration and natural j/
resource claims regulations were
determined to be non-major under
Executive Order 12291. and this rule.
which withdraws those two regulations,
is also unlikely to result in any of the
impacts identified above. Therefore, the
Agency has not prepared a regulatory
impact analysis for this regulation.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
requires that a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis be performed for all rules that
are likely to have "significant impact on
a substantial number of small entities."
The withdrawal of the natural
resource claims regulation will only
affect Federal and State governments or
Indian tribes, since they were the only
parties eligible to file such claims. The
withdrawal of the arbitration regulation
will have little impact since it will be
replaced by the rules for administrative
procedures mandated by the statute.
Therefore. EPA certifies that this rule
will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Information Collection approved
by OMB (2050-0043 (expiring April 30,
1988)) is withdrawn. The 201,600
approved hours have been taken out of
the Information Collection Budgets for
the year ending September 30,1987. and
thereafter.
List of Subjects hi 40 CFR Parts 308
and 308
Administrative Practice and
Procedure. Air pollution control.
Chemicals. Claims, Hazardous
substances, Hazardous waste,
Intergovernmental relations, Natural
resources. Oil pollution. Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Waste
pollution control Water supply.
Authority: 42 U.S.C 8601 et MO. and BXJ.
12580 sect. 4 and ft
Dated: September 1.1987.
Lee M. Thomas.
Administrator.
Chapter L Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as set
forth below.
PARTS 305 AND 306-{REMOVED AND
RESERVED]
Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended by removing
and reserving Parts 305 and 308.
[FR Doc. 87-20547 Filed 9-4-87; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE (MO-aO-M
FEDERAL EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT AGENCY
44 CFR Part 361
Criteria for Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Assistance to State and
Local Governments
Date: September 1.1987.
AGENCY: Federal Emergency
Management Agency.
ACTION; Final rule.
SUMMARY: The purpose of this regulation
is to establish policy and provide
criteria for the provision of financial and
technical assistance to States and local
governments by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). under the
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of
1977 (Pub. L. 95-124. amended by Pub. L,
96-472). This regulation supersedes that
portion of 44 CFR 300.6, Earthquake and
Hurricane Plans and Preparedness.
which pertains to earthquake
preparedness.
In keeping with the trend of Federal
programs of assistance to State and
local governments toward increased
cost sharing. FEMA intends to initiate
cost sharing with States (and local
governments, where appropriate) for
their earthquake ha"1**" reduction
projects. These projects have in the past
been (in most but not all cases) ICO
percent federally funded. This rule sets
out the requirements for cost sharing.
The final objective is cost sharing on a
50-percent Federal-50 percent non-
Federal basis, with the non-Federal
contribution required to be cash.
FEMA realizes, however, that timing
and other contingencies may preclude
the availability of State cash
contributions for earthquake hazards
reduction activities in time for Fiscal
Year (FY) 1988. In order to
accommodate States, therefore, FEMA
plans to phase in cost sharing over a
period of three years. In FY 1988, FEMA
will continue to fund State earthquake
hazards reduction projects without
requiring any State match. Of course.
those States that have already planned
to cost share, and/or have been sharing
the costs with FEMA of their earthquake
hazards reduction projects in previous
years are encouraged to continue to do
so. In FY 1989, minimum cost share
requirements will be instituted. They
wUl require States to contribute 25
percent of the total costs of their
projects, with the Federal Govemmeii.
providing the remaining 75 percent The
State contribution may be cash or in-
kind. Beginning hi FY 1990, the full cost
sharing provisions will be implemented.
which will require States to provide a
minimum of so percent of the costs of
their projects, with this contribution
required to be cash. The publication of
this regulation at this time is intended to
provide official notice to States of this
pending requirement in order to give
them the time necessary to obtain their
required matches for FY 1989 and FY
1990.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1,1987.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Terry Feldman, Earthquakes and
Natural Hazards Programs Division.
Office of Natural and Technological
Hazards Programs, State and Local
Programs and Support Federal
Emergency Management Agency. 500 C
Street SW., Washington, DC 20472. (202)
046-4145.
SUPP1EMENTARV INFORMATION: Congress
enacted the Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Act of 1977 with the purpose
of reducing the loss of life and dar
to property "from future earthqiu
the United States through the
establishment and maintenance of an
effective earthquake hazards reduction
program." The Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) has been
designated as the lead Federal agency
with responsibility for implementing this
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction
Program (NEHRPJ. FEMA exercises this
responsibility in close cooperation with
the three other principal Federal
agencies of the program: U.S. Geological
Survey, National Science Foundation.
and the National Bureau of Standards.
Each of these agencies is responsible for
those specific aspects of the NEHRP that
are most closely related to its own
overall mission.
In addition to its lead agency
responsibilities (Pub. L 90-472. section
101(b)), FEMA is responsible under the
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act for
supporting State and local earthquake
hazards reduction projects, supporting
the development and implementation of
seismic design and construction
standards, leading the Federal
earthquake response planning effort
conducting mitigation and multiha»rd
preparedness planning, and fost
earthquake education and infoi
transfer. The support of State an ^
earthquake hazards reduction projects
-------
-------
Thursday
October 15. 1987
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 350
Trade Secret Claims for Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Information; and Trade Secret
Disclosures to Health Professionals;
Proposed Rule
-------
38312
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 350
(FRL-3261-5)
Trade Secret Claims for Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-
Know Information; and Trade Secret
Disclosures to Health Professionals
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION; Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: This proposed rule publishes
the procedures for claims of trade
secrecy for facilities reporting under
sections 303 (d)(2) and (d){3). 311. 312
and 313 of Title III. and for EPA's
handling of such claims, under the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1986. for
submission and handling of petitions
requesting disclosure of chemical
identities claimed as trade secret, and
for disclosure to health professionals of
Title III information claimed as trade
secret. The proposed rule published
today will not become effective until
promulgated in final form following
opportunity for comment. Until then, the
proposed rule may be used as guidance
by affected parties.
DATES: Written comments on the
proposed rule must be received on or
before December 14.1987. A series of
public meetings will be scheduled about
mid-November to receive comment. For
further information contact die Chemical
Emergency Preparedness Hotline «t 1-
800-535-0202 {in Washington. DC at
(202) 479-2449) or look for notice in the
Federal Register in mid-October.
ADDRESS: Written comments should be
submitted ha triplicate to Preparedness
Staff. Superfuiid Docket Clerk.
Attention: Docket Number 300 PQ-TS.
Superfund Docket Room LG-lOO. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Mail
Stop WH 548D. 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460.
Copies of materials relevant to this
rulcmaking are contained in the
Superfund Docket located in Room LG-
100. at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460. The docket is
available for inspection by appointment
only between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and
4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
excluding Federal holidays. The docket
phone number is (202) 382-3046. As
provided in 40 CFR Part 2. a reasonable
fee may be charged for copying services.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Beverly D. Horn. Attorney-Advisor.
Office of General Counsel. Contracts
and Information Law Branch, LE-132G.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
401 M Street. SW.. Washington. DC
20460. (202) 382-5460. or the Chemical
Emergency Preparedness Program
Hotline at 1-800-535-0202 (in
Washington. DC at (202) 479-2449|.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of toddy's preamble are listed
in the following outline-
I Introduction
A. Authority
B. Background of this Rulemaking
II Trade Secret Claim Procedure
A. Definition of Trade Secret
B Methods of Claiming Trade Secrecy
C. Claims Under Sections 303(d)(Z) and
303(d)(3)
0. Claims Under Section 311
E Claims under Section 312
F. Claims Under Section 313
C. Initial Substantiation
H. Claims of Confidentiality in the
Substantiation
I. Submissions to State and Local
Authorities
III Petition Requesting Disclosure of
Chemical Identity Claims as Trade
Secret
IV EPA Review of Trade Secrecy Claims
A. Overview of the Process
B. Determination of Sufficiency
C. Determination of Insufficiency
D. Deternaoauon of Trade Secrecy
E. Eaforcuimt
V. Relation of Section 322 to Other Statutes
A. Relationship to State Confidentiality
Statutes
B. Overlap with Other EPA-Administered
Statutes
C. Relationship to Freedom of Information
Act
VI. Refease of Trade Secret Information
A. Releases to States
B. Releases to Authorized Representatives
of ERA
VII. Disclosure to Health Professional*
A. Mra-emergency Diagnosis or Treatment
B. Emergency Situations
C. Preventive and Treatment Measures
fl. Statement of Meed
E. Confidentiality Agreement
VUL Summary of Supporting Analyse*
A. Regulatory fcnpnct Analysis
B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
I. Introduction
A. Authority
EPA is proposing this rule pursuant to
sections 322 and 323 of Title III of the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1986. Pub. L. 99-
499. Title III is also cited as "The
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-To-Know Act of 1986." Section 322
of Title III provides the procedures for
claiming trade secrecy for information
submitted under sections 303 (d){2) and
(d)(3). 311. 312 and 313. It also provides
a process whereby members of the
public can file petitions requesting the
disclosure of chemical identities claims
as trade secret. Section 323 provides
procedures for access to chemical
identities, including those claimed as
trade secret, by health professionals
who need the information for diagnosis
treatment or research.
B. Background of this Rulemaking
The Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1986 (SARA).
Pub. L. 99-199. signed into law on
October 17.1986. amends and
reauthorizes portions of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA). 42 U S.C 9601 et
seq. Title III of SARA is a free-standing
statute known as "The Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Act of 1986." It contains provisions
requiring facilities to report to State and
local authorities, and EPA. the presence
use and release of extremely hazardous
substances (described in sections 302
and 304). and hazardous and toxic
chemicals (described in sections 311.
312. and 313 respectively). For the
reporting required in sections 303. 311.
312. and 313. a submitter may claim the
chemical reported as trade secret.
1. Section 303. Section 303 involves
the formulation of comprehensive
emergency reponse plans for extremely
hazardous substances. These are any of
406 substances on a list published by
EPA under section 302. The regulations
for sections 302.303. and 304 were
published on April 22.1987. at 52 FR
13378.
Any facility where an extremely
hazardous substance under section 302
is present in excess of the threshold
quantity (as determined by EPA) must
report to the State emergency response
commission, established under section
301 of Title III. The local emergency
planning committee, also established
under section 301 of Title III. will
contact any facility that has identified
itself, in order to formulate a local
emergency contingency plan. In this
planning process, a facility is required (o
provide the local emergency planning
committee with information the
committee requests, except that the
facility may withhold trade secret
chemical identity from the committee
The facility must also inform the
committee of any relevant changes
which occur or are expected to occur
which may affect the contingency plan
When informing the committee of these
changes, tfae facility may also withhold
trade secret chemical identity from the
committee.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules 38313
2. Sections 311 and 312. Section 311
requires the owner or operator of
facilities subject to the Occupational
Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSHA)
and regulations promulgated under that
Act (15 U.S.C. 651 etseq. as amended. 52
FR 31852 [August 24.1987]) to submit
material safety data sheet (MSDS), or a
list of the chemicals for which the
facility is required to have an MSDS. to
the local emergency planning
committees. State emergency response
commissions, and local fire
departments. The facilities are required
to submit the MSDS or alternative list
by October 17,1987. or three months
after the facility is required to prepare
or have an MSDS for a hazardous
chemical under OSHA regulations.
whichever is later. Any trade secret
chemical identity may be withheld from
the MSDS or list of chemicals, provided
the submitter follows the trade secret
claims procedures under the section 322
regulation.
Under Section 312. owners and
operators of facilities that must submit
an MSDS under section 311 area also
required to submit additional
information on the hazardous chemicals
present at the facility. Beginning March
1,1988, and annually thereafter, the
owner or operator of such a facility must
submit an inventory form containing an
estimate of the maximum amount of
hazardous chemicals present at the
facility during the preceding year, an
estimate of the average daily amount of
hazardous chemicals at the facility, and
the location of these chemicals at the
facility. Section 312(a) requires owners
or operators of such facilities to submit
the inventory form to the appropriate
local emergency planning committee.
State emergency response commission.
and local Tire department on or before
March 1,1988. (or March 1 of the first
year after the facility first become
subject to the OSHA MSDS
requirements for a hazardous chemical)
and annually thereafter on March 1.
Section 312 specifies that there be two
reporting "tiers" containing information
on hazardous chemicals at the facility in
different levels of detail. "Tier I"
containing general information on the
amount and location of hazardous
chemicals by category, is submitted
annually. "Tier II," containing more
detailed information on individual
chemicals, is submitted upon request.
There will be no trade secret claims for
Tier I reporting since no specific
chemical identity is given. However,
submitters may withhold trade secret
chemical identity from the Tier II form.
OSHA recently published a final
rulemaking at 52 FR 31852. on August 24,
1987. expanding coverage of the
facilities required to maintain MSDSs.
The number of facilities thereby subject
to reporting under sections 311 and 312
will have expended from 350,000 to over
4 million, starting in 1988.
The proposed regulation for sections
311 and 312 was published at 52 FR 2838
on January 27,1987. The final regulation
will be published in the near future.
3. Section 313. Section 313 is the last
reporting requirement in Title III in
which trade secret claims can be made.
Under section 313. a toxic chemical
release inventory form (published by
EPA) must be filed with a designated
State agency, and EPA. This form must
be filed for any toxic chemical (on a list
published by EPA) which is
manufactured, processed or otherwise
used in amounts exceeding the threshold
quantity at a covered facility. The form
also indicates the total annual releases
of the chemical to the environment. A
covered facility is any facility with 10 or
more employees in SIC Codes 20-39.
The list of toxic chemicals was
published in the section 313 proposed
rule on June 4,1987 at 52 FR 21152. As
with other sections of Title III. trade
secret chemical identity may be
withheld from the toxic chemical release
inventory form.
4. Section 322. The section 322
regulations contain the procedures
which a submitter must follow in order
to file a trade secret claim. These claims
are submitted to EPA only, by
submitting an unsanitized version of the
document containing the Title in
information. This version will contain
the chemical identity claimed as trade
secret. The submitter must also submit a
santitized version, which is identical to
the unsanitized version in all respects
except that the trade secret chemical
identity is deleted, and instead a generic
class or category is included. This is the
version which is submitted to the State
or local authorities, as appropriate.
Section 322(b) of Title III requires that
a submitter file a substantiation of its
trade secret claim with the filing
containing the chemical identity claimed
as trade secret This up-front
substantiation will consist of the
answers to seven questions which are
intended to elicit sufficient factual
support to indicate whether the claim
will meet the criteria set forth in the
statute for a claim of trade secrecy.
That statute also allows submitters to
claim as trade secret any trade secret or
confidential business information which
the submitter must include in the
substantiation in order to fully answer
the seven questions. This claim of trade
secrecy is more expansive in scope than
that allowed under the reporting
requirements of Title in, because it it
not limited solely to chemical identity,
and includes any trade secret or
confidential business information. A
detailed explanation on how to make a
trade secrecy claim is found under
section Il.G. below.
The regulation contains the
procedures for filing petitions by the
public to request disclosure of chemical
identity claimed as trade secret (The
public petition process does not cover
requests for public disclosure of
information claimed as trade secret
other than chemical identity. These
requests for disclosure must be
submitted under EPA's Freedom of
Information Act regulations at 40 CFR
Part 2.) The section 322 regulation also
sets forth procedures the Agency must
follow in making a determination as to
whether any chemical identity claimed
as trade secret is in fact a trade secret.
These determinations will be made by
the program designated to receive and
handle trade secret claims for that
particular reporting section in Title III.
The Office of General Counsel will hear
intra-agency appeals from the
determinations of trade secrecy.
5. Section 323. The section 323
regulation contains provisions allowing
health professionals to gain access to
chemical identities, including those
claimed as trade secret, in three
different situations. The first situation is
for non-emergency treatment and
diagnosis of an exposed individual.
Second, access is permited for
emergency diagnosis and treatment
Finally, health professionals employed
by the local government may receive
access to a trade secret chemical
identity to conduct preventive research
studies and to render medical treatment
In all situations but the medical
emergency, the health professionals
must submit a written request and a
statement of need, as well as a
confidentiality agreement, to the facility
holding the trade secret The statement
of need verifies that the health
professional will be using the trade
secret information only for the needs
permitted in the statute, and the
confidentiality agreement ensures that
the health professional will not make
any unauthorized disclosures of the
trade secret
II. Trade Secret Chum Procedure
A. Definition of Trade Secret
In accordance with section 322(c) of
Title m, the definition of a trade secret
in this regulation is equivalent to that in
the Restatement of Torts, section 757,
-------
38314
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules
and the regulation developd by the
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration to implement its Hazard
Communication Standard. The OSHA
Hazard Communication Standard
requires disclosures of the specific
chemical identity of chemicals to which
employees are exposed in the
workplace, except in those cases in
which the identity of the chemical in
question is determined to be a bona fide
trade secret. The U.S. Court of Appeals
ruling in United Steel workers of
America v. Auchter. 763 F.2d 728 (3d Cir.
1985). required that OSHA amend its
Hazard Communication Standard to
adopt a definition from common law, the
Restatement of Torts, section 757.
Comment b. (1939). which reads: " 'trade
secret' may consist of any formula.
pattern, device, or compilation of
information which is used in one's
business, and which gives [the
employer] an opportunity to obtain an
advantage over competitors who do not
know or use it." The court concluded in
the Auchter case that the term "trade
secret" is not intended to provide
protection for chemical identities which
are readily determinable by reverse
engineering.
Title III. however, only allows trade
secrecy claims for a subset of the
material which is traditionally covered
under trade secrecy law. Section 322(a)
specifically states that submitters under
Title III may withhold only the "specific
chemical identity (including the
chemical name and other specific
identification)" as a trade secret. The
"specific chemical identity" means
either the chemical name or other
specific identification such as the
Chemical Abstract Services Registry
Number (CASRN).
The statute is unclear as to the
permissible scope for claims of trade
secrecy for chemical identity. The most
narrow interpretation would be to limit
a claim of trade secrecy solely to the
mere presence of the particular chemical
at the facility, or the chemical
composition of the chemical itself.
Congress stated in the Conference
Report that, "the knowledge of [the)
presence [of a specific chemical] at the
purchasing facility could effectively
define for its competitors the process
and/or products being made there." H.R.
CONF. REP. NO. 99-362.99th Cong.. 2d
Sess. 304 (1988).
Throughout the Conference Report.
however. Congress also displayed
general concern for the protection of all
legitimate trade secrets. For instance, in
discussing the reporting requirements
under section 313. it was noted. "[t]he
conference substitute provides for
reporting categories of use and ranges of
chemical present because the exact
[identity] of identified chemicalfs] at a
facility or the exact amount present may
disclose secret processes." Id. at 298.
Similarity, in discussing the reporting
requirements under section 312.
Congress stated. "[i]n order to protect
chemical process trade secret
information, reporting ranges may need
to be broad." Id. at 290. Congress likely
anticipated that it would be possible for
the required reporting on the forms
under Title III to be structured broadly
enough to avoid compromising
legitimate trade secrets. EPA has made
every effort to do this. EPA believes that
even with the use of broad ranges and
reporting categories, however, the
amount of detail requested under Title
III may in some cases still allow cross-
referencing of information which could
reveal valuable trade secret information.
For these reasons. EPA believes that
the statute allows trade secrecy claims
for chemical identity to be made for the
linkage between chemical identity and
other information reported on Title III
submissions (e.g.. specific process
information and special handling
procedures), in addition to claims
relating to the presence of a chemical at
a facility or the chemical composition of
the chemical, through claiming chemical
identity to be a trade secret. Submitters
will be required to meet the four criteria
for supporting a claim of trade secrecy
set forth in section 322(b) of the statute.
and discussed in greater detail in
section U.G. below, for all such claims.
As a practical matter. EPA believes
that this interpretation of the scope of
trade secrecy will not involve great
numbers of additional claims, because
EPA expects that submitters will be
unable to meet the four statutory criteria
for trade secret linkages other than the
presence of the chemical, or its chemical
composition. As an example. EPA does
not expect linkages between the
chemical identity and the amount on site
to meet all the section 322(b)
requirements. Where the identity of a
chemical that a company uses in a
particular product is publicly known but
the amount on site is not known, the
Agency considers it unlikely that a
submitter will be able to show that the
chemical identity is not readily
discoverable through reverse
engineering (section 322(b)(4)). since the
chemical identity is already a matter of
public knowledge.
EPA also believes that this
interpretation does not run counter to
the other major public policy thrust in
Title HI—that of public disclosure—
because the requirement of an up-front
substantiation, which will cause
submitters to justify their claims, will
limit spurious claims. Further, EPA's
intention is to randomly evaluate trade
secret claims and to prosecute
vigorously those submitting frivolous
claims. The S25.000 fine per frivolous
claim under such circumstances is
evidence of Congress's intent to deter
such claims. All submitters should be
aware that supplemental information
submitted to EPA after the initial
substantiation should clearly confirm
the validity of their claim as set out in
the initial substantiation, or they may be
subject to the penalty for frivolous
claims. EPA requests public comment on
the scope of the trade secrecy claim.
The question has been raised as to
whether information which may qualify
as emissions or effluent data.
respectively, under section 114(c) of the
Clean Air Act and section 308(b) of the
Clean Water Act. may be claimed as
trade secret under section 322. The
second criterion of the four which a
trade secret claimant must meet, under
section 322(b). requires that information
claimed as trade secret "is not required
to be disclosed, or otherwise made
available, to the public under any other
Federal or State law." EPA's position is
that this language in section 322(b)
refers to specific information previously
submitted to a Federal or State authority
and determined to be publicly
disclosable, or information previously
submitted to a Federal or State authority
under a law or regulation which does
not allow a claim of confidentiality.
Information which has been
determined administratively or judicially
to constitute emissions or effluent data
within the meaning of section 114(c) of
the Clean Air Act. or section 308(b] of
the Clean Water Act is required to be
disclosed to the public and could not be
withheld from disclosure under section
322. A company could not claim as trade
secret information as to which a trade
secrecy claim has been categorically
disallowed, such as information
required in NPDES permit applications
(40 CFR 122.7(c)). Also, a company could
not claim as trade secret data already
collected by EPA where the Agency has
decided that the data presented no valid
claim of trade secrecy, either because it
was emissions or effluent data or for
other reasons.
A further question has been raised
concerning the status of information
which EPA could obtain, but has not
requested, under the Clean Air Act or
Clean Water Act and of Information in
EPA's possession which could constitute
emissions or effluent data, but as to
which no determination has been made
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules 38315
whether it is trade secret, or. if it is.
whether it is emissions or effluent data.
There is no discussion of this issue in
the Conference Report or elsewhere.
Congress likely intended to leave
undisturbed the status of information as
to which no claim of confidentiality was
permitted under State or Federal law. or
as to which a decision had been made
that no valid claim was presented.
However, a trade secret claimant should
not be required to show that the
chemical identity submitted to the
Agency and claimed confidential would
not constitute emissions or effluent data
required to be made public by EPA if it
had been submitted under section 114(c)
of the Clean Air Act or section 308(b) of
the Clean Water Act. On the other hand.
a successful claim that information is
trade secret under Title in would not be
determinative of the status of the
information under the Clean Water Act
of Clean Air Act, where no
determination had been made whether it
constituted emissions or effluent data.
EPA requests comment on this issue.
B. Methods of Claiming Trade Secrecy
There are five separate submissions
that can be made under Title in which
may include a claim of trade secrecy.
These are: (1) The notification of any
changes at the facility which would
affect emergency plans, under section
303(d)(2); (2) answers to questions posed
by local emergency planning committees
under section 303(d)(3); (3] material
safety data sheets or chemical lists
submitted under section 311; (4) Tier
Two emergency and hazardous chemical
inventory forms submitted under section
312; and (5) the toxic release inventory
form submitted under section 313.
The basic requirements for making a
claim are similar, although there are
some differences among the different
sections. These differences will not
affect the validity of a submitter's claim.
provided the submitter adheres to all of
the requirements. The basic
requirements are as follows. First, EPA
must receive a copy of the document
required to be submitted under sections
303(d)(2J and (d)(3), 311. 312. or 313.
which includes the specific chemical
identity claimed as trade secret. Second,
EPA must receive a sanitized copy of
this same document in which the
chemical identity claimed as trade
secret is deleted and in its place is
included the generic class or category of
the chemical claimed trade secret This
sanitized copy should be identical to the
original in all respects except that it
does not contain the chemical identity.
Third. EPA must receive a
substantiation for each chemical
claimed as trade secret as explained in
Second II.G. below. Although these
three items are the minimum required
for a claim of trade secrecy under all
sections. EPA suggests that submitters
carefully review the requirements under
each section before filing a trade
secrecy claim.
In some cases, a facility may not
know the identity of a chemical that it
uses under a trade name or in a
proprietary mixture, but might want to
file a trade secret claim for the trade
name or mixture. The user will be
allowed to file for trade secrecy, using
the trade name as chemical identity and
filling out those parts of the Title III
submittal sent to EPA that it can supply
without knowing the specific chemical
identity. The user would still be required
to file a complete substantiation.
However, some users making trade
secret claims for trade name products or
mixtures may feel that some portions of
the substantiation questions do not
apply to their trade secret claim. If so,
the user must answer the question to the
best of its ability by explaining why it
believes the question to be inapplicable.
Users who do not wish to make a
trade secret claim for the trade name or
mixture, and have not been provided
with the specific chemical identity in the
trade name or mixture, are not
considered to be withholding specific
chemical identity for purposes of
submitting trade secret claims and
substantiations.
EPA considered imposing more
extensive requirements on users. One
approach would require the supplier to
inform EPA of the chemical identity and
complete the substantiation questions
for the user. Another option considered
was the "best efforts" approach
proposed in the preamble to the section
313 rule, published on June 4.1987 (52
FR 21151.21155], which would require
the user to make multiple attempts to
obtain the chemical identity from the
supplier, including offering to enter into
a confidentiality agreement with the
supplier.
The Agency decided in favor of the
more pragmatic approach taken in this
proposal. In general, the Agency is
concerned with lessening the burden on
users who wish to file for trade secret
status, especially since suppliers are
unlikely to divulge information to users
under a wide variety of circumstances
even if the users are repeatedly
persistent. EPA requests comment on
this issue.
As provided in the final 311 and 312
regulation with regard to reporting
mixtures, owners or operators of
facilities can make trade secret claims
for mixtures on their sections 311 and
312 submittals by either claiming an
element or compound in the mixture as
trade secret or claiming the entire
mixture as trade secret. If the mixture is
reported as a whole, a substantiation
should be provided for the entire
mixture; if the individual elements are
reported, then a substantiation should
be submitted for each element.
All trade secret claims and petitions
requesting disclosure of identities
claimed as trade secret should be sent to
the following address: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. P.O.
Box 70266. Washington, DC 20024-0266.
The Agency will be examining claims
processing issues and may need to
establish an alternate address for
section 313 claims in the future.
C. Claims Under Sections 303(d){2) and
303(d)(3)
Section 303 concerns the formulation
of contingency plans by local emergency
planning committees. Section 303(d)(2)
states that owners or operators of
facilities must promptly inform
committees of any relevant changes
occurring at the facilities as the changes
occur or are expected to occur. Section
303(d)(3) states that owners or operators
of facilities must promptly provide
information to committees when
committees request information from
facilities necessary for the development
and implementation of emergency plans.
A trade secret claim under section
303(d)(2) must include a copy of the
notification of changes in the facility.
This notification may be in the form of a
letter. The document must include the
name and address of the submitter.
Chemical identity claimed as trade
secret must be clearly marked
"CONFIDENTIAL" or 'TRADE
SECRET." A trade secret claim under
section 303(d)(3) must include a copy of
the information requested by the local
emergency planning committee and the
information provided by the facility in
response to the request A letter
containing this information is sufficient
The document must include the name
and address of the submitter. Chemical
identity claimed as trade secret must be
clearly marked "CONFIDENTIAL" or
"TRADE SECRET."
In both of these submittals. the
generic class or category of each
chemical ("class" is synonymous with
"category") claimed as trade secret
should be indicated in parentheses
directly after the claimed chemical
identity. The generic class or category
for chemicals subject to section 303
reporting is discussed below in this
section.
-------
38316
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1S87 / Proposed Rule8
EPA must also be provided with a
sanitized copy of this document The
sanitized copy should be a duplicate of
the original except that the submitter
must delete any chemical identity
claimed as trade secret, leaving in its
place the generic class or category for
each claimed chemical. This sanitized
copy is the copy which is to be sent to
the local emergency planning committee.
Finally, for each chemical identity
claimed as trade secret, a complete
substantiation must be submitted. The
substantiation will be discussed in
greater detail in Section II.G. below.
Generic Class or Category. When a
committee develops its contingency
plan, identification of the specific
chemicals that are present in its
jurisdiction is vital to the negotiation of
the plan and is the first issue to be
resolved in the initial preparation of the
plan. As stated above, if a facility does
not wish to reveal the specific chemical
identity to the committee in the context
of section 303(d)(2) and (d)(3). the
section 303 submittal must include in the
place of chemical identity, the generic
class or category of the chemical
claimed as trade secret.
EPA is proposing three options
regarding the choice of generic class or
category for section 303(d)(2) and (d)(3)
Bubmittals. For purposes of reporting
prior to promulgation of the final rule.
the Agency suggests that submitters
choose an appropriate generic class or
category based upon any of the three
alternatives presented. The purpose of
using generic classes or categories when
chemical identity is requested by the
committee during the contingency
planning process and is not disclosed by
facilities is to aid the public by
providing relevant information about the
chemical as a substitute for knowledge
v.'hich could be gained from the specific
chemical identity. We invite comment
from the public on each of the
alternatives presented below in terms of
which option does, in fact, best aid the
public. All of the alternatives are based
on the concept of an example list of
generic classes or categories.
The purpose of a contingency plan is
to provide effective, expedient
emergency response to aid response
workers and community residents in the
event of a chemical release. In order to
prepare an effective contingency plan.
the hazards involved with the specific
chemicals such as explosiviry or
flammability. adverse health effects
associated with the release, and special
safety equipment needed to contain the
release must be known. Only by
knowing this information, can proper
equipment and procedures be used to
contain the release. If chemical identity
is claimed as trade secret by a facility.
such information can still be obtained
through the determination of a generic
class or category that reflects the
information, as well as by other
questions posed to the facility by the
local emergency planning committee.
EPA recognizes that each individual
committee across the country will have
its own unique safety needs to consider
when developing its contingency plan.
For example, a committee must take into
account various factors relating to risk
management and assessment such as
distance of the affected community from
the facility, type of land use near the
facility, and level of sophistication of
the first responder. These factors vary
greatly from one committee to the next
Likewise, facilities across the country
also differ widely in terms of potential
hazards arising from releases, adverse
health effects associated with the
releases, and prevention techniques
employed to guard against the hazards.
Because of this wide variation of
factors for both committees and
facilities, the Agency believes it
inappropriate to designate specific
generic classes or categories which must
be used by each committee and facility
in all cases where specific chemical
identity is claimed as trade secret To
devise such a list, taking into account
the variety of important safety factors
described above, would be impossible.
Instead, the Agency believes that
committees and facilities should engage
in discussion with each other in order to
jointly arrive at generic classes or
categories that accurately and suitably
reflect the hazards of specific chemical
releases, prevention techniques to guard
against the releases, adverse health
effects associated with the chemical
releases and any other safety
information, as described above.
considered significant
a. Alternative A. This alternative
allows committees and facilities to
arrive at their own choices of generic
classes or categories with no example
classes offered by the Agency. In
suggesting this approach, however. EPA
strongly encourages committees and
facilities to arrive at classes or
categories that incorporate the safety
information discussed above. In this
way, class or category determination
can be a meaningful substitute for
chemical identity and can serve as the
vehicle in which important safety facts
for contingency planning purposes can
be shared, and put to good use.
b. Alternative B. This alternative
differs from Alternative A in that the
hazard categories set forth in the final
sections 311 and 312 regulation are
provided as examples that can be
chosen by committees and facilities in
arriving at generic classes or categories
after discussions. Under this option.
either one of the five categories set forth
below can be chosen to be the generic
class or category, or another hazard-
based class can be chosen.
The following is the example list of
hazard-based classes or categories:
1. Acute (Immediate)
2. Chronic
3. Fire
4. Sudden Release of Pressure
5. Reactivity
Hazard categories are proposed in
this option because, as noted above.
contingency planning should have as its
goal hazard identification, prevention
techniques to guard against the hazards,
adverse health effects associated with
the releases, and any other safety
information the committee and facility
consider significant. A generic class or
category based on these factors will in
most cases be more beneficial for
contingency planning purposes than a
generic class or category based on
chemical structure.
c. Alternative C. This alternative
differs from the other two options in that
the Agency suggests that the
determination of class or category by
committees and facilities generic be
based on chemical structure. It will at
times be appropriate for contingency
planning purposes to have chemical
structure be the basis of the class or
category. The important consideration is
that hazard identification, hazard
prevention techniques, adverse health
effects, and any other safety information
the committee and facility consider
significant be included in the
determination of the class or category.
These factors are essential to the
formulation of an effective contingency
plan.
D. Claims Under Section 311
Section 311 concerns the provisions
for submissions of material safety data
sheets. A trade secret claim submitted
under section 311 to EPA must include a
copy of the MSOS or chemical list
whichever is submitted by the facility
under this section. Chemical identities
claimed as trade secret must be clearly
marked as "CONFIDENTIAL" or
•TRADE SECRET." The generic class or
category (the word "class" is
synonymous with "category") of the
claimed chemical should be inserted
' directly below the chemical identity.
The generic class or category for
chemicals claimed as trade secret under
sections 311 and 312.is explained below
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1967 / Proposed Rules 38317
in this section. This is the unsanitized
version of the MSDS.
EPA must also receive a sanitized
copy of the MSDS or chemical list.
which should be a duplicate of the
original in all respects except that the
chemical identity claimed as trade
secret is deleted and in its place is
included the generic class or category of
the chemical claimed as trade secret.
This is the copy that should be sent to
the State emergency response
commission, the local emergency
planning committee and the local fire
department. When sending copies to
EPA, the unsanitized copy should be
stapled to the sanitized copy, the
unsanitized copy on top. In addition, a
substantiation for each trade secret
chemical identity must be included. An
explanation of a sustantiation is set
forth in Section II.G. below.
Generic CJass or Category. The
chemicals covered by sections 311 and
312 are the same as those covered by
the Occupational Safety and Health Act
of 1970 and its regulations. It is not
possible to write a finite list of generic
classes or categories for sections 311
and 312 because there is no finite list of
chemicals required to be reported under
the sections. Therefore, the choice of
generic class or category should follow
the same process as proposed for
section 303 submittals above.
£ Claims Under Section 312
Section 312 requires the submission of
emergency and hazardous chemical
inventory forms. Information filed on the
Tier I emergency and hazardous
chemical inventory form will not involve
claims of trade secrecy since chemical
identity is not requested on the form.
Trade secrecy claims under section 312
involve only Tier n inventory forms.
On the Federal section 312 Tier II
inventory form, a trade secret box
appears to the right of the space for
chemical identity. Instructions in the
sections 311, 312 final rule, to be
published in the near future, direct that
if chemical identity is claimed as trade
secret, the trade secret box should be
checked. As with section 311. EPA must
receive an unsanitized copy of the form,
i.e., the copy just described with
chemical identity included and the trade
secret box checked. EPA must also
receive a sanitized version of the form
which must be a duplicate of the original
except that the chemical identity will be
deleted and in its place the generic class
or category of that chemical will be
inserted. The two copies should be
stapled to each other, the unsanitized
version on top and the sanitized version
on the bottom. In order to ensure
accurate determination of a trade secret
claim, the order of chemical names
found on the unsanitized version of the
Tier II form (the top page) must match
the order of generic classes or categones
found on the sanitized version. This
sanitized copy of the original form
should be sent to the requesting State
emergency response commission, local
emergency planning committee, or fire
department.
In addition, a substantiation must be
included for each chemical claimed as
trade secret. Explanation of the
substantiation is found in Section II.G.
below.
Claims of confidentiality regarding the
location of chemicals in facilities are not
covered by Title III trade secrecy
protection. The confidential location
information should not be sent to EPA,
but only to the requesting entity. This
information will be kept confidential by
that entity under section 312(d)(2)(F)
which refers to section 324. Section
324(a) states that upon request by a
facility owner or operator subject to the
requirements of section 312, the State
emergency response commission and
the appropriate local emergency
planning committee must withhold from
disclosure the location of any specific
chemical required by section 312(d)(2) to
be contained in a Tier II inventory form.
A few states have expressed an
interest in using State-designed Tier II
inventory forms rather than the Federal
inventory form. Under § 370.40 of the
final sections 311, 312 regulation, to be
published in the near future, facilities
will meet section 312 requirements if
they submit the Federal form, an
identical State form, or an identical
State form with supplemental questions
authorized under State law. If a
submitter wishes to make a trade
secrecy claim, however, he must use the
Federal form as his section 312 Tier II
submittal. Trade secrecy can be more
easily determined by EPA by using the
Federal form. State forms that collect
information under State right-to-know
laws are covered under State
confidentiality laws.
F. Claims Under Section 313
Trade secrecy claims under section
313 must include a copy of the toxic
release inventory form. This proposed
form is published at 52 FR 21152. Under
the proposal, the submitter must check
the box on the form indicating a trade
secrecy claim and include the generic
classification and code preassigned to
the chemical identity in S 372.42 of the
regulation. EPA is reexamining the use
of preassigned generic codes for its final
section 313 reporting rule.
EPA must also receive a sanitized
copy of the toxic release inventory form
which is identical to the original except
that the chemical identity will be
deleted, leaving the generic class or
category. A substantiation for each
claimed chemical identity must also be
submitted, as described in section II.G.
below.
C. Initial Substantiation
All claims of trade secrecy for
chemical identity must be accompanied
by a substantiation for each claim. EPA
is planning to use a form for this
substantiation. (Section 350.27.) EPA
believes this form will assist those
persons filing substantiations because
the substantiation questions which must
be answered are preprinted on the form.
These questions are identical to those
contained in the regulation.
The substantiation must contain an
answer to each of the seven questions
posed in the regulation, or an
explanation as to why that question is
not applicable. These seven questions
are based on the four statutory criteria
in section 322(b) of Title III. EPA
received comment on the proposed
sections 311 and 312 regulation that
substantiations should only be required
after an inquiry as to the specific
chemical identity has been received by
EPA. EPA considers section
322(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the statute to require
an up-front substantiation with each
submission. The Conference Report
states, "[A] claim [must] be documented
at the time the claim is made * * * the
claimant must support a claim of trade
secrecy with assertions of fact
concerning the criteria described below
sufficient to show, if such assertions are
true, that the specific identity is a trade
secret based on those criteria." H.R.
CONF. REP. 99-062.99th Cong.. 2d Sess.
303-304 (1986).
More than a short conclusory
statement must be made in the
substantiation. This is so because EPA
is required, under section 322(d) of the
statute, to make a determination of
"sufficiency" based upon the
information submitted in the
substantiation. To determine statutory
sufficiency, EPA must decide whether,
assuming all the information presented
in the substantiation is true, it is
sufficient to support a claim of trade
secrecy. Descriptive factual statements
are necessary for this purpose. Also.
even though submitters are permitted to
submit further detailed information after
a petition for disclosure is received or if
EPA decides to review a claim on its
own. and EPA has found the initial
claim sufficient EPA does not believe
that this mitigates the requirement for
up-front detailed substantiation. This
-------
38318
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rutes
submission of additional information.
permitted after EPA determines the
initial daim is sufficient is intended to
support the truth of the initial assertions
and may consist of information in even
greater detail than that originally
submitted, such as marketing
information.
The substantiation questions are
designed to elicit specific factual
information from the submitter which
will support the following section 322(b)
statutory requirements for trade secret
protection:
(1) The submitter has not disclosed
the information to any other person.
other than a member of a local
emergency planning committee, an
officer or employee of the United States
or a State or local government, an
employee of such person, or a person
who is bound by a confidentiality
agreement, and such person has taken
reasonable measures to protect the
confidentiality of such information and
intends to continue to take such
measures;
(2) The information is not required to
be disclosed, or otherwise made
available, to the public under any other
Federal or State law;
(3) Disclosure of the information is
likely to cause substantial harm to the
competitive position of such person; and
(4) The chemical identity is not readily
discoverable through reverse
engineering.
Information submitted in response to
these questions should be as complete
as possible. EPA's initial determination
as to whether the substantiation is
sufficient to support a claim of trade
secrecy will be based solely on the
information contained in the
substantiation. Only if the initial
substantiation includes specific
information regarding the four factors
listed above, will EPA consider the
substantiation to be sufficient and allow
the submitter to submit further
information to show the truth of the
assertions in the substantiation, as
required by section 322(d) of the statute.
The specific criteria for determining
whether the substantiation meets the
four statutory requirements are set forth
in § 350.13.
There are currently seven
substantiation questions in § 3S0.7(a) of
this regulation. EPA considered the
alternatives of (a) requiring more
detailed initial substantiations and (b)
requiring no more than a statement of
the four factors listed above.
Under the first alternative, the Agency
considered initially requiring detailed
substantiation like that which must be
provided for chemical Identity claims for
TSCA section S Notices of
Commencement of Manufacture or
Import. 40 CFR 72Q.85(b). However, this
was considered to be overly
burdensome to the submitter moreover.
under section 322(d). the Agency may
later obtain more detailed information
from a submitter to show the truth of the
assertions in the initial substantiation.
The second alternative would neither
meet the requirements of section 322(a)
nor provide EPA with the necessary
information to make the determination
of sufficiency required by section 322(b).
EPA cannot determine the sufficiency of
a claim based upon conclusory
statements that for example, disclosure
of the chemical identity would cause
substantial harm to the competitive
position of the submitter. In order for
EPA to evaluate such a claim, the
Agency would need more information
such as the specific use of the substance
claimed as trade secret and the value to
competitors of knowledge of the
presence of the chemical at the facility.
If the submitter provided only
conciusory statements, this would
require the Agency to make further
inquiries of each submitter to gain
further detail, a time-consuming and
costly effort
Submitters must include a
certification with the substantiation,
signed by an officer of the submitter.
that the information included in the
substantiation is true, accurate and
complete to the best knowledge and
belief of the submitter. This certification
is printed on the substantiation form.
Trade secrecy claims with missing
substantiations or those lacking a
response to each question will be
rejected without notice to the submitter,
and the chemical identity will be made
available to the public. Failure to submit
a substantiation with a trade secret
claim could make a submitter liable for
a fine of up to $10000 per violation.
under section 325(c).
H. Claims of Confidentiality in the
Substantiation
Sometimes the submitter may need to
refer to the chemical identity claimed as
trade secret in the substantiation for
that chemical. Also, in order to supply a
complete explanation of its claim of
trade secrecy, die submitter may include
other trade secret or confidential
business information in the explanation.
Section 322(f) allows submitters to
claim as confidential in the
substantiation any information which
falls within IB U.S.C. 1905. the Trade
Secrets Act This includes not only trade
secret chemical identity but other trade
secret information, as well as any
confidential business information. Ta do
this, the submitter must clearly label
what information it considers to be
trade secret or confidential. This copy of
the substantiation is to be submitted to
EPA. along with a sanitized copy; In the
sanitized copy of the substantiation, the
submitter will delete all of the claimed
trade secret or confidential business
information. If any of the information
claimed as trade secret on the
substantiation is the chemical identity of
a claimed chemical, then the submitter
should include the appropriate generic
class or category of that chemical on the
sanitized version of the substantiation.
No substantiation needs to be
submitted for information that the
submitter includes in the substantiation
and claims as trade secret or
confidential. The submitter need only
include a certification at the bottom of
the substantiation, signed by an officer
of the submitter, that the information
claimed confidential in the
substantiation would, if disclosed.
reveal other reveal other business or
trade secret information. This statement
is included in the certification on the
substantiation form. The claims of trade
secrecy and confidentiality for
information submitted in the
substantiation are not subject to the
petition process described below
because this process applies only to
claims of trade secrecy for the chemical
identity made under Title ffl. Instead.
requests for disclosure of other trade
secret or confidential material must be
submitted pursuant to the Freedom of
Information Act regulations under 40
CFR Part 2.
/. Submissions to State and Local
Authorities
If a trade secrecy claim is made with
respect to a particular submission, only
the sanitized version of the submission
should be sent to the appropriate State
or local authorities. Section 322(a)(2)(iiJ
also requires that a substantiation be
included with the Title DI submittal
Therefore, only the sanitized version of
the accompanying substantiation should
be sent to the appropriate State and
local authorities. If a version of a form
or a substantiation containing trade
secret information is sent to a State or
local authority by the submitter, it will
constitute public disclosure of the
information, and the claim will be
considered invalid.
in. Petition Requesting Disclosure of
Chemical Identity Claimed as Trade
Secret
Section 322 provides for a public
petition process to request the
disclosure of chemical identity claimed
as trade secret This petition process is
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules 38319
applicable only to a chemical identity
claimed as trade secret. If requesters
desire access to items other than
chemical identity claimed as trade
secret or confidential in Title III
submissions (that is. items claimed as
confidential m the substantiation), such
requests for disclosure must be made
pursuant to EPA's Freedom of
Information Act regulations under 40
CFR Part 2.
The petition requesting disclosure
must include the petitioner's name.
address, and telephone number. It must
also include the sanitized copy of the
submission (e.g., the MSDS, toxic
chemical release form) in which the
chemical is claimed as trade secret, and
the petitioner must clearly indicate on
the form which chemical identity is
requested for disclosure. Copies of the
sections 303 (d){2) and (d}(3) filings are
available at a location designated by the
local emergency planning committee.
Copies of the sections 311 and 312 filings
are available at locations designated by
the State emergency response
commission and the local emergency
planning committee. Copies of the
section 313 filings are available from the
public data base maintained by EPA
and from the designated State agency.
EPA is requiring a copy of the
submission in the proposed rule but has
also considered requesting only a
reference to the submission. The Agency
prefers to require a copy in order to
prevent any confusion about what
disclosure the petitioner is requesting.
Public comment is invited on this issue.
As soon as the petition is filed. EPA
will begin the process of reviewing the
trade secrecy claim. The time for
processing the petition may vary, but the
statute requires EPA to reach a decision
within 9 months.
IV. EPA Review of Trade Secrecy
Claims
Section 322 defines the process by
which EPA determines whether a
claimed chemical identity is entitled to
trade secrecy. First. EPA must decide
whether the answers to the
substantiation questions are, if true,
sufficient to support the conclusion that
the chemical identity is a trade secret.
This is the determination of sufficiency
referred to in the statute and is made
prior to any determination on the
validity of the trade secrecy claim. The
statute requires EPA to follow different
procedures depending on whether EPA
decides the answers to the
substantiation questions are sufficient
or insufficient.
A. Overview of the Process
After receiving a petition requesting
disclosure of chemical identity. EPA has
30 days to make a determination of
sufficiency. If the claim meets EPA's
criteria of sufficiency. EPA will notify
the submitter that he has 30 days from
the date of receipt of the notice to
submit supplemental material in writing.
supporting the truth of the assertions
made in the substantiation. If this
additional information is not
forthcoming. EPA will make its
determination based only upon
information previously submitted in the
substantiation. Also, failure to provide
such additional material may make the
submitter liable for a fine of up to
$10.000 per violation, under section
325(c).
If the claim does not meet the criteria
of sufficiency, EPA will notify the
submitter, who may either file an appeal
within 30 days to the Office of General
Counsel or. for good cause shown.
amend the substantiation in support of
its claim.
Once a claim has been determined to
be sufficient, EPA must decide whether
the claim is entitled to trade secrecy. If
EPA determines that the facts support
the claim of trade secrecy, the petitioner
will be notified. If the chemical identity
is determined not to warrant trade
secrecy, the submitter will be notified.
The statute provides for intra-agency
appeal by the submitter to appeal
adverse decisions and for U.S. District
Court review after intra-agency appeal.
This process is explained below in more
detail.
B. Determination of Sufficiency
A person withholding specific
chemical identity from a submission
under Title III must make specific
factual assertions that are sufficient to
support a conclusion that the chemical
identity is a trade secret. These
assertions are made by completely
answering all of the questions listed in
§ 350.7 of the regulation. These
questions will provide answers to the
four requirements set forth in section
322(b) of the statute for claims of trade
secrecy.
Section 350.13 of the regulation sets
forth criteria for use by EPA in
determining whether the answers in the
substantiation fully meet the
requirements for section 322(b). The
criteria listed in § 350.13 can also serve
as a guideline for persons preparing
substantiations.
To support the first criterion, the facts
must show that reasonable safeguards
have been taken against unauthorized
disclosure of the specific identity, and
that the specific chemical identity has
not been disclosed to any person not
bound by a written confidentiality
agreement including local. State or
Federal government entities.
In support of the second criterion, the
submitter must show that the chemical
identity claimed as trade secret is not
required to be released: (1) Under a
determination by a State or Federal
agency that the chemical identity in
question is not a trade secret, or (2)
under a State or Federal statute which
does not allow the chemical identity to
be claimed as trade secret.
To show that disclosure of the
information is likely to cause substantial
competitive harm, under the third
criterion, the facts must show that either
competitors do not know that the
substance can be used in the fashion
used by the submitter and that
duplication of the specific use cannot be
determined by competitors' own
research activities or that competitors
are unaware that the submitter is using
the substance in this manner.
Finally, it must also be shown that
competitors cannot reasonably learn the
specific chemical identity through
reverse engineering analysis of the
submitter's products or environmental
releases. For this criterion, EPA will be
relying on changes made to OSHA's
Hazard Communication Standard in
response to the case of United
Steelworker's v. Auchter. 763 F. 2d 728
(3d Cir. 1985). These regulations are set
forth at 50 FR 48750 (November 27,
1985), and 51 FR 34590 (September 30.
1986). In these regulations. OSHA made
clear that it was adopting the definition
of trade secrecy set forth in the
Restatement of Torts, section 757. The
Restatement definition of trade secrecy
does not include chemical identities
which are readily determmable by
reverse engineering. The OSHA
preamble states, "If the specific
chemical identity of a component can be
readily determined, it does not qualify
as a legitimate trade secret. If the
product is a complex mixture, and
extensive analysis would be required to
determine its ingredients, it is more
likely that the product would qualify for
some trade secret status." 51 FR at 48753
(November 27.1985).
If the substantiation does contain
sufficient answers, EPA will notify the
submitter by certified mail. Under the
statute, a finding of sufficiency
automatically entitles the submitter to
submit supplemental information to
support the truth of the answers
contained in the substantiation. This
could include any information or
documents which would demonstrate
-------
38320
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules
the veracity of the submitter's
substantiation, or provide even greater
detail in support of the submitter's
claim. Upon receiving EPA's request for
supplemental information, the submitter
will have 30 calendar days to submit the
information. If EPA does not receive the
supplemental information within this
time, it will make a trade secret
determination based upon the
information already submitted. Failure
to submit such information, however.
may make the submitter liable for a fine
of up to $10,000 per violation, under
section 325(c).
C. Determination of Insufficiency
If a substantiation does not contain
answers sufficient to support the four
requirements of section 322(b), then EPA
will find that the trade secret claim is
insufficient The submitter will be
notified by certified mail of EPA's
Finding of insufficiency. The submitter
may either appeal EPA finding to EPA's
Office of General Counsel or may
amend his original substantiation if it
demonstrates good cause to do so.
Good cause is limited to the following:
(1) The submitter was not aware of
the facts underlying the additional
information at the tune the original
substantiation was submitted, and could
not reasonably have known the facts at
that time: or
(2) Neither EPA regulations nor other
EPA guidance called for such
information at the time the original
substantiation was submitted.
The submitter must notify EPA by
letter of his contention [1 or 2) as to
good cause and should include in that
letter the additional supporting material
EPA will notify the submitter by
certified mail if the good cause standard
has not been met and the additional
supporting material will not be
accepted. The submitter may then seek
review in U.S. District Court. If after
acceptance of additional supporting
material for good cause. EPA decides
the claim is still insufficient, the
submitter will be notified by certified
mail and may seek review in U.S.
District Court
If EPA reverses itself on appeal or
after accepting additional assertions for
good cause, and decides that the trade
secret claim is sufficient, then the claim
will be processed as though it had been
initially found to be sufficient. If upon
appeal. EPA makes a final
determination that the original answers
in the substantiation were insufficient.
the submitter may request review in U.S.
District Court within 30 days of
notification of the final determination.
The Small Business Administration
has commented that the good cause
standard should include the
circumstance where a submitter
mistakenly does not provide information
but otherwise acts in good faith to
comply with the rule. EPA believes this
is a valid point although it has not
included this circumstance as one of the
good cause exceptions in the proposed
rule. EPA requests comment as to
whether this exception should be
included in the final rule.
D Determination of Trade Secrecy
All claims determined to be sufficient
either initially, after appeal, or after
acceptance of additional material for
good cause, will be examined in order to
determine whether a valid claim of trade
secrecy is presented. In making a
determination of trade secrecy. EPA will
examine all four factors under section
322(b).
If EPA decides that the chemical
identity is a trade secret, the petitioner
shall be notified by certified mail and
may seek review in U.S. District Court.
If EPA decides that the chemical
identity is not a trade secret the
submitter shall be notified by certified
mail and may appeal this determination
to EPA's Office of General Counsel
within 30 days. If EPA does not reverse
its decision on appeal, the submitter
may seek review in U.S. District Court
within 30 days of notification of the final
determination.
£. Enforcement
Section 325(d) authorizes the
Administrator to assess a civil penalty
of 525.000 per claim against a trade
secret claimant if the Administrator
determines that a trade secret claim is
frivolous. Section 325(c) authorizes the
assessment of a civil penalty of $10,000
per violation for any person who fails to
furnish a substantiation or supplemental
information requested by the Agency.
These penalties can be assessed by
either administrative order or through
the appropriate U.S. District Court.
V. Relation of Section 322 to Other
Statutes
A. Relationship to State Confidentiality
Statutes
Section 321 of Title III provides that
nothing in Title III "shall preempt any
State or local law." This means that the
confidentiality requirements of Title HI
are not to displace state confidentiality
requirements under State Right-To-
Know Acts. A State can still prescribe
the type of information it will classify as
confidential when it gathers information
for its own use under a State law, such
as a Rixht-To-Know Act.
A question has been raised as to what
effect State confidentiality statutes will
have on information submitted under
Title III to State and local authorities.
State confidentiality statutes do not
govern information gathered under
Federal law. here Title IIL State
confidentiality statutes only apply to
information collected pursuant to State
law for State use. When information is
gathered under Title III, the Federal
confidentiality requirements of section
322 apply regardless of whether the
information is sent to a State or Federal
agency because the information is being
gathered pursuant to a Federal statute
In stating this. EPA is assuming that
local emergency planning committees
will be asking facilities only for
information properly falling under Title
III. EPA has published guidance to aid
committees in gathering this
information. This guidance is entitled
the Hazardous Materials Emergency
Planning Guide. It is available by
writing to the Hazardous Materials
Emergency Planning Guide. 401 M Street
SW.. Mail Code WH 562-A.
Washington. DC 20460. Additional site-
specific technical guidance for hazards
analysis will be available this fall. A
notice announcing this availability will
appear in the Federal Register.
State confidentiality statutes may
affect Title III information, however, in
that if State trade secrecy regulations
prohibit claims of trade secrecy under
State law for information that a
submitter must'also report under Title
HI. then under the substantiation
provisions of Title HI. a facility will not
be able to justify withholding the
information under Title IIL
B. Overlap with Other EPA-
Administered Statutes
Information collected pursuant to EPA
regulations under statutes other than
Title III may be similar to that collected
under Title III. For purposes of
confidentiality, information should be
claimed as confidential and will be
treated by EPA as is required by the
statute under which it is collected.
However, the mandatory release of
information under one statute may
affect its trade secret status under
another statute.
C. Relationship to Freedom of
Information Act
The procedures set oul in section 322
apply only to claims of trade secrecy for
chemical identity made under Title fTI
Pursuant to section 3221 f). however.
submitters may claim as trade secmt
any other confidential business or trade
secret information which is included in
-------
Federal Register / Vol 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15, 1987 / Proposed Rules 38321
the substantiation, or supplemental
information submitted in the petition
process. Requests for disclosure of this
material must be submitted under the
Freedom of Information Act regulations
dt 40 CFR Part 2. EPA will make
determinations regarding the disclosure
of this material under those regulations
VI. Release of Trade Secret Information
I Releases to States
Under section 322(h). the States, either
the governors or the State emergency
ipsponse commissions, must provide to
Hiiy requesting person the adverse
Vrilth effects associated with extremely
hazardous substances (section 303) and
hcizardous chemicals (sections 311 and
312] claimed as trade secret. The States
Mill not have direct access to the
identities of chemicals claimed as trade
secret in preparing adverse health
effects descriptions. However, the States
have information on health effects in the
MSDSs submitted under section 311 for
this purpose. The MSDS is required to
include such information for any
substance claimed as trade secret. Thus.
governors or State commissions should
not be hindered in meeting their
responsibilities to provide descriptions
of adverse health effects.
Under Title III. EPA is required to
provide to the States, upon request by
the governor, any trade secret
information submitted to EPA. Thus, if a
Stale wished to request the chemical
identities of any or all chemicals
claimed as trade secret in the State, EPA
will provide this information to the State
governor, upon request.
This proposed regulation contains
certain requirements intended to
safeguard the disclosure of trade secret
information released to the States. The
Agency is concerned that there is a
potential for leakage of Title III
information used by various State
agencies unlpss information is carefully
guarded.
The proposed regulation specifies that
the State governor can release trade
secret information only to State
employees. This requirement has the
effect of preventing disclosure of trade
secret information to State emergency
response commissions (SERCs),
although the SERCs are allowed by
statute to identify adverse health
effects. The SERCs are appointed by the
governors and are comprised of
members who have technical experience
m the emergency response field,
including industry representatives that
meet this qualification. Rather than
impose restrictions on SERC
membership or jeopardize the
confidentiality of trade secrets, the
regulation confines the disclosure of
trade secret information to State
employees. Also. State employees who
knowingly and willfully disclose trade
secret information are subject to a Fine
and possible conviction under section
325(d](2)
The Agency is requiring that States
treat all trade secret information as
limited access information to be used by
the States only by staff observing
security procedures equivalent to those
of EPA The Agency feels that this
approach is appropriate to adequately
protect trade secret information. EPA
will publish information on security
pro(,edii'*s in the future
The Agency is requesting comments
on all dspects of disclosure of trade
secret information to State governors
B. Releases to Authorized
Representatives of EPA
In addition to contractors and
subcontractors. EPA has recently begun
to use grantee personnel to perform
Agency functions. The Agency believes
it is appropriate to designate them as
"authorized representatives," along with
Federal contractors and subcontractors.
as that term is used in this regulation.
Full confidentiality protection would be
required, as with contractors. Comment
is requested on this issue.
VII. Disclosure to Health Professionals
Section 323 of Title III consists of
three provisions regarding access to
chemical identity information by health
professionals. These provisions require
the facility owner or operator to disclose
chemical identity, including trade secret
chemical identity, to a health
professional for diagnosis or treatment
in both non-emergency and emergency
situations, and for purposes of
conducting preventive research studies
and providing medical treatment by a;
health professional who is a local
government employee. The health
professional must sign a statement
regarding his need for the chemical
identity, and a confidentiality
agreement prior to disclosure, except in
emergency situations, when these two
documents may be delivered later.
A. Non-emergency Diagnosis or
Treatment
The first provision, part (a) of section
323. requires that in non-emergency
situations, an owner or operator of a
facility which is subject to the
requirements of sections 311. 312 or 313.
shall provide the specific chemical
identity, if known, of a hazardous
chemical, extremely hazardous
substance, or a toxic chemical to a
health professional who requests the
identity in writing and describes a
reasonable basis for suspecting that the
specific chemical identity is needed for
diagnosis or treatment of an individual
or individuals who have been exposed
to the chemical concerned The health
professional must also state that
knowledge of the specific chemical
identity will assist in diagnosis or
treatment of the exposed individuslls)
The health professional must certify ihnt
the information contained in the
statement of need is true and accuse
The health professional onus! also
prcnide a signed confidentiality
agreement to the facilih pnor !o "riming
access to trade secret rhnw.d icit.nniv
Any health pioiessiona1 pbrfr.rmmg
diagnosis or treatment, no: solely
doctors or nurses, is peimitted access to
trade secret chemical identity in d non-
emergency situation. The request for
and safeguarding of trade secrets is a
serious responsibility and EPA urgi-s
health professionals to use other
available information about a cherrm.ciJ
for diagnosis, treatment, or research
studies if possible
B Emergency Situations
The second provision of section 323
deals with medical emergencies and
requires an owner or operator of a
facility subject to the requirements of
sections 311.312 or 313 to immediately
provide a copy of an MSDS. an
inventory form, or a toxic chemical
release form, including the specific
chemical identity, if known, of a
hazardous chemical, extremely
hazardous substance, or a toxic
chemical, to any treating physician or
nurse who requests the information and
has determined that a medical
emergency exists and that the specific
chemical identity of the chemical is
necessary for emergency or first-aid
diagnosis or treatment of an exposed
individual or individuals. Only a treating
physician or nurse can gain access to a
trade secret chemical under this
provision; these health professionals
must use their professional judgment to
determine whether a medical emergency
exists. The requesting physician or
nurse in such an emergency does not
need to submit a written confidentiality
agreement or statement of need prior to
receiving the trade secret chemical
identity. The owner or operator
disclosing such information may,
however, require a written
confidentiality agreement and a
statement of need as soon as
circumstances permit The fact that H
treating physician or nurse does not
need to submit a confidentiality
agreement or statement of need before
-------
38322 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed_Rule9_
receiving the requested information does
not imply that the information received
may be used in any manner other than
the proper treatment and diagnosis of a
chemically related injury or illness. The
chemical identity absolutely may not be
disclosed or used for any other purpose.
encourage requesters to understand the
serious responsibility involved in
handling trade secret material. The
certification must be signed by the
health professional and must state that
the information contained in the
statement of need is true.
C. Preventive and Treatment Measures E. Confidentiality Agreement
The third provision of section 323
deals with preventive and treatment
measures by local health professionals.
This subsection is intended to allow
local health professionals access to
information on chemicals in order to
facilitate epidemiological and
lexicological research and to render
medical treatment for the effects of
chemical exposures. This subsection
requires an owner or operator of a
facility to promptly provide the specific
chemical identity, if known, of a
hazardous chemical, an extremely
hazardous substance, or a toxic
chemical to any health professional who
is a local government employee or under
contract with a local government who
submits a request in writing and
provides a written statement of need
and a confidentiality agreement. The
statement of need must describe one or
more of the needs set forth in the
regulations.
Under this section of the statute. EPA
interprets the term health professional
to be any health professional with the
professional expertise to perform the
types of research and treatment set forth
in the statute, and who is employed by
the local government. Under this
section, such health professionals as
physicians, lexicologists and
epidemiologists may gain access to
trade secret chemical identity.
D. Statement of Need
Unlike the Occupational Safety and
Health Act Hazard Communication
Standard, the health professional
providing medical treatment will not be
required to explain in detail in the
statement of need why the disclosure of
the specific chemical identity is
essential, and that in lieu thereof, the
disclosure of the following information
would not enable the health
professional to provide the medical
services: (a) The properties and effects
of the chemical, (b) measures for
controlling the public's exposure to the
chemical, (c) methods of monitoring and
analyzing the public's exposure to the
chemical, and (d) methods of diagnosing
and treating harmful exposure to the
chemical. EPA requests comment on
whether this information should be
included in the statement of need.
EPA decided to require certification in
the statement of need in order to
The confidentiality agreement
required of the health professional must
state that the health professional will
not use the trade secret chemical
identity for any purpose other than the
health needs asserted in the statement
of need, or as may otherwise be
authorized by the terms of the
agreement itself. This agreement may be
negotiated between the health
professional and the facility.
At a minimum, the written
confidentiality agreement shall include a
description of the procedures to be used
to maintain the confidentiality of the
disclosed information and a statement
by the health professional that he will
not use the information for any purpose
other than the health needs asserted in
the statement of need. Also, the health
professional must agree not to release
the information under any
circumstances, except as authorized by
the terms of the agreement. For example,
the terms of the agreement could specify
that the health professional may release
the trade secret chemical identity to
other health professionals if the
professionals work on a daily basis with
each other and routinely rely on each
other's expertise for needed advice. The
agreement could also specify that the
first health professional may disclose
the trade secret chemical identity to
other health professionals if such
disclosure is necessary in order for the
first professional to learn necessary
information in order to render a
professional opinion. Except in those
instances specified in the confidentiality
agreement, the health professional may
not be permitted to release the
information to other health
professionals. The health professional
may not be permitted to write articles
for medical journals or to go on speaking
tours discussing the chemical involved if
such activity could result in the
disclosure of the identity of the chemical
and the facility's relationship to that
chemical. Such activities could be
permitted, however, if the link between
the facility and the chemical identity
would not be revealed.
The agreement may provide for
appropriate legal remedies in the event
of a breach, including a reasonable pre-
estimate of damages. However, the
agreement cannot include a requirement
that a penalty bond be posted. This
would have a chilling effect on the
health professional community. The
Agency believes that the underlying
purpose of the confidentiality agreement
is to protect a facility's trade secret
chemical identity from unlimited and
unbridled disclosure, not to make it
overly burdensome or difficult for the
health professional to obtain the specific
identity of a chemical.
This confidentiality agreement is
subject to State law and State
contractual remedies. The agreement
can specify the law of the State that will
apply. Also, nothing in this regulation
precludes the facility or health
professional from pursuing non-
contractual remedies to the extent
permitted by law.
F. Related Issues
Following the receipt of a written
request, the facility owner or operator to
whom such request is made shall
promptly provide the requested
information to the health professional.
EPA has considered specifically defining
"promptly" and "immediately" to mean
a particular number of days. However,
EPA is concerned that defined times will
limit the speed of response. Comment is
requested on this issue. The statute
requires "immediate" provision of data
in the case of medical emergencies and
EPA interprets this to mean that the
owner or operator will provide the data
over the telephone, without requiring a
written statement of need or a
confidentiality agreement in advance.
Comment is also requested on this issue.
The Agency is aware of the possible
situation where the owner or operator of
a facility is unable to provide the
chemical identity because the
manufacturer of the chemical has kept
the identity confidential. In these
situations, EPA suggests that the owner
or operator of the facility put the
requester in touch with the supplier of
the chemical, but the facility is not
responsible for supplying information
which it cannot obtain for itself. EPA
requests comment on this approach.
The regulation authorizes health
professionals to refer to trade secret
chemical identity in discussions with
EPA personnel, who themselves are
authorized to have access to Title III
trade secret information. This is based
on a provision of the OSHA Hazard
Communication Standard. If this
provision was not included in the
regulation and the confidentiality
agreement does not so provide, the
health professional would not be
permitted to reveal or refer to any trade
secret identity information in
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1967 / Proposed Rules
discussions with EPA. EPA requests
comment on this issue.
EPA construes section 323 to mean
that a facility is not permitted to deny
disclosure of a specific chemical identity
to a health professional under any
circumstances provided there is a
written statement of need and a
confidentiality agreement. Section 325[cj
empowers EPA to assess civil penalties
of up to $10.000 for failure to disclose the
trade secret chemical identity to health
professionals in emergency situations,
as required by Section 323(b). Health
professionals may also sue under
section 325(e) in U.S. District Court to
obtain the information.
vm. Summary of Supporting Analyses
4. Regulatory Impact Analysis
l. Purpose. Executive Order No. 12291
requires each Federal agency to
determine if a regulation is a "major"
rule as defined by the Order and to
prepare and consider a Regulatory
Impact Analysis (RIA) in connection
with each major rule. EPA has
determined that the requirements and
procedures for treatment of chemical
data considered to be trade secret by
facilities reporting under other sections
of Title III in this rulemaking does not
constitute a major rule under Executive
Order No. 12291. However, the Agency
has prepared an RIA to assess the
economic impact of the final regulation
on affected industry and government
entities. The following results are
presented in detail in the analysis
documented in Regulatory Impact
Analysis in Support of Proposed
Rulemaking Under Sections 322-323 of
the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986, which is
available for review in the public docket
for this rulemaking. This regulation was
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review as
required by E.O. No. 12291.
2. Methodology and Data Sources.
EPA conducted an assessment of the
costs, benefits, and economic impacts
associated with the final rule and the
primary provisions of sections 322 and
323, including: Preparation of trade
secrecy claims by facilities; processing
and storage of trade secret reports by
EPA: provisions by EPA and the States
of health effects information for
chemicals whose identities are withheld
as trade secrets; and special access
procedures under which facilities must
promptly provide chemical data to
members of the health profession. Both
industry and government are required
by sections 322 and 323 of title ID to
undertake certain activities, and thus*
both types of entities will incur costs to
comply with this regulation
implementing these sections.
Benefits for both facilities and
government may also arise in
conjunction with trade secret activities.
In addition, industry, government and
other groups may, as a result of this
regulation, undertake additional
voluntary activities that generate
benefits both for these groups as well as
the general community.
Interrelationships among the activities
undertaken by the various affected
groups, the provisions of Title ID. and
potential consequences for health and
the environment are complex. Thus, time
constraints did not permit EPA to
perform a quantitative evaluation of the
benefits of these provisions; a
qualitative discussion of the benefits is
provided in the RIA.
Costs of complying with sections 322
and 323 of Title III are incurred by
facilities and the Agency in terms of the
following major activities: protection of
trade secrets for facilities complying
with sections 303(d)(2). 303(d)(3). 311.
312. and 313; the petition and review
process designed to ensure that the
public obtains access to reported
information that is found to not warrant
trade secrecy protection: provision of
adverse health effects information in
lieu of chemical identities where
facilities have disclosed only generic or
category information on the materials
involved; and. special access, as needed.
for members of the health profession for
diagnosis, treatment, medical
emergency, and health study purposes.
Total costs of these activities are highly
sensitive to assumptions concerning:
The number of reports submitted by
facilities under sections 303.311.312.
313; the number of reports for which
facilities claim trade secrets; the number
of petitions submitted by the public to
challenge facility claims of trade
secrecy, the number of health officials
requesting trade secret information and
the unit costs associated with each of
the activities.
Both the industry and government
analyses assume that reporting and
receiving entities undertake the
minimum activities that they must
perform to comply with Title IIL The
anlaysis. therefore, does not take into
account the costs associated with
voluntary activities, alterations in
chemical usage patterns that may arise
at facilities as a result of other sections
of Title IIL or other activities or effects.
Several supplemental analyses were
performed to provide evidence on the
sensitivity of the results to changes in
various assumptions of the
methodology. In particular, a sensitivity
model was performed of the potential
variability of substantiation costs
reflecting EPA's list of questions that it
feels are necessary to establish the
sufficiency and validity of a claim for
trade secrecy; and. the assumption thai
facilities will answer the questions with
reasonably detailed research and
responses. Also included is an analysis
of the effects of sections 322 and 323 on
small businesses and the analytical
factors affecting whether a Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis would be required
for the proposed regulation. In
particular, a definition of small
businesses or entity sizes was set forth
and a determination as to whether the
regulation will have a significant impact
upon a substantial number of small
entities was considered.
3. Results. The RIA analyzes the
specific requirements of sections 322
and 323 as established by the statute
and the proposed regulation
implementing these sections of the Act.
The RIA analyzes four activity areas
under sections 322 and 323 for facilities
and EPA. in particular Preparation.
processing and storage of trade secret
reports, petition and review process.
provision of adverse health effects
information, and disclosure of
information to health professionals
a. Preparation, Processing and
Storage of Trade Secret Reports. A
facility must prepare a trade secret copy
of a given Title HI report and send it to
EPA with an accompanying trade
secrecy substantiation. A trade secrecy
substantiation (based upon the proposed
form) costs approximately from $380 to
$1,040 for the Brst chemical that a
facility claims as trade secret
depending upon the level of effort a firm
puts into responding to questions on the
proposed form. Given certain
possibilities for economies of scale
where a facility provides
substantiations for more than one
chemical each additional substantiation
is estimated to cost $220 to $560 for the
facility to prepare (these costs do not
include the costs of preparing the non-
trade secret copy of a Title III report).
EPA will incur costs for processing
and storing each of the reports
containing trade secret information. EPA
will treat as confidential any
information properly claimed as trade
secret until a review is conducted
demonstrating otherwise. The cost to
EPA of processing (logging in) and
storing (filming, microfilming) trade
secret reports is estimated to be less
than $10 per report.
b. Petition and Review Process. A
major provision of section 322 is the
opportunity for members of the public to
-------
38324
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules
challenge a facility's claim to the trade
secrecy of a chemical's identity through
a petition and review process
administered by EPA. The estimated
costs of the three most likely scenarios
of the petition and review process
include cases where a facility is found
to have a claimed trade secret without a
valid basis; a case where the facility has
a valid basis; and, a case with many
complications in the petition and review
process.
In the cases where a facility claims a
trade secret without a valid basis.
petitioner costs are estimated to be $75
per petition. EPA costs are $593 per
petition, and. facility costs are $222 per
petition. In the cases where a facility
has a valid basis, petitioner costs and
facility costs remain the same with an
EPA cost of $388 per petition. In cases
with many complications in the petition
and review process, the petitioner cost
are $75 per petition, but EPA costs could
be $1.325 per petition, and facility costs
are $1,048 per petition.
c. Provision of Adverse Health Effects
Information. A responsibility is created
under section 322 to provide requesters
with information on the health hazards
of chemicals where specific chemical
identity is withheld as trade secret
There is no additional cost to the
Agency here; the States will be able to
use the MSDSs to provide the public
with adverse health effects for
chemicals claimed as trade secret under
sections 303.311 and 312. The Agency
will already have a listing on the section
313 database of adverse effects for
chemicals claimed as trade secret under
section 313.
d. Disclosure of Information to Health
Professionals. Section 323 provides for
special access to reported data for
health professionals. There are three
circumstances for which section 323 sets
up special access for health
professionals to specific chemical
identities or reports: diagnosis or
treatment, medical emergencies, and
preventive studies of exposure or
treatment by local health professionals.
e. Aggregate Costs. Total costs (both
for facilities and for EPA) are largely
related to the number of trade secret
claims made in any time period. These
are expected to total about $48 million
in the first year, drop to $13 million in
the second, rise to $169 million in the
third, and level off at $23 million for
each succeeding year.
The total cost picture is dominated by
trade secret claims associated with the
submission of MSDSs under section 311.
Over the first ten years of the program.
these trade secret claims are estimated
to account for over 90 percent of all Title
in trade secret claims.
The aggregate cost of preparation.
petition and review, health effects
descriptions, and disclosure of
information to health professionals of
Title III reports in this medium case
projection in present value terms over 10
years, at a 10 percent real discount rate
will be $263 million to facilities, and $3.8
million for EPA.
The aggregate cost of the preparation,
petition and review process, health
effects descriptions, and disclosure of
information to health professionals in
present value terms over 10 years, at a 4
percent real discount rate will be $329
million to facilities, and $4.8 million for
EPA.
With the section 311 and 312 rules so
recently published by EPA. and with the
publication on August 24.1987. of the
OSHA rulemaking expanding coverage
of facilities required to report under
sections 311 and 312, EPA has not been
able to estimate accurately the added
costs of the trade secret provisions.
However, analysis conducted for the
sections 311/312 rulemaking estimates
that the total number of reports to be
filed would roughly double, as compared
with the coverage prior to the OSHA
expansion. EPA intends to look further
into the effects of the OSHA expansion
prior to promulgation of this rule and
requests information from commentors
on how unit costs might differ for the
newly covered facilities and the likely
frequency of trade secret claims.
f. Benefits. Section 322 fosters benefits
both directly and indirectly. Direct
benefits include the following: Facilities
are given protection of trade secrets
involving their chemicals, which by
definition involve information that
allows particular firms competitive
advantages over others; the public is
given a petition and review process that
allows them to challenge the validity of
trade secrecy claims through an
administrative review process; the
substantiation requirements will limit
the number of trade secrecy claims to
cases where firms believe that they have
a bona fide basis for trade secrecy; and.
information on the health hazards of
chemicals is made available to the
public while the specific chemical
identities are kept from disclosure
where facilities have established valid
trade secrecy claims. The first two
benefits serve to reduce the costs that
are incurred by virtue of the other Title
III sections (i.e., costs that were not
accounted for in the other RIA's).
Indirectly, section 322 has benefits as an
auxiliary section that makes detailed
reporting under sections 303(d)(2),
303(d)(3). 311.312. and 313 practical.
given the competing interests of
facilities with a need for protection of
trade secrets and the public with a need
to know about exposure to chemical
health hazards. Without the protections
of section 322. many facilities would be
reluctant to rally disclose the
information required under Title III and
as a result the efficacy of the entire
program would be compromised.
Allowing trade secrecy claims
effectively encourages complete
reporting and thus increases the benefits
of the entire Title III program.
Section 323 offers specific benefits in
the case of medical emergencies, where
exposure to chemicals can lead to
debilitating or fatal consequences for
workers, residents, and others. Prompt
disclosure of information by facilities to
health professionals will accelerate their
ability to diagnose incidents properly
and bring the necessary type of
treatment into effect.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
1. Purpose. Under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act whenever an Agency is
required to issue for publication in the
Federal Register any proposed or final
rule, it must prepare and make available
a Regualtory Flexibility Analysis that
describes the impact of the rule on small
entities (small businesses, small
organizations and small governmental
jurisdictions), unless the Agency's
administrator certifies that the rule will
not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The
analysis contained in the RIA addresses
.the impact of this rule on small entities.
Based on this analysis. EPA has
concluded that while a large number of
small businesses reporting under Title
ID could be affected, costs will generally
be low per facility and significant
impacts will not occur.
2. Methodology and Results. To
examine the impacts on small
businesses. EPA compared average
costs for small facilities (defined to be
those with fewer than 20 employees) to
average and median sales for those
facilities, and by two digit SIC code.
There are a substantial number of
small businesses under this definition;
2.794.400 facilities (the universe of
facilities in categories covered by
section 303. the broadest of the sections
associated with trade secrecy claims).
The number of projected trade secret
claims—37.000 to 1,114,600—is large
enough to affect over 20 percent of small
businesses if evenly distributed across
• facilities.
In order to assess the impacts on
small businesses, several guidelines
were used. The first criterion is the ratio
of annual costs of facilities engaged in
manufacturing, with production costs
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules 38325
represented by sales. A worst case
scenario is provided by assuming an
average in the high projection of 3
chemicals per facility and assuming
detailed responses to the proposed
substantiation questions. Average first
year reporting per facility costs of
industry for small businesses, by SIC
code, is $885. Average annual costs are
significantly lower. As a percent of
average sales, the range is between 0.00
to 0.40 percent of sales, which is well
below EPA's guideline criterion of 5
percent of production costs in order to
avoid significant impact
3. Certification. On the basis of the
analyses contained in the RIA with
respect to the impact of this rule on
small entities. I hereby certify that this
rule will not have a significant impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule, therefore, does not
require a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the
Office of Management and Budget under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980,44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Comments on these
requirements can be submitted to the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget 726 Jackson Place. NW.,
Washington. DC 20503. marked
"Attention: Desk Officer for EPA". The
final rule will respond to any OMB or
public comments on the information
collection requirements.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 350
Chemicals. Hazardous substances,
Extremely hazardous substances.
Community right-to-know, Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
Trade secrets, Trade secrecy claims,
Intergovernmental relations.
Dated: October 6,1987.
Lee M. Thomas.
Administrator.
Therefore, it is proposed that Title 40
of the Code of Federal Regulations be
amended by adding a new Part 350 to
read as follows:
PART 350—TRADE SECRET CLAIMS
FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW
INFORMATION: AND TRADE SECRET
DISCLOSURES TO HEALTH
PROFESSIONALS
Subpart A—Trade Secret Claims
350.1 Definitions.
350.3 Applicability of subpart: priority where
provisions conflict: interaction with 40
CFR Part 2.
350.5 Assertion of claims of trade secrecy.
350.7 Substantiating claims of trade secrecy.
350.9 Initial action by EPA.
350.11 Review of claim.
350.13 Sufficiency of assertions.
350.15 Public petitions requesting disclosure
of chemical identity claimed as trade
secret.
350.16 Address to send trade secret claims
and petitions requesting disclosure.
350.17 Appeals.
350.18 Release of chemical identity
determined to be non-trade secret; notice
of intent to release chemical identity.
350.19 Provision of information to States.
350.21 Adverse health effects.
350.23 Disclosure to authorized
representatives.
350.25 Disclosure in special circumstances.
350.27 Substantiation form to accompany
claims of trade secrecy.
Subpart B—Disclosure of Trade Secret
Information to Health Professionals
350.40 Disclosure to health professionals.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11042 and 11043 Pub. L.
99-499.100 Stat. 1747. Subpart A—Trade
Secret Claims
§350.1 Definitions.
"Administrator" and "General
Counsel" mean the EPA officers or
employees occupying the positions so
titled.
"Business confidentiality" includes
the concept of trade secrecy and other
related legal concepts which give (or
may give) a business the right to
preserve the confidentiality of business
information and to limit its use or
disclosure by others in order that the
business may obtain or retain business
advantages it derives from its right in
the information. The definition is meant
to encompass any concept which
authorizes a Federal agency to withhold
business information under 5 U.S.C.
552(b)(4), as well as any concept which
requires EPA to withhold information
from the public for the benefit of a
business under 18 U.S.C. 1905.
"Petitioner" is any person who
submits a petition under this regulation
requesting disclosure of a chemical
identity claimed as trade secret
"Specific chemical identity" means
the chemical name. Chemical Abstracts
Service (CAS) Registry Number, or any
other information that reveals the
precise chemical designation of the
substance. Where the trade name is
reported in lieu of the specific chemical
identity, the trade name will be treated
as the specific chemical identity for
purposes of this part
"Submitter" means any person
submitting a trade secret claim under
sections 303(d)(2) and (d)(3). 311.312
and 313 of Title III.
"Substantiation" means the written
answers submitted to EPA by a
submitter to the specific questions set
forth in this regulation in support of a
claim that chemical identity is a trade
secret.
'Trade secrecy claim" is a submittal
under sections 303(d)(2) or (d)(3). 311.
312 or 313 in which a chemcial identity
is claimed as trade secret, and is
accompanied by a substantiation in
support of the claim of trade secrecy for
chemical identity.
'Trade secret" means any
confidential formula, pattern, process.
device, information or compilation of
information that is used in a submitter's
business, and that gives the submitter an
opportunity to obtain an advantage over
competitors who do not know or use it.
"Working day" is any day on which
Federal government offices are open for
normal business. Saturdays, Sundays.
and official Federal holidays are not
working days; all other days are.
§ 350.3 Applicability of subpart; priority
where provisions conflict; Interaction with
40 CFR Part 2.
(a) Applicability of subpart. Sections
350.1 through 350.40 establish rules
governing assertion of trade secrecy
claims for chemical identity information
collected under the authority of sections
303(d)(2) and (d)(3). 311, 312 and 313 of
Title til of the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1986. and for
trade secrecy or business confidentiality
claims for information submitted in a
substantiation under sections 303(d)(2)
and (d)(3). 311.312. and 313. This
subpart also establishes rules governing
petitions from the public requesting the
disclosure of chemical identity claimed
as trade secret and determinations by
EPA of whether this information is
entitled to trade secret treatment.
Claims for confidentiality of the location
of a hazardous chemical under section
312(d)(2)(F) of Title III are not subject to
the requirements of this subpart.
(b) Priority where provisions conflict.
Where information subject to the
requirements of this subpart is also
collected under another statutory
authority, the confidentiality provisions
of that authority shall be used to claim
that information as trade secret or
confidential when submitting it to EPA
under that statutory authority.
(c) Interaction with Freedom of
Information Act procedures. (1) No trade
secrecy or business confidentiality
claims other than those allowed in this
subpart are permitted for information
collected under sections 303(d)(2) and
(d)(3), 311.312. and 313.
(2) Request for access to chemical
identities withheld as trade secret under
this regulation is solely through this
regulation and procedures hereunder.
-------
38326
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday, October 15, 1987 / Proposed Rules
not through EPA's Freedom of
Information Act procedures, set forth at
40 CFR Part 2.
(3) Request for access to information
other than chemical identity submitted
to EPA under this regulation is through
EPA's Freedom of Information Act
regulations at 40 CFR Part 2.
§ 350.5 Assertion of claims of trade
secrecy.
(a) A claim of trade secrecy may be
made only for the specific chemical
identity (and other specific identifier) of
an extremely hazardous substance
under sections 303(d)(2) and (d)(3), a
hazardous chemical under sections 311
and 312. and a toxic chemical under
section 313.
(b) Method of asserting claims of
trade secrecy for information submitted
under sections 303(d)(2) and (d)(3).
(1) In submitting information to the
local emergency planning committee
under sections 303(d)(2) or (d](3). the
submitter may claim as trade secret the
specific chemical name (and other
specific identifier) of any chemical
subject to section 303 reporting.
(2) To make a claim, the submitter
shall submit to EPA the following:
(i) A copy of the information which is
being submitted under sections 303(d)(2)
or (d)(3) to the local emergency planning
committee with the chemical identity or
identities claimed trade secret clearly
labeled 'TRADE SECRET." In
parentheses after each chemical identity
claimed as trade secret should be
included the generic class or category of
the chemical. The generic class or
category for section 303 chemicals is set
forth in paragraph (f) of this section.
(ii) A sanitized copy of the document
described in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this
section, which is to be identical to that
document except that the submitter
shall delete the chemical identity or
identities claimed as trade secret.
leaving the generic class or category of
the chemical or chemicals. This copy
shall be sent by the submitter to the
local emergency planning committee.
which shall make it available to the
public.
(iii) A substantiation in accordance
with § 350.7 for each chemical identity
claimed as trade secret.
(3) If the submitter wishes to claim
information in the substantiation as
trade secret or business confidential, it
shall do so in accordance with
§ 350.7(d).
(4) Section 303 claims shall be sent to
the address specified in fi 350.16 of this
(c) Method of asserting claims of trade
secrecy for information submitted under
section 311.
(1) Submitters may claim as trade
secret the chemical identity (and other
specific identifier) of any chemical
subject to reporting under section 311 in
the material safety data sheet or
chemical list under section 311.
(2) To assert a claim the submitter
shall submit to EPA the following:
(i) A copy of the material safety data
sheet or chemical list under section 311.
The submitter shall clearly indicate the
specific chemical identity claimed as
trade secret, and shall label it 'TRADE
SECRET." The generic class or category
of the chemical claimed as trade secret
shall be inserted directly below the
claimed chemical identity. The generic
class or category for chemicals subject
to section 311 is set forth in paragraph
(f) of this section.
(ii) A sanitized copy of the material
safety data sheet or chemical list under
section 311. This copy shall be identical
to the document in paragraph (c](2)(i) of
this section except that the submitter
shall delete the chemical identity
claimed as trade secret leaving in place
the generic class or category of the
chemical claimed as trade secret. This
copy shall be sent by the submitter to
the State emergency response
commission, the local emergency
planning committee and the local fire
department, which shall make it
available to the public.
(iii) A substantiation in accordance
with § 350.7 for every chemical identity
claimed as trade secret.
(3) If the submitter wishes to claim
information in the substantiation as
trade secret or business confidential, it
shall do so in accordance with
§ 350.7(d).
(4) Section 311 claims shall be sent to
the address specified in 8 350.16 of this
regulation.
(d) Method of asserting claims of
trade secrecy for information submitted
under section 312.
(1) Submitters may claim as trade
secret the chemical identity (and other
specific identifier) of any chemical
subject to reporting under section 312.
(2) To assert a claim the submitter
shall submit to EPA the following:
(i) A copy of the Tier II emergency
and hazardous chemical inventory form
under section 312. (The Tier I emergency
and hazardous chemical inventory form
does not require the reporting of specific
chemical identity and therefore no trade
secrecy claims may be made with
respect to that form.) The submitter
shall clearly indicate the specific
chemical identity claimed as trade
secret by checking the box marked
"trade secret" next to the claimed
chemical identity.
(ii) A sanitized copy of the Tier II
emergency and hazardous chemical
inventory form. This copy shall be
identical to the document in paragraph
(d)(2)(l) of this section except that the
submitter shall delete the chemical
identity or identities claimed as trade
secret and include instead the generic
class or category of the chemical
claimed as trade secret. The generic
class or category for chemicals subject
to section 312 is set forth in paragraph
(f) of this section. The sanitized copy
shall be sent by the submitter to the
State emergency response commission,
local emergency planning committee or
the local fire department, whichever
entity requested the information.
(iii) A substantiation in accordance
with S 350.7 for every chemical identity
claimed as trade secret.
(3) If the submitter wishes to claim
information in the substantiation as
trade secret or business confidential, it
shall do so in accordance with
§ 350.7(d).
(4) Section 312 claims shall be sent to
the address specified in 8 350.16 of this
regulation.
(e) Method of asserting claims of trade
secrecy for information submitted under
section 313.
(1) Submitters may claim as trade.
secret the chemical identity (and other
specific identifier) of any chemical
subject to reporting under section 313.
(2) To make a claim, the submitter
shall submit to EPA the following:
(i) A copy of the toxic release
inventory form under section 313 with
the information claimed as trade secret
clearly identified To do this, the
submitter shall check the box on the
form indicating that the chemical
identity is being claimed as trade secret.
The submitter shall enter the generic
classification name and code that is
preassigned by 40 CFR 372.42 to that
specific toxic chemical.
(ii) A sanitized copy of the toxic
release inventory form. This copy shall
be identical to the document in
paragraph (e)(2)(i] of this section except
that the submitter shall delete the
chemical identity claimed as trade
secret This copy shall be submitted to
the State official or officials designated
to receive this information.
(iii) A substantiation in accordance
with § 350.7 for every chemical identity
claimed as trade secret.
(3) If the submitter wishes to claim
information in the substantiation as
trade secret or business confidential, it
shall do so in accordance with
8 350.7(d).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October IS. 1987 / Proposed Rules 38327
(4) Section 313 claims shall be sent to
the address specified in § 350.16 of this
regulation.
(f](l) Method of choosing generic class
or category for sections 303. 311 and 312.
A facility owner or operator claiming
chemical identity as trade secret under
sections 303. 311. or 312 should engage
in discussion with the state emergency
response commission, local emergency
planning committee, or local fire
department to choose an appropriate
generic class or category which suitably
reflects the hazards of the release.
preventive techniques to guard against
the release, adverse health effects
associated with the release, and any
other significant safety information.
(2) Method of choosing generic class
or category for section 313. A facility
owner or operator claiming chemical
identity as trade secret should choose
the generic class or category of the
chemical preassigned to the chemical
identity in 40 CFR 372.42.
(g) No trade secrecy claim shall be
considered to be asserted unless the
submittal in which it is made is
accompanied by a substantiation under
§ 350.7. A submittal containing a trade
secrecy claim and unaccompanied by a
substantiation shall be summarily
rejected without further notice to the
submitter.
(h) If a specific chemical identity is
submitted under Title III to EPA. or to a
State emergency response commission,
designated State agency, local
emergency planning committee or local
fire department, without asserting a
trade secrecy claim, the chemical
identity shall be considered non-trade
secret and may be disclosed without
notice to the submitter.
(i) A submitter making a trade secrecy
claim under this section shall submit to
entities other than EPA (e.g., a
designated State agency, local
emergency planning committee and
local fire department) only the sanitized
copy of the submission and
substantiation.
§350.7 Substantiating claims of trade
secrecy.
(a) Claims of trade secrecy must be
substantiated by providing a specific
answer to each of the following
questions with the submission to which
the trade secrecy claim pertains.
Submitters must answer these questions
on the form entitled "Substantiation to
Accompany Claims of Trade Secrecy" in
§ 350.27 of this subpart
(1) Describe the specific measures you
have taken to safeguard the
confidentiality of the chemical identity
claimed as trade secret
(2) Have you disclosed this chemical
identity to any person not an employee
of your company or of a local. State or
Federal government entity, who has not
signed a confidentiality agreement
requiring the person to refrain from
disclosing the chemical identity to
others?
(3) List all local. State, and Federal
government entities to which you have
disclosed the specific chemical identity.
For each, indicate whether you asserted
a confidentiality claim for the chemical
identity and whether the government
entity denied that claim.
(4) In order to show the validity of a
trade secrecy claim, you must identify
your specific use of the substance
claimed as trade secret and explain why
it is a secret of interest to competitors.
Therefore:
(i) Describe the specific use of the
chemical substance, identifying the
product or process in which it is used. (If
you use the substance other than as a
component of a product or in a
manufacturing process, identify the
activity where the substance is used.)
(ii) Has your company or facility
identity been linked to the specific
chemical identity of the substance in
publications or other information
available to the public (of which you are
aware)? Is this linkage known to your
competitors? If the answer to either
question is yes. explain why this
knowledge does not eliminate the
justification for trade secrecy.
(iii) If this use of the substance is
unknown outside your company, explain
how your competitors could deduce this
use from disclosure of the chemical
identity together with other information
on the Title III submittal form.
(iv) Explain why your use of the
substance would be valuable
information to your competitors.
(5) Indicate the nature of the harm to
your competitive position that would
likely result from disclosure of the
specific chemical identity, including an
estimate of the potential loss in sales or
profitability.
(6) To what extent is the substance
available to the public or your
competitors in products, articles, or
environmental releases? Describe the
factors which influence the cost of
determining the identity of the
substance by chemical analysis of the
product, article, or waste which contains
the substance (e.g., whether the
substance is in pure form or is mixed
with other substances), and provide a
rough estimate of that cost.
(7) Is the substance, or your use of it
subject to any U.S. patent of which you
are aware? If so. identify the patent and
explain why—
(i) It does not connect you with the
substance, and
(ii) Why it does not protect you from
competitive harm.
(b) The answers to the substantiation
questions listed in paragraph (a) of this
section are to be included with a
claimant's trade secret claim, on the
form in § 350.27 of this subpart.
(c) An officer of the submitter shall
sign the certification on the bottom of
the form contained in 8 350.27, stating
that the information included in the
substantiation is true, accurate and
complete to the best knowledge and
belief of the submitter.
(d) Claims of confidentiality in the
substantiation. (1) The submitter may
claim as confidential any trade secret or
confidential business information
contained in the substantiation. Such
claims for material in the substantiation
are not limited to claims of trade
secrecy for chemical identity, but may
also include claims of confidentiality for
any confidential business information.
To claim this material as confidential.
the submitter shall clearly designate
those portions of the substantiation to
be claimed as confidential by marking
those portions "CONFIDENTIAL."
"PROPRIETARY." or 'TRADE
SECRET." Information not so marked
will be treated as public and may be
disclosed without notice to the
submitter.
(2) An officer of the submitter shall
sign the certification stating that those
portions of the substantiation claimed as
confidential would, if disclosed, reveal
the chemical identity being claimed as a
trade secret, or would reveal other
confidential business or trade secret
information. This certification is
combined on the substantiation form in
§ 350.27 with the certification described
in paragraph (c) of this section.
(3) The submitter shall submit to EPA
two copies of the substantiation, one of
which shall be the unsanitized version,
and the other shall be the sanitized
version.
(i) The unsanitized copy shall contain
all of the information claimed as trade
secret or business confidential, marked
as indicated in paragraph (d)(l) of this
section.
(ii) The second copy shall be identical
to the first copy of the substantiation
except that it will be a sanitized version,
in which all of the information claimed
as trade secret or confidential shall be
deleted If any of the information
claimed as trade secret in the
substantiation is the chemical identity
which is the subject of the
substantiation, the submitter shall
include the appropriate generic class or
-------
38328
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 199 / Thursday, October 15, 1987 / Proposed Rules
category of the chemical claimed as
trade secret This sanitized copy shall
be submitted to the State emergency
response commission, a designated
State agency, the local emergency
planning committee and the local fire
department as appropriate.
(e) Supplemental inrcrmation. (l) EPA
may request supplemental information
from the requester in support of its trade
secret claim, pursuar.'. 10 § 350.11(a)(i).
EPA may specify the kind of irJcnsation
to be submitted, or the submitter may
submit any additional detailed
information which further supports the
information previously supplied to EPA
in its initial substantiation, under
§ 350.7.
(2) The submitter may claim as
confidential any trade secret or
confidential business information
contained in the supplemental
information. To claim this material as
confidential, the submitter shall clearly
designate those portions of the
supplemental information to be claimed
as confidential by marking those
portions "CONFIDENTIAL."
"PROPRIETARY." or "TRADE
SECRET." Information not so marked
will be treated as public and may be
disclosed without notice to the
submitter.
(3) If portions of the supplementary
information are claimed confidential, an
officer of the submitter shall certify that
those portions of the supplemental
information claimed as confidential
would, if disclosed, reveal the chemical
identity being claimed as confidential or
would reveal other confidential business
or trade secret information.
(4) If supplemental information is
requested by EPA and the submitter
claims portions of it as trade secret or
confidential, then the submitter shall
submit to EPA two copies of the
supplemental information, an
unsanitized and a sanitized version.
(i) The unsanitized version shall
contain all of the information claimed as
trade secret or business confidential.
marked as indicated above in paragraph
(e)(2) of this section.
(ii) The sanitized version shall be
identical to the unsanitized version
except that all of the information
claimed as trade secret or confidential
shall be deleted.
§350.9 Initial action by EPA.
(a) When a claim of trade secrecy.
made in accordance with § 35O5 above.
is received by EPA, that information is
treated as confidential until a contrary
determination is made.
(b) A determination as to the validity
of a trade secrecy claim shall be
initiated upon receipt by EPA of a
petition under § 350.15 or may be
initiated at any time by EPA if EPA
desires to determine whether chemical
identity information claimed as trade
secret is entitled to trade secret
treatment even though no request for
release of Ihe information has been
received.
(c) If EPA initiates a determination as
to the validity of a trade secrecy claim,
the procedures set forth in §5 350.11.
350.15. and 350.17 shall be followed in
making the determination.
(d) When EPA receives a petition
requesting disclosure of trade secret
chemical identity or if EPA decides to
initiate a determination of the validity of
a trade secret claim for chemical
identity, EPA shall first make a
determination that the chemical identity
claimed as trade secret is not the subject
of a prior trade secret determination by
EPA concerning the same facility, or if it
is, that the determination upheld the
facility's claim of trade secrecy for that
chemical identity. If such a prior
determination held that the facility's
claim for the chemical identity is
invalid, EPA shall notify the petitioner
that the chemical identity claimed trade
secret is the subject of a prior
determination concerning the same
facility in which it was held that such a
claim was invalid, and EPA shall release
the claimed chemical identity to the
public.
5350.11 Review of claim.
(a) Determination of sufficiency.
When EPA receives a petition submitted
pursuant to 8 350.15. or if EPA initiates a
determination of the validity of a trade
secret claim for chemical identity, and
EPA has made the determination
required in paragraph (d) of 9 350.9, then
EPA shall determine whether the
submitter has presented sufficient
support for its claim of trade secrecy in
its substantiation. EPA must make such
a determination within 30 days of
receipt of a petition. A claim of trade
secrecy for chemical identity will be
considered sufficient if. assuming all of
the information presented in the
substantiation IB true, this supporting
information could support a valid claim
of trade secrecy. A claim is sufficient if
it meets the criteria set forth in § 350.13.
(1) Sufficient claim. If the claim meets
the criteria of sufficiency set forth in
S 350.13. EPA shall notify the submitter
in writing, by certified mail (return
receipt requested), that H has SO days
from the date of receipt of the notice to
submit supplemental information in
writing in accordance with { 350.7(e). to
support the truth of the facts asserted in
the substantiation. EPA will not accept
any supplemental information, in
response to this notification, submitted
after the 30-day period has expired. The
notification required by this section
shall include the address to which
supplemental information must be sent
The notification may specifically request
supplemental information in particular
areas relating to the submitter's claim.
The notification must inform the
submitter of his right to claim any trade
secret or confidential business
information as confidential, and shall
include a reference to 8 350.7(e) of this
regulation as the source for the proper
procedure for claiming trade secrecy for
trade secret or confidential business
information submitted in the
supplemental information requested by
EPA.
(2) Insufficient claim. If the claim does
not meet the criteria of sufficiency set
forth in § 350.13. EPA shall notify the
submitter in writing of this fact by
certified mail (return receipt requested).
Upon receipt of this notice, the submitter
may either file an appeal of the matter
to the Office of General Counsel under
paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section, or. for
good cause shown, submit additional
material in support of its claim of trade
secrecy to EPA under paragraph
(a)(2)(ii) of this section. The notification
required by this section shall include the
reasons for EPA's decision that the
submitter's claim is insufficient and
shall inform the submitter of its rights
within 30 days of receiving notification
to file an appeal with EPA's Office of
General Counsel or to amend its original
substantiation for good cause shown.
The notification shall include the
address of the Office of General
Counsel, and the address of the office to
which an amendment for good cause
shown should be sent The notification
shall also include a reference to
§§ 350.11(a)(2) (iHiv) of this regulation
as the source on the proper procedures
for filing an appeal or for amending the
original substantiation.
(i) Appeal. The submittal may file an
appeal of a determination of
insufficiency with the Office of General
Counsel within 30 days of notification of
insufficiency, in accordance with the
procedures set forth in §350.15.
(ii) Good cause. In lieu of an appeal.
the submitter may send additional
material in support of its trade secret
claim, for good cause shown, within 30
days of receipt of the notification of
insufficiency. To do so, the submitter
shall notify EPA by letter of its
contentions as to good cause, and shall
include in that letter the additional
supporting material. EPA shall notify the
submitter fay certified mail if the good
cause standard has not been met anri
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October IS. 1967 / Proposed Rules 38329
the additional material will not be
accepted. The submitter may then seek
review in U.S. Oistnct Court.
(iii) Good cause is limited to thp
following:
(A) The submitter was not aware of
(he facts underlying the additional
information at the time the
substantiation was submitted, and could
not reasonably have known the facts at
that time: or
(B) Neither EPA regulations nor other
EPA guidance called for such
information at the time the
substantiation was submitted.
(iv) If EPA determines that the
submitter has met the standard for good
cause, then EPA shall decide whether
the submitter's claim meets the Agency's
standards of sufficiency set forth in
S 350.13.
(A) If after receipt of additional
material for good cause. EPA decides
the claim is sufficient. EPA will
determine whether the claim presents a
valid claim of trade secrecy according to
(he procedures set forth in paragraph (b)
of this section.
(B) If after receipt of additional
material for good cause. EPA decides
the claim is still insufficient. EPA will
notify the submitter by certified mail
(return receipt requested) and the
submitter may seek review in U.S.
District Court within 30 days of
notification. The notification required by
this paragraph shall include EPA's
reasons for its determination, and shall
inform the submitter of its right to seek
review in U.S. District Court within 30
days of receipt of notification.
(v) If EPA determines that the
submitter has not met the standard for
good cause, then EPA shall notify the
submitter by certified mail (return
receipt requested). The submitter may
seek review of EPA's decision within 30
days of receipt of notification in U.S.
District Court. The notification required
in this paragraph shall include EPA's
reasons for its determination, and shall
inform the submitter of its right to seek
review in U.S. District Court within 30
days of receipt of the notification.
(b) Determination of trade secrecy.
Once a claim has been determined to be
sufficient under paragraph (a) of this
section, EPA must decide whether the
claim is entitled to trade secrecy
(1) If EPA determines that the
information submitted in support of the
trade secret claim is true and that the
chemical identity is a trade secret, the
petitioner shall be notified by certified
mail (return receipt requested) of EPA's
determination and may bring an action
in U.S. District Court within 30 days of
receipt of such notice. The notification
required in this paragraph shall include
the reasons why EPA has determined
that the chemical identity is a trade
secret and shall inform the petitioner of
its right to seek review in U.S. District
Court within 30 days of receipt of
notification. The submitter shall be
notified of EPA's decision by regular
mail
(2) If EPA decides that the information
submitted in support of the trade secret
claim is not true and that the chemical
identity is not a trade secret:
(i) The submitter shall be notified by
certified mail (return receipt requested)
of EPA's determination and may appeal
to the Office of General Counsel within
30 days of receipt of such notice, in
accordance with the procedures set
forth in § 350.17. The notification
required by this paragraph shall include
the reasons why EPA has determined
that the chemical identity is not a trade
secret and shall inform the submitter of
its appeal rights to EPA's Office of
General Counsel. The notification shall
include the address to which an appeal
should be sent and the procedure for
filing an appeal, as set forth in
§ 350.17(a) of this regulation.
(n) The General Counsel shall notify
the submitter by certified mail (return
receipt requested) of its decision on
appeal pursuant to the requirements in
§ 350.17. If the General Counsel affirms
the decision that the chemical identity is
not a trade secret, then the submitter
shall have 30 days from the date it
receives notification of the General
Counsel's decision to bring an action in
U.S. District Court. If the General
Counsel decides that the chemical
identity is a trade secret, then EPA shall
follow the procedure set forth in
paragraph (b)(l) of this section.
§350.13 Sufficiency of assertions.
(a) A substantiation submitted under
§ 350.7 will be determined to be
insufficient to support a claim of trade
secrecy unless the answers to the
questions in the substantiation
submitted under § 350.7 assert specific
facts to support all of the following
conclusions:
(1) The submitter has not disclosed
the information to any other person.
other than a member of a local
emergency planning committee, an
officer or employee of the United States
or a State or local government, an
employee of such person, or a person
who is bound by a confidentiality
agreement and such person has taken
reasonable measures to protect the
confidentiality of such information and
intends to continue to take such
measures. To support this conclusion.
the facts asserted must show all of the
following:
(i) The submitter has taken reasonable
safeguards to prevent unauthorized
disclosure of the specific chemical
identity.
(ii) The submitter has not disclosed
the specific chemical identity to any
person who is not bound by an
agreement to refrain from disclosing the
information.
(ni) The submitter has not previously
disclosed the specific chemical identity
to a local. State, or Federal government
entity without asserting a confidentiality
claim.
(2) The information is not required to
be disclosed, or otherwise made
available, to the public under any other
Federal or State law.
(3) Disclosure of the information is
likely to cause substantial harm to the
competitive position of such person. To
support this conclusion, the facts
asserted must show all of the following.
(i) Either:
(A) Competitors do not know that the
substance can be used in the fashion
that the submitter uses it. and
competitors cannot easily duplicate the
specific use of this substance through
their own research and development
activities; or
(B) Competitors are not aware that the
submitter is using the substance in this
fashion.
(ii) The fact that the submitter
manufactures, imports or otherwise uses
the substance in a particular fashion is
not contained in any publication or
other information source available to
competitors or the public.
(iii) The non-confidential version of
. the submission under this title does not
contain sufficient information to enable
competitors to determine the specific
chemical identity withheld therefrom
(iv) The information referred to in
(a)(3)(i)(A) is of value to competitors.
(v) Competitors are likely to use this
information to the economic detriment
of the submitter and are not precluded
from doing so by a United States patent
(vi) The resulting harm to submitter's
competitive position would be
substantial.
(4) The chemical identity is not readily
discoverable through reverse
engineering. To support this conclusion.
the facts asserted must show that
competitors cannot reasonably learn the
specific chemical identity by analysis of
the submitter's products or
environmental releases.
(b) The sufficiency of the trade
secrecy claim shall be decided entirely
upon the information submitted under
§ 350.7.
-------
38330 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules
} 350.15 Pubnc petition* requesting
disclosure of chemical Identity claimed as
trade secret
(a) The public may request the
disclosure of chemical identity claimed
as trade secret by submitting a written
petition requesting such disclosure to
the address specified in 5 350.16.
(b) The petition shall include:
(l)The name, address, and telephone
number of the petitioner
(2) The name, and address of the
company claiming the chemical identity
as trade secret; and
(3) A copy of the submission in which
the submitter claimed chemical identity
as trade secret, with a specific
indication as to which chemical identity
the petitioner seeks disclosed.
(c) EPA shall acknowledge to the
petitioner the receipt of the petition by
letter.
(d) Incomplete petitions. If the
information contained in the petition is
not sufficient to allow EPA to identify
which chemical identity the petitioner is
seeking to have released. EPA shall
notify the petitioner that the petition
cannot be further processed until
additional information is furnished. EPA
will make every reasonable effort to
assist a petitioner in providing sufficient
information for EPA to identify the
chemical identity the petitioner is
seeking to have released.
(e) EPA shall make a determination on
a petition requesting disclosure, in
accordance with section 350.11, and
within nine months of receipts of such
petition.
§ 350.16 Address to send trade secret
claims and petitions requesting disclosure.
All claims of trade secrecy under
sections 303(d)(2), (d)(3), 311. 312, and
313 and all public petitions requesting
disclosure of chemical identities claimed
as trade secret should be sent to the
following address:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 70266
Washington. DC 20024-0266
§350.17 Appeals.
(a) Procedure for filing appeal. A
submitter may appeal an EPA
determination under § 350.11(a)(2) or
(b)(2)(i), by filing an appeal with the
Office of General Counsel. The appeal
shall be addressed to the Office of
General Counsel. Environmental
Protection Agency. Contracts and
Information Law Branch. Room 3600M,
LE-132G. 401M Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20460, and shall
contain the following:
(1) A letter requesting review of the
appealed decision; and
(2) A copy of the letter containing
EPA's decision upon which appeal is
requested.
(b) Appeal from determination of
insufficient claim.
(1) Where a submitter appeals from a
finding by EPA under { 350.11(a](2) that
the trade secrecy claim presents
insufficient support for a finding of trade
secrecy, the Office of General Counsel
shall make one of the following
determinations:
(i) The trade secrecy claim at issue
meets the standards of sufficiency set
forth in g 350.13; or
(ii) The trade secrecy claim at issue
does not meet the standards of
sufficiency net forth in S 350.13.
(2] If the General Counsel reverses the
decision made by the EPA office
handling the claim, the claim shall be
processed according to fi 350.11(a)(l).
The General Counsel shall notify the
submitter of its determination on appeal
in writing, by certified mail. The appeal
determination shall include the date the
appeal was received by the General
Counsel, a statement of the decision
appealed from, and a statement of the
decision on appeal.
(3) If the General Counsel upholds the
decision made by the EPA office
handling the claim, the submitter may
seek review within 30 days in U.S.
District Court The General Counsel
shall notify the submitter of its
determination on appeal in writing, by
certified mail. The appeal determination
shall include the date the appeal was
received by the General Counsel, a
statement of the decision appealed from,
a statement of the decision on appeal,
and a statement of the submitter's right
to seek review in U.S. District Court.
(c) Finding of no trade secret. (1) If a
submitter appeals from a finding by EPA
under § 350.11(b)(ii) that the specific
chemical identity at issue is not a trade
secret the Office of General Counsel
shall make one of the following
determinations:
(i) The assertions supporting the claim
of trade secrecy are true and the
chemical identity is a trade secret; or
(ii) The assertions supporting the
claim of trade secrecy are not true and
the chemical identity is not a trade
secret.
(2) If the General Counsel reverses the
decision made by the EPA office
handling the claim, the General Counsel
shall notify the submitter of its
determination on appeal in writing, by
certified mail (return receipt requested).
The appeal determination shall include
the date the appeal was received by the
General Counsel, a statement of the
decision appealed from, a statement of
the decision on appeal. The Office of
General Counsel shall send the
petitioner the notification required in
§ 350.11(b){l).
(3) If the General Counsel upholds the
decision of the EPA office which made
the trade secret determination, the
submitter may seek review in U.S.
District Court within 30 days. The
General Counsel shall notify the
submitter of its determination on appeal
in writing, by certified mail (return
receipt requested). This notification
shall be written, and shall be furnished
by certified mail (return receipt
requested). The notice shall include the
date the appeal was received by the
General Counsel, a statement of the
decision appealed from, the basis for the
appeal determination, that it constitutes
final Agency action concerning the
chemical identity trade secret claim, and
that such final Agency action may be
subject to review in U.S. District Court.
With respect to the release of the trade
secret chemical identity EPA shall
include in this notification notice of
intent to release chemical identity, as
required by S 350.18.
S 350.18 Release of chemical Identity
determined to be non-trade secret; notice
of Intent to release chemical Identity.
(a) Where EPA's Office of General
Counsel makes a determination under
8 350.17(c)(3). that chemical identity
claimed as trade secret is not entitled to
trade secret protection, EPA shall
furnish the notice set forth in paragraph
(c) of this section to the submitter
claiming the chemical identity as trade
secret
(b) Where a submitter fails to seek
review within Federal District Court
within 20 days of receiving notification
of an EPA determination under
SS 350.11(a)(iv)(B). or 350.11(a)(2)(v) of
this regulation, EPA may furnish notice
of intent to disclose the claimed trade
secret chemical identity within 10 days
by furnishing the submitter with the
notice set forth in paragraph (c) of this
section by certified mail (return receipt
requested).
(c) EPA shall furnish notice of intent
to release chemical identity claimed
trade secret by sending the following
notification to submitters, under the
circumstances set forth in paragraphs
(a) and (b) of this section. The
notification shall state that EPA, will
make the chemical identity available to
the public on the tenth working day
after the date of the submitter's receipt
of written notice (or on such later date
as the Office of General Counsel may
establish), unless the Office of General
Counsel has first been notified of the
submitter's commencement of an action
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15, 1967 / Proposed Rules 38381
in Federal court to obtain judicial
review of the determination at issue,
and to obtain preliminary injunctive
relief against disclosure. The notice
shall further state that if such an action
is timely commenced. EPA may
nonetheless make the information
available to die public (in the absence of
an order by the court to the contrary),
once the court has denied a motion for a
preliminary injunction in the action or
has otherwise upheld the EPA
determination, or whenever it appears to
Office of General Counsel, after
reasonable notice to the business, that
the business is not taking appropriate
measures to obtain a speedy resolution
of the action.
§350.19 Provision of Information to
States.
(a) Any State may request access to
trade secrecy claims, substantiations.
supplemental substantiations, and
additional information submitted to EPA
for good cause. EPA shall release this
information, even if claimed
confidential, to any State requesting
access it
(1) The request is in writing:
(2) The request is from the Governor
of the State; and
(3) The State agrees to safeguard the
information with procedures equivalent
to those which EPA uses to safeguard
the information.
(b) The Governor of a State which
receives access to trade secret
information under this section may
disclose such information only to State
employees.
§ 350.21 Adverse health effects.
The Governor or State emergency
response commission shall identify the
adverse health effects associated with
each of the chemicals claimed as trade
secret and shall make this information
available to the public. The material
safety data sheets submitted to the State
emergency response commissions may
be used for this purpose.
§350.23 Disclosure to authorized
representatives.
(a) Under section 322(f) of the Act.
EPA possesses the authority to disclose
to any authorized representative of the
United States any information to which
this section applies, notwithstanding the
fact that the information might
otherwise be entitled to trade secret or
confidential treatment under this part.
Such authority may be exercised only in
accordance with paragraph (b) of this
section.
(b) (1) A person under contract or
subcontract to EPA or a grantee who
performs work for EPA in connection
with Title III or regulations which
implement Title HI may be considered
an authorized representative of the
United States for purposes of this
S 350.23. Subject to the limitations in
this § 350.23(b). information to which
this section applies may be disclosed to
such a person if the EPA program office
managing the contract, subcontract, or
grant first determines in writing that
such disclosure is necessary in order
that the contractor, subcontractor or
grantee may carry out the work required
by the contract subcontract or grant
(2) No information shall be disclosed
under this § 35O.23(b) unless this
contract, subcontract or grant in
question provides:
(i) That the contractor, subcontractor
or the grantee and the contractor's or
subcontractor's employees shall use the
information only for thf* purpose of
carrying out the work required by the
contract subcontract or grant and shall
refrain from disclosing the information
to anyone other than EPA without the
prior written approval of each affected
business or of an EPA legal office, and
shall return to EPA all copies of the
information (and any abstracts or
extracts therefrom) upon request by the
EPA program office, whenever the
information is no longer required by the
contractor, subcontractor or grantee for
the performance of the work required
under the contract, subcontract or grant
or upon completion of the contract.
subcontract or grant
(ii) That the contractor or
subcontractor shall obtain a written
agreement to honor such terms of the
contract or subcontract from each of the
contractor's or subcontractor's
employees who will have access to the
information, before such employee is
allowed such access: or that the grantee
who has access to the information will
sign a written agreement to honor the
terms of the grant; and
(iii) That the contractor, subcontractor
or grantee acknowledges and agrees
that the contract subcontract or grant
provisions concerning the use and
disclosure of business information are
included for the benefit of. and shall be
enforceable by. both EPA and any
covered facility having an interest in
information concerning it supplied to the
contractor, subcontractor or grantee by
EPA under the contract or subcontract
or grant.
(3) No information shall be disclosed
under this 9 350.23(b) until each covered
facility has been furnished notice of the
contemplated disclosure by the EPA
program office and has been afforded a
period found reasonable by that office
(not less than 5 working days) to submit
its comments. Such notice shall include
a description of the information to be
disclosed, the identity of the contractor.
subcontractor or grantee, the contract
subcontract or grant number, if any, and
the purposes to be served by the
disclosure. This notice may be published
in the Federal Register or may be sent to
individual facilities.
(4) The EPA program office shall
prepare a record of disclosures under
this 350.23(b). The EPA program office
shall maintain the record of disclosure
and the determination of necessity
prepared under paragraph (b](l) of this
section for a period of not less than 36
months after the date of the disclosure.
§350.25 Disclosure In special
Other disclosure of specific chemical
identity may be made in accordance
with 40 CFR 2.209.
§350.27 Substantiation form to
accompany claims of trade secrecy.
(a) The form in paragraph (b) of this
section must be completed and
submitted as required in § 350.7(a).
(b) Substantiation form to accompany
claims of trade secrecy.
BILLING CODE «MO 50 II
-------
38332
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15.1987 / Proposed Rules
&EPA
Substantiation to Accompany Claims of
Trade Secrecy Under Title HI
FOIIII Approved
OMB No. xxxx-xxxx
Approval Expires xx-xx-xx
Instructions: Please answer the following questions in the space provided. Type all responses. If you
need more space to answer a particular question, please use additional sheets. If you use additional" sheets,
be sure to include the number and (if applicable) subpart of the question being answered and to write your
facility's Dun & Bradstreet Number on the lower right-hand corner of each sheet.
You must submit this form to EPA in sanitized and unsanitized versions, along with sanitized and unsanitized
copies of the submittal that gives rise to this trade secret claim. The unsanitized version of this form contains
specific chemical identity and CAS number and may contain other trade secret or confidential business
information, which should be clearly labeled as such. Failure to claim other information trade secret or
confidential will make that information publicly available. In the sanitized version of this form, the specific
chemical identity and CAS number must be replaced with the chemical's generic class or category and any
other trade secret or confidential business information deleted. You should also send sanitized copies of the
submittal and this form to relevant State and local authorities. Failure to answer each question on this form
will make your submittal publicly available.
Is this form sanitized or unsanitized?
Sanitized f"1 Unsanitized
Facility Identification
Name
Title HI Section (Check one only)
D303 Q311 D312
313
Street Address
CAS Number (Unsaniozed Version Only)
1 ' ' ' '
City. State, and ZIP Code
Specific Chemical Identity (Unsanitized Version Only)
Dun & Bradstreet Number
m-rm-i MM
Generic Class or Category
(1) Describe the specific measures taken to safeguard the confidentiality of the chemical identity
claimed as trade secret
(2) Have you disclosed this chemical identity to any person not an employee of your company or
of a local. State or Federal government entity, who has not signed a confidentiality agreement
requiring them to refrain from disclosing the chemical identity to others?
EPA Form xxxx (xx-xx)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15.1987 / Proposed Rules
38333
& EPA
Substantiation to Accompany Claims of
Trade Secrecy Under Title in
Fonn Approved
OMB No. xxxx-xxxx
Approval Expires xx-xx-xx
(3)
List all local, State, and Federal government entities to which you have disclosed the specific
chemical identity. For each, indicate whether you asserted a confidentiality claim for the
chemical identity and whether the government entity denied that claim.
Government Entity
Confidentiality
Claim Asserted
Yes
No
Confidentiality
Gaim Denied
Yes
No
(4) In order to show the validity of a trade secrecy claim, you must identify your specific use of
the substance claimed as trade secret and explain why it is a secret of interest to competitors.
Therefore:
(a) Describe the specific use of the chemical substance, identifying the product or process
in which it is used. (If you use the substance other than as a component of a product
or in a manufacturing process, identify the activity where the substance is used.)
(b) Has your company or facility identity been linked to the specific chemical identity of die
substance in publications or other information available to the public (of which you are
aware)? QYes QNo
Is this linkage known to your competitors? Qves [""I No or Not Applicable
If the answer to either question is yes, explain why this knowledge does not eliminate the
justification for trade secrecy.
EPA Form uuut (xx-xx)
-------
38334
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15.1987 / Proposed Rules
ft EPA
Substantiation to Accompany Claims of
Trade Secrecy Under Title III
Foim Approved
OMB No. xxxx-xxxx
Approval Expires xx-x«-xx
(c) If this use of the substance is unknown outside your company, explain how your
competitors could deduce this use from disclosure of the chemical identity together
with other information on the form.
(d) Explain why your use of the substance would be valuable information to your competitors.
(5) Indicate
sales or profitability
to your competitive position that would likely resu}^™
EPA Form XXM (xx-*x)
-------
. Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15,1987 / Proposed Rules
38335
& EPA
Substantiation to Accompany Claims of
Trade Secrecy Under Title III
FOIIII Approved
OMB No. xxxx-xxxx
Approval Expires xx-xx-xx
(6) To what extent is the substance available to the public or your competitors in products.
articles, or environmental releases?
Describe the factors which influence the cost of determining the identity of the substance
by chemical analysis of the product, article, or waste which contains the substance
(e.g., whether the substance is in pure form or is mixed with other substances), and
provide a rough estimate of that cost.
PI No
(7) Is your use of this substance subject to any U.S. patent?
If so, identify the patent and explain why (A) it does not connect you with the
substance and (B) why it does not protect you from competitive harm.
Patent Number
I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information
submitted in this and all attached documents. Based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately
responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that the submitted information is true, accurate,
and complete, and that those portions of the substantiation claimed as confidential (if any) would,
if disclosed, reveal the chemical identity being claimed as a trade secret, or would reveal other con-
fidential business or trade secret information. I acknowledge that I may be asked by the Environmental
Protection Agency to provide further detailed factual substantiation relating to this claim of trade secrecy,
and certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief such information is available. I understand that
if it is determined by the Administrator of E.P.A. that mis trade secret claim is frivolous, I may be liable
for a penalty of up to $25,000 per claim.
Signature and Date
Name and Title
ieiepnone
EPA Form uu (xx-u)
HLUNO COOe M60-60-C
-------
Thursday
October 15, 1987
Part IV
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 370
Emergency and Hazardous Chemical
Inventory Forms and Community Right-
to-Know Reporting Requirements; Final
Rule
-------
38344
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 370
[FRL 3251-9]
Emergency and Hazardous Chemical
Inventory Forms and Community
Right-to-Know Reporting
Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: Section 312 of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 (SARA), signed into law on
October 17.1988. required the
Administrator to publish a uniform
format for emergency and hazardous
chemical inventory forms within three
months. Under sections 311 and 312 of
SARA, facilities required to prepare or
have available a material safety data
sheet (MSDS) under the Occupational
Safety and Health Act (OSHA) and its
implementing regulations must submit
the MSDS and the inventory forms to
local and State officials. These reporting
provisions give public access to
information on hazardous chemicals
present in the local community for a
wide variety of uses including
emergency response and environmental
and public health planning priorities.
Today. EPA publishes a revision of the
form for inventory reporting based on
public comment received on the January
27.1987. proposal and the July 14.1987,
notice reopening the comment period on
several issues. EPA is also publishing
the final rules for reporting under
sections 311 and 312.
EFFECTIVE DATES: This rule becomes
effective on October IS. 1987. Other
dates relevant to this rule include the
following:
1. Initial submission of material safety
data sheets or alternative list: October
17,1987 (or 90 days after the owner or
operator of a facility is required to
prepare or have available an MSDS for
a hazardous chemical under OSHA
regulations, whichever is later For
facilities newly subject to OSHA MSDS
requirements in May 1988. MSDS or
alternative lists will be due in August
1988).
2. Initial submission of the inventory
form containing Tier I information:
March 1.1988 (or March 1 of the first
year after a facility is required to
prepare or have available an MSDS for
that hazardous chemical under OSHA
regulations, whichever is later. For
facilities newly subject to OSHA MSDS
requirements in May 1988. Tier I
information must be submitted annually
beginning March 1.1989).
ADDRESS: The record supporting this
rulemaking is contained in the
Superfund Docket located in Room
Lower Garage at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460. The docket is
available for inspection by appointment
only between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and
4:00 p.m.. Monday through Friday.
excluding federal holidays. The docket
phone number is (202) 382-3048. As
provided in 40 CFR Part 2, a reasonable
fee may be charged for copying services.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Kathleen Brody. Program Analyst
Preparedness Staff. Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response, WH-
562A. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street SW.. Washington.
DC 20460. or the Chemical Emergency
Preparedeness Program Hotline at 1-
(800) 535-0202. or in Washington. DC at
(202) 479-2449.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are listed
in the following outline.
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
B. Background
1. Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
2. Title III
3. Subtitle B
0. Summary of the Public Comments on the
Proposed Rule
III. Summary of Revisions to the Proposed
Rule
IV. Response to Major Public Comments
A. Definitions
B. Reporting Thresholds
C. Submission of Material Safety Data
Sheets
D. Hazard Categories
E. Mixtures
P. Public Access to Information
C. Trade Secrets and Confidentiality
H. Design and Content of Forms
I. Integration of Title ni Federal
Requirements with State and Local
Programs
J. Information Management
K. Regulatory Impact Analysis
L. Miscellaneous
V. Relationship to Other EPA Programs
A. Other Title III Programs
1. Subtitle A — Emergency Planning
2. Subtitle B — Section 313 Emissions
Inventory
3. Trade Secrets
B. CERCLA Reporting Requirements
VI. Effective Dale
VII. Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C Paperwork Reduction Act
VIII. Submission of Reports
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority
These regulations are issued under
Title III of the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Pub. L.
99-499). ("SARA" or "the Act"). Title III
of SARA is known as the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Act of 1986.
B. Background
1. Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
On October 17.1986, the President
signed into law the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 (SARA), which revises and
extends the authorities established
under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response. Compensation
and Libility Act of 1980 (CERCLA).
Commonly known as "Superfund."
CERCLA provides authority for federal
clean-up of sites where hazardous
materials have been deposited or
released and for response to releases of
hazardous substances or other
contaminants. Title III of SARA
establishes new authorities for
emergency planning and preparedness.
community right-to-know reporting, and
toxic chemical release reporting.
2. Title ID
Title III of SARA, also known as the
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act of 1986. is intended
to encourage and support emergency
planning efforts at the State and local
levels and to provide citizens and local
governments with information
concerning potential chemical hazards
present in their communities.
Title ED is organized into three
subtitles. Subtitle A establishes the
framework for State and local
emergency planning. Final rules for
facilities subject to Subtitle A
requirements were published on April
22.1987.52 FR13378. Subtitle B provides
the mechanism for community
awareness concerning hazardous
chemicals present in the locality. This
information is critical for effective local
contingency planning. Subtitle B
includes requirements for the
submission of material safety data
sheets and emergency and hazardous
chemical inventory forms to State and
local governments as well as the
submission of toxic chemical release
forms to the States and EPA. Subtitle C
' .contains general provisions concerning
trade secret protection, enforcement.
citizen suits, and public availability of
information.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday, October 15, 1987 / Rules and Regulations 38345
3. Subtitle B
Subtitle B of Title III is primanly
concerned with providing information to
aopropnate local. State, and federal
officials on the type, amount, location.
use. disposal, and release of chemicals
at certain facilities.
Subtitle B contains three reporting
provisions. Section 311 requires the
owner or operator of facilities subject to
the Occupational Safety and Health Act
of 1970 (OSHA) and regulations
promulgated under that Act (15 U.S.C.
651 et seq. as amended. 52 FR 31852
(August 24.1987)) to submit material
safety data sheets (MSDS), or a list of
the chemicals for which the facility is
required to have an MSDS. to the local
emergency planning committees. State
emergency response commissions, and
local Tire departments. The facilities are
required to submit the MSDS or
alternative list by October 17.1987. or
three months after the facility is
required to prepare or have an MSDS for
a hazardous chemical under OSHA
regulations, whichever is later.
Information collection requirements are
approved by Office of Management and
Budget under control number 2050-
0072.)
Under section 312, owners and
operators of facilities that must submit
an MSDS under section 311 are also
required to submit additional
information on the hazardous chemicals
present at the facility. Beginning March
1.1988. and annually thereafter, the
owner or operator of such a facility must
submit an inventory form containing an
estimate of the maximum amount of
hazardous chemicals present at the
facility during the preceding year, an
estimate of the average daily amount of
hazardous chemicals at the facility, and
the location of these chemicals at the
facility. Section 312(a) requires owners
or operators of such facilities to submit
the inventory form to the appropriate
local emergency planning committee.
State emergency response commission.
and local fire department on or before
March 1.1988 (or March 1 of the first
ysar after the facility first becomes
subject to the OSHA MSDS
requirements for a hazardous chemical)
and annually thereafter on March 1.
Section 312 specifies that there be two
reporting "tiers" containing information
on hazardous chemicals at the facility in
different levels of detail. "Tier I."
containing general information on the
amount and location of hazardous
chemicals by category, is submitted
annually. "Tier II." containing more
detailed information on individual
chemicals, is submitted upon request
A proposed rule setting forth sections
311 and 312 reporting requirements and
forms for inventory reporting under
section 312 was published on January
27.1987. 52 FR 2836. Additionally, on
July 14,1987, EPA announced reopening
of the comment period on three issues
raised during the initial rulemaking and
held a public meeting on those issues. 52
FR 26357 (July 14.1987). Today's rule
finalizes the reporting requirements and
the inventory forms, which have been
revised based on public comment.
Section 313 requires that certain
facilities with ten or more employees
that manufacture, process, or use a
"toxic chemical" in excess of a
statutonly-prescribed quantity submit
annual information on the chemical and
releases of the chemical into the
environment. This information must be
submitted to EPA and to the appropriate
State offices annually beginning on July
1.1988. EPA is required under section
313(i) to establish a national toxic
chemical inventory database for the
management of these data. A proposed
rule setting forth section 313 reporting
requirements and a form for submission
of such reports was published on June 4.
1987. 52 FR 21152.
The public has access to most Title HI
information at locations designated by
the Administrator, the State emergency
response commission, or local
emergency planning committee, as '
appropriate.
II. Summary of the Public Comments on
the Proposed Rule
A total of 241 letters was received on
the proposed rule setting forth sections
311 and 312 requirements and an
additional 94 letters following the notice
of the reopening of the comment period
on July 14.1987. There were a number of
comments requesting clarification of
terms and exemptions provided in the
rule. Specific comments focused on the
definition of "facility" and the need for
clarification of the exemptions that are
applicable to the definition of
"hazardous chemical." particularly the
exemptions related to research
laboratories, household products, and
solids.
There were numerous comments on
the proposed reporting threshold; these
focused on the appropriate length of
phase-in, appropriate reporting
threshold quantities in each year, and
the threshold for the extremely
hazardous substance list. Many related
comments identified the need for funds
to implement these reporting
requirements.
Another issue commonly addressed
by commenters was the need to reduce
the number of physical and health
hazard categories by which the MSDS
list and Tier I and Tier II submissions
are compiled. There were also
comments on the design and content of
the reporting forms.
Other major issues were the need for
integration of the federal reporting
requirements into existing State and
local programs and flexibility for
effective implementation by State and
local governments.
Other comments addressed
information management, the economic
analysis and small business analysis.
confidentiality of information, and
enforcement and penalties.
III. Summary of Revisions to the
Proposed Rule
This section describes the significant
changes that EPA has made to sections
311 and 312 reporting regulations based
upon the public comments on the
proposed rule. The following summary.
which is organized according to the
sections of the rule, describes each of
the changes.
Section 370.2 Definitions
Under section 311. an alternative to
submitting the actual MSDS for each
"hazardous chemical" at a facility is the
submission of a list of such chemicals.
grouped in "categories of health and
physical hazards" as set forth under
OSHA or its implementing regulations.
Section 312 specifies that these
categories should also be used in Tier I
inventory reporting. EPA is authorized
under these sections to alter these
hazard categories.
The proposed rule required use of the
OSHA hazard classification but
solicited comment on several other
options for establishing hazard
categories. Based on the numerous
comments requesting modifications of
the categories in the proposed rule, EPA
has consolidated the 23 OSHA hazard
categories into five categories, as
discussed in more detail in Section IV.D.
of this preamble.
A definition for "hazard category" has
been added to indicate the hazard
classification to be used for Tier I and
Tier II reporting and when the
alternative list of chemicals rather than
MSDS is submitted under S 370.21 of the
rule.
Definitions of "extremely hazardous
substance" and "threshold planning
quantity" (TPQ) have also been added
because of the reference to these terms
in the minimum threshold regulation.
Additionally, "present in the same form
and concentration as a product
packaged for distribution and use by the
general public" is defined to help clarify
-------
the-nonsenold product" exemption.
EPA aiao tliniTTinlnt the reference to40
CFR Part 3QO far additional definition of
terms., since ait necessary terms are now
defined in Parts 350 and 320. Finally.
EPA eliminated the definition on "Act"
because that term does not appear
elsewhere is the regulations..
Section 37020 Applicability
Several changes were made to this
section based ait public comment. First.
EPA has revised the threshold level* for
reporting, as discussed in more detail in
Section W.B. of this preamble. EPA has
revised the rule to raise th* threshold in
the second year and to establish a
threshold of 500 pounds or theTPQ.
whichever is less, for extremely
hazardous; substances. (For nst of
extremely hazardous substances, see 52
FR 1337ft (April 22.1987)t to be codified.
at 49 CFR Part 3554 Section 370.20 of the
final rule has been revised to reflect
these changes.
Several commeBters requested
clarification on whether the threshold
applies to the calendar year or to the
year preceding October 17. The final
rule was modified to delete reference to
year in order to.make clear that MSDS
reporting on October 17,1987. is to be
made for chemicals present at or above
the threshold on that date. With regard)
to inventory reporting, § 370.25 has been
modified to make clear thai reporting ts
for the preceding calendar year as
specified under Section 312. In addition,
the rule has been clarified by setting out
the threshold as. they apply to MSDS
reporting, inventory reporting, and
faculties that become sofaject to these
requirements after October 17,1987.
for MSDS betettr the threshold and
MSOS for Gated cheaicate.
Sectwn 37H25(c} of the final rute
indicates tfca* the Tier B form must be
submitted to the commission, the
committee, and the fire department upon
the request of such entities, hi the
proposed rutev the commission wa*
omitted erroneously.
Section 37O2B Mixtures
Section (a) has. beea modified to
indicate that repotting of mixtnces under
§ S 370.21 and 378.25 should be
consistent "where practicable." This
was done because one commentei
pointed out that coosistencjr in reporting
may not always be pessibag e.g>, the
percentage of the hazardous
components may not be known.
A new section f b) was addled to
describe the calculation, off the quantity
of mecnires. tf the reporting is on each
component that is a hazardous eheancaU
then the concentration of the: hazardous
chemical, in weight percent (greater
than 1* orO.1% if cascinoaenie) most be
multiplied: by the mass |iu pounds) of
the mixture to determine me quantity of
the hazardous chemical therein. If the
reporting is on the mixture itseff.the
total quantity of die mixture oust be
reported*
Sections 370.40 and370.41 Inventory
Forms
As discussed in Section IV J. of this
preamble, several commenters sought
chffificatnnr on the extent to which State
or local forms similar in purpose and
content could be ased in heu. of tn* form
pubnshed under section 312. Because
facilities will need some certainty in.
[.••ting their reporting: obligations, EPA
is clarifying; the-role to indicate that tae
fenast published today are to- be
considered* axdfono formats for
reporting. However, Slate crtocal
governmentemay add snppl
-----
Section 370.21 MSDS Reporting
In response to a request for
clarification; regarding; repotting of
mixtures-under the MSDS list Bepuiuag. o . ^^
§ 37G.21ib){ui) has been modified to questions. Mew |ft:3*°>*JW "*
indicate that the hazardous components 37ftal|a) address, tern issue n the fins*
ofmixhnesdonotneedtobBBeported rule. This seetnw has ateaibeenreTOed
f ^L _ mjvture **—••*>••• • •• — ••-• "•• »«• ••*«Bm«itB»oi
The title of subsection fc) of i 370.21
has been changed from "update
reporting" to "supplemental reporting'
to reflect more accurately tne content.
This paragraph has also-bees modifietf
to require that revised MSDS be
submitted not only to the committee aa
indicated hi the proposed nde. but also-
to the commission, and the fin
department. This, change was made to
ensure accuracy of the files held by
these entities.
Section 37O2±td) has. been, revised to
clarify that facilities, must respond to aH
requests! far MSDS, including- Eeqpest*
ruiemaiuny uun in»m.cTi^«» ••«•• ~«- -— - -
form must be submitted to EPA. Section
370 41 in today's rule correctly indicates
that the Tta U fora- must be sabmirted
to to* SEM& LEFC. aw* fire department
as required in ft WJ/Sfcj*
In response to severalicoBBBeBte
concerning the average daily amount
* «• tA, n an nthnri aTaT
COnCESning MIW «*» •&•• —f —~
EPA has changed the method rf
calculating this figun. Tke< ceaa
primary concern was: tfcs EPA's
proposed method' of catatlauoai ww«W
create misleadingly low figures for
chemical* that are present oMite » t
oniy start periods of tSme. Oft-the-Snel
form, avesae &&> anaunt is te>be>
calculated by dividing the total of aff
daily weight* by the-number of day sand
chemical was present on. the site. To
reflect the amount moee accurately.
however. EPA will require facilities to
report the Bomber of days used in tae
calculation.
Although several commenters
requested that EPA eliminate the
requirement for a 24-hour emergency
contact. theAgency has retained this.
requirement with minor changes, as
discussed in Section IV.H. of this
preamble. The final forms for both Tier I
and Tier II have space for two
emergency contacts and contain
amended instructions that allow the
naming of an office, instead of an
individual, as a contact.
After considering numerous comments
about the certification statement. EPA
has deleted1 the word "immediately"
from the proposed Tier I and Tier II
certification statements, ta its present
form, the statement indicates that the
person signing has read all the
information in the inventory and has
been responsible in a supervisory
capacity—directly or indirectly—for the
gathering of the information.
EPA made several other minor
changes in both the Tier I and Tier n
forms. The revised forms include the
correct B-Z-1 block format for CAS
numbers- and a 4-block format for SrC
codes. The revised instructions include
an- explanation of where a fadTity can
find ifs Den ft Bradsn^tmnnber. a
clarification of the reporting of CAS
numbers of mixtures, a stalemenl-of the
thresholds promulgated by the
regulations, and a chmficafian that
those thresholds apply to the calendar
year precedinf the reporting deadline.
Additionally, me irwtrections for the
forms hare been modified to
differentiate-between Tftte HIand
OSHA exemption, hwhnhng the
supplementary OSHA exemptions that
appry under the newfy revised1 hazard
communication standard.
hi response to numerous comments
regarding tfte rbcantm identification
system on Ae Tier II form., the Agency
has clarified that the- building and lotbe
indicated, at» minimum, and has added
the option of providing a brief narrative
statement of location to the sitej*m
and s*»e eo^rdSnales options. EPA nas
renewed1 the 3-spaee site co-ordinate
abbreviation and adtferf a blank Kne to
provide more space-for this narrative
descripSen. Miner changes made to the
Tier n fcr» rise indade more space for
the chemical name. In addition, cede*
of the temperature- and pressure eoe>
("less than- ambfeat temperetwe > w
revised sngn«Pr «o avew* everlap
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 38347
between code 6 and code 7 ("cryogenic
conditions").
IV. Reponses to Major Public Comments
A document summarizing the
comments and providing EPA's
responses to all the public comments is
available in the public docket to this
final rule. The major issues raised by the
commenters and the Agency's response
to them are described below.
A. Definitions
I. "Facility"
Several commenters requested a
clarification of the general definition of
"facility" for purposes of Title d.
Commenters requested that the term be
limited to manufacturing, distribution.
and storage facilities, or to operations
required to prepare or have available an
MSDS rather than the whole site. Other
commenters asked the Agency to clarify
whether the term excludes motor
vehicles, rolling stock, and aircraft
Additional comments questioned
whether the term "facility" includes
non-adjacent warehouses and
contractors who bring hazardous
materials onto a plant site.
In both the proposed and final rules,
EPA has codified the definition of
"facility" provided in section 329 of
SARA. Section 370.2 provides that, for
the purposes of these regulations,
"facility" means all buildings and other
stationary items located on contiguous
property under common ownership or
control. Certain non-stationary items
(motor vehicles, rolling stock, and
aircraft] are also considered facilities,
but only for the purposes of emergency
release notification under section 304 of
the Act (codified at 40 CFR 355.40).
Thus, transportation vehicles are not
"facilities" for purposes of this rule.
("Transportation-related facilities"
under Title III are further defined in 40
CFR 355.20.)
In response to comments requesting
EPA to limit "facility" to manufacturing.
distribution, and storage, under Section
329, the term "facility" is not limited to
manufacturing, distribution, and storage
facilities, or operations required to
prepare or have available an MSOS.
However, sections 311 and 312
requirements are applicable only to
facilities required to comply with the
OSHA hazard communication standard,
which is currently limited to facilities in
SIC codes 20-39. OSHA has recently
expanded the application of the hazard
communication standard to facilities in
the non-manufacturing sector, to be
effective over the next nine months. 52
rR 51852 (August 24.1987). With respect
to the non-adjacent warehouses, any
offsite storage would be considered a
separate facility because the definition
of "facility" includes only adjacent or
contiguous property.
With respect to contractors bringing
hazardous matenal on-site. the
hazardous material brought to a facility
is subject to sections 311 and 312
requirements if the facility is required to
prepare or have available an MSDS for
the material. Off-site contractors, if
subject to OSHA MSDS requirements,
will be required to submit MSDS and
inventory forms for the material.
2. "Hazardous Chemical" Issues
Several commenters believed that
federal agencies should develop a
common definition of "hazardous
substance" and "hazardous chemical."
Title ni uses several different terms to
describe related groups of substances.
"Hazardous substances" are substances
subject to CERCLA provisions and are
defined in section 101(14) of that Act.
"Extremely hazardous substances" are
substances subject to the emergency
planning provisions of Title III and are
defined in section 302 of SARA.
"Hazardous chemical" comprises the
group of substances subject to sections
311 and 312 and is defined as all
"hazardous chemicals" as defined under
OSHA and its implementing regulations,
but with five additional exclusions
under section 311(e) of Title III. Because
all of these groups of substances are
specifically defined by statute. EPA is
not able to revise the definitions to
eliminate all differences among them.
However. EPA is attempting to clarify
the requirements pertaining to these
different types of substances both
through the Title in rulemakings and in
future rulemakings concerning CERCLA
hazardous substances so that any
confusion generated by the different
definitions is minimized.
EPA received numerous requests for
clarification of the OSHA definition of
"hazardous chemical."
Under OSHA's hazard communication
standard, "hazardous chemical" is
defined as any element, chemical
compound, or mixture of elements and
compounds that is a physical or health
hazard. 29 CFR 1910.1200(c). OSHA does
not specifically list all of the substances
that may be "hazardous chemicals" but
provides definitions of hazards, criteria
for evaluating hazard information, and
sources of information to determine the
physical and health hazards of each
chemical. Section 311(e) provides five
exclusions from this definition. These
exclusions are listed under the
definition of "hazardous chemical"
under § 370.2 of this regulation.
OSHA regulations also exempt other
substances and products from the MSDS
requirements, including Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
hazardous wastes, tobacco products.
wood, and manufactured articles.
Because these are not exclusions from
the definition of "hazardous chemical"
but rather from the applicability of the
MSDS requirements, these exclusions
are not listed under § 370.2 of the final
rule, as requested by a commenter, but
are provided in the instructions on the
Tier I and Tier II forms.
3. "Research Laboratory"
The Agency received numerous
comments requesting clarification of the
exemption under section 311(e) for
chemicals used in research or medical
facilities.
Section 311(e)(4) of SARA and § 370.2
of the regulations exclude from the
definition of "hazardous chemical" any
substance to the extent it is used in a
research laboratory or a hospital or
other medical facility under the direct
supervision of a technically qualified
individual. EPA believes that this
exclusion is designed to exempt
facilities where small amounts of many
types of chemicals are used, or stored
for short periods, that are not hazardous
to the general public when administered
or used under appropriate supervision.
In addition, it is important to
recognize that the exemption applies to
the substance used, rather than to the
entire facility. Thus, research and
medical facilities are not exempted from
reporting requirements under sections
311 and 312; rather, they will not need to
provide information on many of their
chemicals.
With respect to research laboratories,
EPA interprets the exclusion to apply to
research facilities as well as quality
control laboratory operations located
within manufacturing facilities.
However, laboratories that produce
chemical specialty products or full-scale
pilot plant operations are considered to
be part of manufacturing rather than
research operations and would not be a
"research laboratory." EPA has adopted
this interpretation of "research
laboratories" because it is consistent
with the interpretation of "laboratory
operations" used by OSHA in enforcing
its limited requirements under the
hazard communication standard for
such facilities. In addition, the Agency
believes this definition is consistent
with the purpose of this exemption
because it confines the exclusion to
operations where small quantities of
hazardous substances are used for short
periods of time under the supervision of
highly trained individuals.
-------
Vol. 55 Ffov 19S I" Tnnrarfar. October I?- 198T / Rnlea and RppiTaffnns
i respect ta>m«ttcal facilities;
cmnmeoleis requested that EPA tuiuuipf
veterinary and dental' operations and
portions of facilities dedicated to
medical or first-aid purposes. hi
contrast. """ commenter requested that
EPA eliminate the exclusion for medical
facilities.
EPA does not beheve that it has the
authority ta expand the definition of
"hazardous, chemical" beyond that
provided by Congress in section 33.1 te)
and therefore raimm± eliminate the
exclusion for substances used in>
medical facilities. However, as- noted
earlier, the exclusion is net for medical
facilities but is. limited Ux subatengea
used in die facility fat medical purposes.
In addition,, such, substances must be
used under the direct supervision of a
technically qualified individual. A
medical facility might abo- use. OE store
hazardous chemicals, that are not used.
for medical purposes, under the
supervision, of a "technically qualified
individual." Such, chemicals would be
subject to sections 311 and 312,
requirements unless, excluded under
another exemption under section. 311 or.
OSHA.
With, respect to the scope of the
definition of "medical faculty.." EPA.
believes that the terra includes
veterinary and dental operations and
any portion, of a facility devoted to
medical treatment including, first-aid.
4r. "Household Products"
Several commenters requested
clarification of the household* product
exemption. One commenter specifically
requested clarification about petroleum.
products.
Section- Sllfef exempts from the
definition of "hazardous chemical" any
substance to the extent it hr used for
personal, family, or household purposes,
or is present hi the same form and
concentration as a product packaged for
distribution and use by me general
public. EPA interprets this1 exclusion to-
sppfy to hoasehoitt or consumer
products, either m use by/the generaF
public or in commercial or industrial use
when in- the same fora- and
concentration as the product intended
for use by the public. Because-the pubKc
is generally familiar witt web
substances, their hazards; and their
likely locations; the d&ctosare of such-
substances is- unnecessary far righMe-
know pupposesi
This exemption is- for general
household and domestic products; and
thus the cleanest example of tt»
application is ovdinavy houcehoft)
products: stored in> a home or located-on.
a. setaiter's shell However, EPA believes
that this exemption afoo-appttas tosueh
products prior te distribution t» the
consumer wnen in the same* fbrnr and
concentration; and to seen- products
when not intended for use by the
general public. Thus, the exemption also
applies-to-any substance packaged in
the same form and concentration as a
consumer product whether er net it is
used foe the same parposeas the
consumer product, m addition, the
exemption- applies te such products
when purchased in larger quantities by
industrial facilities if packaged in
substantially the same form as- me
consumer product and present m me
same concentration. The-exemption-will
not apply to substances present in
different cuitcmitiutiuus:from the
consumer products even if the substance
is only used in. small1 quantities.
to the July 1*1987. notice, EPA
requested comment on the scope of the
exemption frorni the definition of
"haoardflMS chemical" under section.
Sllfej for consumer or household
products'. EPA specifically-requested
commeat on- whether the tarn "faraT in
the phrase-"present in toe. same bom
and ca&eantramas as a- product
packaged foe diafciboo'on- and use by me.
genual public" should refer u» the
packacjag; of the-product or only the
physical state.
Most coauneuters on. the notice
supported EPA's interpretation that this
exemption would apply to a substance-
in tha same concentration as the
analogous- coasiuuerproducfc whethet or
not U is used for the same purpose OF
intended foe useot distribution- to-tha
general public. Thus, a product labeUed
"for industrial use. only" weuW qualify
for this exemption, if it was- in, the same
form and concentration as tha analogous-
product used by the general public.
However, several
disagreed wilh EPA's proposed
interpretation that the term "form" refer
to the packaging, rather than, the.
physical state., of the substance. One
commenter argued mat the. packaging, of
a product does not usually affect us,
hazardous properties. EPA. disagrees;.
the packagmg of the product not only
may affect" the hazard presented by a
particular substance but also will affect
the degree to which the public wilt be
generslfy fanrifiarwitn the substance, its
hazards; and rts-tifcely locations. For
instance, if 'finnr* refers only to
physical state; then the amount of the
product present in a* container is
irrelevant. Thus; a-substance may be
packaged iff smaff contahiets when
distributed as- a nonsenofd product but
transported or stored in trafk quantities
when used fur other purposes: EVen
though in the same concentration as: the
househoff product, a- substance may
pose much greater hazards' when1'
present m significantly forger quantities.
In addition, while the general public
may betaunfair with the heoards posed
by small packages, of hazardous-
materials, they may not be as-aware of
the hazaxds posad by or likely locations
of the same substances when
transported on stored in bulk As a
result. EPA has cetained the proposed
interpretation ol the consumer product
exemption as more consistent with the
community right-to-know purpose of
section 311 and the section ailfe}.'
exemptions. EPA has also added a
definition of this exemption to the
regulation.
One commenter stated that the
reference to this exemption, aa the
"household product exemption" implies
that products used for personal or family
purposes-but that would not normally be
considered "household products" axe
not exempted. However, section 30.1(eJ
explicitly refers, to substances used for
"personal. fanubjR. oc household
purposes," and EPA dfd not intend to
imply any Boutstion OR this exemption
that woukt exclude only substances
used for household purposes.
Concerning the effect of the
exemption, EPA agrees with
commenters who suggested that the
exemption fur consumer products
applies even if the owner or operator of
the facility must prepare or have
available an MSDS for the substance.
The requirements for MSDS submission.
both in the statute and under the
regulation^ apply only to a faculty that is.
required to prepare or have available an
MSDS for a hazardous chemical.
Because.Title HI contains exemptions
from. the. definition of hazardous
chemical that do not occur- under the
OSHA hazacd communication standard.
noVaU.MSDS.ara subject to the MSDS
reporting requirement under Title HI
Thuvia tEue of all ax«B2ationa>uRdac
section) 311(e}. not just the household
product exemfttiQBw
Wife napes* te petroleum products, a
peteokunc pmdnct is. excluded bom the
definition of hazardous chemical only
when need for peanut family, OP
household purposes, such, as gasoline in
a family motor vehicle, or whew the
petrouiiuB product is packaged m the
same BURBOT as a product avatla&le to
the genera* pnoRc, svch as a can of
motor, off. Certain petroleum products or
petroleum-derived materials may afetr
be-excluded under section-WifeJf5J
when BVejpare-Hsedsas'pBrt ofreuntte
agrieuftarat operations or are fertilizers
held for sate by retailers;
5. Other Exemptions
-------
federal Register / VoL 52. No. 15S / Thorsday. October 15. 1987 / Rufea and Regulations 38349
A number of comments dealt with
exemptions of specific substances or
facility types.
With respect to questions concerning
the exemption of radioactive sources.
non-isolated intermediates, and scrap
steel or steel and metal components.
MSDS for these substances are required
under Title 01 only if MSDS are
necessary for them under OSHA and
they meet the definition of "hazardous
chemical" under section 311(e). For
example. OSHA requires MSDS for non-
isolated intermediates, and EPA does
not see the need to exempt these
substances from reporting.
OSHA has not included radioactivity
as a hazard to be covered under the
HCS. Such hazards would generally be
covered under rules of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission or OSHA's
radiation rule. Thus, radioactive
substances are not subject to reporting
under sections 311 and 312.
Steel and other similar non-reactive
solids are generally exempt from MSDS
requirement under OSHA (and thus
from sections 311 and 312) when they
are articles shaped during manufacture
whose end use depends upon that
shape. (See 29 CFR 1910.1200fb).) Even if
subject to the OSHA MSDS
requirements, steel and other
manufactured solids are excluded from
sections 311 and 312 reporting under
section 311(eM2).
Other comments concerning
exemptions touched on the applicability
of these requirements to newspaper
producers, general merchandise
retailers, and suppliers, dealers, or
wholesalers who are not involved in the
manufacture, repackaging, or use of
hazardous chemicals.
Contrary to the commenters'
suggestions that reporting by such
facilities would be unnecessary, the
Agency does not believe that
exemptions for these facilities would be
justified at this time. The basis of
community right-to-know is not simply
the risk that the specific facility may
pose to a community by virtue of its
manufacture, processing, or direct use of
a chemical but rather, the availability of
information to the surrounding
community concerning the amounts and
location of certain substances that are
present at a facility. Thus, if newspaper
producers or merchandise suppliers.
retailers, or dealers use. handle, or store
"hazardous chemicals" for which an
MSDS is required under OSHA. the
public should have access to that
information.
One commenter sought clarification of
whether "storage" includes materials in
pipelines and similar transportation
systems.
Pipelines are part of the
transportation exclusion under section
327. which excludes transportation-
related facilities from all requirements
under Title ID except Section 304 release
notification. Thus, materials on pipelines
are not subject to the Section 311 and
312 reporting requirements.
Several commenters offered
recommendations on exemptions in the
agricultural area. Section 311(e)(5) is a 2-
part exemption that excludes retailers of
fertilizer from reporting requirements for
the fertilizer and also excludes any
substance when used in routine
agricultural operations. EPA believes
that this exemption is designed to
eliminate reporting of fertilizers.
pesticides, and other chemical
substances when applied, administered,
or otherwise used as part of routine
agricultural activities. Fertilizers
handled by retailers, even though not
directly utilized by such persons for
agricultural purposes, are also excluded.
Because the general public is familiar
with the application of agricultural
chemicals as part of common farm,
nursery, or livestock production
activities, and the retail sale of
fertilizers, there is no community need
for reporting of the presence of these
chemicals.
EPA agrees with the commenter who
requested that the agricultural
exemption be applied to horticultural
growers. The term "agrictorraral" is a
broad term encompassing a wide range
of growing operations, not just farms,
and includes nurseries and other
horticultural operations. In addition, the
general public is likely to expect
pesticides and fertilizers to be used in
such operations.
Another commenter would exempt
farm supply co-operatives and other
retail distributors of agricultural
chemicals.
Under section 311(e){5). substances
sold as fertilizers would not need to be
reported under sections 311 and 312 by
retail sellers because such si"
are not "hazardous chemicals."
However, other agricultural chemicals.
such as pesticides, would need to be
reported by retailers and suppliers of
such chemicals if and when they
become subject to the OSHA hazard
communication standard. The
exemption for substances used in
routine agricultural operations applies
only to substances stored or used by the
agricultural user.
Thus, agricultural chemical retail and
storage operations not now covered by
the OSHA hazard communication
standard will also become subject to
reporting under sections 311 and 312 of
Title UI when the OSHA MSDS
requirements for such businesses
become effective.
B. Thresholds
1. Threshold Quantities for the
Hazardous Chemicals in Each Year and
the Appropriate Phase-in
Section 370.20 of the proposed rule
was designed to allow facilities and
State and local governments to phase in
the receipt and submission of reports
under sections 311 and 312 over three
years. In the first year, only chemicals
stored in excess of 10.000 pounds were
to be reported: in the second year, die
threshold was to drop to 500 pounds.
triggering reporting on chemicals stored
between 500 and 10.000 pounds: in the
third year, there was no threshold, so
that all remaining hazardous chemicals
were to be reported. EPA solicited
comments in the proposed rule on the
appropriate length of the phase-in period
and threshold levels for each year. After
receiving and considering the comments
concerning the phase-in threshold, EPA
reopened the comment period on those
issues in the July 14.1987. notice. EPA
requested comment on an option under
which the first-year threshold would be
10,000 pounds, maintained at 10,000
pounds in the second year, and dropped
to 500 pounds in the third and final year
of the phase-in.
a. Length of phase-in. Numerous
commenters addressed the issues of the
number of years for phase-in of
reporting and the appropriate threshold
levels for each year. By far. most
comments on the phase-in approach
viewed it favorably, either stating
specifically that the commenter was in
favor of a phase-in approach, or
suggesting alternative phase-in schemes
ranging from two to ten years in length.
The general reasons given in favor of
phasing-in the reporting were:
alleviating the administrative burden on
government and industry and allowing
time for information management
planning and for the development of
information management systems.
Fewer than ten of the more than 90
comments dealing with the phase-in
opposed the approach. Some of these
comments questioned whether or not
EPA bad statutory authority to use the
phase-in approach: others said that the
information should be immediately
available or suggested that a phase-in
would not alleviate the burdens on
government and industry but simply
spread the burdens out over time.
Most of the commenters who favored
the phase-in approach supported a 3-
year phase-in schedule. Some
commenters* however, suggested that
-------
38350
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
the phase-in be lengthened, in order to
-provide more time for proper evaluation
and management of incoming data, as
well as to give industry time to set up
appropriate data management systems.
Comments suggesting a phase-in
longer than three years fell into three
categories. About half of these used
EPA's proposed initial threshold but
maintained at least one initial or
intermediate threshold for two or more
years, allowing for more gradual
adjustment to the final threshold level.
Approximately one-quarter of the
comments requested higher initial
threshold quantities (ranging from 20.000
up to 100,000 pounds) and suggested
reasonable extension to the phase-in
period. The third group requested a
longer phase-in, without specific
quantity suggestions. Several
individuals favored a "wait and see"
approach, suggesting that EPA should
re-evaluate the final threshold decision
in the second or third year. Nearly all
commenters on the July 14 notice
supported the 3-year phase-in.
EPA disagrees with commenters who
questioned EPA's statutory authority to
establish phase-in thresholds. Section
311(b) provides very broad authority to
the Administrator to establish threshold
quantities below which a facility may be
exempted from reporting under sections
311 and 312. Given the serious concerns
raised in the legislative history over the
paperwork burden that may be created '
for State and local governments under
these provisions. EPA believes that
Congress intended EPA to use this
broad authority to establish thresholds
that would appropriately balance the
public right-to-know with the potentially
overwhelming flood of information to
State and local governments, especially
in the First years of the program. EPA
has thus used its authority to fashion the
thresholds to meet this Congressional
objective. EPA has found no indication
in the statutory language or legislative
history that the establishment of
thresholds based on time as well as
amounts of chemicals would be
inconsistent with Congressional intent.
EPA agrees with the majority of
commenters. who stressed the
importance of providing time for local
and State governments to set up data ,
management systems by reducing the
volume of information being processed
initially. Because EPA continues to
believe that the phase-in of information
is crucial to the development of effective
Title III right-to-know programs and that
there is no specific limitation on the type
of threshold EPA may establish under
the statute. EPA has decided to retain
the 3-year phase-in approach in the final
rule with some modifications.
EPA recognizes the concern expressed
by some commenters over the
immediate need to have access to
valuable information on chemicals
stored below the threshold level. In
response. EPA believes that the rule
reduces the potential loss of important
information due to the threshold in
several ways. First, as discussed below,
§ 370.20 provides no phase-in of
thresholds for extremely hazardous
substances, which are substances
identified by Title HI as significant for
emergency planning. Second, the public
retains access, by request, to MSDS for
chemicals stored below the threshold.
Third. EPA has retained a relatively
short. 3-year phase-in schedule so that
'the baseline threshold is achieved
quickly.
EPA recognizes that extending the
phase-in beyond three years would
provide government and industry with
additional time to adjust and thus might
be beneficial. There is, however, some
burden potentially associated with
extending the phase-in period, since it
delays the date at which full reporting
above the permanent threshold is
mandatory. In doing so, it prolongs the
uncertainty over how much and what
information may be generated and may
increase the number of requests during
that time. In addition, as discussed
below. EPA is not raising the initial
' threshold above the proposed threshold
level (10,000 pounds), thus obviating the
need to prolong the phase-in on that
ground.
b. Threshold Quantities—i. Final
Threshold Level. One of the most
significant issues in the rulemaking was
the issue of whether or not EPA should
establish a non-zero threshold in the last
year of the phase-in.
Approximately 100 commenters
addressed the issue of whether or not
zero was an appropriate permanent
reporting threshold, with or without the
phase-in approach. Of these, few
favored the proposed reduction of the
threshold to zero in the final year.
Arguments made by those favoring
the zero threshold emphasized (a) the
volume of information that would be
lost through establishment of a non-zero
threshold, (b) the difficulty of requesting
desired information below the threshold
without the chemical-specific
information in section 311 for all
volumes of chemicals, and (c) the
potential hazards posed by small
quantities of chemicals.
The points raised by proponents of
non-zero thresholds fall into several
general groups. First, because there are
numerous chemicals stored in very small
quantities, the data management burden
created by zero thresholds could be
overwhelming for the recipients of the
data, thus jeopardizing public access to
the information. Second, they argued
that non-zero threshold levels could be
established that would capture all
substances of concern to the community
or emergency response personnel and
fire departments. Finally, a large
majority of those arguing for non-zero
thresholds also suggested that the same
threshold should not apply to the
extremely hazardous substance list;
thus, they argued that information on
chemicals of concern at lower levels
could be made available without
requiring reporting at those levels for all
chemicals.
Although several commenters
requested that the final threshold be
non-zero without specifying the amount.
the majority of comments contained
suggestions for a final threshold, ranging
from de minimis or one-pound quantities
up to 50.000 pounds. However, few
commenters provided a justification for
the numbers they suggested.
EPA believes that there are several
competing concerns that must be
weighed in determining an appropriate
final threshold level. First information
on chemicals of most concern to
planners and communities must be
readily available. In addition, enough
information should be available for
members of the public and public
officials to be able to ascertain what
additional information they want to
request. Third, the burden generated for
government recipients of the reports
should be manageable.
After considering the arguments both
supporting and opposing the ....
establishment of a non-zero threshold in
the final year of the phase-in, and after
considering the comments on the 500-
pound permanent threshold that EPA
suggested in the July 14 notice. EPA
believes that the balance of these
concerns weighs in favor of a non-zero
threshold.
However, at this time the Agency is
not setting a final threshold, but will
propose one after conducting a study of
alternative thresholds. The Agency has
considered 500 pounds (approximately
the weight of a 55-gallon drum) as the
final threshold beginning in the third
year of reporting. Five hundred pounds
thus will be the point of departure for
discussion of a final threshold. This
threshold would eliminate automatic
reporting of numerous chemicals that
are stored In smaller quantities. As
discussed in more detail below.
estimates based on available evidence
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 199 / Thursday. October 15, 1987 / Rules and Regulations 38351
suggest that 35 to 57 percent of MSDS
would be subject to sections 311 and 312
reporting, except upon request, as a
result of the 500-pound threshold.
While a 500-pound threshold would
eliminate numerous reports of de
minimis levels of hazardous chemicals,
a substantial volume of information
would still be provided to State and
local governments. The 500-pound level
is also the most common non-zero
threshold in effect in States with
community right-to-know laws. Over
half of all States have community right-
to-know laws. Almost one-third of these
have a threshold of 500 pounds; the
remaining States have thresholds
ranging from zero to 500 pounds. This is
important since EPA's primary concern
in establishing thresholds under sections
311 and 312 is to prevent State and local
governments from being so
overwhelmed with submissions under
this program that effective public access
and government use of the information
are not possible. A significant number of
commenters also supported the 500-
pound threshold.
Finally, the expansion of OSHA's <
hazard communication standard to rion-
manufacturing employers and the
consequent changes in both the number
of MSDS and the number of facilities
covered by Title III magnify the
difficulties associated with a lower, or
zero threshold. Because the community
right-to-know laws in some of the States
described above provide broader
coverage than is currently provided
under sections 311 and 312 (i.e.. they
include non-manufacturing facilities that
will not be subject to sections 311 and
312 requirements until May, 1988), they
provide a significant measure of the
continued appropriateness of this
threshold when these requirements
become applicable concurrently with the
expanded hazard communication
standard.
Even if EPA were to establish such a
500-pound threshold, mis would not
suggest that no chemicals of interest to
emergency respondere, planners, fire
departments, or the public are stored in
quantities less than 500 pounds, or that
all chemicals stored above 500 pounds
pose a hazard to the community. Rather.
this threshold would attempt to
establish a balance between setting the
level high enough to avoid an
overwhelming paper burden for State
and local governments and low enough
to avoid a loss of substantial amounts of
information. Similarly, a threshold less
than 500 pounds would likely present an
unmanageable administrative burden.
Thus, States or local governments could'
request information on substances
below the threshold, or a State could
require reporting at lower thresholds
under State law.
EPA has also considered higher final
threshold levels. As part of the
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RLA) in
support of the proposed rulemaking.
EPA estimated the percentage of
chemicals and facilities that would be
covered at different threshold levels.
This analysis was revised and expanded
for the RIA in support of final
rulemaking. The analysis is the final RIA
of the effects of thresholds on reporting
is based on data sets provided by three
States (New Jersey, New York, and
Michigan) on the quantity of chemicals
stored at a substantial number of
manufacturing facilities, for limited lists
of hazardous substances. Although the
data from each State were adjusted so
that the results would be representative
of the effects of thresholds nationwide.
the limited numbers of facilities
reporting, the restrictive chemical lists,
and other limitations of the data suggest
that the results be viewed with caution.
EPA analyzed four alternatives for the
final threshold. Estimates indicate that a
500-pound threshold would lead to
reporting by between 50 and 82 percent
of the facilities covered by current
OSHA requirements, and submissions of
between 35 and 57 percent of the MSDS
for these chemicals. At this level, the
cost to industry in the third year is
estimated to be $348 million. At higher
thresholds, reporting would be further
reduced; a 2.000-pound threshold could
result in between 35 and 47 percent of
facilities reporting and 22 to 32 percent
of chemicals being reported. At the 2.000
pound level, the cost to industry in the
third year is estimated to be S225
million. In addition, a threshold that
reduces reporting significantly could
place substantial burdens on all parties
by increasing the numbers of requests
made by government and the public for
additional information from facilities.
On the other hand, a 50-pound threshold
could result in between 77 and 90
percent of facilities reporting and
between 84 and 79 percent of chemicals
reported. At this level, the cost to
industry in the third year is estimated to
be $387 million. At a zero threshold
level, the cost to industry in the third
year is estimated to be $500 million.
Although information indicates that the
500-pound threshold may represent the
most appropriate balance between the
broad right-to-know information
submission objectives of these
provisions and the need to avoid
overwhelming State and local
governments with the submission of
vast amounts of information on de
minimis amounts of chemicals. EPA is
deferring the establishment of a
threshold in the third year of the phase-
in. The substantial number and
variation of comments received on this
issue and the great uncertainty over the
impact of these requirements on the
recipients of this information, and
ultimately on the effectiveness of this
program, create a need for further study
prior to establishing a permanent
threshold level.
After the initial submission of the
Section 312 inventory forms in March.
1988. EPA will have more information
about the effectiveness of the regulatory
thresholds under the federal nght-to-
know program. During this evaluation.
EPA will examine compliance
experience with both State and federal
right-to-know programs, the
completeness of information generated
under these programs, the ability of
State and local officials to manage and
provide public access to this
information, the number and source of
requests for additional facility
information, and volumes of hazardous
chemicals covered at a range of
thresholds. As stated above, following
such review. EPA will initiate another
rulemaking to establish the final year
thresholds.
ii. Initial Threshold Levels.
Approximately 50 comments on the
proposal addressed the issue of the
threshold level in the initial year of a
phase-in, either by proposing a specific
phase-in schedule of quantities or by
registering support of the EPA proposal
but suggesting a modification for the
final year. Over half of these comments
favored 10,000 pounds. The remaining
suggestions ranged between 15,000 and
100,000 pounds (one comment suggested
up to 500,000 pounds for some
chemicals), with a substantial number
favoring 50.000 pounds.
In general arguments that supported
raising the first-year threshold
emphasized the consequent decrease in
the reporting burden and the belief that
adequate information on large volume
chemicals would still be available with
a higher threshold
After considering comments on the
proposal and the July 14 notice. EPA has
decided to retain 10.000 pounds as the
initial threshold because that level
provides the appropriate balance
between ensuring, that the public has
access to information on large volume
chemicals and reducing the number of
reports to manageable levels in the first
years of the program. EPA has rejected
establishing higher initial thresholds
because it believes that a threshold
greater than 10.000 pounds might not
-------
38352 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
provide sufficient information in the first
year of reporting; the best estimates
available to EPA indicate that a
threshold equal to 10.000 pounds may
reduce reporting to less than 13 to 22
percent of facilities or 8 to 13 percent of
chemicals. EPA believes that a reduction
in reporting below these levels would
not be consistent with the community
right-to-know purpose of these
provisions and would provide marginal
benefits in terms of information
management, in comparison with a
10.000-pound reporting threshold.
iii. Thresholds for Non-manufacturing
Facilities. As indicated in the January 27
proposal and in the July 14 notice. EPA
believes that section 311 and 312
reporting requirements apply to any
facilities subject to OSHA's MSDS
requirements for any Title HI
"hazardous chemical." Because these
requirements are self-implementing
under the statute. EPA does not need to
promulgate a rule in order for these
reporting requirements to become
effective. Under section 311(d). facilities
must submit an MSDS for each
hazardous chemical (or a list of such
chemicals) to the appropriate Stale and
local authorities by October 17.1987, or
within three months after they are
i -quired to have or prepare such an
MSDS. Thus, under the statute, facilities
n iwly covered by the OSHA MSDS
requirements must submit those MSDS
within three months after they are
r -quired to comply with the MSDS
requirements. Because OSHA's MSDS
requirements will become effective for
I'.-.e non-manufacturing sector in May.
1 -?88 (see 52 FR 31852. (August 24.1987)).
such facilities will be required to submit
these MSDS under section 311 in
August. 1988. Similarly, inventory forms
under section 312 for these facilities
must be submitted annually beginning
March 1.1989.
However, although the section 311
and 312 requirements take effect without
any regulatory action on the part of
EPA. the Agency may. by exercising its
discretion under the statute to establish
minimum thresholds for reporting, limit
the facilities or number of MSDS to be
submitted under these provisions. EPA
has. under this rule, established such
thresholds and amended the proposed
threshold regulation specifically to
provide analogous thresholds to
facilities newly subject to these
requirements after October 17.1987.
Some commenters have suggested that
EPA limit this rule to facilities currently
subject to the OSHA MSDS
requirements, i.e.. facilities in SIC codes
20-39. However, the effect of such
limitation would not be to limit the
scope of the section 311 and 312
reporting requirements since such
requirements are effective without
regulation, but rather to limit the
thresholds established by this rule to
manufacturing facilities. A zero
threshold would thus be in effect for
facilities in the non-manufacturing
sector that become subject to the MSDS
requirements in May. 1988. and would
result in precisely the paperwork burden
that the thresholds in this rule are
intended to avoid.
Moreover. EPA solicited comment on
the appropriateness of the thresholds in
today's rule as they would apply to the
expected OSHA expansion universe.
Based on information currently
available. EPA believes that the
thresholds applicable to the
manufacturing sector currently subject
to sections 311 and 312 would be equally
applicable to the non-manufacturing
facilities that will soon be subject to the
MSDS requirements. However, as a
result of concerns raised over the
possible need to provide different
thresholds for the facilities newly
subject to these requirements as a result
of OSHA's expanded MSDS
requirements, EPA is undertaking
additional analysis of the universe
newly-covered by the OSHA MSDS
requirements. This analysis will include
a more detailed analysis of small
business impacts, a review of some
current State right-to-know programs
that cover non-manufacturing, and the
need for different thresholds for such
facilities. Following such review and
prior to the time that this rule requires
actions by the newly covered non-
manufacturing universe. EPA wilt make
the analysis public, receive comment.
and, if appropriate, revise the relevant
thresholds.
2. Thresholds for the Extremely
Hazardous Substances and Other
Chemical Lists
In the proposed rule, EPA provided an
exeception to the phase-in for
substances on the list of extremely
hazardous substances under section 302
of Title in. The threshold for reporting of
such substances was zero in the first
year. EPA requested comments on
whether the threshold provision should
contain this exception and whether
there should be additional exceptions
for other special chemical lists.
A majority of the over 60 comments
on this issue suggested that thresholds
should be lower for some classes of
hazardous chemicals (than for
hazardous chemicals in general), but
that the threshold for such substance
should still be non-zero. Several
comments requested that there be no
"special chemical exception" to the
reporting thresholds on the basis that it
complicated the process. A few
commenters suggested zero or very low
thresholds for varying lists of chemicals
(e.g.. SARA section 302 Extremely
Hazardous Substances (EHS).
carcinogens on the IARC list other
known human carcinogens, or SARA
section 313 chemicals). Those comments
that addressed the EHS list were split
between suggesting thresholds equal to
the "reportable quantities" (RQs) and
thresholds equal to the "threshold
planning quantities" (TPQs) for the EHS.
(See the April 22.1987. final rule for
further discussion of RQs and TPQs. 52
FR 13378.)
Of the comments favoring thresholds
that are lower for the EHS than for
hazardous substances in general, most
favored a non-zero threshold and argued
that the burden of accounting for and
reporting de minimis quantities far
outweighs the risk posed by the EHS in
very small quantities. Several
commenters argued that reporting of
minute quantities of these chemicals
creates an unnecessary burden on local
and State governments and on
emergency response groups who receive
the information.
Several arguments were made
concerning the appropriateness of the
TPQs or the RQs for EHS thresholds.
The risk of off-site hazard posed by
these chemicals either for emergency
planning or for emergency response
purposes has already been explicitly
taken into account in determining the
TPQs and RQs. Thus, several comments
argued, quantities stored below these
amounts are unimportant for planning,
response, or other purposes of sections
311 and 312.
After consideration of the several
arguments and approaches suggested by
commenters, EPA suggested a one-
pound de minimis threshold for the EHS
list in the July 14 notice. Based on the
additional comments received on the
notice. EPA has decided to revise the
rule to establish a reporting threshold
for each EHS of 500 pounds or the TPQ.
whichever is less. This threshold will be
effective from the first year of reporting
onward.
There are several reasons for
establishing these thresholds. First EPA
continues to believe that reporting on
the EHS should not be subject to the
phase-in. Because, based on the
information available to date, EPA
believes that the 500-pound level
represents an appropriate permanent
threshold, the Agency is requiring
reporting of EHS at a 500-pound
threshold during the first year of
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 38353
reporting, so that information on these
chemicals can be made available to the
community, while initial planning efforts
under section 303 are underway.
In addition, the EHS list represents
chemicals that are of particular interest
to the community; the TPQs have been
established as representing quantities of
these chemicals that may pose risks to
the community and, thus, are of interest
to emergency planners. The Agency has
decided, therefore, that for each EHS for
which the TPQ is less than 500 pounds.
the threshold in the first year and in
subsequent years should be the TPQ.
This will ensure that information
concerning these chemicals will be
available not only to emergency
planners, but to emergency responders
and the general community as well.
EPA is not expanding the list of
chemicals subject to the "special
chemical threshold" beyond the EHS
list. EPA has singled out the EHS list as
an exception to the phase-in for several
reasons. Although there are numerous
chemical lists referenced in Title III, the
Agency believes that information
concerning EHS will be critical for
States and local governments during the
next year when emergency planning
efforts are under way. Under section 303
of Title III, local committees must
prepare an emergency response plan by
October, 1988. Because the EHS list
developed under section 302 of Title ffl
is intended to be the basis of initial
emergency planning efforts under
section 303, information concerning all
EHS present at facilities will be critical
in the first year of section 311 reporting.
EPA believes that such information
should be made easily accessible to the
local planning committee through
mandatory reporting under sections 311
and 312. rather than burdening the
committee in the first year of its
organization with the need to request
information on EHS from each facility
under section 303(d) or section 311(c).
C. Submission of Material Safety Data
Sheets
1. Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) or
yst Option
A facility may meet the requirements
of section 311 either through submission
of MSDS or a list of chemicals for which
an MSDS is required. In the preamble
to the proposed rule, the Agency
encouraged facilities to exercise the list
option whenever possible.
With one exception, the commentera
indicated unqualified support of the list
option. In addition, many commentera
inquired whether use of MSDS for
routine reporting of potential community
hazards is actually productive and cost-
effective. However, numerous
commenters indicated that the lists
would be difficult to prepare because of
the difficulty in using the 23 hazard
categories.
As discussed in more detail in Section
III. D. EPA has reduced the number of
hazard categories in this final
rulemaking in order to facilitate list
reporting. EPA is continuing to
encourage list reporting because it
reduces the information management
burden on recipients of the information
without substantially reducing the
amount of information provided.
One commenter requested
clarification regarding the right of a
State emergency response commission
or local emergency planning committee
to mandate the submission of a list
rather than the actual MSDS. Because
the federal law expressly provides that
facilities may choose whether to submit
a chemical list or each MSDS, EPA has
also provided this option in today's final
rule. However, State or local
governments may effectively limit this
choice by establishing reporting
requirements pursuant to their own
authority.
2. Format and Content of Material Data
Sheets
Several commenters requested
various changes to the MSDS format.
such as the inclusion of the hazard
categories on the MSDS.
EPA agrees that the addition of
hazard categories on the MSDS would
be useful and encourages chemical
manufacturers to include this
information. However. EPA does not
believe that modification of the MSDS
can be required in this rule; the content
of the MSDS is subject to the regulatory
authority of OSHA, not EPA.
A number of commenters raised
concerns about the responsibility for
accuracy of MSDS information on the
part of manufacturers and chemical
users who pass on an MSDS received
from other manufacturers.
"Downstream" recipients of an MSDS
are not generally responsible for its
content. However, EPA believes that if
an owner or operator is aware of
inaccurate or inconsistent information.
he should take reasonable steps to
clarify the information or alert the
recipients of the information when it is
distributed that it may tie inaccurate.
3. Revisions and Updates
Two commenters requested
clarification of the requirement to
submit revised material safety data
sheets as applied to a facility that had
exercised the list option. Further
clarification was also requested
regarding any obligation to submit a
revised MSDS if the original was
submitted as a result of a public request.
Section 311(d) requires a facility to
submit an MSDS or list by October 17.
1987. or within three months after the
owner or operator is required to prepare
or have available an MSDS for the
chemical, whichever is later. An owner
or operator is also required to submit a
revised MSDS within three months of
the discovery of significant new
information concerning a chemical for
which an MSDS was submitted. If a
facility has submitted only a list of
chemicals rather than the actual MSDS.
the facility does not need to file a
revised MSDS upon discovery of new
information. However, after October 17.
1987. if additional hazardous chemicals
become present at such facility, a list of
these (or the MSDS) must be submitted
to the State commission, local
committee, and fire department within
three months.
Once an MSDS is submitted, even as
a result of a request, a revised MSDS
must be submitted if the owner or
operator receives significant new
information concerning the substance.
Because the OSHA regulations require
MSDS to be revised within three months
after a chemical manufacturer or
employer becomes aware of significant
new information concerning the hazards
of a chemical, the Title III regulations
merely require that such revised MSDS
also be submitted to the agencies that
have the original MSDS.
D. Categories for Reporting
Section 311 list reporting and section
312 Tier I reporting requirements were
initially based on the 23 physical and
health hazards identified under OSHA .
regulations. To facilitate reporting under
sections 311 and 312, Title III permits the
Administrator to modify the categories
of health and physical hazards set forth
under OSHA regulations by requiring
information to be reported in terms of
"groups of hazardous chemicals which
present similar hazards in an
emergency." Additionally, for Tier I
reporting, the Administrator may require
reporting on individual hazardous
chemicals of special concern to
emergency response personnel.
In the January 27 proposal, the
Agency proposed the use of the 23
OSHA categories for reporting but
solicited comments on approaches for
modification of the reporting categories.
EPA recognized that a smaller number
of reporting categories might facilitate
the manageability of the information
and enhance its usefulness, particularly
since information on chemicals that
-------
38354 Federal Register / Vol. 52.. No. 199 / Thursday, October IS.'-1987 / Rules and Regulations
present more than one hazard must be
provided in all applicable categories.
EPA specifically requested comment on
two approaches for modification: Use of
the eight DOT hazard labeling
categories and use of a 5-category
scheme with two health hazard
categories and three physical hazard
categories. The July 14.1987. Federal
Register notice specifically requested
comment on the proposed use of the 5-
category scheme.
In response to the January 27
proposed rule. EPA received over 100
comments that disagreed with the use of
the 23 OHSA categories, while only four
conunenters supported their use. Many
of those conunenters that disagreed
provided alternative categorization
schemes. Many comments supported the
Department of Transportation (DOT)
categorization scheme in combination
with additional health hazard
categories. The main advantage to using
the DOT categorization would be that
emergency response personnel are
already familiar with these categories.
However, it was designed for hazardous
material transportation and reflects an
emphasis primarily on immediate health
and physical hazards. Thus, the Agency
believes that the DOT categories would
have to be revised to address delayed
(chronic) hazards adequately before this
option could be used for Sections 311
and 312. EPA believes that altering the
DOT categorization scheme would result
in some confusion and reduce the
effectiveness of this option.
EPA received several additional
proposals for the modification of the
reporting categories. However, all of
these alternatives were refected because
they either did not adequately
encompass the OSHA hazard classes,
did not sufficiently reduce multiple
reporting, or did not sufficiently reduce
the burden of reporting and interpreting
data by decreasing the number of
reporting categories.
After consideration of these
comments, the suggested alternatives,
and the burden of using the proposed 23
categories, EPA has revised the rule to
reduce the number of reporting
categories. Today's rule contains the 5-
category scheme described by EPA In .
the Preamble to the proposal and in the
July 14 notice: two health hazard
categories (immediate or acute hazards
and delayed or chronic hazards) and
three physical hazard categories (fire
hazards, sudden release of pressure
hazards, and reactivity hazards). Thn
scheme was supported by • substantial
number of conunenters.
A number of other commeBten
disagreed with the use of the 5-category
scheme because they thought the
categories were too general and did not
represent groups of hazardous chemicals
that present similar hazards in an
emergency. EPA disagrees with these
commenters. Although the categories
could be subdivided further, the Agency
believes this could complicate the
categorization process and could result
in inconsistencies in reporting. EPA
believes the 5-category scheme will be
useful to emergency response personnel
by conveying general information on the
types of hazards a chemical may present
in an emergency response situation and
by supplementing other sources of
information commonly used by
emergency response personnel.
EPA agrees with the numerous
conunenters who noted that this
categorization scheme should
significantly reduce the paperwork
burden of reporting, minimize multiple
reporting and double counting, and
enhance the clarity and usefulness of
the information reported. The Rve
categories have several advantages over
the other proposed alternatives because
they encompass all of the OSHA
categories as well as all of the DOT
categories, and they address delayed
(chronic) health hazards as well as
immediate (acute] health hazards. The
Agency plans to provide written
guidance to help facilitiate reporting so
that this categorization scheme can be
easily used by both large and small
reporting entities.
E. Mixtures
EPA received several comments
regarding the reporting of mixtures. One
commenter requested clarification of the
term "mixture." Another desired
guidance in applying threshold levels to
mixtures. Several commenters stated
their belief that reporting of mixtures
would be difficult since many mixtures
have unknown compositions.
In response to the request for
clarification of the term "mixture." EPA
has revised 9 37O28 of the rule to
include the definition of mixture used by
OSHA in the hazard communications
standard. 29 CFR 1910.1200. In addition.
5 370.28 has been revised to indicate •
how the threshold levels apply to
mixtures. The rule now states that if the
.reporting is on each component of the
mixture that is a hazardous chemical,
then the concentration of the hazardous
chemical in weight percent (greater
than 1% or 0.1% if carcinogenic) should
be multiplied by the mass (in pounds) of
the mixture to determine the quantity of
the HnTfflr^rT'f chemical in the mixture.
If a mixture is reported as whole, the
threshold applies to the total weight of
the mixture.
Finally, where mixtures have
unknown composition, facilities should
report the mixture as a whole.
F. Public Access to Information
Title ID contains a number of
provisions relating to public access to
information submitted under sections
311 and 312. many of which were
codified in today's final rule. Section 324
of Title in. which is not codified in the
final rule, requires SERCs and LEPCs to
make all MSDS, lists, and inventory
forms that are submitted under sections
311 and 312 available to the public
during normal working hours. This is the
only source of Tier I information for the
genera] public, and there re no access to
Tier I below the regulatory threshold.
Section 370.30(8) of the regulation .
codifies section 311(c) of Title DI and
provides that any person may request
an MSDS through the LEPC. If the MSDS
is not m the possession of the LEPC
(because a facility had the hazardous
chemical only in amounts below the
threshold or a facility had submitted
only the list of chemicals), the LEPC
must request the MSDS from the facility
and the facility must, under 5 370.21(d).
submit the MSDS within 30 days. Under
S 370.31, the LEPC must provide the
requested information to the requester.
Section 370.30(b) codifies section
312(e) of Title m and provides that any
person may request Tier n information
concerning a specific chemical at a
facility through the LEPC or SERC. If the
Tier II information is not in their
possession, the SERC or LEPC must
request it from the facility if the
chemical is stored at the facility in
quantities above 10,000 pounds or if the
requester is a public official. If the
chemical is present in quantities below
10,000 pounds, the response by the
SERC or LEPC is discretionary. Under
g 370.25(c) of the final rule, a facility
mast submit requested Tier D
information within 30 days. Under
§ 370.31, the LEPC or SERC must then
provide the Tier II information to the
requester.
1. Information below Thresholds
In the proposed rule EPA established
temporary thresholds below which
facilities would not be required to report
under sections 311 and 312. However,
those thresholds were not applicable to
public requests for information on
hazardous chemicals. Thus, facilities
would need to report on hazardous
chemicals below the thresholds, but
only upon request. Although EPA
codified the requirement that below-
rareshold requests be justified for Tier
information under section 312, no such
-------
Register / VoL 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
justification was proposed for below-
threshold requests for MSDS. EPA
solicited comment on its approach to
thresholds and public access.
Commenters were split over the issue
of public access to information below
thresholds through the LEPC. In
addition, some commenters believed
that requests for below-threshold MSDS
information should be justified, and
some asked EPA to set guidelines for
demonstrating adequate justification.
With respect to issues concerning
request justification, section 312 is
explicit about the justification of need
required in public requests for Tier n
information below 10.000 pounds if such
information is not already in the
possession of the SERC or LEPC but is
silent on the issue of what should be
included in the statement of need. EPA
believes that the task of denning
appropriate criteria for the justification
of need should be left to the SERCs and
LEPCs. who must ultimately decide
whether to remit such a request With
regard to MSDS information below the
threshold, neither the statute nor this
regulation requires that the need
underlying a request be justified.
Congress specified in section 311(cK2)
that MSDS be submitted upon request
by any person. The Agency thus
believes that the preservation of access
to all MSDS information by the public to
most consistent with the intent of
section 311.
2. Justification of Need
A number of commenters posed more
specific questions on the necessity of
justifying requests for Tier II
information. One felt "need" should
relate to the potential of a hazardous
chemical directly to affect either person
or property. Others noted that farilitfct
should be able to review requests for
Tier II information and be allowed to
comment on sensitivity of information.
As indicated above, however, the
LEPC and SERC have ultimate
responsibility for setting guidelines in
this area since the statute and today's
final rule give them the decision-making
authority in granting requests for Tier II
information. Therefore. EPA believes
that issues concerning the statement of
need should be left to local and State
officials.
A few commenters requested that a
strategy be developed to assist the
SERC and LEPC in fulfilling their
responsibilities for public availability.
Several other commenters felt programs
should be developed to help the general
public interpret and use the information.
EPA intends to provide such guidance in
the form of brochures and pamphlets to
be published and distributed through the
regional offices to SERCs and LEPCs at
a later date. EPA recently used a series
of workshops and other presentations to
provide information on Tide III to the
public.
3. Other Clarification
Several commenters requested
changes in the time frames for providing
information to the public. Some
commenters had general questions
about bow the public would have access
to MSDS and inventory information. The
public may request Tier II information
through either the SERC or the LEPC.
For quantities below 10.000 pounds, die
SERC or LEPC may exercise discretion
in forwarding these requests to a
specific facility. Concerning MSDS
requests, section 311 and today's final
rule place the responsibility for handling
requests only in the LEPC States may.
however, under their own authority, also
require provision of such MSDS to the
SERC.
One commenter requested that the
rule clarify that any person may request
Tier n information. Although the rule
explicitly states that any person may
request Tier II information, there are
certain instances in which it is not
automatically provided. For in*tanf^ g
facility may opt to withhold chemical
location information from the Tier II
form, and the public would not have
access to this location information. A
person may request Tier n information
for chemicals stored at a facility in
quantities less than 10.000 pounds, but if
the SERC or LEPC does not already
possess the information, the requester
would be required to give a written
statement of need. Based on the
statement the LEPC or SERC may.
where appropriate, request the
information from the faculty. A facility
may also withhold chemical identity
from disclosure by submitting a trade
secret claim under section 322. When •
facility withholds chemical identity by
virtue of trade secret provisions, the '
public may challenge the withholding by
submitting a petition to EPA pursuant to
section 322.
C. Trade Secrets and Confidentiality
EPA received several comments in
support of the provision for withholding
location information from the public at
the facility's request While a few
commenters indicated a need Cor criteria
for determining a confidential location.
EPA agreed with other commenten that
a request on the part of a facility owner
or operator is sufficient. Section 324
allows a facility to request withholding
of location information without any
determination that such location would
be confidential
The Agency also received numerous
comments regarding the protection of
trade secret information under sections
322 and 323 of SARA. These will be
addressed as part of EPA's rulemaking
on trade secrets under sections 322 and
323. to be proposed later this year. It
should be noted, though, that if a facility
wishes to make a trade secret claim, it is
required to submit the federal Tier n
inventory form to EPA. rather than any
alternative State form, with appropriate
substantiation. Such trade secret claims
should be sent to: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know, P.O.
Box 70266. Washington. DC 20024-0266.
H. Design and Content of Forms
The most significant comments on the
design and content of the Tier I and Tier
n forms concerned the calculation of the
average daily amount and the reporting
format for storage location. Other
significant comments concerned the
emergency contact the certification
statement, and the Dun ft Bradstreet
number. In response to these comments,
as well as comments on the general
layout and graphic design of the forms.
EPA has revised the section 312
reporting forms. Following is a
discussion of these comments and EPA's
response.
On the proposed Tier I and Tier n
forms, EPA required facilities to report
maximum daily amount and average
daily amount in prescribed ranges.
Several commenters approved of the
proposed reporting ranges on the Tier I
and Tier n forms, but several more
believed the ranges were too broad. EPA
received suggestions to narrow the
ranges, add a range category of 0-0
pounds, combine the two lowest ranges,
or devise ranges that correspond to
powers of ten. A few commenters
favored broader ranges.
Upon consideration of these
comments, EPA *"»• chosen to retain the
ranges set forth in the proposed rule.
The Agency believes that the ranges
adequately balance the trade-off
between protection of confidential
information and provision of useful
data. In addition, the present ranges are
consistent with those proposed for use
on the section 313 reporting form and
those used on tfco Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) inventory form.
Several commenters favored EPA's
proposed method of calculating average
daily amount that is. by totaling all
daily weights and dividing by 385, or
totaling all monthly weights and
dividing by 12. Several other
commenten. however were concerned
that the results obtained by the
-------
38356 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
proposed method would be misleading
because it would produce artificially
low amounts for those chemicals
present on site during only short periods
of time throughout the year.
The Agency has decided to revise the
method of calculating average daily
amount so that the figure is based upon
the number of days the chemical is
actually on site. Thus, facilities should
total all daily weights and divide by the
number of days the chemical was on
site. This method of calculation
produces a more accurate figure for
average daily amount, particularly for
those chemicals that are on site for only
a short time each year. To reflect the
amount more accurately, however. EPA
believes that it will be necessary to
report the number of days used in the
calculation and has revised the form to
require reporting of this information.
The Agency received several
comments concerning the maximum
daily amount. As many commenten
favored the method of calculation as
expressed doubts concerning its
ultimate usefulness. One comraenter
suggested that EPA require facilities to
report maximum storage capacity
instead of maximum daily amount
Because the maximum daily amount
describes a "worst case" scenario, it is
useful to both emergency planners and
emergency responders. It is important
for them to know the maximum amount
of hazardous chemicals that they might
actually encounter at any time. Because
storage capacity may not be an accurate
reflection of the amount of hazardous
chemicals actually on site at any one
time. EPA believes that the reporting of
maximum storage capacity is not an
appropriate substitute for the maximum
daily amount. Thus. EPA has not -
required reporting of maximum storage •
capacity instead of maximum daily
amount. However. EPA is aware that
maximum storage capacity may be the
best information available to some
facilities in calculating the maximum
daily amount.
EPA received numerous comments
regarding the "location" section of the
Tier II form. Several commenters
requested the use of any site
identification procedure acceptable to
local emergency response agencies;
others suggested that EPA design the
location coding system solely for ease of
data entry. Several commenters gave
specific suggestions for revision of the
location identification system—namely.
grid or quadrant systems. Several other
commenters suggested that EPA allow
facilities to report that chemicals are
unbiquitous at the plant. Based on these
comments. EPA has revised the Tier II
form to provide for reporting of the
building or lot at a minimum, and to
allow facilities to describe briefly on the
form itself the location of hazardous
chemicals, rather than requiring them to
provide a site plan or site co-ordinates.
EPA believes that the narrative
approach will provide more flexibility
for a facility, in conjunction with its
SERC. LEPC. and fire department to
identify the method of providing the
most useful chemical location
information for specific emergency
response and information management
needs and capabilities of the community
in which the facility is located.
EPA believes that additional
requirements for location information.
such as site plans or quadrants or grid
systems, may be useful on a site-by-site
basis, but are not necessary for each
facility. If a State or local government
desires such additional information, it
may require it to be submitted under
State or local law as a supplement to the
federal form. However, the Agency
encourages State and local governments
to co-ordinate reporting formats so that
facilities are not subject to duplicate or
inconsistent reporting requirements.
Some commenters requested EPA to
state the exceptions io reporting on the
inventory forms. Another inquired about
the correct number of exemptions.
The exemptions from reporting under
both the OSHA hazard communication
standard and section 311 of Title ffl are
set out in the instructions to the form.
The instructions on the proposed forms
included eight reporting exemptions
because EPA merged the OSHA and
Title ID exemptions where there
appeared to be substantial overlap. In
this final rule, the instructions to the
inventory forms state the OSHA and
Title III exemptions separately for
< clarity and accuracy.
EPA received numerous comments
regarding the certification statement on
the Tier I and Tier U forms. Several
commenten raised concerns that the
statement implied the owner's or
operator's first-hand knowledge of the
conditions at the facility relevant to
Title in. In response to these concerns.
EPA has modified the certification on
the final form by deleting the word
"immediately." to make clear that the
signatory is responsible for the data on
the form but has not personally
interviewed those principally
responsible for performing the
calculations. The certification on the •
final form now reads: "I certify under
penalty of law that I have personally
examined and am familiar with the
information submitted in this and all
attached documents, and that based on
my inquiry of those individuals
responsible for obtaining the
information. I believe that the submitted
information is true, accurate and
complete."
A number of commenters wanted EPA
to eliminate or revise the requirement
for a 24-hour contact and telephone
number. One commenter suggested that
EPA require the same number of
emergency contacts on Tier II as on Tier
I.
The emergency contact is a person, or
office at which persons will be
available, who can aid responders in the
event of an emergency at the facility.
The emergency contact need not be a .
person with expertise concerning the
chemical hazards at the facility, but he
or she must be available to act as a
referral if emergency responders need
assistance in responding to a chemical
accident at the facility. Although the
Agency requires facilities to supply the
name of only one emergency contact
both the Tier I and Tier II forms will
have space for two. A facility may
supply two emergency contacts as
necessary to ensure 24-hour availability.
Numerous commenters inquired about
the extent to which they could use their
computers for reporting. The majority of
the comments focused on the
acceptability of computer-generated
facsimiles of the forms; others dealt with
electronic transmittal of data.
To the extent possible. EPA has
designed the Tier I and Tier II forms to
accommodate computer output. Since
EPA wiU not receive the information.
however, the issues regarding computer
facsimiles and electronic transmittal are
more appropriately addressed to the
recipients of the information at the State
and local levels. However. EPA does not
believe that any provisions of section
312 would prohibit computer generated
facsimile forms or electronic transmittal
of data.
- Several commenters stated that EPA
should not require hazard category
information on the Tier II form.
Although the legislation requires hazard
category information only on the Tier I
form. EPA has designed Tier Q as a
worksheet for the preparation of Tier I.
For this reason, and because the
hazards may provide helpful data to the
users of chemical-specific information.
EPA believes that hazard categories are
an essential element of the Tier II form
and has retained this requirement in the
final form.
Although several commenters
questioned the necessity for the Dun &
Bradstreet identification number, the
Agency has opted to retain this
requirement because of its general
usefulness as a widely known and
accessible identifier, unique for each
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 38357
facUity. In response to commenters who
stated that Dun & Bradstreet numbers
should not be required because they did
not have such a number. EPA has
revised the instructions to the form to
indicate where facilities can obtain the
number. (Information collection
requirements are approved by Office of
Management and Budget under control
number 2050-0072.)
/. Integration of Title III Federal
Requirements With State and Local
Programs
A large number of commenters
registered concern about the potential
for duplication in data collection, since
Title III requirements overlap with
reporting provisions under some State
and/or local laws. Some commenters
would prefer to comply with Title III
through equivalent State programs:
others suggested that the reporting rules
be flexible enough to allow integration
with existing programs.
Although section 321 states that Title
III generally does not pre-empt State or
local laws, including similar community
right-to-know reporting, the Agency
strongly discourages duphcative
reporting systems that would increase
the community right-to-know paperwork
burden and thus potentially reduce the
effectiveness of the program and of
public access to information. EPA
encourages States to modify their
community right-to-know requirements
to accommodate Title III without
eliminating additional requirements that
are beneficial to State or local needs.
The Agency also advises States to
consider reporting requirements that are
applicable to local emergency planning
committees and fire departments. To the
extent possible in this final rule, the
Agency has attempted to provide
flexibility for State and local
implementation and integration with
their existing programs.
Several commenters recommended
that State and local jurisdictions be
allowed to determine the method of
reporting.
In the final rule. EPA has tried to
provide as much flexibility aa possible
to the local and State officials who must
implement this program, while at the
same time provide a degree of
standardization to the regulated
community and ensure that statutory
requirements are met. EPA has thus
revised the regulations to specify the
circumstances under which a State or
local form can be used in lieu of the Tier
I and Tier II forms published today.
Revised §§ 370.40 and 370.41 of the final
rule state that facilities will meet the
Section 312 requirements if they submit
the published form, or any State or local
form that contains identical content
"Identical content" means that, at a
minimum, the same information
requested on the form published in
today's final rule must be requested in
some portion of the State form. States
may. in addition, use the form as
published today but add supplemental
questions, either interspersed
throughout the form or attached at the
end.
/. Information Management
With respect to data management
issues, commenters focused on two
principal points. First, the majority of
commenters on this issue strongly
expressed the conviction that the entire
program can be made workable only if
the information is handled by computer
systems. The second principal issue
raised by commenters was the need for
assistance in organizing the material;
designing and selecting systems; co-
ordinating the use of the material among
SERCs. LEPCs. and fire departments;
and ultimately making the information
available to the general public.
Specific comments concerned the
need to allow information submission in
computer-readable media and for
guidance from the federal government to
aid information management at the
State and local levels. A recurring
message in the comments was the need
for the federal government to play an
active role in solving the extensive data
management problems triggered by Title
m. Suggestions were for EPA, alone or
with OSHA. to develop model MSDS
databases, to design or develop effective
data management and communications
techniques for information systems, to
convene a high level workgroup to draft
a plan for solving the problems, and to
provide seed money to each SERC for
development of its own MSDS
information system. Commeniere also
raised general concerns about the
sources for financial support to
implement the legislation and the time
necessary to prepare for
implementation.
In response to the general information
management concerns raised by
commenters. the Agency agrees that the
data resulting from Title III compliance
would best be managed through a
computerized system. EPA recommends
that the LEPCs and fire departments
work closely with the SERCs to develop
flexible systems that address the
particular requirements of each planning
district However, because most of Title
III is carried out through State and local •
organizations, it is not appropriate for
the Agency itself to recommend or
design data management systems, to
establish a national database under
sections 311 and 312, to specify data
collection points, or to make any other
information management decisions that
belong to the State and local authorities
implementing the community right-to-
know program. Thus, although EPA
shares commenters' concerns over the
critical data management needs
generated by Title III. EPA believes that
the most appropriate role for the Agency
in information management under
sections 311 and 312 will be one of
technical assistance to State and local
entities in developing effective
information management systems. The
Agency is reviewing such systems in an
effort to identify useful systems that
could meet State and local needs and
also intends to publish technical
guidance regarding the development of
such systems by States.
EPA acknowledges that the provisions
of Title III concerning hazardous
chemicals and community right-to-know
present information management
problems that are difficult to implement,
given the statutory time-frames and
governmental budget constraints. Of all
the sections of Title III, sections 311 and
312 present by far the largest
information management burden for
State and local governments. EPA's
concern over this issue has been the
principal basis for several key
regulatory decisions during this
rulemaking. For instance, to permit time
to work out information management
systems and to ensure that State and
local capabilities are not overwhelmed
during initial implementation, EPA is
establishing a 3-year phase-in schedule
with high initial reporting thresholds for
both sections 311 and 312.
State and local governments also need
time to obtain funding and to establish
the organizations and processes to
implement mis legislation. In order to
provide as much flexibility as possible
to State and local governments in
establishing their Title III programs. EPA
is leaving decision-making concerning
the medium to be used in reporting (e.g..
paper, magnetic tape.
telecommunication lines) to States and
local governments.
Some State mi*i local governments
already receive information required
under sections 311 and 312 from
facitities in their jurisdictions, and some
make this information available to the
public. To the extent that these
submissions under State or local law
meet the requirements of sections 311
and 312 regarding the content of
submission, timing, and recipients of the
information, facilities submitting such
information will be in compliance with
the federal requirements. Duplicate
-------
•submissions under the federal
community right-to-know program are
unnecessary. Also, in some instances, it
may be permissible for fire departments
to designate such State systems as the
address for their MSDS submissions.
provided that these systems will support
the emergency response needs.
K. Regulatory Impact Analysis
A number of comments addressed
various aspects of the Regulatory Impact
Analysis. Comments ranged from
general concerns that estimated costs
for industry or government were loo low
to specific comments on the time.
personnel, or equipment attributed to
individual compliance activities. The
comments also addressed the
methodology used in the RIA. including
compliance activities they felt had been
omitted by government, the inclusion of
costs for requests and trade secrets in
aggregate costs, estimating costs for
facilities covered by the OSHA
expansion, and expanding the treatment
of small business costs.
A number of commenters stated that
the time estimated for industry to fill out
the forms, or the estimates of the time
and space required by government to
maintain MSDS. were too low. Other
commenters argued generally that
estimates of industry costs were too low
and gave estimates ranging from one
and one-half to ten times the EPA
estimates.
EPA has revised the analysis to reflect
variations in costs for sections 311 and
312 by facility size and number of
MSDS. EPA has also modified the
section 312 inventory forms and clarified
the instructions in this final rulemaking.
which should reduce the amount of time
it will take industry to comply with
these requirements. Wage rates used in
the RIA have also been increased to
reflect growth in wages and the
technical personnel being used to
comply with regulations. EPA believes
that the costs imputed to the final rule
reasonably estimate, on average, the
time and other costs that will be
incurred by facilities complying with the
requirements of the regulation.
Several commenters addressed
government costs, stating that estimated
costs were too low. that not all
necessary government activities were
considered, or that additional personnel
would be required to comply with
sections 311 and 312. One commenter
siated that EPA's estimated costs were
too low by as much as an order of
magnitude.
In response to these comments. EPA
has revised the time requirements to
include additional time spent.
particularly by State and local
government on several activities. Wage
rates in the government are assumed
equal to those in the private sector thus.
government wage rates have also been
revised to reflect the estimated change
m private sector wages. It should be
noted that the RIA has assumed that
government agencies do the minimum
activities necessary to comply with the
regulations. Costs are intended to
reflect, on average, the costs that will be
incurred by representative government
entities undertaking these activities.
However, community right-to-know is
essentially a State and local program.
and the costs of implementing its
provisions will depend on the activities
undertaken by each entity. Thus, the
costs presented in the RIA may
underestimate the actual costs to
individual government entities with
sufficient funding and the ability, need.
or constituency to be proactive in
implementing Title in.
Several commenters said that EPA
has not included in the RIA the costs of
requesting information, responding to
requests, or making trade secret claims.
EPA has modified its approach and
provides additional sensitivity analysis
on the possible magnitude of some of
the costs associated with information
requests. However, it should, again, be
stressed that community right-to-know
is a State and local program; the number
of requests is highly dependent on the
extent and nature of the uses to which
data are put. both by public officials and
by private citizens and organizations.
These uses, in turn, depend on the
manner and breadth of the
implementation and outreach plans of
State and local governments, which
makes the costs associated with
requests for information difficult to
predict. Thus, while a sensitivity
analysis is provided, the costs of
requests are not aggregated into total
costs. The costs associated with trade
secrets are being addressed in a
separate rulemaking that is under way
for the Title III trade secret provisions,
sections 322 and 323 of SARA.
Numerous comments point out that
EPA did not address the costs that may
be associated with any forthcoming
expansion of the OSHA hazard
communication standard. These costs
are included in a supplemental analysis,
which is part of the final RIA. These
costs are not aggregated into total costs
of sections 311 and 312; total costs
reflect the costs to facilities and
government of complying with sections
311 and 312. given the current scope of
the OSHA hazard communication
standard. , .
Other commenters said that the costs
estimated for small business were too
low or that the regulation constituted a
significant impact on small business. An
additional group of commenters
submitted a form letter saying that the
regulations would be an immense
burden on small business.
EPA has expanded its small business
analysis considerably for the final
rulemaking. In particular, per facility
costs are vaned to reflect both facility
size and the estimated number of
hazardous chemicals that are present.
on average, at a facility in a particular
SIC code and size class. To determine
whether the regulation will have an
impact on small business, a small
facility is defined as one with fewer
than 20 employees. This group is more
likely to show an impact than the
broader group (50-150 employees)
suggested in the comments. The analysis
then looks at the impact on small
business using several criteria, including
the ratio of costs per facility to sales.
After consideration of this additional
analysis. EPA reached the same
conclusion as in the proposed
rulemaking; a substantial number of
small businesses will be affected, but
the impact will not be significant. Thus.
the Agency is not performing a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
L. Miscellaneous
1. Enforcement/Penalties
The Agency received numerous
comments and queries on the subject of
enforcement. Some commenters stated
that a violation should be treated as a
one-time occurrence and not a
continuous violation as specified in the
proposed rule. Others requested
flexibility in determining violations and
assessing penalties, especially where
the owner or operator makes good faith
efforts toward compliance. Still another
commenter asked how enforcement
would be accomplished.
With regard to one-time versus
continuous violations, section 325(c)(3)
of Title III provides that each day a
violation of section 311 and 312
continues shall constitute a separate
violation. EPA has therefore retained
this provision in the final rule. With
respect to issues concerning how EPA
will enforce compliance with these
provisions. EPA is preparing a
compliance strategy for Title III that will
address these issues. Criteria for
determining penalties will also be set
out in that document.
2. Compliance/Timing
Two dozen commenters addressed
questions concerning compliance and
scheduling. Their statements ranged
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 38359
from a view that the 45-day response
period for Tier II requests is unrealistic.
to a request that EPA stipulate a 15-day
period for a SERC or LEPC to respond to
a public request for MSDS or Tier II
forms and that the same 15-day deadline
be placed on the facility.
EPA has retained the 45-day schedule
for response to Tier II public requests as
specifically provided under section 312.
In the regulation. EPA establishes a 30-
day schedule for response by an owner
or operator to SERC or LEPC requests
for MSDS and Tier II information. EPA
believes that the 30-day timetable for
Tier II information is necessary to
ensure adequate time for the SERC and
LEPC to meet the statutorily-established
response time. The same period was
estalished for MSDS responses to avoid
confusion over applicable time periods
under this rule. However, the Agency'
has also rejected the establishment of
other time limitations in order to
preserve flexibility at the State and local
levels with respect to timing of
responses.
3. Use of Tier I and Tier II Forms
Numerous comments were received
indicating that Tier II information is
more useful than Tier I information. EPA
agrees with these commenters. For this
reason, the Tier II form has been
designed for potential use as a
worksheet and guide for gathering
information ultimately to be used in the
Tier I aggregate data. Section 312 and
§ 370.25(b) of the regulations allow >
facilities to submit the Tier II form in
lieu of Tier I.
Several commenters asked whether
the Tier II inventory form could be
submitted instead of the MSDS or list;
others favored the option of submitting
the MSDS instead of Tier I and Tier E.
Under today's rule, the Tier II inventory
form cannot be submitted in lieu of the
MSDS: nor can the MSDS submission
constitute compliance with inventory
form reporting. Title III establishes
several distinct reporting requirements
under community right-to-know that
serve different purposes. The MSDS
submission under section 311 allows the
public to find out what chemicals are
present at facilities and the types of
hazards they present. The 312 inventory
forms provide more specific location.
storage, and quantity information. These
requirements are not alternative.
4. Need for Funds
A dozen commenters indicated a need
for funding in order to carry out the Title
III requirements.
No federal funding has been provided
in support of Title III community right-
to-know requirements at State and local
levels. However. EPA intends to provide
technical support to States in carrying
out their responsibilities.
The Agency received a number of
comments regarding the burden that
Title III places on both industry and
State and local agencies in terms of
costs, manpower, and record-keeping.
EPA has made every effort in this
rulemaking to minimize this burden.
while effectively satisfying the
legislative intent of Title III. The Agency
has instituted a 3-year phase-in period
encouraged the use of the list option as
opposed to the MSDS option, and
reduced the number of reporting
categories for physical and health
hazards. Additionally, the Agency as
conducted outreach activities such has
teleconferences and workshops targeted
at overall Title III implementation.
5. Responsibility for and
Appropriateness of Data
EPA received many comments
requesting clarification of the
submitter's responsibility for the
accuracy and completeness of submitted
data.
Several commenters felt that only
producers, importers, and distributors
should be responsible for the accuracy
of chemical hazard assessments and
that users should not be responsible for
initiation or verification of data.
While producers, importers, and
distributors are responsible for
providing accurate MSDS information.
downstream users who submit, or rely
upon, such MSDS should make
reasonable efforts to correct information
that they know to be inaccurate or to
inform the recipients of the information
of its inaccuracies.
A number of commenters noted that
many workplace substances classified
as hazardous chemicals under OSHA
regulations do not present a danger to
communities. Others mentioned cleaning
and maintenance products as examples
and asked that they be excluded.
Many work-place substances do not
in fact, constitute a hazard to the
community. Sections 311 and 312 focus
primarily on the presence of hazardous
chemicals within the community and the
need for public access to information
about their existence whether or not
they pose a present hazard to the
community. However, many cleaning
and maintenance products are excluded
from the definition of hazardous
chemical as consumer products, or need
be reported only on request if they are
present in quantities below the
threshold.
One commenter asked for a
clarification of the obligations of facility
owners or operators who voluntarily
provide MSDS to customers and
employees.
If an owner or operator chooses to
provide MSDS to customers and
employees even though he is not
required to do so under OSHA, the
owner or operator does not need to
submit the MSDS or Tier I and Tier II
forms under Title ID since these
requirements only apply to persons
required to prepare or have available
MSDS for hazardous chemicals under
OSHA regulations.
6. Scope of the Section 311 and 312
Requirements
Several commenters remarked on the
transitory nature of some of the
information and the necessity of
frequent revisions.
Under section 312, the reporting
requirement is annual and thus will
automatically capture new or revised
information. Facilities may, and in most
cases should, inform their local or State
government or fire department
immediately if there is a change in the
emergency contact number or other
significant information on the inventory
forms. Facilities subject to section 303
must provide information on relevant
changes at the facility to the LEPC for
planning purposes. With respect to
MSDS submission under section 311,
under today's rule, a revised MSDS must
be filed with the LEPC, the SERC, and
the local fire department within three
months after significant new information
is discovered.
EPA received a number of comments
on the scope of the reporting
requirements. According to one
commenter. reporting on all chemicals
required to have an MSDS is too broad,
because chemical suppliers have
interpreted the OSHA hazard
communication standard to include the
broadest range of chemicals in order to
avoid future liability. Another
commenter felt that the reporting
requirements would be too narrow if
only SIC codes 20-39 were covered".
Title m requires that MSDS be
submitted for each hazardous chemical
for which an MSDS is required under
OSHA except where EPA establishes a
threshold for reporting. EPA does not
believe that sections 311 and 312
requirements can or should be applied
to facilities not required to have MSDS
under OSHA regulations. However,
when OSHA's expansion of the hazard
communication standard to non-
manufacturing facilities becomes
effective, the reporting requirements
under sections 311 and 312 will
automatically apply to the facilities
newly covered by the OSHA
-------
Federal Reenter I Vol. SZ.. No. 199 / Thanday, October IS. 19*7 / Rule* «nd Kcgulations
requirements. Also. EPA does not
believe that the expansive interpretation
of the OSHA hazard cemaunicatkm
standard given by members of the
regulated community provides a
sufficient basis for limiting the scope of
section 311 and 312 requirements,
especially in light of explicit statutory
coverage and specific statutory
exclusions.
To the extent possible, EPA has taken
into consideration the expansion of the
311 and 312 universe. EPA has limited
authority to revise sections 311 and 312
requirements and has in this rale
exercised its full authority to ensure an
effective community right-to-know
program. la this rule. EPA has mitigated
impact by setting high initial thresholds
to avoid undue burden in early
implementation stages, reducing hazard
categories, developing outreach
programs, and retaining flexibility for
local and Stale governments as much as
possible. However, as discussed earlier.
EPA will review the minimum
thresholds established in this rule when
OSHA's expansion of its hazard
communication standard becomes
effective and will undertake a
rnlemaking, if necessary, to revise those
thresholds to avoid overwhelming
MSDS and Tier I submissions to State
and local officials as a result of the
expansion.
One commenter recommended that all
required information, including updates,
be submitted to both the State and local
organizations to maintain consistency in
reporting.
EPA agrees and has exercised its
general rutemaking authority under
Section 328 to require submission of the
updated MSDS to all entities receiving
the original MSDS. Otherwise, under the
proposed rule, only the LEPC would
receive updated information and thus
have current information on a facility. A
new MSDS at the facility must also be
submitted to all three entities (as
indicated in § 37021^(2}).
V. Relationship to Other EPA Programs
A. Other Title UlPropuaa
1. Subtitle A—Emergency Planning
Title III of SARA establishes several
reporting and notification requirements
in addition to sections 311 and 312.
Subtitle A of Title III contains several
notification provisions that are critical
to local emergency plaooing. In order to
facilitate local emergency planning.
under section 302 facilities that have
present aa amoaot of an extremely
hazardous substance in excess of the
corresponding threshold planning
quantity were required to notify the
State emergency response commission
by May V. 1987, or within 60 days trf
acquisition of such a substance. Section
303 requires that such facilities
designate a representative to work with
the local emergency planning
committees in the Tide tfl planning
process and provide information
suing the facility that may be
relevant to emergency planning. Section
304 establishes immediate release
reporting requirements to enable timely
and effective local response to releases
of extremely hazardous substances and
CERCLA hazardous substances. These
emergency planning requirements are
set forth in a final rale published on
April 22.1987.52 PR 13380. These
requirements are unaffected by today's
rule.
Today's rate sets oat die reporting
requmaents under sections 311 and
312. Subtitle B of Title IIL The focus of
Subtitle B is public access to
information concerning chemicals in
their uuBmunities rather than
emergency response, and thus reporting
requirements under Subtitle B are both
broader in scope than Subtitle A aad.
under section 312, continuing in nature.
However, the information obtested or
made available under sections 311 and
312 of Subtitle B may also be of
significant value to emergency
responders.
Subtitle B will make available to the
local and State emergency planners
information on ether ehemicah and
facilities, beyond those identified under
Subtitle A. that they may wish to
include in their emergency planning
efforts. Tier II information under section
312 will provide specific information on
the quantities and locations of
hazardous chemicals. Thus, sections 311
and 312 provide tufermation beneficial
to the emergency planning required
under Subtitle A. As discussed in the
April 22.1987. Gaul rate, the faeHracs
identified as a result of that role are
only a "first cut" of the faeiiines and
potential chemical hazards for which
emergency planning may be necessary.
2. Subtitle B—Section 313 Toxic
Chemical Release Inventory
Subtree B also establishes reporting
requirements under Section 313.
Beginning July 1,MSB. certain
manufacturing faculties at-which these
is a "toxic cfaeaacai" manufactured.
• 0 ^i
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 19Q / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 38361
community over how to comply with
statutory and regulatory repotting
requirements. In addition, this final rule
reduces the categories for reporting and
establishes minimum thresholds, which
relieves the impact of the statutory
requirements otherwise effective on
October 17,1987. Finally, the other
requirements implemented by this rule
relate to section 312 reporting, which is
not required until March 1.1988. Thus.
those requirements would not be
affected by the 30-day effective date
requirement under section 553(d) of the
APA.
Because EPA believes that it thus has
"good cause" to suspend the 30-day
effective date requirement and this rule
relieves reporting otherwise required by
statute, the Agency has made this rule
immediately effective in accordance
with section 553(d) of the APA.
VIL Regulatory Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis
1. Purpose
Executive Order No. 12291 requires
each federal agency to determine if a
regulation is a "major" rule as defined
by the Order and to prepare and
consider a Regulatory Impact Analysis
(RIA) in connection with each major
rule. Because EPA has determined that
the reporting requirements for
hazardous chemicals in this rnlemaking
constitute a major rule under Executive
Order No. 12281. the Agency has
prepared an RIA to assess the economic
impact on the final regulation on
affected industry and State and tocal
government entities. The following
results are presented in detail in the
analysis documented in Regulatory
Impact Analysis in Support of Final
Rulemaking Under Sections 311 and 312
of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986, which is
available for review in the public docket
for this rulemaking.
This rule was submitted to the Office
of Management and Budget for review
as required by E.O. No. 12291.
2. Methodology and Data Sources
EPA conducted an assessment of the
costs, benefits, and economic impacts
associated with the final rule and the
primary regulatory alternatives. The
regulation affects employers covered by
some provisions of OSHA's hazard
communication standard and three
types of government entities—State
emergency response commissions, local
emergency planning committees, and
fire departments. Both industry and
government are required by sections 311
and 312. of SARA to undertake certain
activities, and. thus, both types of
entities incur costs to comply with these
regulations.
Benefits for both industry and
government may also arise in
conjunction with compliance activities.
In addition, industry, government, and
other groups may. as a result of these
regulations, undertake additional
voluntary activities that generate
benefits both for these groups as well as
for the general community. The
intenrelationships among the activities
undertaken by these diverse groups, the
provisions of Title UL and the potential
consequences for health and the
environment are complex. Thus, time
constraints did not permit EPA to
perform a quantitative evaluation of the
benefits of these provisions; a
qualitative discussion of the benefits is
provided in the RIA.
Costs of complying with sections 311
and 312 of SARA are incurred by
covered facilities. State emergency
response commissions, local emergency
planning committees, and fire
departments. Total costs depend on the
number of facilites reporting, the total
number of MSDS. and the number of
government entities receiving the data.
For the industry analysis. EPA
analyzed the activities that each facility
would have to undertake to comply with
sections 311 and 312 and the unit costs
associated with each activity. It was
assumed that the cost incurred by a
facility varied in different years
depending on the regulatory alternative
being considered, the size of the facility.
and the number of chemicals at the
facility. Total costs to industry, thus,
depend on the number of facilities
affected or reporting, the number of
chemicals for which MSDS are
maintained at these facilities, and the
unit costs associated with each of the
compliance activities.
OSHA's hazard communication
standard fHCS) currently covers
facilities in the manufacturing sector
(Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
codes 20 through 39). although OSHA
has recently expanded the HCS to the
non-manufacturing sector, to be
effective in May. 1988. The number of
facilities in each two-digit
manufacturing SIC code nationwide was
obtained from the Bureau of the Census
(County Business Patterns, U.S.
Department of Commerce. 1984) for four
facility sizes: (1) 1-19 employees. (2) 20-
99 employees. (3) 100-249 employees,
and (4) more than 249 employees. Based
on census data, there are an estimated
350.740 manufacturing facilities that
could potentially be affected by this
rule.
The number of MSDS present, on
average, at a facility in each SIC code
and facility size class was provided by
updating OSHA's 1980 estimates of the
number of "regulated chemicals" (i.e.,
MSDS) in each SIC code and size class
to 1988. The total number of MSDS
maintained at all manufacturing
facilities is estimated to be 35404.503.
which implies that an average facility
maintains 100 MSDS. On average, the
smallest facilities (those with 1-19
employees) are estimated to have 74
MSDS, and the largest facilities (more
than 250 employees) have 308 MSDS.
The costs to industry of complying
with each of the regulatory alternatives
have been estimated as have the costs
of complying with the default legislative
requirements if EPA had promulgated no
regulations. Five regulatory alternatives
are identified for analysis in this report.
The regulatory options differ from each
other with regard to the threshold that is
in effect in each year. Raising the
threshold in a given year reduces
industry costs in that year by reducing
the number of chemicals that facilities
report under both Sections 311 and 312
and by reducing the number of facilities
that report
Estimates of the numbers of covered
facilities and reportable chemicals for
each threshold level were obtained from
a data set that was compiled as part of
an industrial survey conducted by the
State of New Jersey in 1979. To perform
this analysis, the chemical reports in the
New Jersey data set were weighted to
make the mix of facilities by SIC code
more representative of the mix of
facilities nationwide. The effects of
different thresholds on the numbers of
facilities and chemicals covered were
then calculated. The cost methodology
assumed that the effect of thresholds on
the percent of facilities or chemicals
covered is unaffected by SIC code or the
size of the facility. At 10.000 pounds, it is
estimated that 22. percent of the facilities
(78400) will be required to report, and
that 13 percent of the chemicals (4.5
million j will be reported. At 500 pounds.
it is estimated that 82 percent of the
facilities (288.000) and 57 percent of the
chemicals (19.9 million) will be covered.
Similar weighting procedures were
followed for data sets obtained from
two other states. Michigan and New
York. The data from these states did not
contradict the New Jersey data; the
latter were used in the analysis since
they were more complete in several
variables and also provided a more
conservative view of the extent to which
thresholds reduce costs.
bi addition to differences in the
reporting thresholds, the regulatory
alternatives differ from the default
statutory requirements in two respects.
First, the statutory default for hazard
categorization is the OSHA categories,
which were-defined as 23 categories of
health and physical hazards for the
proposed rule. EPA is promulgating five
-------
hazard categories; performing hazard
categorization should be less costly for
industry than under the 23 OSHA
categories. Second. EPA is publishing
inventory forms for reporting: if no forms
exist, the legislation requires that
facilities submit section 312 information
by letter. Both these factors reduce the
estimated cost of the regulatory
alternatives in comparison with the
legislation.
The analysis of costs to government
proceeded along lines similar to the
industry analysis. The analysis
estimated costs for a representative
State commission, local committee, and
fire department. It was assumed that the
costs incurred by each entity in each
year depended on the number of reports
received, on the number of facilities
reporting, and on the number of
government entities. EPA assumed that
there would be only one commission per
State and estimated the number of local
committees and fire departments.
Both the industry and government
analyses assume that reporting and
receiving entities undertake the
minimum activities that they must
perform to comply with SARA. The
analysis, therefore, does not take into
account the costs associated with
voluntary activities, such as designing
and using computer systems to store and
access the data, alterations in chemical
usage patterns that may arise at
facilities as a result of these sections of
SARA, or other activities or effects.
Several supplemental analyses were
performed to provide evidence on the
sensitivity of the results to changes in
various assumptions of the
methodology. In particular, present
value total costs were computed (a) for
two discount rates, 4% and 10%, (b)
using an alternative set of results on the
effects of thresholds, (c) for the 23
OSHA categories as well as the five
categories in the rule, and (d) for the
non-manufacturing facilities that will be
covered by the OSHA expansion of the
HCS.
An analysis of some of the costs
potentially associated with requests is
also presented. In particular, a
sensitivity analysis of the aggregate cost
to government of responding to requests
for MSDS or Tier I information when the
information is already in the files is
included. The cost to a facility of
responding to an individual request for
MSDS or Tier I information is provided
as is the cost to a government entity of
requesting MSDS or Tier I information if
it is not in the files. The cost to a facility
of responding to Tier II requests, under
alternative assumptions on the number
of chemicals for which Tier II
information is requested, is also
provided.
3. Results
The RIA analyzes five regulatory
alternatives as well as the statutory or
default baseline. In addition, two
alternative hazard categorization
schemes are considered. The five
threshold options considered are:
Alternative I: No threshold
Alternative II: (Proposed)
10,000 pounds in year 1
500 pounds in year 2
No threshold in year 3 and subsequent
years
Alternative III:
10.000 pounds in year 1
10.000 pounds in year 2
500 pounds in year 3 and beyond
Alternative IV:
10.000 pounds in year 1
10.000 pounds in year 2
50 pounds in year 3 and beyond
Alternative V:
10.000 pounds in year 1
10.000 pounds in year 2
2.000 pounds in year 3 and beyond.
In present value (PV) terms, the cost
of each of the regulatory alternatives is
lower than the cost associated with the
statutory requirements. Present value
costs for each of these threshold
alternatives were computed by
discounting annual costs over the first
ten years of reporting at ten percent
Assuming the five hazard categories
promulgated in the final rule, the PV
costs to industry for the five alternatives
range between $520 million and just
over $1 billion, in comparison with $1.0
billion for the statutory requirements-
(the baseline).
For government, present value costs
range between $120 million and $280
million; the costs of the no-threshold
option are the greatest and are identical
with the costs of the baseline under the
assumptions of the analysis. For both
industry and government. Alternative V.
which has the highest permanent
threshold, has the lowest continuing
costs and the lowest present value costs.
Alternative I, the no-threshold option.
has the highest costs. Alternative ID, the
preferred alternative for this rulemaking.
is towards the low end: $708 million for
industry and $178 million for
government.
For Alternative III. first-year industry
costs equal approximately $102 million.
second-year costs drop to $24 million
since the threshold is unchanged, third
year costs rise to $348 million, since the
reduction in the threshold requires many
more facilities to report on additional
chemicals. Costs level off at $59 million
in the fourth and subsequent years.
Costs for the other alternatives in the
fourth and subsequent years range
between $39 million and $66 million.
depending on the threshold level in
those years.
In the first year of reporting, all
system set-up and design costs are
attributed to section 311: thus, the costs
to industry of complying with section
311 slightly outweight those associated
with section 312 for all regulatory
alternatives except Alternative 1. the no-
threshold option. For year three onward.
section 312 costs outweigh section 311
costs: for Alternative ffl in year four, the
costs associated with section 312 are
approximately 64 percent of the
combined costs to industry of sections
311 and 312.
In general, annual government costs
for sections 311 and 312 combined are
much smaller than those estimated for
industry. This reflects the assumption in
the analysis that many costs, such as
rule familiarization and system design.
are incurred by each individual facility
or government entity and are not
directly related to the number of forms
being handled. First-year costs equal $43
million for all alternatives except the no-
threshold option: second-year costs drop
substantially; third-, fourth- (and
subsequent) year costs level off at
between $15 million and $32 million.
Although costs to an individual State
commission far exceed those to a local
committee or fire department there are
many more fire departments than
commissions or committees so that, in
aggregate, costs to fire departments may
account for as much as one-third to
more than one-half of government costs
• in any given year.
The above costs do not reflect the
costs of the regulatory alternatives if
OSHA's 23 hazard categories had been
used in the final rule. In present value
terms, using the original 23 categories
rather than five leads to a 28% to 38%
increase in costs over 10 years.
depending on the alternative.
Both industry and government will
incur costs in conjunction with requests.
SERCs. LEPCs and fire departments, as
well as other government officials, may
have access to the information reported
under these sections and may request
additional information. In addition.
SERCs and LEPCs will, under certain
circumstances, have to make available
MSDS and inventory forms that they
have received from facilities. They will
also have to request information that
either was not reported or that concerns
chemicals below the threshold, and the-
will need to make determinations on.
and possibly request Tier II
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. "1987 / Rides and Regulations
information. Similarly, facilities will
need to respond to requests by
government. It is difficult to estimate the
aggregate costs associated with
requests, since the magnitude of these
costs depends crucially on the behavior
of the public and government and the
types of programs that are set up on the
threshold level in effect, and on the
government's implementation of the Tier
II provisions.
An estimate of the potential costs to
government of responding to requests
for MSDS was obtained assuming that
requests for between five and 25 percent
of facilities are received by government.
If government agencies provide copies
of all MSDS that a facility has
submitted, estimated costs to
government of handling these requests
range between less than $400,000 to over
$1.8 million.
The number of Tier n requests to
which industry must respond will
depend on the criteria used by local
committees to evaluate public requests,
the number of public requests made, the
distribution of these requests across
chemical volumes, and the number of
requests originating with the
government It is thus difficult to
estimate the aggregate costs associated
with' Tier II information: however, the
costs to an individual facility of
responding to a Tier II request may
range between approximately $600 and
$6.500, depending on the number of
chemicals for which the request is
received and the size of the facility.
Similarly, the number of requests that
government will make to industry for
MSDS stored below the threshold will
depend on the number of requests that
governments receive, which, in turn.
depends on the size of the threshold and
the outreach program and policies of
government Further, if facilities choose
to submit lists, additional requests for
MSDS will be generated.
No aggregate estimates of the costs of
complying with requests below the
threshold are presented. However, the
cost to government of requesting all
MSDS from a facility, photocopying, and
mailing the information to the requester
when the information is not on file is
estimated to be $52 per request; the cost
to industry of complying with the
request is $31. Those activities and
associated costs are intended to
represent one reasonable method of
making information available to the
public and may not be used by all
government entities.
The analysis also examined the
effects of OSHA's expansion of its HCS
on industry and government costs. This
expansion may affect as many as 3.5
million non-manufacturing facilities with
approximately 67 million MSDS. Very
rough cost estimates suggest that, for the
chosen alternative, present value costs
to non-manufacturing facilities of
complying with sections 311 and 31Z
combined may be as high as $3.7 billion:
this is approximately five times the
costs estimated for manufacturing. For
government, incremental costs
associated with the expansion are
approximately $1.1 billion, which is over
six times the costs associated with the
current scope of the HCS.
Benefits arise in conjunction with
several parts of the reporting
requirements of this rule. Potential
benefits arise in conjunction with this
rule primarily because the information
that is reported is used (e.g., more
effective planning occurs, which reduces
the probability of accidents or chronic
exposures). Thus, the provisions of the
regulation affect the benefits generated.
in comparison with those generated by
the statutory requirements, in several
ways. First the reporting thresholds
affect the volume of information
submitted. Reducing the number of
submissions generates benefits if the
information is more manageable.
However, raising thresholds may reduce
benefits if public access to complete
information on chemical hazards in the
community is reduced or impeded.
Second, simplifying the hazard
classification system affects benefits.
On the one hand, it promotes efficient
use of the information: conversely, it
reduces the level of detail available to
the government and the public.
Benefits also raise in conjunction with
two public access provisions that have
been incorporated into the final rule:
reporting on the list of EHS at 500
pounds or the TPQ and access by the
public, on request, to information on
chemicals stored below the threshold.
Both these provisions provide benefits
to communities with specific needs for
complete information.
Finally, use of the published form by
industry for Section 312 reporting may
provide benefits. Consistently formatted
information is easier to process,
manage, and use and thus may
encourage utilization of the information
by the general public and government
entities.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
1. Purpose
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
whenever an agency is required to issue
any proposed or final rale for
publication in the Federal Register, it
most prepare and make avaOable a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis that
describes the impact of the rule on small
entities (i.e., smaD businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
junsdictions). unless the agency's
Administrator certifies that the rule will
not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entitles. The
analyses contained in the RIA address
the impact of this rule on small entities.
Based on these analyses. EPA has
concluded that, while the rule affects a
substantial number of small entities, the
impact on each is not significant.
2. Methodology and Results
To examine the impacts on small
businesses, EPA compared average
costs for small facilities (defined to be
those with 1-19 employees) to average
and median sales for those facilities, by
two-digit SIC code.
There are a substantial number of
small businesses under this definition;
225,423 facilities—64 percent of total
manufacturing—are estimated to be
small All of these facilities must, at
least, incur the cost of becoming familiar
with the requirements of these Sections,
and thus, incur some costs of complying
with sections 311 and 312.
In order to assess the impacts on
small businesses, several guidelines
were used. The primary criterion.
however, is the ratio of annual costs to
average or median sales. A worst-case
scenario is provided by examining the
first year of Alternative I. no threshold.
Average costs to industry for small
businesses, by SIC code, range between
$1,400 and $2.100. As a percentage of
average sales, the range is .12 to .71
percent The range as a percentage of
median sales is narrower—.20 to .64
percent This is well within EPA's
guidelines that cost remain below 5
percentage of sales in order to avoid
significant impacts.
However. EPA is concerned that it has
been unable to provide a complete
assessment of the impact of this rule on
small businesses in all business sectors
that will in the future become subject to
these requirements due to OSHA's
expanded hazard communication
standard. As indicated earlier, EPA is
understanding a more detailed review of
the appropriateness of these thresholds
in this rule as they apply to the
expanded coverage of the OSHA MSDS
requirements. EPA will also be
conducting a further analysis of small
businesses newly subject to OSHA and
Title in requirements.
3. Certification
On the basis of the analyses
contained in the RIA with respect to the
impact of this rale on small entities. I
hereby certify that this rule win not
have a significant impact on a
-------
38364 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and -Regulations
substantial number of small entities.
This rule, therefore, does not require a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements contained in this rule have
been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980. 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq. and have been assigned OMB
control number 2050.0072.
Vin. Submission of Reports
If necessary to obtain reporting forms.
facilities should contact their State
emergency response commission.
Although EPA intends to provide
camera-ready copy of the federal form
for use by the SERCs. the commission
will be responsible for co-ordinating
with the LEPCs and fire departments
regarding the printing and distribution of
the inventory forms.
To obtain the address of a SERC, an
individual or facility should contact
their Governor's office or the Chemical
Emergency Preparedness Hotline at
(800) 535-0202 or (202) 479-2449 (DC and
Alaska). The SERC should be able to
provide information concerning the
LEPCs within the State.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 370
Chemicals. Hazardous substances.
Extremely hazardous substances,
Intergovernmental relations. Community
right-to-know. Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act. Chemical
accident prevention. Chemical
emergency preparedness. Community
emergency response plan. Contingency
planning. Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Date: October a 1987.
Lee M. Thomas,
Administrator..
For the reasons set out in the
Preamble. Subchapter J of Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
by adding Part 370 to read as follows:
PART 370—HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL
REPORTING: COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-
KNOW
Subpart A—General Provisions
Sec.
370.1 Purpose
370.2 Definitions
370.5 Penalties
Subpart B—Reporting Requirements
Sec.
370.20 Applicability
370.21 MSDS Reporting
370.25 Inventory Form Reporting
370.28 Mixtures
Subpart C—Public Access and Availability
of Information
Sec.
370.30
370.31
Requests for Information
Provision of Informs tion
Suboart D—Inventory Forms
Sec.
370.40 Tier I Emergency and Hazardous
Chemical Inventory Form
370.41 Tier II Emergency and Hazardous
Chemical Inventory Form
Authority: Sees. 311. 312.324.325. 328.329
of Pub. L. 99-499.100 Slat. 1613.42 U.S.C
11011.11012.11024.11025.11028,11029.
Subpart A—General Provisions
9370.1 Purpose.
These regulations establish reporting
requirements which provide the public
with important information on the
hazardous chemicals in their
communities for the purpose of
enhancing community awareness of
chemical hazards and facilitating
development of State and local
emergency response plans.
§370.2 Definitions.
"Commission" means the State
emergency response commission, or the
Governor if there is no commission, for
the State in which the facility is located.
"Committee" means the local
emergency planning committee for the
emergency planning district in which the
facility is located.
"Environment" includes water, air.
and land and the interrelationship that
exists among and between water, air.
and land and all living things.
"Extremely hazardous substance"
means a substance listed in the
Appendices to 40 CFR Part 355.
Emergency Planning and Notification.
'Tacility" means all buildings.
equipment structures, and other
stationary items that are located on a
single site or on contiguous or adjacent
sites and that are owned or operated by
the same person (or by any person
which controls, is controlled by, or
under common control with, such
person). For purposes of emergency
release notification, the term includes
motor vehicles, rolling stock, and
aircraft . ,
"Hazard Category" means any of the
following:
(1) "Immediate (acute) health hazard.
including "highly toxic," "toxic,"
"irritant" "sensitizer." "corrosive." (as
defined under 9 1910.1200 of Title 29 of
the Code of Federal Regulations) and
other hazardous chemicals that cause an
adverse effect to a target organ and
which effect usually occurs rapidly as.a
result of short term exposure and is of r
short duration:
(2) "Delayed (chronic) health hazard."
including "carcinogens" (as defined
under § 1910.1200 of Title 29 of the Code
of Federal Regulations) and other
hazardous chemicals that cause an
adverse effect to a target organ and
which effect generally occurs as a result
of long term exposure and is of long
duration:
(3) "Fire hazard." including
"flammable." combustible liquid."
"pyrophoric." and "oxidizer" (as defined
under S 1910.1200 of Title 29 of the Code
of Federal Regulations):
(4) "Sudden release of pressure."
including "explosive" and "compressed
gas" (as defined under S 1910.1200 of
Title 29 of the Code of Federal
Regulations); and
(5) "Reactive." including "unstable
reactive." "organic peroxide," and
"water reactive" (as defined under
§ 1910.1200 of Title 29 of the Code of
Federal Regulations).
"Hazardous chemical" means any
hazardous chemical as defined under
§ 1910.1200(c) of Title 29 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, except that such
term does not include the following
substances:
(1) Any food, food additive, color
additive, drug, or cosmetic regulated by
the Food and Drug Administration.
(2) Any substance present as a solid
in any manufactured item to the extent
exposure to the substance does not
occur under normal conditions of use.
(3) Any substance to the extent it is
used for personal, family, or household
purposes, or is present in the same form
and concentration as a product
packaged for distribution and use by the
general public.
(4) Any substance to the extent it is
used in a research laboratory or a
hospital or other medical facility under
the direct supervision of a technically
qualified individual
(5) Any substance to the extent it is
used in routine agricultural operations
or is a fertilizer held for sale by a
retailer to the ultimate customer.
"Inventory form" means the Tier I and
Tier II emergency and hazardous
chemical inventory forms set forth in
Subpart D of this Part
"Material Safety Data Sheet" or
"MSDS" means the sheet required to be
developed under S 1910.1200(g) of Title
29 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
"Person" means any individual, trust.
firm, joint stock company, corporation
(including a government corporation).
partnership, association. State,
municipality, commission, political
subdivision of State, or interstate body.
"Present in the same form and
concentration as a product packaged for
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 38365
distribution and use by the general
public" means a substance packaged in
a similar manner and present in the
same concentration as the substance
when packaged for use by the general
public, whether or not it is intended for
distribution to the general public or used
for the same purpose as when it is
packaged for use by the general public.
"Stale" means any State of the United
States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Guam.
American Samoa, the United States
Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana
Islands, and any other territory or
possession over which the United States
has jurisdiction.
"TPQ" means the threshold planning
quantity for an extremely hazardous
substance as defined in 40 CFR Part 355.
§370.5 Penalties
(a) MSDA reporting. Any person other
than a governmental entity who violates
any requirement of § 370.21 shall be
liable for civil and administrative
penalties of not more than $10.000 for
each violation.
(b) Inventory reporting. Any person
other than a governmental entity who
violates any requirement of § 370.25
shall be liable for civil and
administrative penalties of not more
than $25,000 for each violation.
(c) Continuing violations. Each day a
violation described in paragraphs (a) or
(b) of this section continues shall
constitute a separate violation.
Subpart B—Reporting Requirements
§370.20 Applicability.
(a) General. The requirements of this
subpart apply to any facility that is
required to prepare or have available a
material safety data sheet (or MSDS) for
a hazardous chemical under the ;
Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970 and regulations promulgated under
that Act.
(b) Minimum threshold levels. Except
as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this
section, the minimum threshold level for
reporting under this subpart shall be
according to the following schedule.
(1) The owner or operator of a facility
subject to this Subpart shall submit an
MSDS:
(i) On or before October 17,1987 (or 3
months after the facility first becomes
subject to this subpart), for all
hazardous chemicals present at the
facility in amounts equal to or greater
than 10.000 pounds, or that are
extremely hazardous substances present
at the facility in an amount greater than
or equal to 500 pounds (or 55 gallons) or
the TPQ. whichever is less, and
(ii) On or before October 17.1989 (or 2
years and 3 months after the facility first
becomes subject to this Subpart). for all
hazardous chemicals present at the
facility between 10.000 and zero pounds
for which an MSDS has not yet been
submitted.
(2) The owner or operator of a facility
subject to this Subpart shall submit the
Tier I form:
(i) On or before March 1.1988 (or
March 1 of the first year after the facility
first becomes subject to this Subpart),
covering all hazardous chemicals
present at the facility during the
preceding calendar year in amounts
equal to or greater than 10,000 pounds,
or that are extremely hazardous
substances present at the facility in an
amount greater than or equal to 500
pounds (or 55 gallons) or the TPQ,
whichever is less, and
(ii) On or before March 1.1989 (or
March 1 of the second year after the
facility first becomes subject to this
Subpart). covering all hazardous
chemicals present at the facility during
the preceding calendar year in amounts
equal to or greater than 10.000 pounds,
or that are extremely hazardous
substances present at the facility in an
amount greater than or equal to 500
pounds (or 55 gallons) or the TPQ,
whichever is less, and
(iii) On or before March 1990 (or
March 1 of the third year after the
facility first becomes subject to this
Subpart), and annually thereafter.
covering all hazardous chemicals
present at the facility during the
preceding calendar year in amounts
equal to or greater than zero pounds or
that are extremely hazardous
substances present at the facility in an
amount equal to or greater than 500
pounds (or 55 gallons) or the TPQ,
whichever is less.
(3) The minimum threshold for
reporting in response to requests for
submission of an MSDS or a Tier II form
pursuant to §§ 370.21(d) and 370.25(c) of
this Part shall be zero.
§370.21 MSDS reporting.
(a) Basic requirement. The owner or
operator of a facility subject to this
Subpart shall submit an MSDS for each
hazardous chemical present at the
facility according to the minimum
threshold schedule provided in
paragraph (b) of § 370.20 to the
committee, the commission, and the fire
department with jurisdiction over the
facility.
(b) Alternative reporting. In lieu of the
submission of an MSDS for each
hazardous chemical under paragraph (a)
of this section, the owner or operator
may submit the following:
(1] a list of the hazardous chemicals
for which the MSDS is required, grouped
by hazard category as defined under
§ 370.2 of this Part;
(2] the chemical or common name of
each hazardous chemical as provided on
the MSDS; and
(3) except for reporting of mixtures
under S 370.28(a](2). any hazardous
component of each hazardous chemical
as provided on the MSDS.
(c) Supplemental reporting. (1) The
owner or operator of a facility that has
submitted an MSDS under this section
shall provide a revised MSDS to the
committee, the commission, and the fire
department with jurisdiction over the
facility within three months after
discovery of significant new information
concerning the hazardous chemical for
which the MSDS was submitted.
(2) After October 17.1987, the owner
or operator of a facility subject to this
section shall submit an MSDS for a
hazardous chemical pursuant to
paragraph (a) of this section or a list
pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section
within three months after the owner or
operator is first required to prepare or
have available the MSDS or after a
hazardous chemical requiring an MSDS
becomes present in an amount
exceeding the threshold established in
S 370.20(b).
(d) Submission of MSDS upon request.
The owner or operator of a facility that
has not submitted the MSDS for a
hazardous chemical present at the
facility shall submit the MSDS for any
such hazardous chemical to the
committee upon its request. The MSDS
shall be submitted within 30 days of the
receipt of such request
§ 370.25 Inventory reporting.
(a) Basic requirement. The owner or
operator of a facility subject to this
Subpart shall submit an inventory form
to the commission, the committee, and
the fire department with jurisdiction
over the facility. The inventory form
containing Tier I information on
hazardous chemicals present at the
facility during the preceding calendar
year above the threshold levels
established in § 370.20(b) shall be
submitted on or before March 1 of each
year, beginning in 1988.
(b) Alternative reporting. With respect
to any specific hazardous chemical at
the facility, the owner or operator may
submit a Tier II form in lieu of the Tier I
information.
(c) Submission of Tier II information.
The owner or operator of a facility
subject to this Section shall submit the
Tier II form to the commission,
committee, or the fire department having
-------
38366 Federal Register J Ved. 52. No. MQ / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Bales and Begukrtkms
jurisdiction over the facility upon
request of such persons. The Tier II fonn
shaH be submitted within 30 days of the
receipt of each request
(d) Fire department inspection. The
owner or operator of a facility that has
submitted an inventory form under this
section shall allow on-site inspection by
the fire department having jurisdiction
over the facih'ty upon request of the
department, and shall provide to the
department specific location information
on hazardous chemicals at the facih'ty.
§370.28
(a) Basic reporting. The owner or
operator of .a facility may meet the
reporting EequmsmeBts. of §{370.21
(MSDS reporting) and 33025 {inventory
form reporting} of this Subpart fora
hazardous chemical thai is a mixture of
hazardous chemicals fay.
(1) Providing the requeued information
on each icorapoaent in the mixture which
is a hazardous •chemical, or
(2) Providing the required information
on the mixture itself, so long as the
reporting of mixtures by a facility under
§ 370.21 is in the same manner as
under § 37O25. where practicable.
(b) Calculation of the quantity. (Ij if
the reporting is oa each campeneat ef
the mixture which is a bazar-dene
chemical, then theconcentratioBcf .the
hazardous chemical, in weight peooent
(greater than l%«ror local
official acting in his or her official
capacity or the request is limited to
hazardous tr""*'"'-1'1'' stored at the
facility in «n amount in excess of 1O00B
pounds.
(3) If She request under paragraph
(b1(lj of this section does not meet ihe
requirements of paragraph ^(2) «f this
section, the committee or commission
may nquest submwsion of tfae Tier fl
form from the owner or operator of the
facility that is the subject of the request
if the request under paragraph fbfll) of
this section includes a-general •statement
of need.
9370J1 Provision of Marmatloa.
All information obtained from an
owner or operator in response to a
request under this subpart and any
requested Xier II form or MSDS
otherwise in possession of 'the
commission or me committee shall be
made available to the person submitting
the .request under this Subpart pcovided
upon request of the owner or operator.
the commission or committee shall
withhold from disclosure the location .of
any specific .chemical identified in the
Tier II form.
Subpart D—Inventory Forms
5370.40 Tier I emergency and >iam dotm
chenricsJfcwsaMfyJorm.
(a) Hie form set out in paragraph (b)
of this section shall be completed and
submitted as required
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 38367
_ EMERGENCY AND HAZARDOUS
Tier On0 CHEMICAL INVENTORY
Aggregate Information by Hazard Typt
Page of page*
Form Approved OMB No. 2050-0072
FOR
OFFICIAL
USE
ONLY
OataRaoarwd
Important: Read instructions before completing form
Facility Identification
Mama
Straat AMrrn**
City
SIC Coda ( I I I I
°«V?J*!SI 1 l-l 1 1 l-l 1 1 1 1
Owner/Operator
MJI.I AdKra.. . .,
Phan. 1 )
Reporting Period From January 1 to Daoambar 31. 10
Emergency Contact*
Tltla
( I
iHourPnona J >
TIM
I )
MHBurPhon.
HaiardTyp,
4ff^uS* XtR1"!
AmouXf °6*-S&
Gtntral Location
1 1 Chae* -f •!!• plan ta atlaehad
Fir.
cm
cm cm i i i i
Reactivity | | |
irrn
Immediate
(acute)
Delayed
(Chronic)
cui rm
i i i i
Certification (Read and tlgn after completing all nctions)
1 nnlty under pmlty of law that 1 run* psnonally *aamr»i and am famllar with
tha information tubmiitad In thb and all atlaetwd docmantt. and that basad on my
Inquiry of Ihow Individual* raspomlbla tor obtaining tha information. 1 ballom that
tha lubmittad Informalnn n trua. aocurata and oomplota
Mama and official till* of ownar/oparator OR ownar/opar atari autnormd raprasamaln*
Signaiura
Data iignad
' Reporting Range Weight Range In Pounds
*^ Value From... To...
Ranuee
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
0
100
1000
10.000
100.000
1.000.000
10.000.000
50.000.000
100.000.000
500.000.000
1 bfliion
99
999
9.999
99.999
999.999
9.999.999
49.999.999
99.999.999
499.999.999
999.999.999
higher than 1 bOflon
-------
VoL 52. No. 199 / Thursday. Qtiiobef 15. «87 / Rutei and
TIER ONE INSTRUCTIONS
.GENERAL .INFORMATION
t~ --<; — •>
om.
Puttie Uw W-«W.
SSSaSsSSSSSSS
your TacDRy during the part year.
YOU MUST FROV1DH AU. INFORMATION
REQUESTED ON THIS FORM.
~~
i Superfund
latlom at §1910.1200.
^^ TMto 4H *nmTipt »trmt ananNew* •"•"•• I^IM •
TO Any'hazartouBWSStB
sued under that Act:
{UH vVood or'
(lv) -Articles-- defined unctor §1910.1200 (b) a. a
manufactured Item:
• which Is formed to a specific shaps or design
end use: and
mal condWons ot -use.
to
(vl) Faadsi. drugs, or ci
sonal consumption ty
fJem Intended for per-
whOe In the
Amendments sind Beaolhortattan Act «f
auency of .xpwure wWch to not greater than expo-
sures experienced by consumers; and
Ing substances:
ill Any food, food additive, color adcflffce. *ug.or
w«nettc^egulate« by the Fee- «nd Drug Admini-
stration:
Any
present as a sold In «*
--
to the extent It Is used for per
tousehold purpo^.
^SsVams form and concentration ias
aged for dlstrtoetloa and use by tfce
flsd InrtMrtiial-
b7 a retailer to the uHlmate customer.
•yvar « w «Uw»e Hie hurts isieu uem* .
...10.000
e January to Oecemberl 989
(or third year of reporting) ...»ro toe.
fee Jlnaiansslrt. *
. after addition* analysis
less, from the
and there-
WHEN TO SUBMIT THIS FORM
on or'belore Warch 1 «t every J**-
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. Mo. 199 / Thursday, October 15.1967 / Rules and Regulations 38369
JNSTRUCTIONS_
nod I*CM Instructions carefully. Print or typt all responses.
WHERE TO SUBMIT THIS FORM
Send one completed Inventory form to each of the fol-
lowing organizations:
1 • Your State emergency planning commission
2. Your local emergency planning committee
3. The fire department wrth Jurisdiction over your
facility.
PENALTIES
Any owner or operator of a facllty who fate to submit or
supplies false Tier One Information shall be Babte to the
United States for a cIvH penalty of up to $25.000 for each
such violation. Each day a violation continues shaB con-
stitute a separate violation. In addition, any citizen may
commence a chrtl action on his or her own behalf against
any owner or operator who falls to submit Tier One Infor-
mation.
You may use the Tier Two form as a worksheet for
completing Tier One. rang in the Tier Two
• chemical Information section should help you •
assemble your Tter.One responses. •; -
t.. - '
If your responses require more than one page, m In the
page number at the top of the form.
REPORTING PERIOD
Enter the appropriate calendar year, beginning January 1
and ending December 31.
FACILITY IDENTIFICATION
Enter the complete name of your faculty (and eum>aiiy
Identifier where appropriate).
Enter the ful street addrees or state road. N a street
address Is not avatabk*. enter other appropriate Mentm-
ers that describe the physical location of your faoOMy
(e.g.. longitude and latitude). Include city, state, and
zip code.
Enter the primary Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
code and the Dun & Bradstreet number for your facBty.
The financial offloer of your facWty should be abto to pro-
vide the Dun & Bradstreet number. If your firm does not
have this Information, contact the state or regional office
of Dun & Bradstreet to obtain your faculty number or
have one assigned.
OWNER/OPERATOR
Enter the owner's or operator's Ml name, maflng ad-
dress, and phone number.
EMERGENCY CONTACT
Enter the name. tWe. and work phone number of at least
one local person or office that can act as a referral If
emergency respondars need assistance bi responding to
a chemical accident at the facflty
Provide an emergency phone number where such emer-
gency Information wB be avalabto 24 hours a day. every
day.
PHYSICAL AND HEALTH HAZARDS
Descriptions. Amounts, and Locations
Thto section requires aggregate Information on chemi-
cals by hazard categories as defined In 40 CFR 370.3.
The two health hazard categories and three physical haz-
ard categories are a consolidation of the 23 hazard cate-
gories defined In the OSHA Hazard Communication Stan-
dard. 29 CFR 1910.1200. For each hazard type. Indi-
cate the total amounts and general locations of afl appt-
cabto chemicals present at your faculty during the past
• What units should I uee?
Calculate an amounts as weight In pounds. To
convert gas or RquM volume to weight In
pounds, multiply by an appropriate density fac-
tor.
• What about mixtures?
rf a chemical Is part of a mixture, you nave the
option of reporting ether the weight of the en-
ttne mixture or arty the portion of the mixture
that to a particular hazardous chemical (e.g.. If
a hazardous solution weighs 100 fes. but Is
composed of only 5% of a particular hazardous
chemical, you can Indicate either 100 fee. of the
mbiture or 5 IDS. of the chemical).
Select the option consistent wtth your Section
3H reporting of the chemical on the MSOS or
Bst of MSDS chemicals.
• Where do I count a chemtoal that to a fire reae-
ttvtty physical hazard and an Immediate (acute)
health hazard?
Add the chemical'• weight to your totals tor afl
threw hazard categories and Include Its location
In afl three categories. Many oherrtcate fal Mo
more than one hazard category.
In doubto-eounthio.
which results
MAXIMUM AMOUNT
The amounts of chemicals you have on hand may vary
throughout the year. The peak weights — greatest
single-day weights during the year — are added together
In thto column to determine the maximum weight for each
hazard type. Since the peaks for different ohemtoato
often occur on dWferant days, thto marimum amount w*
saam artfflclatty Ngh
To complete trm and the toaowJna. sections, you may
choose to use the Tier Two form as a worksheet.
To determine the Maximum Amount:
1. Ltot afl of your hazardous chemicals mdMdualy.
2. For each chemical...
a. Indicate al physical and health hazards that
the chemical presents. Include afl chemicals.
•von If they are present for orty a short pe-
riod of time during the year.
-------
38370
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15.1987 f Rules and Regulations
b. Estimate the maximum weight In pounds that
was present at your faculty on any single
day of the reporting period.
3. For each hazard type — beginning with Fire and re-
peating for all physical and health hazard types...
a. Add the maximum weights of all chemicals
you Indicated as the particular hazard type.
b. Look at the Reporting Ranges at the bottom
of the Tier One form. Find the appropriate
range value code.
c. Enter this range value as the Maximum
Amount.
EXAMPLE:
You are using the Tier Two form as a
worksheet and have Bated raw weights In pounds
for each of your hazardous chemicals. You
have marked an X In the Immediate (acute)
hazard column for phenol and sutfurte acid.
The maximum amount raw weight you listed
were 10.000 bs. and 50 be. respectively. You
add these together to reach a total of 10.050 be.
Then you look at the Reporting Range at the
bottom of your Tier One form and And that the
value of 03 corresponds to 10.050 bs. Enter
03 as your Maximum Amount for Immediate
(acute) hazards materials.
EXAMPLE:
You are using the Tier Two form, and have
marked an X to the Immediate (acute) hazard
column for nicotine and phenol. Nicotine is
present at your faculty 100 days during the year.
and the sum of the daUy weight* Is 100.000 bs.
By dividing 100.000 bs. by 100 days on-slte.
you calculate an Average Dally Amount of
1.000 IDS. for nicotine. Phenol Is present at
your facility 50 days during the year, and the
sum of the dally weight* Is 10.000 bs. By
dividing 10.000 las. by SO days on-slte. you
calculate an Average Daily Amount of 200 bs.
for phenol. You then add the two average
daDy amounts together to reach a total of
1.200 bs. Then you look at the Reporting
Range on your Tier One form and find that the
value 02 corresponds to 1.200 bs. Enter 02 as
your Average Dally Amount for Immediate
(acute) Hazard.
You also marked an X In the Fire hazard column
for phenol. When you calculate your Average
Dally Amount for fire hazards, use the 200 b.
weight again.
NUMBER OF DAYS ON-SITE
Enter the greatest number of days that a single chemical
within that hazard category was present on-stte.
You also marked an X bi the Fire hazard box
for phenol. When you calculate your
Maximum Amount totals for fire hazards.
add the 10.000 b. weight again.
AVERAGE DAILY AMOUNT
This column should represent the average daDy amount
of chemicals of each hazard type that were present at
your facility at any point during the year.
To determine this amount:
1. List al of your hazardous chemicals MMduaBy
(same as for Maximum Amount).
2. For each chemical...
a. Indicate al physical and health hazards that
the chemical presents (same as for Maxi-
mum Amount).
b. Estimate the average weight In pounds that
was present at your faculty throughout the
year. To do this, total aB datty weights and
divide by the number of days the chemical
was present on the site.
3. For each hazard type — beginning wtth Fire and
repeating for al physical and health hazards...
a. Add the average weights of al chemicals
you Indicated for the particular hazard type.
b. Look at the Reporting Ranges at the bottom
of the Tier One form. Find the appropriate
range value code.
c. Enter this range vahw as the Average DaBy
Amount.
' i
? EXAMPLE: ?
'", At your facility, nicotine Is present for 100 days •<-
>' and phosgene Is present for 150 days. Enter :
-. 150 fi the space provided.
GENERAL LOCATION
Enter the general location within your f aeBty where each
hazard may be found. General locations should Include
the names or Identifications of buildings, tank fields, tots.
sheds, or other such areas.
For each hazard type. 1st the locations of al applicable
chemicals. As an alternative you may also attach a site
plan and 1st the site coordinates related to the appropri-
ate locations, if you do so. check the Site Plan box.
EXAMPLE:
On your worksheet you have marked an-X In
the Fire hazard column for acetone and
butane. You noted that these are kept In steel
drums In Room C of the Main BuMlng. and In
oressurtzed cylinders ki Storage Shed 13.
respectively. You could enter Mam BuHdlng
and Storage Shed 13 as the General
Locations of your fire hazards. However.
you choose to attach a alts plan and 1st
coordinates. Cheek the She Plan box at
the top of the column and enter stte coor-
dinates for the Main Building and Storage Shed
13 under General •Locations.
If you need more space to 1st locations, attach an adoV
tktnal Tier One form and continue your list on the proper
Ine. Number al pages.
CERTIFICATION
This must be completed by the owner or operator or the
officially designated representative of the owner or op-
erator. Enter your fun name and official title. Sign your
name and enter the current date.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52.. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
3837
§370.41 Tter II emergency and hazardous
chemical Inventory form.
(a) The form set out in paragraph (b)
of this Section must be completed and
submitted as required in { 370.25(c). In
lieu of the form set out in paragraph (b)
of this section, the facility owner or
operator may submit a State or local
form that contains identical content.
(b) Tier II Emergency and Hazardous
Chemical Inventory Form.
BILUNO CODE 6SCO-SO-M
-------
Pig* of
Form Approved OMB No 2060-007?
Tier Two
EMERGENCY
AND
HAZARDOUS
CHEMICAL
INVENTORY
Sptelflc
Information
by Cfiimical
Facility Idantlflcallon
pltw "'at* . ... . "*'-
siccod. ""tfJS-l 1 l-l 1 1 l-l 1 1
FOR I D .
ONLY |o«.H«-«d
1
'Ownar/Oparator Nama
— ( I
Mill Mdrara . —
- Emarganoy Contact
Mimr Tllto
Phor»_L_J_ 24HrRion.J >
Ml-T Tn"
„„, < ) MM, B— . ( 1
arm
Reporting Purled fnm January 1 to Paeambar 3), I8_
Chemical Description
Physical
and Health
Hazards
(ohaokaH that tap*)
Inventory
Max. Avg. No. Of
Dally. Dally Day*
Mnount Amount • On-alta
(coda) '(code) (days)
Storage Codes and Locations
(Non-Confidential)
Storage Code Storage Locations
i i i i i irnn
Cham. Nima
c»«* an r~i rn
MolApp/y: L-J I—I
RAQCI ivfty
knradlct* (MUM]
DM«y^ (ehronto)
anon rrn
Mix
Solid UquM
Oil
CASI i i i i i ii~nn
Cham. Mum
—»B s a a s
knmdlaw (aoul*
(M«y^ (ehrenlo)
«*.i i i i i i imn ss&n
Cham.
C»M*AH n n n n n
thai apply: p^ M|J( g^ llquM Oli
OfPrMlur*
Rucllvlly
kimdlati laeuta
FMUyrt (ohronle)
mm rm
Cortlllcatlon (Rtod end 4lt» ojttr cotnflitlng oil iittlom)
I cattily Midar penalty of law that I hav* oartenally examined and am familiar with th* Information •,
en .ny inquiry oMhoee Individual. «.pon.lb4e for obt.lnlng th. mtarmatlen. 11*^. that the tubmltted Intarmallon I. Iru*. aoourat*. and oompl.te.
d ki thla and all attachad doeumanta. and that ba*M)
Nmm» «ndolllclal till*ot o»m«/ep«nler OP
Dalai
Optional Attachment* (Check one
B
I hav* atlaenad a alt* plan
I hav* •inched a Hit of ilia
coordinate abbrmlailoni
-------
Tier Two
EMERGENCY
AND
HAZARDOUS
CHEMICAL
INVENTORY
Sptclfle
Information
*jr Clitmical
kl«n.
Sln.1 A**...
City
SIC Cod* [ T
FOR
OFFICIAL
USE
ONLY
1 1 1 °"A3£\ 1 H 1 1 l-l 1 1 1 1
1
Oat* Received |
Owner/Operator Nam*
|J»n* . , »««• ( )
U.ll A*
-------
TIER TWO INSTRUCTIONS
GENERAL INFORMATION
t -
at your facility during the past year.
YOU MUST PROVIDE ALL INFORMATION
REQUESTED ON THIS FORM TO FULFILL
TIER TWO REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
TWB form may also boused as a **•*•»•**
completing the TJer One form or may be
In place of the Tier One lorm.
WHO MUST SUBMIT THIS FORM
Section 312 of Title IB requb-ee that tbeowner or opera-
tor of a fadtty submit this Tier Two forwilf so requested
by a State emergency planning commission, a local
emergency planning committee, or a fire department
with Jurisdiction over the facOty.
request may apply to the owner or operator of any
to required, under regulations ImpJementhg
Ml Safety and Health Act of 1O70. ta pre-
pare or nave available a Material Safety Data Sheet
(MSDS1 for a hazardous chemical present at the facnty.
MS)S requirements are specified m the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Hazard Com-
munications Standard, found m Title 29 of the Code of
Federal Regulations at §1910.1200.
WHAT CHEMICALS ARE INCLUDED
You must report the Information required on thta form for
wh tazardoaV chemical for which Thr Two Information
{^requested. However. OSHA regutatlone and Title III
exempt some chemicals from reporting.
Section W10.1200(b) of the OSHA regulations currently
provides the following exemptions:
(I) Any hazardous waste as such twm to defined
by the SoBd Waste Disposal Act aa amended (42
US C. 6901 et seq.) when subject to regutatlone
Issued under that Act:
(D) Tobacco or tobacco products:
(Q) Wood or wood products:
(lv)-Articles-- defined under §19leM200(b) as a
manufactured Item:
e Which* formed to a specific shape or design
during manufacture:
e Which tias end use funetlon(e) dependent In
whole or tn part upon the ehape or design dur-
ing end use: and
e WWch does not release. or^_
exposure to a hazardous chemical under nor-
mal conditions of use.
i.i Food, drugs, cosmetics or alcoholic beverages
ha reSS establishment which are packaged for sale
to consumers:
irii Foods, drugs, or cosmetics latended for per-
•Sial comW«on by employee. wNte In the
workplace.
(rD) Any consumer product or hazardous •"bstanca.
as those terms are defined ri the Consumer Product
Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 1251 et asp.) "•P"**'**-
where fee employer can awontrateltls l»»*»™
worto>ace In the same manner as normal consumer
use. and wrtch use results h a duration and fre-
quency of ensure which Is net grnw
seres experienced by r—•-—<—«
druo as that term *s eetned In the Federal
$?'JZ Co«n«lc Act pi U.8.C. 301.1
sag.). when It to h sold, ftaal form for direct admW-
straton to the patient P.O.. tablets or pills).
m addklon. Section 311W of TMe IH exdudes the foBow-
tag substancaa:
IU Any food, food adOWve. color addKlve. drug, or
cosmeSc^egulated by the F««« and Drug Admlnl-
straflon:
(0) Any substance present aa a *e»d m •"*m"r»-
taetored Itwn » the e«wn exposure »*••«*:
stance does not occur under normal conoitlons of
use:
(B) Any substance to the extent K t
sonal. famBy. or househoM purpose*. - -r~""'-
the same form and concentration as a product pack-
aged for distribution and use by the general public:
iivi Ajnw lUjbstBncA to ttv 0)dont It M UsWQ «i • rv*
(££X£2S™~ a ho** e> or •tt-r.n.dte.lf.c.l.
tty under the direct euperrteloa of a technically quaB-
fled Individual:
,v) Any substancstofce extent »to »eTle>Onew>de7TMe III. Section 312. You need
toWport onN those hazartous ohsmteato that were pre-
sent at your faculty at any *ne during the preceang cav
endar year at or abowj the teveto teted below:
e January to December 1987
(or first year of reporting) ...10.00* be.
• January to December t«8i
(or second year of report**) ...10.00B) bs.
e January to December 1981
(or thrd vesr of reparnngl .. J»n> t».*
• EPAwBp-bBehtheflr^«ireetw*ellectl»e
In the third year. a*er additional analrsis.
e For extremely hazardous •<*>taMC*>"-^
bs. or the thresnoW ptaweng *u**'**~'*~
ever to toes, from die first year of reporthg
and thereafter.
chemicals regardless of
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^•••^•^••MP^^MMM^MiMi^M^^j^l^BI^^MEjp^B^^M^jl^MM^jl^^M^^^^M^^^^^^^^^^^^^^M^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^j
38375
INSTRUCTIONS
Pltatt rtad thtit instructions carefully. Print or lypt all niponta.
WHEN TO SUBMIT THIS FORM
Owners or operators must submit the Tier Two form to
the requesting agency within 30 days of receipt of a writ-
ten request from an authorized official.
WHERE TO SUBMIT THIS FORM
Send the completed Tier Two form to the requesting
agency.
PENALTIES
Any owner or operator who violates any Tier Two report-
Ing requirements shad be liable to the United States for a
civil penalty of up to S2S.OOO for each such violation.
Each day a violation continues Shan constitute a separate
violation.
You may use the Tier Two form as a worksheet for
completing the Tier One form. Fining m the Tier
Two Chemical Information section should help you
assemble your Tier One responses.
If your responses require more than one page, flu In the
page number at the top of the form.
REPORTING. PERIOD
Enter the appropriate calendar year, beginning January 1
and ending December 31.
FACILITY IDENTIFICATION
Enter the fufl name of your faculty (and company Identi-
fier where appropriate).
Enter the fun street address or state road. If a street
address Is not available, enter other appropriate Identifi-
ers that describe the physical location of your faculty
(e.g.. longitude and latitude). Include city, state, and zip
code.
Enter the primary Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
code and the Dun & Bradstreet number for your faculty.
The financial officer of your fadDty shouk) be able to pro-
vide the Dun a Bradstreet number. If your firm does not
have this Information, contact the state or regional office
of Dun & Bradstreet to obtain your faculty number or
have one assigned.
OWNER/OPERATOR
Enter the owner's or operator's fuO name, mailing ad-
dress, and phone number.
EMERGENCY CONTACT
Enter the name, title, and work phone number of at toast
one local person or office who can act as a referral If
emergency responders need assistance In responding to
a chemical accident at the faculty.
Provide an emergency phone number where such emer-
gency chemical Information will be available 24 hours a
day. every day.
CHEMICAL INFORMATION: Description.
Hazards. Amounts, and Locations
The main section of the Tier Two form requires specific
Information on amounts and locations of hazardous
chemicals, as defined In the OSHA Hazard Communica-
tion Standard.
e What unKa should I use?
Calculate al amounts as weight In pounds. To
convert gas or Iquld volume to weight hi
pounds, multiply by an appropriate density fac-
tor.
e What about mixtures?
If a chemical to part of a mixture, you have the
option of reporting either the weight of the en-
tire mixture or only the portion of the mixture
that Is a particular hazardous chemical (e.g..
If a hazardous sedition weighs 100 bs. but to
composed of only 5% of a particular hazardous
chemical, you can Indicate either 100 DM. of
the mixture or 5 bs. of the chemical.
Select the option consistent wttti your Section
311 reporting of the chemical on the MSDS or
Hst of MSDS chemicals.
CHEMICAL DESCRIPTION
1. Enter the Chemical Abstract Service number
(CAS*).
For mixtures, enter the CAS number of the mix-
ture as a whole H It has been assigned a number
dtotlnct from KB components. For a mixture
that has no CAS number, leave this Hem blank or
report the CAS numbers of as many constituent
chemicals as possible.
If you are withholding the name of a chemical In ac-
cordance wtth criteria specified In Title B. Section
322. enter the generic chemical class (e.g.. 1st
toluene dtoocynata as organic toocynate) and check
the box marked Trade Secret. Trade secret
Info
atio
sh
uld be submitted to EPA and must
Include a substantiation. Please refer to Section
322 of TKIe III for detailed Information on how to
comply wtth trade secret request*.
2. Enter the chemical name or common name of each
hazardous chemical.
3. Circle ALL appBcabto descriptors: pure or mixture.
and solid, liquid, or gas.
EXAMPLE:
You have pure chlorine gas on hand, as
weD as two mixtures that contain Iquld
chlorine. You write 'chlorine' and enter the
CAS*. Then you circle 'pure* and 'mix' —
as we0 as 'Hq* and 'gas .
.•:• ., ','«£ — -„ ,,ff . ?,„"•, •?• - '.•'.:•
-------
3837B Federal Register / Vot. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. OctoberlS. 1987 / Rates and Regulations
PHYSICAL AND HEALTH HAZARDS
For each chemical you have listed, check al the physical
and health hazard boxe. that apply. Thesehazard cate-
gories are defined m 40 CFR 370.3. The two health haz-
ard categories and three physical hazard categories are
a consolidation of the 23 hazard categories defined m we
OSHA Hazard Communication Standard. 29 CFR
1910.1200.
1 For each hazardous chemical, estimate the average
weight to pounds that was present at your faeRy dur-
tog the year.
To do this, total al daly weights and dMde by the
number of days the chemical was present en the
site.
2. Find the appropriate range value to Table I.
3. Enter this range value as the Average Da* Amount.
MAXIMUM AMOUNT
1. For each hazardous chemical, estimate the greatest
amount present at your facility on any single day dur-
ing the reporting period.
2. Find the appropriate range value code In Tabte I.
3. Enter this range value as the Maximum Amount.
Table I REPORTING RANGES
Range
Value
Weight Range to Pound*
From... To...
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
0
100
1.000
10.000
100.000
1 .000.000
10.000.009
50.000.000
100.000.000
500.000.000
1 billion
99
999
9.999
99.999
999.999
9.999.999
49.999 .999
99.999.999
499.999.999
999.999,999
higher than 1
bifflon
« you are using this form as •.worksheet «orcom-
pleting Tier One. •nt£^5Ptl«L?^Jn0E_*lDa
In the shaded space below In* re«puiwe BUCK*. BO
fcls f orboth Maximum Amount and Averag*
Daily Amount.
EXAMPLE:
gallon storage tar*.
contains 10% benzene, which ta a
chemical.
50*>
«f
*
if
You figure
aallons You also know that the
SerSene Is 7.29 pounds per galto.. •• ye-
multiply 500 by 7.29 to get a weight of 3,«
pounds.
Then you look at Table I .
range value 02 correspond8to
enter 02 as «he Maximum AtneanU
llf vou are using the form as a worksheet for
completing a Tier One form, you should write
3.645 In the stiaded area.)
EXAMPLE:
The 5.000-gaflon shipment of solvent you re-
ceived last year was gradualy used up and
d3l?Pvot|ume0tev'els •Vthe'lanic te K9!MO°gaBons.
*Z™&2¥!£^&"^™£
gallons.
You already knew that the solvent contains 1O%
benzene, which Is a hazardous chemical. Stoce
10% of 2 950 Is 295. you figure that you had an
average of 295 gallons of benzene. X*".*]*?,^.
know that the density ofbenjen* to ™*P»»*
per gallon, so you multfaty 295 by 7.29 to get
a weight of 2.150 pound*.
Then you took at Tableland M
range value 02 cuireuends to 2.150. You
enter 02 as the Average DaDy Amount.
llf you are using the form as a •uihstiii* for
completing a Tier One form, you should wrrte
2.150 In the shaded area.)
NUMBER OF DAYS ON-8ITE
Enter the number of days that tbe hazardous chemical
was found on-slte.
<'
EXAMPLE:
ed o! lOTfcbenzenewam
The ecjlvert c»n^sed o! lOTfcbenzenewam
present for 315 days at your facOty. Enter S15
in the space provided.
th*
You
STORAGE COOeS AND STOWAGE1OCAT1ONS
UM alflon-confioentlal Chemteal location* toOJ*(«*•""•
along w» storage types/eonoWons associated with each
mtrffir Codes: Indicate the type* and conditions of
tterage present.
a. Loo* af Tab* J7. For each location, ftod the
appropriate storagetype(s). Enterthe cor-
raspondlng eode(s) to front of the parenthe-
ses.
b Loo* ar Taft* 111. For ••ote etorage type.
find the.tamperat«re and *•*•»•• ««"*-
_ „ —_—•-•-—~ture code •>
the first space wrthto the pareiaheiss. 6nt»r
the applicable temperaoire code In the last
apace within the pa»eiiMwse».
AVERAGE DAILY AMOUNT
-------
A Above ground tank
B Below ground tank
C Tank Inside building
D Steel drum
E Plastic or non-metallic drum
F Can
Q Carboy
H Silo
I Fiber drum
J Bag
K Box
L Cylinder
M Glass bottles or Jugs
N Plastic bottles or Jugs
O Tote bin
P Tank wagon
Q Ran ear
R Other
Optional anachmftnm: If you choose to attach one of the
following, check the appropriate Attachments box at the
bottom of the Tier Two form.
a. A site plan with site coordinates Indicated for
buildings, lots, areas, etc. throughout your
faculty.
b. A list of site coordinate abbreviations that
correspond to buildings, lots, areas etc
throughout your facility.
EXAMPLE:
Voii.hw w,?J2.enzene"" *"• "w*room «* the
mam building, and In tank 2 In tank fleld 10.
You attach a site plan wtth coordinates as
follows- main bunding = Q-2. tank field 10 .
B-6. FID In the Storage Location as follows:
B-6 [ Tank 2 ] Q-2 [Main Room)
Table III - TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE
CONDITIONS
CODES Storage Conditions
(PRESSURE)
Ambient pressure
Greater than ambient pressure
Less than ambient pressure
(TEMPERATURE)
Ambient temperature
Greater than ambient temperature
Less than ambient temperature
but not cryogenic
Cryogenic conditions
1
2
3
4
6
6
Virus,; •Z,* V£,~?,Z Z
EXAMPLE:
The benzene In the main bunding Is kept ki a
tank Inside the building, at ambient pressure
and less than ambient temperature.
Table II shows you that the code for a tank
Inside a building Is C. Table III shows you that
code for ambient pressure Is 1. and the code
for less than ambient temperature to 6.
You enter: C(1.6)
Under Title III. Section 324. you may elect to withhold
location Information on a specific chemical from disclo-
sure to the public. If you choose to do so:
• Enter the word •confidential- In the Non-Con-
fldentlal Location section of the Tier Two form.
• On a separate Tier Two Confidential Location
Information Sheet, enter the name and CAS*
of each chemical for which you are keeping
the location confidential.
• Enter the appropriate location and storage In-
formation, as described above for non-confi-
dential locations.
• Attach the Tier Two Confidential Location In-
formation Sheet to the Tier Two form. This
separates confidential locations from other kv
formatton that wB be disclosed to the public.
CERTIFICATION.
Tnto must be completed by the owner or operator or the
officially designated representative of the owner or op-
erator. Enter your ful name and official tttle. Sign your
name and enter the current date.
Storage Locations:
Provide a brief description of the precise location of the
chemical, so that emergency responders can locate the
area easily. You may find It advantageous to provide the
optional site plan or site coordinates as explained below.
For each chemical. Indicate at a minimum the buDcDng or
lot. Additionally, where practical, the room or area may
be Indicated. You may respond m narrative form wtth
appropriate site coordinates or abbreviations.
If the chemical to present hi more than one budding, tot.
or area location, continue your responses down the page
as needed. If the chemical extots everywhere at the
plant site simultaneously, you may report that the chemi-
cal to ubiquitous at the she.
(FR Doc. 87-23842 Filed 10-13-87; 10:48 am]
-to-c
-------
38338
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules
Subpart B—Disclosure of Trade Secret
Information to Health Professionals
§ 35O.40 Disclosure to health
professionals.
(a) Definitions. "Medical emergency"
means any unforeseen condition which
a health professional would judge to
require urgent and unscheduled medical
attention. Such a condition is one which
results in sudden and/or serious
symptom(s) constituting a threat to a
person's physical or psychological well-
being and which requires immediate
medical attention to prevent possible
deterioration, disability, or death.
(b) The specific chemical identity.
including the chemical name of a
hazardous chemical, extremely
hazardous substance, or a toxic
chemical, is made available to health
professionals, in accordance with the
applicable provisions of this section.
(c) Diagnosis or Treatment by Health
Professionals. In non-emergency
situations, an owner or operator of a
facility which is subject to the
requirements of sections 311. 312. and
313. shall, upon request, provide the
specific chemical identity, if known, of a
hazardous chemical, extremely
hazardous substance, or a toxic
chemical to a health professional if:
(1) The request is in writing:
(2) The request describes why the
health professional has a reasonable
basis to suspect that:
(i) The specific chemical identity is
needed for purposes of diagnosis or
treatment of an individual.
(ii) The individual or individuals being
diagnosed or treated have been exposed
to the chemical concerned, and
(iii) Knowledge of the specific
chemical identity of such chemical will
assist in diagnosis or treatment.
(3) The request contains a
confidentiality agreement which
includes:
(i) A description of the procedures to
be used to maintain the confidentiality
of the disclosed information: and
(ii) A statement by the health
professional that he will not use the
information for any purpose other than
the health needs asserted in the
statement of need authorized in
paragraph (c)(2) of this section and will
not release the information under any
circumstances, except as authorized by
the terms of the confidentiality
agreement or by the owner or operator
of the facility providing such
information.
(4) The request includes a certification
signed by the health professional stating
that the information contained in the
statement of need is true.
(5) Following receipt of a written
request, the facility owner or operator to
whom such request is made shall
provide the requested information to the
health professional promptly.
(d) Preventive Measures and
Treatment by Local Health
Professionals. An owner or operator of a
facility subject to the requirements of
sections 311.312. or 313 shall provide
the specific chemical identity, if known,
of a hazardous chemical, an extremely
hazardous substance, or a toxic
chemical to any health professional
(such as a physician, lexicologist.
epidemiologist, or nurse) it
(1) The requester is a local
government employee or a person under
contract with the local government
(2) The request is in writing:
(3) The request describes with
reasonable detail one or more of the
following health needs for the
information:
(i) To assess exposure of persons
living in a local community to the
hazards of the chemical concerned.
(ii) To conduct or assess sampling to
determine exposure levels of various
population groups.
(iii) To conduct periodic medical
surveillance of exposed population
groups.
(iv) To provide medical treatment to
exposed individuals or population
groups.
(vj[To conduct studies to determine
the health effects of exposure.
(vi) To conduct studies to aid in the
identification of chemicals that may
reasonably be anticipated to cause an
observed health effect.
(4) The request contains a
confidentiality agreement which
includes:
(i) A description of the procedures to
be used to maintain the confidentiality
of the disclosed information; and
(ii) A statement by the health
professional that he will not use the
information for any purpose other than
the health needs asserted in the
statement of need authorized in
paragraph (d)(3) of this section and will
not release the information under any
circumstances except as may otherwise
be authorized by the terms of such
agreement or by the person providing
such information.
(5) The request includes a certification
signed by the health professional stating
that the information contained in Ihe
statement of need is true.
(6) Following receipt of a written
request, the facility owner or operator to
whom such request is made shall
promptly provide the requested
information to the local health
professional.
(e) Medical Emergency. (1) An owner
or operator of a facility which is subject
to the requirements of sections 311,312.
or 313 must provide a copy of a material
safety data sheet, an inventory form, or
a toxic chemical release form, including
the specific chemical identity, if known.
of a hazardous chemical, extremely
hazardous substance, or a toxic
chemical, to any treating physician or
nurse who requests such information if
the treating physician or nurse
determines that
(i) A medical emergency exists as to
the individual or individuals being
diagnosed or treated;
(ii) The specific chemical identity of
the chemical concerned is necessary for
or will assist in emergency or first-aid
diagnosis or treatment; and.
(iii) The individual or individuals
being diagnosed or treated have been
exposed to the chemical concerned.
(2) Owners or operators of facilities
must provide the specific chemical
identity to the requesting treating
physician or nurse immediately
following the request, without requirinf
a written statement of need or a
confidentiality agreement in advance.
(3) The owner or operator may require
a written statement of need and a
written confidentiality agreement as
soon as circumstances permit. The
written statement of need shall describe
in reasonable detail the factors set forth
in paragraph (e)(l) of this section. The
written confidentiality agreement shall
be in accordance with paragraphs (c](3)
and (f) of this section.
(f) Confidentiality agreement. The
confidentiality agreement authorized in
paragraphs (c)(3). (d)(4) and (e)(3) of this
section:
(1) May restrict the use of the
information to the health purposes
indicated in the written statement of
need:
(2) May provide for appropriate legal
remedies in the event of a breach of the
agreement, including stipulation of a
reasonable pre-estimate of likely
damages; and
(3) May not include requirements for
the posting of a penalty bond.
(g) Nothing in this regulation is meant
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 199 / Thursday. October 15. 1987 / Proposed Rules 38337
to preclude the parties from pursuing
any non-contractual remedies to the
extent permitted by law. or from
pursuing the enforcement remedy
provided in section 325(e) of Title III.
(h) The health professional receiving
the trade secret information may
disclose it to EPA only under the
following circumstance: the health
professional must believe that such
disclosure is necessary in order to learn
from the Agency additional information
about the chemical necessary to assist
him in carrying out the responsibilities
set forth in paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of
this section. Such information comprises
facts regarding adverse health and
environmental effects.
[FR Doc. 87-23843 Filed 10-9-87; 4.35 pm]
BILLING CODE 6NO-SO-M
-------
Wednesday
October 21, 1987
Part VI
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 310
Reimbursement to Local Governments
for Emergency Response to Hazardous
Substance Releases; Interim Final Rule
-------
39386 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 310
[FRL-3254-3]
Reimbursement to Local Governments
for Emergency Response to
Hazardous Substance Releases
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) today is issuing an
interim final rule to provide
reimbursement to local governments for
costs of temporary emergency measures
taken to prevent or mitigate injury to
human health or the environment. This
reimbursement program is authorized
under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response.
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA). 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.. as
amended by § 123 of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 (SARA). Pub. L 99-499.
hereinafter referred to as CERCLA. This
regulation should help to alleviate
significant financial burden on local
governments for costs incurred in
responding to releases or threatened
releases of hazardous substances.
CERCLA requires, however, that
reimbursement must not supplant local
funds normally provided for response.
EPA believes that today's interim final
rule is both consistent with the intent of
Congress and appropriate for effective
emergency response at the local level.
The Agency seeks comments on the
overall approach to this rule and on
specific components of the approach
outlined.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before December 21.1987.
Effective October 21.1987. The
incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in the regulation is
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register as of October 21.1987.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this interim
final rule should be sent to the
Superfund Docket Clerk, ATTN: Docket
Number 123 LGR. (WH-548D). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20460. The
public docket is located in Room LG-100
and is available for viewing from 9 a.m.
to 4 p.m.. Monday through Friday.
excluding Federal holidays.
Appointments must be made by calling
(202) 382-3046. The public may copy a
maximum of 50 pages of matenal from
the docket at no cost. Additional copies
cost S.20/page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
F.or general information on the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980. the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1986 and the
National Contingency Plan (40 CFR Part
300] contact the RCRA/CERCLA Hotline
at 1-800-424-9346 (toll free) or. in the
Washington. DC. metropolitan area.
382-3000.
For information on specific aspects of
this interim final rule for reimbursement
to local governments contact: Karen
Burgan. Project Officer, Emergency
Response Division. (WH-548B),
Environmental Protection Agency. 401M
Street SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preamble Outline
I. Statutory Authority
II. Background
A. Overview of the Superfund Program
B. Congressional Intent
m. Approach to This Rulemaking
IV. Analysis of Major Issues
A. Intent of the Reimbursement Regulation
B. Basis of Reimbursement Decisions
C. State Role
V. Reimbursement Process
A. Response to Release
B. Contact with the Federal Government
C. Decision to Pursue Reimbursement
D. Reimbursement Request
E. Preliminary Screening
F. Evaluation of Requests
VI. Section-By-Section Analysis
A. Subpart A—General
1. § 310.05 Purpose. Scope and
Applicability
2. ! 310.10 Abbreviations and § 31041
Definitions
3. $ 310.12 Penalties
B. Subpart B—Reimbursement
1. $ 310.20 Eligibility for Reimbursement
2. $ 310.30 Requirements for Requesting
Reimbursement
3. § 310.40 Allowable and Unallowable
Costs
C Subpart C—Procedures for Filing and
Processing Reimbursement Requests
1. § 310.50 Filing Procedures
2. § 310.60 Verification and
Reimbursement
3. { 310.70 Records Retention
4. $ 310.80 Payment of Approved
Reimbusement Requests
5 § 310.90 Disputes Resolution
VII. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order No. 12291
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
VIII. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 310
I. Statutory Authority
Section 123 of CERCLA directs the
EPA Administrator to develop a
regulation containing procedures for
reimbursing local governments for
expenses incurred in carrying out
temporary emergency measures in
response to hazardous substance
threats. These measures must be
necessary to prevent or mitigate injury
to human health or the environment
from a release or threatened release of a
hazardous substance or a pollutant or
contaminant. Temporary emergency
measures may include such activities as
erecting security fencing to limit access.
responding to fires and explosions and
other measures that require immediate
response at the local level. CERCLA
specifically limits reimbursement to
$25,000 per single response and requires
that reimbursement not supplant local
funds normally provided for response.
Any general purpose unit of local
government that incurs costs in response
to a release or threatened release at a
facility within its jurisdiction may apply
for reimbursement. Section 111-of
CERCLA specifies that not more than 0.1
percent (or a maximum of S8.5 million)
of the total amount appropriated from
the Fund may be used for local
government reimbursement.
The responsibility for promulgating
today's interim final rule rests with the
Administrator for EPA. The authority to
receive, evaluate and make
determinations regarding requests for
reimbursement and to issue payments to
qualified applicants has been delegated
to the Assistant Administrator for the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response. Today's rulemaking
establishes how this reimbursement
program will work.
n. Background
A. Overview of the Superfund Program
CERCLA was originally enacted in
1980 and establishes the authority to tax
the chemical and petroleum industries to
finance a Sl.6 billion response trust fund
(the Superfund or Fund). CERCLA
provides broad Federal authority to
respond directly to releases or
threatened releases of hazardous
substances and pollutants or
contaminants that may endanger public
health or welfare or the environment
EPA is primarily responsible for
implementing the Superfund program.
On October 17.1986. President Reagan
signed into law the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthonzation Act
of 1986. These Amendments add S8.5
billion to the Superfund Trust Fund and
broaden the Federal Government's
response authority.
Under the Superfund program. EPA
may take legal action to force those
responsible for hazardous substance
releases to clean them up or to
reimburse EPA for the costs of cleanup.
EPA also can pay for the cleanup of
hazardous waste releases when those
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 39387
responsible for such releases cannot be
found or are unwilling or unable to
conduct a cleanup themselves.
Response actions may be taken to
address such incidents as illegal
disposal of hazardous substances.
improper handling or disposal of
hazardous substances at landfills or
industrial areas, spills of hazardous
substances when a truck or train
overturns, or discharges of hazardous
substances into the air or water during a
Tire or other accident. Response actions
may include, but are not limited to:
removing hazardous substances from
the release site to an EPA-approved.
licensed hazardous waste facility for
treatment, containment or destruction:
constructing fences, posting warning
signs or taking other security
precautions necessary to control access:
providing a temporary alternate water
supply to local residents; temporarily
relocating affected residents; or
containing the hazardous substance on
site so that it can safely remain there
and present no further problem.
CERCLA responses usually are joint
efforts by Federal. State and local
agencies. Since State and local public
safety and health organizations are
normally the first government
representatives at the scene of a
hazardous substance release, they play
a critical role in providing temporary
emergency measures. These temporary
emergency measures may include
security, control of the release source.
containment of the substances released
control of contaminated runoff and
similar activities that must be performed
immediately to prevent or mitigate
injury to human health or the
environment. The National Contingency
Plan (NCP, found at 40 CFR Part 300).
the main Federal regulation that guides
the Superfund program, outlines Die
roles and responsibilities of each
Federal agency involved in responding
to releases of hazardous substances and
describes State and local participation
in hazardous substance releases. In
addition, the NCP establishes
procedures that are to be followed in
conducting appropriate response
actions.
B. Congressional Intent
The original Superfund law did not
provide reimbursement to local
governments for costs incurred in
conducting temporary emergency
measures. SARA added a new section to
the law that specifically allows such
reimbursement, although the Conference
Report makes it clear that
"reimbursement under this provision
shall not include reimbursement for
normal expenditures that are incurred in
the course of providing what are
traditionally local services and
responsibilities, such as routine
emergency firefightmg." With the
specific requirement in section 123 that
reimbursement not supplant local funds
normally provided for response.
Congress intends that local governments
continue to bear some share of expenses
for providing temporary emergency
measures. However. Congress
recognized that in the past conducting
such response activities has placed a
significant financial burden on some
local governments. Reimbursement
under section 123 can provide some
financial relief (limited to S25.000 per
single response] to local governments
most seriously affected by costs above
and beyond those incurred routinely and
traditionally. This S25.000 cap on
individual responses plus the limited
availability of funds for the program
may not allow EPA to reimburse local
governments for all responses that may
qualify.
III. Approach to this Rulemaking
Because this rule falls under the
grants, benefits and contracts exemption
of section 553 of the Administrative
Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2)). the
Agency is not required to solicit public
comment before the rule becomes
effective. In addition, the Agency may
make the rule effective immediately
upon publication.
In developing this interim final rule,
EPA incorporated substantial input from
officials of fire departments, police
departments and emergency services
and other representatives of local
governments, in an effort to make the
rule realistic and practical. Those who
offered comments and suggestions are
described below. The interim final
approach is designed to allow the
Agency to implement the reimbursement
program and to make reimbursement
monies available quickly, while
continuing to solicit comments. Public
comments are invited and should be
sent to the address listed in the
"Address" section above. Comments
received by December 21.1987 will be
considered in the final rule.
EPA's approach to this rulemaking
included making use of appropriate
features of parallel programs and
precedents, where possible. EPA began
investigating other Federal and State
programs early in the regulatory
development process to determine their
possible applicability to this
reimbursement program. Table 1 depicts
representative programs considered by
the Agency. Research into these
programs provided useful information
for several reasons. First, this
information helped both to identify
issues and to suggest regulatory options
The Asbestos in Schools Hazard
Abatement Program, for example.
provided a model for evaluating
requests for reimbursement. Second, the
regulations associated with these
programs suggested possible regulatory
frameworks for the reimbursement rule.
For instance, the Superfund response
claims regulation, now being drafted.
had already addressed some of the
issues posed in section 123. Third.
analysis of these programs helped
highlight implementation considerations
and alternatives. The Pesticides
Indemnification Program, for example.
pointed to same internal forms and
procedures that could expedite
reimbursement. Finally, detailed
analyses of these programs.
supplemented by research on Superfund
removal actions involving response by
local governments, helped EPA outline
the basic regulatory framework leading
to today's interim final rule.
TABLE 1 —REPRESENTATIVE FEDERAL AND
STATE PROGRAMS OF POTENTIAL INTEREST
Ageney/Sute |
EPA! .
EPA
EPA . .. .
EPA.
EPA _
Fodsfil cinwQBncy
Oaoanmam of Slate
Department of
Agriculture.
Nf* Vfli*
Asbestos m Scnoo-s Hua-o
Abatement
Construction Grants Reimoursa.
mem
Pesuedes indemnrf^anon
Supertund Response Claims
Suparfund Technical Asu's^ce
Grams.
Federal Disaster Assistance
Protection of Foreign M.SS o^s
Casual Firefighter.
Emergency Response F*no
Spin Prevention ana Pfssorse
Fund.
EPA also held discussions with local
officials in five areas of the country to
gain the perspective and insights of
frontline response officials in an effort
to develop a rule that realistically
addresses local concerns and that could
be implemented in a practical way. The
five meetings were held in Baton Rouge.
LA: Chattanooga, TN: Edison. NJ:
Jefferson, OH: and Los Angeles. CA.
These localities were selected as
meeting locations because they
represent a range of community sizes
and emergency response capabilities
and because local officials in and
around these communities expressed
interest and willingness to participate
when asked.
-------
39388 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No
. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
IV. Analysis of Major Issues
A. Intent of the Reimbursement
Regulation
The overall purpose of the
reimbursement program is to provide
some financial relief to local
governments in conducting temporary
emergency measures in response to
hazardous substance threats. This
response may be conducted entirely by
a local government or may be a
response involving State or Federal
assistance. The intent of today's interim
final rule is to alleviate significant
financial burden on a local government.
EPA believes that this approach
achieves the intent of section 123 of
CERCLA to channel the small pool of
reimbursement monies to the most
deserving applicants and local
governments must demonstrate that a
response has created expenses that
significantly exceed the funds normally
available for temporary emergency
services. This approach also is
consistent with the overall policies and
goals of the Superfund program. The
Agency wishes to emphasize, however.
that reimbursement under section 123
does not eliminate the requirement to
try to identify potentially responsible
parties (PRPs) and attempt cost recovery
from liable parties, but is available as a
measure of financial relief when
responsible party search and cost
recovery actions have proven
unsuccessful.
EPA considered two other approaches
that ultimately were rejected. The first
of these alternatives was to use the
reimbursement program to encourage
local governments to undertake smaller
response actions, thereby reserving
Agency resources for complex
responses. Under this alternative.
Federal manpower resources would be
conserved for responses outside the
scope of local and State capabilities.
Local governments might have been
encouraged to enhance their response
capabilities and become more skilled at
conducting small response actions. Th«
limited funds available for the
reimbursement program and the
resulting uncertainty of reimbursement.
however, might not have provided
adequate incentive for local
governments to become more assertive
in undertaking small response actions.
Some communities with poorly
developed response programs might not
have had the capability to attempt even
small responses to hazardous substance
releases. EPA believes that this
approach also would have generated an
unmanageable number of requests.
creating an administrative burden
disproportionate to the total amount of
funds to be distnbuted.
The second alternative EPA
considered was to focus the regulation
on encouraging localities to assist in
responses at Federal-lead cleanup
actions. Such an approach would have
facilitated greater involvement of local
government resources in support of
Federal responses. Again, however, the
uncertainty of receiving reimbursement
may not have provided an adequate
incentive for many localities to increase
their level of participation in Federal-
lead responses. This approach also
would have made it difficult to
distinguish between equally meritorious
applicants based on the broad criterion
of participating in Federal-lead
responses.
B. Basis of Reimbursement Decisions
As discussed above. EPA has
determined that the reimbursement
money should be distributed to
applicants who demonstrate the greatest
financial burden from conducting
emergency response actions that adhere
to the overall policies and goals of the
Superfund program. However, due to the
limited funds available for the
reimbursement program (a maximum of
0.1 percent of the total amount
appropriated for the Superfund over five
years, or approximately S8.5 million).
not all applicants may actually receive
reimbursement monies. For this reason.
the Agency needs some basis for
determining which requests to
reimburse.
EPA has written today's rule so that
reimbursement decisions are based
primarily on the ratio of eligible
response costs to the applicant locality's
per capita income adjusted for
population, with consideration given to
other relevant financial information
provided at the applicant's discretion.
(For example, such information might
include cost data for other hazardous
substance responses if the locality has
conducted numerous responses over a
short period of time.) This approach
ensures that communities with limited
resources will receive priority in the
reimbursement program. Basing
reimbursement decisions primarily on
per capita income statistics provides an
objective method for deciding among
requests, while allowing special
consideration of other relevant data.
such as frequency of recent emergency
responses, recent local economic
changes or other financially catastrophic
events, provides flexibility.
Per capita income statistics are
readily available through the Bureau of
Census. EPA expects to use the Current
Population Reports. Local Population
Estimates. Series P-26. "1984 Population
and 1983 Per Capita Income Estimates ^
for Countries apd Incorporated Places."
published in June 1986 by the U.S.
Department of Commerce. Bureau of the
Census. This series will be used for the
reimbursement program unless and until *
superseded by more recent data.
Additional financial information
provided by the applicant should
provide the opportunity to consider
economic factors that may not be
represented accurately in the available
income statistics. For example, if
significant population shifts have
occurred since the last census, the
applicant may wish to supply relevant
financial data demonstrating the
economic effects of that shift upon the
community.
EPA initially considered distributing
the reimbursement money
geographically (i.e., providing
reimbursement to a certain number of
applicants in each state or Region] to
ensure that all areas of the country had
access to some of the reimbursement
fund. Dividing the reimbursement money
this way. however, might not accurately
address the most deserving cases
nationwide. A second possibility was to
reimburse, on a first-come-first-served
basis, applicants who meet pre-
determined criteria. This method could
neglect deserving applicants because it
would favor reimbursement for
responses occurring early in the year.
EPA also considered basing
reimbursement decisions on the
percentage of a community's annual
budget spent on a response. Because
budgeting practices vary so greatly from
locality to locality, the amounts
budgeted would be difficult to compare
accurately. This alternative also would
favor communities that had allocated
few. if any. funds for emergency
response activities. This bias would be
inconsistent with the intent of the
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (Title III of
SARA) and the overall goals and
objectives of the Superfund program.
Moreover, evaluating local budgets
would have forced EPA to make
judgment calls on how communities
allocate their funds.
Another option EPA considered was
to base reimbursement decisions on the
severity and magnitude of the threat
posed by the hazardous substance
incident. This option would have
reflected the overall mission of the
Superfund program to dedicate Federal
resources to significant and/or National
emergencies that require resources
outside the scope of State and local
capabilities. However, estimates of
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 39389
potentially affected populations, relative
toxicity of the waste and impacts on
human health and the environment can
be very subjective measurements.
The most flexible option EPA
considered was to allow applicants to
develop their own rationale for
reimbursement in accordance with
review guidelines developed by EPA.
This option recognized the diversity
among hazardous substance release
incidents and responses nationwide by
allowing local governments to evaluate
their own resources and demonstrate
that they have assumed a
disproportionate financial burden. The
seventy of the incident could have been
incorporated into an applicant's
reimbursement rationale. This
alternative would have obviated the
need for EPA to develop a
comprehensive definition of
reimbursable financial burden, greatly
simplifying the rule development phase
of the program. However, program
administration would have been very
difficult because of the uniqueness of
each application and the time required
to review, compare and analyze the data
submitted by the local governments.
This alternative also could have favored
more organized applicants with
experience in assembling response
information efp.ciently. at the expense of
less experienced communities that may
have had more deserving claims.
C. State Role
Section 123 authorizes
reimbursements to local governments
for costs incurred in conducting
temporary emergency measures. The
law does not authorize reimbursement
to. States. Today's rule precludes States
from requesting reimbursement under
§ 310.20(b) either for themselves or on
behalf of political subdivisions within
the State. EPA believes this approach
will help eliminate the potential for two
parties to request reimbursement for the
same response.
Local officials and most State officials
who offered comments to EPA about
developing this rule believed that there
should be no administrative role for
States in the reimbursement process.
Some local officials, however, indicated
that States might assist EPA in
evaluating reimbursement requests
since they may be familiar with the
hazardous substance incident and local
government response. Further, some
States have expressed an interest in
receiving copies of reimbursement
requests in order to identify local areas
in need of financial assistance. In the
interest of streamlining the review
process. EPA intends to contact the
States for information on specific
requests when necessary, but no formal
or routine State role is proposed. EPA
does not intend, however, for this rule to
preclude or interfere with existing State
and local response procedures.
V. Reimbursement Process
The reimbursement process comprises
six steps, each of which is descnbed
below. The roles and responsibilities of
EPA and the local government in the
process are discussed as well.
A. Response to Release
The reimbursement process begins
with a local government's response to a
release or threatened release of
hazardous substances or pollutants or
contaminants. (Unlike responses to
hazardous substances, which cover
threats both to human health and to the
environment responses to releases of
pollutants and contaminants must
specifically address human health
threats to qualify for possible
reimbursement.) This response may be
conducted solely by the local
government or in conjunction with State
or Federal responders. To be eligible for
reimbursement, the response must be
consistent with CERCLA, the National
Contingency Plan and. if applicable, the
local emergency plan prepared under
section 303 of the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act of
1986. Title ID of Pub. L 99-499.
Although temporary emergency
measures that local governments take to
prevent or mitigate injury to human
health or the environment may be
reimbursable, it is clear that Congress
did not envision that reimbursement
monies would be available for activities
typically included in a local
government's budget. Section 123(b](2)
of the statute specifically requires that
reimbursement "not supplant local funds
normally provided for response." The
conference report on SARA states that
reimbursement does not apply to
"normal expenditures . . . incurred in
the course of providing what are
traditionally local services and
responsibilities, such as routine
emergency fireflghting." The statute also
characterizes reimbursable response
measures as those requmng "immediate
response at the local level." Therefore.
the Agency believes that reimbursement
may be appropriate for activities such as
security, control of the release source.
containment of the substances released.
control of runoff that would contaminate
drinking water sources and similar
activities that must be performed within
minutes or hours of the release to
prevent or mitigate injury to human
health or the environment.
EPA does not intend that
reimbursement monies be used for
emergency response activities that are
eligible for funding from other sources.
EPA also believes that actions such as
ground-water decontamination, ongoing
sampling and analysis programs.
construction of water treatment
facilities or installation of new water
lines are outside the scope of the
reimbursement program because they do
not constitute temporary emergency
measures. EPA wishes to make clear
that costs of such projects are not
reimbursable under this program.
Instead, the local government may want
to contact the EPA Regional office or the
State to determine whether a
Cooperative Agreement with the Agency
would be appropriate for performing
long-term response projects.
B. Contact with the Federal Government
Contact with a Federal response
authority is a necessary condition for
reimbursement under today's interim
final rule. The purpose of this contact
requirement is to give EPA or the U.S.
Coast Guard (USCG) an opportunity to
ascertain if Federal response action is
appropriate in this instance. For this
reason, contact is required as soon as
possible, but not later than 24 hours
after response initiation.
Contact must be made in one of two
ways. The local government can use
normal response communication
channels to alert EPA or the USCG to
the release. Normal channels include
notification to the National Response
Center (NRC) or established Regional
networks that link local agencies with
State agencies and ultimately with EPA
and/or the USCG. Notification of the
release through normal response
communication networks satisfies the
contact requirement in this rule.
Alternatively, if the locality is not part
of an established communication
network, the local government can
contact the EPA Regional office or the
NRC directly for purposes of satisfying
this requirement. (Appendix I of today's
rule identifies the EPA Regional office
for each State and Territory and notes
the NRC telepone numbers.) Contact
must be made by telephone or radio as
soon as possible, but not more than 24
hours after response initiation, to meet
the Federal contact requirement for
reimbursement.
C. Decision to Pursue Reimbursement
If the response has imposed
significant financial burden on the
community and appears to meet the
basic requirements for reimbursement.
as specified in § 310.30 of today's
-------
39390 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
interim final rule, the local government
may choose to seek reimbursement and
proceed to the next step.
D. Reimbursement Request
The local government should obtain a
reimbursement application package by
calling the RCRA/CERCLA Hotline at 1-
800-424-9346 (toll free) or. in the
Washington. DC. metropolitan area, at
382-3000. The package conta-.ns the
forms and detailed instructions for
preparing and submitting reimbursement
requests. Application packages will be
mailed to the locality upon request. The
completed package must be returned to
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Emergency Response Division.
Attn: Reimbursement Officer. WH-548B
401 M Street SW. Washington. DC
20460. within six months of completion
of the response. In the event that cost
recovery efforts are still underway, the
Agency will waive the application
deadline if the application specifically
states that the delay resulted from cost
recovery efforts that ultimately were
unsuccessful.
Only one request for reimbursement
will be accepted for response to any
single incident. When more than one
local government (e.g.. a city and
county) has participated in such a
response, those governments must
determine which one of them will
submit the application on behalf of them
all. If more than one request is received
for a single incident, all will be returned
with appropnate written explanation
and instructions for resubmitting a
single, coordinated application.
£ Preliminary Screening
Initially. EPA will screen the request
to make sure that-it meets three
preliminary screening criteria: (1) The
request meets basic reimbursement
criteria, as stated in today's rule: (2) it
complies with the procedures for filing.
as defined in this rule; and (3) it is
complete. A request that does not meet
the requirements for reimbursement
stipulated m § 310.30 will be returned to
the local government with a written
explanation of why the application has
been rejected.
An application that meets the basic
criteria but that has not complied with
the filing procedures specified in
§ 310.50 or that is incomplete will be
returned to the local government with an
explanation of its deficiencies. If the
application has missed the filing
deadline, it will be rejected, unless
delay resulted from prolonged, but
unsuccessful, cost recovery efforts.
Other filing or completeness deficiencies
may be corrected and resubmittsd to
EPA within 60 days.
If all reimbursement criteria and filing
requirements have been met. and the
application is complete. EPA will notify
the local government in writing that the
request meets the preliminary screening
criteria and will be considered for
reimbursement. Such a notice in no way
implies that reimbursement is assured. It
means only that EPA will consider this
request along with ail other requests
received during the review period that
also have satisfied this initial screening.
F Evaluation of Requests
Screened applications will be
reviewed twice yearly, with each
request assigned to a six-month review
period based on the date a complete
application is received. EPA will
convene a review panel, comprising
representatives from EPA Headquarters.
EPA Regional offices and the USCG. for
each review period. The review panel
will make the final decision on
reimbursement. In general. EPA intends
to divide the funds appropriated each
year for reimbursement evenly between
the six-month periods. However. EPA
may choose not to use all funds
available during any penod in which
requests do not meet program
requirements.
All requests for each six-month period
will be evaluated on their own ments
and with respect to the other requests
under review. Because reimbursement
monies are limited to 0.1 percent of the
Superfund appropriation (which
represents a maximum of S8.5 million, or
Sl.7 million for each year of the five-
fiscal-year penod beginning October l.
1986) and because EPA expects that
requests for reimbursement will exceed
the funds available, the Agency will
rank the requests and distribute the
monies accordingly until available funds
are disbursed.1 The Agency will rank
requests on the basis of significant
financial burden incurred by the locality
in performing the single response for
which reimbursement is being sought.
The financial burden for the
individual applicant is defined as the
ratio of project cost to aggregate income
and is computed as follows:
B
Yx P
Where- B=burden on applicant
C= eligible costs of response minus
1 Because no reimbursement monies were
disbursed during the fiscal year beginning October
1.1986. EPA will prorate the total amount availab'e
for reimbursement over the remaining four j ears of
the program.
reimbursement from responsible parties.
States or other sources
Y = per capita annual income for the locdli:\
P=popuJauon of locality
The review panel will use U.S. Censu
Bureau "Local Population Estimates" _
Series P-26 in conjunction with response
cost data supplied by the applicant to
compute financial burden on the
locality. Responses with higher costs
proportionate to local aggregate income
will be ranked higher than responses
with proportionately lower costs.
In general. EPA expects that financial
burden will be computed on the basis of
the single response for which
reimbursement is requested. In
exceptional cases, however, the Agency
may consider other financial data
demonstrating financial hardship
incurred by the community in
responding to hazardous substance
threats. For example, a small community
with limited resources that has had to
respond to numerous hazardous
substance emergencies over a short
period of time may choose to supply
additional information demonstrating
the cost impacts of those multiple
responses. As another example, a
community in a declared disaster area
may want to supply economic impact
data associated with the disaster along
with the financial information for the
hazardous substance response.
Any requests not reimbursed dunng
the six-month penod in which they are
first considered remain open for later
consideration, at the review panel's
discretion, for one year (two additional
review periods) after the initial review
period. EPA will notify the applicant if
the request is carried over to the next
period. After that time, an unreimbursed
request will no longer be considered and
the applicant will be notified that the
request will not be reimbursed.
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
A. Subpart A—General
Subpart A discusses the purpose.
scope and applicability of the local
government reimbursement interim final
rule. It also provides definitions
necessary for the proper interpretation
and implementation of the rule and
outlines penalties applicable to false
statements or claims made as part of an
application for reimbursement under
section 123 of CERCLA.
1. Section 310.05 Purpose. Scope and
Applicability
As stated in § 310.35, the purpose of
this rule is to alleviate significant
financial burden imposed on a local
government as a result of conducting
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 39391
temporary emergency measures to
prevent or mitigate injury to human
health or the environment, as authorized
under section 123 of CERCLA. This
purpose is consistent with the statutory
requirement that reimbursement not
supplant funds normally provided for
response. Today's rule only applies to
local governments (e.g.. a county, parish,
city, municipality, township. Federally-
recognized Indian tribe or other general
purpose unit of local government).
States are not eligible for this program.
In keeping with the statutory limits on
this use of the Superfund set forth in
section 111 and section 123 of CERCLA,
§ 310.05(c) of today's rule limits the
maximum possible reimbursement
award to S25.000 per single response
and restricts the amount of money
available to the overall reimbursement
program to 0.1 percent of the total
amount appropriated from the
Superfund. Due to the limited amount of
money authorized for reimbursement.
some requests for reimbursement may
not ever be paid even though they meet
all the requirements of today's rule.
2. Section 310.10 Abbreviations and
section 310.11 Definitions
Section 310.10 explains the acronyms
referenced in this rule. Section 310.11
defines key terms used in the rule. In an
effort to be consistent with the
requirements and objectives of the
overall Superfund program, most of the
definitions contained in § 310.11 of
today's interim final rule are taken from
CERCLA and the NCP either verbatim or
with minor wording changes. EPA
developed the definitions of "General
Purpose Unit of Local Government."
"Single Response" and "Date of
Completion" specifically for this rule.
3. Section 310.12 Penalties
Section 310.12 imposes penalties for
any person who knowingly gives or
causes to be given any false statement
or claim as part of any application for
reimbursement under section 123 of
CERCLA. EPA has included these
penalties, under the authonty of the
False Statement Act. 18 U.S.C. 1001. and
False Claims Act. 31 U.S.C. 3729. to
prevent fraudulent or abusive use of the
Fund. Failure to abide by the
requirements found in these two laws
when filing a reimbursement application
may result in fines or imprisonment.
B. Subpart B—Reimbursement
Subpart B of this interim final rule
establishes conditions that must be met
for reimbursement under CERCLA 123.
Three types of conditions are set forth:
eligibility of the applicant to receive
reimbursement, requirements for
reimbursement and allowable and
unallowable costs. These conditions are
included to ensure that (1) The intent of
Congress is carried out in reimbursing
local governments: (2) reimbursement is
consistent with, and complementary to.
the rest of the Superfund program: and
(3) expenditures from the Superfund are
warranted and appropriate.
1. Section 310.20 Eligibility for
Reimbursement
Section 310.20 of the interim final rule
specifies who is eligible for
reimbursement. Thus section limits
eligibility for reimbursement to general
purpose units of local government
These may include cities, counties.
municipalities, panshes. townships.
Federally-recognized Indian tribes or
other official political subdivisions
designated by a particular State. This
restriction is consistent with section
123(a) of CERCLA. which limits
applicability to "(a)ny general purpose
unit of local government for a political
subdivision which is affected by a
release or threatened release. . . ."
Section 123 of CERCLA specifically
designates local governments as
recipients of reimbursement monies and
does not indicate that this provision
applies in any way to States. Therefore.
State governments are not eligible for
reimbursement under § 310.20(b). States
also are precluded from requesting
reimbursement on behalf of political
subdivisions within the State. This
restnction is designed to avoid any
question of eligibility when
reimbursement requests are reviewed by
EPA.
2. Section 310.30 Requirements for
Requesting Reimbursement
The purpose of § 310.30 is to ensure
consistency with the requirements.
policies and practices of the Superfund
program, to lend support to related
initiatives and to encourage the use of
established procedures in conducting
responses. EPA has established
requirements to ensure an equitable
distribution of funds to the most
deserving applicants.
a. Effective Date for Response
Section 310.30(a] restricts
reimbursement to responses initiated on
or after the effective date of this interim
final rule. Although section 123(b)(l) of
CERCLA authonzes reimbursement for
expenses incurred before or after the
enactment of SARA. EPA believes that
eligibility can be reduced to a shorter
period in accordance with the
procedures promulgated by EPA under
section 123(d). It is EPA's view that
prospective reimbursement will permit a
more equitable distribution of the funds.
since all potential applicants will be
considered in the same timeframe and
according to the same criteria. These
criteria are established in today's
interim final rule. In order to qualify for
reimbursement a local government must
meet the requirements of CERCLA. the
NCP. and the Community Right-to-Know
Act. and. in addition, contact the
Federal government within 24 hours
after response initiation to ensure that
these requirements are understood and
can be met. This notice requirement is
discussed in greater detail in subsection
2(b) of this preamble.
The Agency decided not to allow
reimbursement for actions taken before
the effective date of this rule for several
reasons. Such reimbursement would
require the Agency either to waive the
criteria or apply them retroactively.
However, waiving the criteria for past
responses or attempting to apply them
retroactively could result in inconsistent
and potentially unfair implementation of
this program. A prospective approach
better ensures that Federal funds are
used to support safe and effective
responses, since the Federal government
will be able to assess local capabilities
for dealing with the release and to
provide technical assistance if
necessary. Waiving these criteria for
past responses could result in
reimbursement for responses that do not
meet established Superfund standards.
or are inadequately documented or were
ineffective, thereby reducing the pool of
funds available for responses that are
fully compliant. Conversely, applying
these cntena retroactively could give a
significant advantage to larger
communities with more sophisticated
response and recordkeeping
capabilities, and. as a general rule.
greater financial resources. Thus, these
communities could receive
reimbursement at the expense of
communities with less developed
capabilities, but possibly greater
financial need.
EPA is aware that limiting
reimbursement to responses occurring
after promulgation of this rule will
preclude reimbursement of some
otherwise valid and deserving requests.
However, the Agency believes that the
mission of the Superfund program, and
specifically the local government
reimbursement program, is best served if
all requests are subject to the same
requirements, thereby helping to ensure
that the limited reimbursement funds are
used for safe and effective response.
The Agency specifically requests
comment on this issue.
-------
39392 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
b. Federal Contact Requirement
Section 310.30(b) requires the local
government to contact EPA or the
National Response Center as a condition
of reimbursement. Contact for purposes
of reimbursement is to be made as soon
as possible, but not more than 24 hours
after response initiation, unless EPA or
the USCG has been informed of the
response through a release notification
to the National Response Center or
other established response
communication channels.
Because EPA seeks to ensure safe and
appropriate responses and appropriate
use of the Fund, the Agency believes
that it is appropriate for EPA or the
USCG to be aware of a response for
which a local government seeks
reimbursement. Timely contact is useful
in several respects. First, it can help
EPA or the USCG assess local response
capabilities relative to this response.
ascertain the effectiveness of local
actions and determine whether Federal
technical assistance or action is
appropriate or necessary. Second, it
allows EPA or the USCG to make sure
the local responder understands EPA
criteria and requirements, such as
compliance with the NCP. Finally, it
provides an opportunity to determine
whether a response might be a
candidate for reimbursement. This can
prevent a locality from prepanng an
application for a response that is not
eligible for reimbursement (e.g.. an oil
spill).
EPA had considered a 72-hour contact
requirement but reasoned that, if the
incident exceeded local response
capabilities, then the Federal
Government needed to be notified of
that in order to lend technical
assistance, and 72 hours after the fact
could be too late. Local representatives
at all five regional meetings supported
the longer timeframe and expressed
concern that a 24-hour requirement
might divert local officials from the
response action itself. EPA believes thai
the need for timely information and
prompt assistance, if required.
outweights the risk posed by the brief
diversion of effort to make the contact.
Initially EPA considered two other
approaches. The first approach was
certification of the capabilities and
credentials of a potential respondent on
a one-time basis, in advance of any
response action. This approach was
rejected because it would be impractical
to attempt to certify all local
governments for reimbursement owing
to their sheer number (more than 50.000
as of 1982). Although certification could
be attempted on an as-requested basis.
the effort and cost could be wasted
because hazardous substance release
incidents are unpredictable and a
certified local agency may never be
called on to perform temporary
emergency measures. Moreover.
certification may not take into account
the specific technical requirements of an
individual incident
Preauthonzation to carry out
temporary emergency measures specific
to a particular incident was the second
approach considered. Preauthorizaf.on
would entail obtaining EPA's prior
approval before carrying out response
activities for which the local government
later requests reimbursement. Although
preauthonzation would enable EPA to
ensure appropriate use of the Fund, it
appears unpractical because of the -
timeframe involved. Moreover, the
statutory language suggests that
Congress envisioned reimbursement for
response actions that cannot wait for
advance approval ("measures vvfiich
require immediate response") and cites
responses to fires and explosions as
examples. For these reasons. EPA
decided preauthonzation is not
appropriate for reimbursement under
this program.
Several localities suggested limiting
reimbursement to responses reported to
EPA or the USCG through normal
response communication channels, m
lieu of a separate contact for
reimbursement. In general, localities
favonng this approach had well-
established and mandatory
communication procedures for
emergency situations. The approach
included in today's interim final rule
brings in localities that may not be part
of an established communication
network. For those localities already in
an active network, this requirement
would not create a new reporting
burden and could enhance the
effectiveness of the existing response
communication channel.
c. Consistency Requirement
Section 310.30(c) of this interim final
rule stipulates that response actions for
which reimbursement is sought must be
consistent with CERCLA. the NCP. and.
if applicable, the local emergency
response plan required under section
303(a) of the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act of 1938
(or Title III of SARA). Clearly, responses
must comply with the provisions of
CERCLA even to be eligible for this use
of the Fund. In addition, section
104(a)(l) of CERCLA calls for "response
measure(s) consistent with the National
Contingency Plan. . . ."
The NCP provides for efficient.
coordinated and effective responses to
actual or threatened releases of
hazardous substances or pollutants or
contaminants. Local governments
should consult the NCP for specific
procedures to follow in conducting
temporary emergency measures to
satisfy this consistency requirement.
The NCP also specifies the division of '
responsibility among the Federal. State
and local governments during response
actions and appropnate roles for private
entities (NCP §§ 300.21 through 300.25).
Because the NCP stipulates the basic
requirements for CERCLA-funded
responses, a response for which
reimbursement is requested must
conform to the Plan. Likewise, because
the Title III emergency response plan
spells out methods and procedures for
responders that are specific to that
community. EPA expects local agencies
lo comply with that plan.
d. Restriction on Supplanting Local
Funds
Section 310.30(d) specifies that
reimbursement monies may not supplan"
nonfederal funds normally provided for
emergency response programs. As
required by section 123(b)(2] of
CERCLA. local governments may be
reimbursed for the costs of temporary
emergency measures only if
reimbursement would supplement, not
supplant, nonfederal (State and local)
funds that would otherwise be made
available. Compliance with this
requirement entails certification and
demonstration that reimbursement does
not supplant local funds normally
provided for response. (This certification
is stipulated in § 310.50(c)(3) of today's
rule). In addition. EPA may request
reimbursement applicants to submit
line-item budgets for the fiscal year in
which the incident for which
reimbursement is requested occurred as
well as response cost information. Since
only limited funds are available for this
program. EPA expects that the
possibility of being reimbursed will not
provide adequate incentive for local
governments to intentionally decrease
nonfederal funding for response
programs.
e. Attempt to Recover Costs
Section 310.30(e) of this rule requires
applicants to seek other funding sources
before requesting reimbursement from
the Fund. Local governments must make
a good faith effort to recover costs from
potentially responsible parties (P3Ps).
Because of the time that cost recovery
efforts can entail. EPA will waive the
six-month application deadline for
requesting reimbursement in thuse cases
where cost recovery is pursued. Thus.
local governments should take the nine
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday, October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 39393
they need to complete cost recovery
action before applying for
reimbursement for unrecovered costs.
EPA recognizes that PRP searches can
become extensive and costly and.
therefore, the Agency will be satisfied
with evidence of a reasonable attempt
at recovering costs. Such evidence might
include, for example, copies of return-
receipt letters requesting payment, with
certification that payment has not been
received, or copies of letters from PRPs
stating refusal to pay or sworn
statements from local officials that no
PRP has been or can be identified.
The evidence of attempt to recover
costs must indicate that, where a PRP
could be identified, the PRP was given at
least 60 days to satisfy the demand for
cost recovery. Copies of return-receipt
letters or swom statements may suffice
for this purpose. Where no PRP can be
identified, the locality must certify that
none can be found. (This certification is
stipulated in § 310.50 of today's rule.)
This section also requires that local
authorities pursue all other sources of
funds, such as insurance or State
reimbursement monies, before seeking
reimbursement from the Superfund
under section 123 of CERCLA. This
provision has been included to ensure
that the limited funds available to this
program are used only when no other
source can be found and to prevent
multiple reimbursements for one
response.
In developing today's rule. EPA
considered the option of having no cost
recovery requirement. This alternative
was rejected for several reasons. First.
one of EPA's primary goals in
implementing the Superfund program is
to compel those responsible for a
release to conduct or finance cleanup of
that release or to recover costs from the
responsible party if EPA has conducted
a response action using Fund monies.
The reimbursement program must be
consistent with this overall program
goal. Second, local officials who
participated in the regional meetings
expressed concern that lack of such a
requirement would give PRPs a loophole
for escaping their responsibility to pay
and take away the leverage that
localities need to recover costs
wherever possible. Finally, failure to
include such a requirement could add
unnecessarily to the drain on the Fund.
taking away money needed for
responses where no PRP truly could be
found or made to pay.
f. Emergency Planning
Section 310.30(f) of this rule requires
that, after October 17.1968. the
applicant's jurisdiction be included in
the comprehensive emergency response
plan completed by the local emergency
planning committee, as stipulated by
section 303(a) of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Act of 1986 (or Title III of SARA).
Because establishment of a local
emergency planning committee is the
responsibility of the State government.
EPA will waive this requirement for
localities where the State emergency
response commission has not yet
established a committee responsible for
the geographic area in which the
applicant is located.
EPA believes this requirement is
appropriate for the reimbursement
program because this emergency
planning provisions required under title
III are designed to encourage the
development of coordinated local
response capabilities and they address
the emergency response actions for
which local governments may decide to
seek reimbursement. Furthermore, the
Agency wishes to encourage local
governments to participate in local
emergency planning committees and in
the development of emergency plans
consistent with the intent of Title III and
believes that linking this requirement to
reimbursement will offer added
incentive to local communities to do so.
EPA received comments from officials
at the five regional meetings as to their
views on including a link between
reimbursement and Title III. The
majority favored including participation
in local emergency planning as a
condition of reimbursement because
they believe it will encourage local
planning. Community officials did
express reservations about their
dependency on the State government to
establish local emergency planning
committees and the waiver provision
included in § 310.30(f] is designed to
address that concern.
3. Section 310.40 Allowable and
Unallowable Costs
To be allowable for reimbursement.
all costs for temporary emergency
measures for which reimbursement is
being sought must be consistent with
section 111 of CERCLA ("Uses of Fund")
and with the Federal cost principles
outlined in the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87. "Cost
Principles for State and Local
Governments." These standard
requirements apply to all Superfund
programs involving State and/oi local
governments where monies from the
Trust Fund are spent.
CERCLA section lll(c)(ll) explicitly
authorizes reimbursement to local
governments for temporary emergency
measures as an allowable use of the
Superfund. OMB Circular A-87
establishes principles and standards for
determining costs that are applicable to
grants, contracts and other agreements
with State and local governments. EPA
has determined that the principles and
standards set forth in Circular A-87
apply to reimbursement under section
123 of CERCLA. and in addition has
identified a set of allowable and
unallowable costs that are specific to
the reimbursement program. Section
310.40 of today's rule outlines this set of
allowable and unallowable costs.
EPA's objective in identifying
allowable and unallowable costs
specific to the reimbursement program is
to provide guidance to potential
applicants on the types of costs EPA
will consider for reimbursement and to
ensure that reimbursement does not
supplant local funds normally provided
for response. EPA used section 111 of
CERCLA and OMB Circular A-87 as a
basis for deciding what costs are
reimbursable.
In making its cost determinations.
EPA also considered the types of
temporary emergency measures
typically undertaken during a response.
with special consideration given to the
limited funds available for the
reimbursement program relative to the
number of potential applicants. A
particular issue the Agency addressed
was replacement of equipment, because
the potential for abuse is significant and
because reimbursement monies are
limited. EPA determined, however, that
there are potential response situations
where such costs should be considered
for reimbursement. For example, the loss
of breathing apparatus and hoses due to
irreversible contamination and
contamination of other essential
response equipment represents a
considerable loss to local governments.
EPA has decided to allow replacement
costs for equipment contaminated
beyond reuse or repair, if the applicant
can demonstrate that the equipment was
a total loss and that the loss occurred
during the response for which
reimbursement is being sought. It should
be noted that since the maximum
reimbursement amount is limited to
S25.000. it is likely that large-scale
equipment replacement will not be
reimbursed in full. (Purchase and routine
maintenance of equipment for response.
however, are not allowable costs. EPA
views these as costs for which local
funds are normally provided.)
Costs associated with the sen. ices.
supplies and equipment procured for a
specific evacuation also have been
included as allowable costs. EPA
considers evacuation to be a temporary
emergency measure and evacuation
-------
393S4 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
costs incurred that exceed services and
costs normally provided by the local
government may be eligible for
reimbursement.
EPA has determined that disposable
matenals and supplies already owned
by a local government but consumed
during response, constitute items
normally provided for response by the
local governments and therefore are not
allowable costs for purposes of the
reimbursement program. EPA has
decided not to include medical expenses
as an allowable cost because
reimbursement for such costs normally
should be covered by insurance or
Workmen's Compensation.
In addition. EPA has determined that
certain other costs are unallowable for
purposes of the reimbursement program.
These include employee fringe benefits.
administrative costs for filing
reimbursement applications, employee
out-of-pocket expenses normally
provided for in the applicant's operating
budget and legal expenses that may be
incurred as a result of response
activities. EPA has determined that
fringe benefits, certain employee out-of-
pocket expenses, and legal expenses are
costs normally provided for in a local
government's operating budget. In
addition. EPA considers administrative
costs associated with filing a request for
reimbursement not allowable, since it is
the responsibility of the local
government to determine whether or not
to pursue reimbursement under this
program.
C. Subpart C—Procedures for Filing and
Processing Reimbursement Requests
Subpart C establishes the procedures
for preparing the processing
reimbursement applications. The
purpose of defining these procedures is
to give applicants a clear understanding
of what information EPA needs in
considering an application, to provide a
consistent basis on which to evaluate
reimbursement requests and to improve
processing efficiency by making all
forms and procedures standard.
1. Section 310.50 Filing Procedures
Section 310.50(a) of today's rule limits
local governments to filing only one
request for reimbursement for a given
response to a release even though
multiple agencies (and possibly
jurisdictions) may have participated.
This requirement is needed to ensure
that the statutory maximum of S2S.OOO
per single response is not exceeded and
that payments are not duplicated. EPA
expects that local officials will work
together to determine total response
costs, the relative share borne by each
local agency and the appropriate agency
or official who will assume
responsibility for preparing the
application.
Under § 310.50(b] of this rule.
applicants must use the standard
application form illustrated in Appendix
II of the rule for filing the:r requests for
reimbursement. EPA has decided to use
a standard form because it reduces
confusion about what information is to
be supplied, helps ensure that all
applicants are evaluated on the basis of
comparable information and enables
reviewers to check applications for
completeness and consistency quickly.
The form requests five basic pieces of
information: (l) Identification of the
local government requesting
reimbursement: (2) information about
the incident (3) information about the
response, including the specific
temporary emergency measures for
which reimbursement is being sought*
(4) cost data: and (5) certifications and
signature of an authorized
representative of the local government
Detailed instructions for completing the
form and examples will be included in
the application package provided by
EPA to potential requesters.
Section 310.50(b)(l) further requires
that the applicant demonstrate that
costs were incurred for temporary
emergency measures necessary to
protect human health and the
environment. As discussed previously.
the Agency has not attempted to
explicitly define "temporary emergency
measures." owing to the unpredictability
and variability of hazardous substance
releases, but actions that may qualify
include security, source control, release
containment, control of contaminated
runoff and similar steps to protect
people and the environment from
imminent threats. The application form.
includes a section for explaining exactly
what temporary emergency measures
were taken and why they were
necessary. For example, an acceptable
demonstration might be: "Erected berms
to prevent migration of pesticides
leaking from ruptured drums into Fast
River, the drinking water source for the
City of Middletown." By contrast, an
assertion along the lines of "source
control needed to protect human health"
would not constitute an acceptable
demonstration.
Cost must be indentined with specific
actions, as indicated in Table 1 of the
application form. The applicant should
briefly state the specific temporary
emergency measure for which
reimbursement is being sought and
indicate which local agency (e.g., fire
department, sheriffs office) incurred the
cost for performing this measure. Each
cost element for performing this
measure should be specified in detail
(e.g.. overtime, decontamination
services, equipment rental) and matched
to the specific amount expended.
Estimated amounts will not be
considered for reimbursement.
Section 310.50(b)(2) requires the
applicant to demonstrate that a
reasonable effort has been made to
obtain reimbursement from sources
other than the Superfund. This filing
requirement is intended to document the
effort to recover costs, as stipulated in
§ 310.30(e) of today's rule. Acceptable
demonstrations that cost recovery has
been attempted include copies of letters
from potentially responsible parties
(PRPs) stating their inability or refusal to
pay or copies of dated letters (with
return-receipt requested) from the local
government to the PRP requesting
payment with a statement certifying
that the PRP has failed to respond to
such letters within at least 60 days.
Sworn statements attesting to the fact
that no PRP could be found or that
insurance monies or Slate funds are not
available to cover the costs for these
temporary emergency measures also
will suffice.
Section 310.50(c) requires the
applicant to certify that costs were
incurred specifically for this response
and are accurate, that the contact
requirement in §31Q.30(b] was met that
this reimbursement does not supplant
local funds normally required for
response and that no PRP be identified.
The applicant also must certify that if
the local government later recovers
costs from responsible parties. States or
insurance after those costs have been
reimbursed from the Superfund, that
local government is required to return
the reimbursement monies to the Fund
in the amount of the recovery. This
requirement is consistent with the intent
of CERCLA that the Superfund be used
only when no other source of funds is
available and eliminates the possibility
of duplicate payment for the same costs.
All four certification requirements are
necessary to ensure that the Superfund
is used appropriately and that the
provisions of Section 123(b)(2) of
CERCLA are met.
Section 310.50(d) stipulates that the
local government's request for
reimbursement must be received by EPA
within six months of the date of
completion of the response unless cost
recovery efforts are underway. For
purposes of this rule, "date of
completion" is defined as the date when
all field work has been completed and
all project deliverables have been
received by the local government. EPA
is imposing this requirement for several
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
39395
reasons. First, the Agency may have
questions about the application or need
more information and it should be easier
to answer them sooner, rather than
later. Second. EPA believes that the time
requirement will help smooth the
number of applications to be processed
in any one year and prevent a sudden
increase in the rate of application as the
funding expiration date approaches.
Section 310.50(e) stipulates that the
application be signed by the chief
executive officer of the local government
or his or her delegate. This requirement
protects the local government from
unauthorized or improper attempts to
obtain reimbursement that might later
preclude a legitimate request It also
provides EPA with assurance that the
request is legitimate, and thus an
appropriate use of the Super-fund, and
can be considered for reimbursement.
2. Section 310.60 Verification and
Reimbursement
Section 310.60 specifies the
venfication and reimbursement
procedures EPA will follow in
evaluating and processing requests for
reimbursement. The verification
procedures are intended to ensure that
all requests are complete and
adequately documented. Thus.
§ 310.60(a) allows EPA to return an
incomplete request to the applicant with
written notice of the deficiencies and
§ 310.60(b) gives the applicant 60 days in
which to respond. Under § 310.60(c).
EPA will notify the applicant when the
Agency has determined that the request
meets all requirements for
reimbursement and complies with all
filing procedures. At that point the
request is considered complete and can
be reviewed by the evaluation panel.
Under § 310.60(d), if documentation is
not adequate to demonstrate the
reasonableness of the costs claimed.
EPA can make adjustments accordingly,
including asking for additional
information.
Reimbursement procedures are
specified in §310.60(e). (f) and (g). Upon
reviewing a completed request. EPA will
compute the financial burden borne by
the community in conducting the
response and rank the request relative
to the financial burden associated with
other requests. Financial burden will be
computed as B=C/(Y x P). where
B=financial burden on applicant:
C=eligible costs of response minus
reimbursement from responsible parties.
States or other sources: Y = per capita
annual income for the locality: and
P=population of the locality. Depending
upon the ranking of the request and the
funds available for reimbursement. EPA
will either reimburse the request, deny
it, or hold it for consideration during a
later period. Section 310.60(f) limits EPA
to reimbursing local governments (1]
only for costs that are allowable.
reasonable and necessary and (2) only
to the extent that the temporary
emergency measures conformed to the
hazardous substance response criteria
set forth in CERCLA. the NCP and the
local emergency response plan. EPA will
notify the applicant of the Agency's
decision in writing.
3. Section 310.70 Records Retention
This section stipulates that an
applicant receiving a reimbursement
must maintain cost documentation and
other relevant records, and must provide
EPA access to these materials, for six
years from the date of reimbursement
This requirement ensures the
availability of pertinent information if
EPA pursues cost recovery for this
response. Once the six years has
expired, the applicant must notify EPA
of any intention to destroy these
records. If EPA chooses not to take
possession of them, the local authority
may dispose of the materials. The
requirements of this section do not
apply to requests that have been denied
and are not being disputed under
§310.90.
4. Section 310.80 Payment of Approved
Reimbursement Requests
This section stipulates that
reimbursement payments can be made
only when an appropriation in the
Superfund is available and that
payments will be in the order in which
approved requests are ranked, according
to financial burden on the applicant.
This provision is consistent with section
lll(e)(l) of CERCLA. which restricts
payment of claims against the Superfund
"in excess of the total money in the
Fund.. . ."
5. Section 310.90 Disputes Resolution
This section specifies EPA's
procedures for reviews of denial of
reimbursement and reviews of amount
of reimbursement, either of which the
requester may choose to dispute. The
applicant has 60 days from the date of
the reimbursement decision to request a
review, otherwise that decision
constitutes a final Agency action. The
request for review includes a discussion
of the issue involved and a statement of
the applicant's objection. After filing for
review, the applicant is entitled to an
informal conference with the EPA
disputes decision official. The requester
may be represented by counsel and
submit evidence for inclusion in a
written record. The Agency will provide
the requester with a written decision
specifying the outcome of the review.
This decision constitutes final EPA
action on the matter.
VII. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order No. 12291
Under Executive Order No. 12291. the
Agency must judge whether a regulation
is "major" and thus subject to the
requirement of a Regulatory Impact
Analysis. The notice published today is
not major because the rule will not
result in an effect on the economy of
$100 million or more, will not result in
increased costs or prices, will not have
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment.
productivity and innovation and will not
significantly disrupt domestic or export
markets. Therefore, the Agency has not
prepared a Regulatory Impact Analysis
under the Executive Order. This
regulation was submitted to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review as required by Executive Order
No. 12291.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
requires that a Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis be performed for all rules that
are likely to have "significant impact on
a substantial number of small entities."
This regulation involves reimbursement
of the costs of local governments for
responding to a hazardous substance
release. This is a benefit authonzed by
CERCLA. and does not adversely affect
the pnvate sector economy or small
entities, which may include local
governments, and in fact provides a
benefit to local governments in the form
of reimbursement to offset financial
hardship incurred from responses to
hazardous substances and pollutants or
contaminants. EPA. therefore, certifies
that this regulation will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The reporting or recordkeeping
requirements in this interim final rule
have been submitted for approval to the
Office of Management and Budget under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of I960,44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Submit comments on
these requirements to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs:
Office of Management and Budget: 726
Jackson Place. NW.. Washington. DC
20503. marked "Attention: Desk Officer
for EPA." The final rule will respond to
any OMB or public comments on the
information collection requirements.
-------
39396 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
VIII. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 310
Administrative practice and
procedure. Hazardous substances.
Incorporation by reference.
Intergovernmental relations. Local
governments. Reporting and
recortikeeping requirements, Superfund.
Lee M. Thomas.
Administrator.
October 16.1987.
Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended by adding the
following new Part 310:
PART 310—REIMBURSEMENT TO
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FOR
EMERGENCY RESPONSE TO
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE RELEASES
Subpart A—General
Sec.
310.05 Purpose, scope and applicability.
310.10 Abbreviations.
310.11 Definitions.
310.12 Penalties.
Subpart B—Reimbursement
310.20 Eligibility for reimbursement.
310.30 Requirements for requesting
reimbursement
310.40 Allowable and unallowable costs.
Subpart C—Procedures for Filing and
Processing Reimbursement Requests
310.50 Filing procedures.
310 60 Verification and reimbursement.
310.70 Records retention.
310.80 Payment of approved reimbursement
requests.
310.90 Disputes resolution.
Appendix I—EPA Regions and NRC
Telephone Lines.
Appendix II—Application for Reimbursement
to Local Governments for Emergency
Response to Hazardous Substance
Releases Under CERCLA Section 123
Authority: 42 U.S.C 9611(c)(ll). 9623.
Subpart A—General
5 310.05 Purpose, scope and applicability.
[a] Through this regulation, the
Environmental Protection Agency is
establishing the procedures for
reimbursing local governments for
temporary emergency measures to-
prevent or mitigate injury to human
health or the environment, as authorized
under section 123 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response.
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA), as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorizanon Act of 1986 (SARA).
This program is intended to alleviate
significant financial burden on local
governments for response to releases or
threatened releases of hazardous
substances or pollutants or
contaminants and will not supplant
local funds normally provided for
response. Reimbursement does not
apply to expenditures incurred in the
course of providing what are
traditionally local services and
responsibilities, such as routine
firefighting-.
(b) Applications for reimbursement for
temporary emergency measures may be
submitted only through the procedures
established in this regulation. Any
general purpose unit of local government
for a political subdivision may request
reimbursement. States are not eligible
for this program. Under this regulation.
local governments may apply for
reimbursement for temporary emergency
measures performed subsequent to
promulgation of this rule.
Reimbursement may be made for
temporary emergency measures
conducted during, either Federal-lead or
non-Federal-lead responses.
(c) Reimbursement to local
governments for temporary emergency
measures may cot exceed 525,000 per
single response, nor may reimbursement
supplant local funds normally provided.
for response. Because CERCLA specifies
that no more than. 0.1% of the amount
appropriated from the Hazardous
Substance Superfund may be allocated
to the reimbursement program for the
five fiscal years beginning October 1.
1988, some requests may not ever be
reimbursed even though they meet al!
requirements of this regulation.
§ 310.10 Abbreviations.
CERCLA—The Comprehensive
Environmental Response.
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(Pub. L. 96-510). 42 U.S.C. 9601-75. as
amended by the Superfund Amendments
end Reauthorization Act of 1986, also
known as Superfund
EPA or the Agency—Environmental
Protection Agency
NC?—National Contingency Plan
OMB—Office of Management and
Budget
SARA—The Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1986 [Pub. L.
99-499]
USCG—LT.S. Coast Guard
§ 310.11 Definitions.
For purposes of this rule except when
otherwise specified:
(a) "Date of completion" means the
date when all field work has been
completed and all deliverables (e.g., lab
results, technical expert reports) have
been received by the local government.
(b) "Energency Planning and
Community Right-To-Know Act of 1986"
means Title III—Emergency Planning
and Community Right-To-Know of the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986.
(c) "General purpose unit of local
government" means the governing body
of a county, parish, municipality, city.
town, township. Federally-recognized
Indian tribe or similar governing body.
(d) "Hazardous substance." as defined
by section 101(14) of CERCLA. means:
(l) Any substance designated
pursuant to section 311(b)(2)(A) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
(2) Any element, compound, mixture.
solution, or substance designated
pursuant to section 102 of CERCLA.
(3) Any hazardous waste having the
characteristics identified under or listed
pursuant to section 3001 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act (but not including
any waste the regulation of which under
the Solid Waste Disposal Act has b'een
suspended by Act of Congress).
(4) Any toxic pollutant listed under
section 307(a) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act
(5) Any hazardous air pollutant listed
under section 112 of the Clean Air Act
and
(6) Any imminently hazardous
chemical substance or mixture with
respect to which the Administrator has
taken action pursuant to section 7 of the
Toxic Substances Control Act
The term does not include petroleum.
including crude oil or any fraction
thereof that is not otherwise-specifically
listed or designated as a hazardous
substance under paragraphs (d)(l)
through (d)(6) of this paragraph, and the
term does not include natural gas,
natural gas liquids, liquefied natural gas.
or synthetic gas usable for fuel (or
mixtures or natural gas and such
synthetic gas).
(e) "Local comprehensive emergency
response plan" means the emergency
plan prepared by the local emergency
planning committee as required by
section 303 of the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-To-Know Act of
1386 (SARA Title III).
(f) "National Contingency Plan"
means the National.OU and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(40 CFR Part 300).
(g) "National Response Center" means
the national communications center
located in Washington. DC that
receives and relays notice of oil
discharge or releases of hazardous
substances to appropnate Federal
officials.
(h) "Pollutant or contaminant" as
defined by section 104(a)(2) of CERCLA.
includes, but is not limited to. any
element, substance, compound, or
mixture, including disease-causing
agents, which after release into the
environment and upon exposure.
ingestion. inhalation, or assimilation
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 39397
into any organism, either directly from
the environment or indirectly by
ingestion through food chains, will or
may reasonably be anticipated to cause
death, disease, behavioral
abnormalities, cancer, genetic mutation.
physiological malfunctions (including
malfunctions in reproduction) or
physical deformations, in such
organisms or their offspring. The term
does not include petroleum, including
crude oil and any fraction thereof that is
not otherwise specifically listed or
designated as a hazardous substance
under section 101[14)(A) through (F) of
CERCLA, nor does it include natural
gas. liquefied natural gas. or synthetic
gas of pipeline quality (or mixtures of
natural gas and such synthetic gas).
(i) "Release." as defined by section
101(22) of CERCLA, means any spilling.
leaking, pumping, pounng, emitting,
emptying, discharging, injection.
escaping, leaching, dumping, or
disposing into the environment, but
excludes: any release that results in
exposure to persons solely within a
workplace, with respect to a claim that
such persons may assert against the
employer of such persons; emissions
from the engine exhaust of a motor
vehicle, rolling stock, aircraft, vessel, or
pipeline pumping station engine: release
of source, by-product or special nuclear
material from a nuclear incident, as
those terms are defined in the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954. if such release is
subject to requirements with respect to
financial protection established by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission-under
section 170 of such act. or. for-the
purpose of section 104 of CERCLA or
any other response action, any release
of source, by-product, or special nuclear
material from any processing site
designated under section 122(a)(l) or
302(a) of the Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation Control Act of 1978: and the
normal application of fertilizer. For the
purpose of this regulation, release also
means substantial threat of release.
(j) "Single response" means all of the
concerted activities conducted in
response to a single episode, incident or
threat causing or contributing to a
release or threatened release of
hazardous substances or pollutants or
contaminants.
§310.12 Penalties.
Any person who knowingly gives or
causes to be given any false statement
or claim as part of any application for
reimbursement under section 123 of
CERCLA. upon conviction, may be fined
or imprisoned subject to the False
Statement Act (18 U.S.C. 1001) and the
False Claims Act (31 U.S.C. 3729).
Subpart B—Reimbursement
§ 310.20 Eligibility for reimbursement
(a) Any general purpose unit of local
government may request reimbursement
for temporary emergency measures if all
requirements under § 310.30 of this rule
are met.
(b) States are not eligible for
reimbursement for temporary emergency
measures and no State may request
reimbursement on its own behalf or on
the behalf of political subdivisions
within the State.
§ 310.30 Requirements for requesting
reimbursement
(a) Response must have been initiated
on or after the effective date of this rule.
(b) The local government must inform
EPA or the National Response Center
(NRC) of the response as soon as
possible, but not later than 24 hours
after the start of response, unless EPA
or the USCC has been contacted via the
NRC or other established response
communication channel. EPA Regional
offices and NRC telephone numbers are
designated in Appendix I to this rule.
(c) Requests for reimbursement must
demonstrate that response actions are
not inconsistent with CERCLA. the NCP
and. where applicable, the local
comprehensive emergency response .
plan completed under the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Act of 1986.
(d) Requests for reimbursement must
provide assurance that reimbursement
for costs incurred for temporary
emergency measures does not supplant
local funds normally provided for
response.
(e) Applicants for reimbursement must
first present requests for payment of
incurred costs to all known potentially
responsible parties and permit at least
60 days for payment or for expression of
intent to pay or willingness to negotiate
prior to submitting a reimbursement
request to the Agency. Local
governments also must pursue all other
sources of reimbursement (e.g.,
insurance, reimbursement from the
State) before seeking reimbursement
from EPA under this rule.
(f) After October 17,1988. the
applicant's jurisdiction must be
included in the comprehensive
emergency response plan completed by
the local emergency planning committee
as required by section 303(a) of the
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act of 1986. This
requirement does not apply if the State
Emergency Response Commission
(SERC) has not established a local
emergency planning committee(s)
responsible for the emergency planning
district(s) encompassing the applicant's
geographic boundaries.
§ 310.40 Allowable and unallowable costs.
To be allowable, costs for which
reimbursement is sought must be
consistent with CERCLA and with
Federal cost principles outlined in the
OMB Circular A-87, "Cost Principles for
State and Local Governments." The
local government may also seek
assistance from the EPA Regional Office
in determining which costs may be
allowable. Final determination of the
reasonableness of the costs for which
reimbursement is sought will be made
by EPA.
(a) In general, allowable costs are
those project costs that are eligible.
reasonable, necessary and allocable to
the project. Costs allowable for
reimbursement may include, but are not
limited to:
(1) Disposable matenals and supplies
acquired, consumed and expended
specifically for the purpose of the
response for which reimbursement is
being requested (hereafter referred to as
"the response")
(2) Compensation of employees for the
time and efforts devoted specifically to
the response that are not othewise
provided for in the applicant's operating
budget (e.g., overtime pay for permanent
full-time and other than full-time
employees)
(3) Rental or leasing of equipment
used specifically for the response (e g..
protective equipment or clothing.
scientific and technical equipment]
(Note: reimbursement for these costs
will not exceed the duration of the
response)
(4) Replacement costs for equipment
owned by the applicant that is
contaminated beyond reuse or repair, if
the applicant can demonstrate that the
equipment was a total loss and that the
loss occurred during the response (e.g..
self-contained breathing apparatus
irretrievably contaminated during the
response)
(5) Decontamination of equipment
contaminated during the reponse
(6) Special technical services
specifically required for the response
(e g., costs associated with the time and
efforts of technical experts/specialists
not otherwise provided for by the local
government)
(7) Other special services specifically
required for the response (e.g.. utilities)
(8) Laboratory costs for purposes of
analyzing samples taken dunng the
response
-------
39398 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations
(9) Costs associated with the services.
supplies and equipment procured for a
specific evacuation.
(b) In general, costs unallowable for
reimbursement include, but are not
limited to:
(1) Purchase or routine maintenance
of equipment of a durable nature that is
expected to have a period of service of
one year or more after being put into use
without material impairment of its
physical condition, except as provided
in (a)(4) and (a){5) of this section
(2) Materials and supplies not
purchased specifically for the response
(3) Employee fringe benefits
(4) Administrative costs for filing
reimbursement applications
(5) Employee out-of-pocket expenses
normally provided for in the applicant's
operating budget (e.g.. meals, fuel)
(6) Legal expenses that may be
incurred as a result of response
activities, including efforts to recover
costs from potentially responsible
parties
(7) Medical expenses incurred as a
result of response activities.
(c) The local government must ensure
that costs incurred are substantiated
and that cost documentation is adequate
for an Agency audit. Documentation of
response costs must include at a
minimum:
(1) Specification of the temporary
emergency measures for which
reimbursement is requested
(2) Specification of the local agency
incurring the cost
(3) Detailed breakdown of actual
costs, by cost element such as overtime.
equipment rental
(4) Supporting documents such as
invoices, sales receipts, rental or leasing
agreements
(5) Generally accepted accounting
practices consistently applied.
Subpart C—Procedures for Filing and
Processing Reimbursement Requests
§ 310.50 Filing procedures.
(a] Only one request for
reimbursement will be accepted for each
hazardous substance emergency
requiring immediate response at the
local level. When more than one local
agency has participated in such a
response, tnose agencies must determine
which single agency will submit the
request on behalf of them all.
(b) A request for reimbursement must
be submitted on EPA form 9310-1,
illustrated in Appendix II. and must
demonstrate that:
(1) Costs for which reimbursement is
sought were incurred for temporary
emergency measures taken by the local
government to protect human health and
the environment from releases or
threatened releases of hazardous
substances, pollutants or contaminants:
temporary emergency measures may
include security, source control, release
containment, neutralization or other
treatment methods, contaminated runoff
control and similar activities mitigating
immediate threats to human health and
the environment
(2) Reasonable effort has been made
to recover costs from the responsible
party and from any other available
source and that such effort has been
unsuccessful
(3) Response actions were not
inconsistent with CERCLA. the NCP
and. if applicable, the local emergency
response plan required under Title III of
SARA
(c) Applicants must certify that:
(1) All costs are accurate and were
incurred specifically for the response for
which reimbursement is being requested
(2) The local government complied
with the requirement to inform EPA or
the USCG of the response, as specified
in § 310.30(b)
(3) Reimbursement for costs incurred
for response activities does not supplant
local hinds normally provided for
response.
(4) If costs subsequently are recovered
from responsible parties or other
sources after the local government has
received reimbursement from the
Superfund, the local government agrees
to return to EPA the reimbursement
monies for which costs have been
recovered.
(d) Reimbursement requests must be
received by EPA within six months of
the date of completion of the response
for which reimbursement is being
requested unless a cost recovery action
is pending, in which case EPA will
waive the deadline.
(e) A request for reimbursement must
be signed by the chief executive officer
of the local government or his or her
delegate.
§ 310.60 Verification and reimbursement
(a) Upon receipt of a reimbursement
request. EPA will verify that it complies
with all requirements. Where the
request is incomplete or has significant
defects. EPA will return the request to
the applicant with written notification of
its deficiencies.
(b) A request returned to the applicant
for correction of deficiencies must be
resubmitted to EPA within 60 days.
(c) For purposes of this regulation, a
reimbursement request is deemed
complete when EPA determines that the
request complies fully with all -
requirements for reimbursement and
with all filing procedures. When the
request is complete, a notice will" be
provided to the applicant of EPA's
receipt and acceptance for evaluation
(d) If EPA de-ermines that it car.no:
complete its evaluation of a request
because the records, documents ar.d,
other evidence were not maintained :~
accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles and practices
consistently applied, or were for any
reason inadequate to demonstrate the
reasonableness of the costs claimed.
EPA may reject the request or make
adjustments, if possible. Further
consideration of such amounts will
depend on the adequacy of subsequent
documentation. Any additional
information requested by EPA ir.us: be
submitted within 60 days unless
specifically extended by EPA. The
failure of the applicant to provide m a
timely manner the requested
information without reasonable cause
may be cause for denial of the
reimbursement request.
(e) When the reimbursement recupst
is completed. EPA will rank the request
on the basis of financial burden.
Financial burden will be based on the
ratio of eligible response costs to the
applicant locality's per capita income
adjusted for population. Per capita
income and population statistics used to
calculate financial burden shall be those
published by the U.S. Department of
Commerce. Bureau of the Census, in
Current Population Reports. Local
Population Estimates. Series P-26, "1984
Population and 1933 Per Capita Income
Estimates for Counties and Incorporated
Places." Vols. 84-S-SC. 84-MW-SC. 84-
NE-SC. B4-W-SC. 84-WNC-SC. June
1986. This incorporation by reference
was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1CFR Part 51. Copies
are available from the Bureau of the
Census. Office of Public Affairs.
Department of Commerce. Constitution
Avenue. ME.. Washington. DC 20230 (l-
202-763-MMO). Copies may be inspected
at the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 401 M Street. SW.. Room LG-
100. Washington. DC. or at the Office of
the Federal Register, 1100 L Street. NVV..
Room 8401. Washington. DC In ranking
requests on the basis of financial
burden. EPA also will give consideration
to other relevant financial information
supplied by the applicant. Once the
request is ranked. EPA will:
(1) Reimburse the request or
(2) Decline to reimburse the request or
(3) Hold the request for consideration
in a subsequent period.
(f) Reimbursement will be made:
(1) Only for costs that are allowab,'
reasonable and necessary.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 39399
(2) Only to the extent that the
temporary emergency measures
conformed to response criteria
established by CERCLA. the NCP and
the local emergency response plan, if
applicable.
(g) The EPA reimbursement official
will provide the requester with a written
final decision. Payment of approved
requests will be made according to
§ 310.80 of this regulation.
(h) Requests that are not reimbursed
during the reviexv period in which they
are first considered remain open for
consideration, at the EPA
reimbursement official's discretion, for
one year. EPA will notify the requester
in writing if the request is held for later
review. After that time, an unreimbursed
request will no longer be considered and
EPA will notify the requester in writing
that the request has been denied.
§ 310.70 Records retention.
An applicant receiving a
reimbursement from the Superfund is
required to maintain all cost
documentation and any other records
relating to the reimbursement request
and to provide EPA with access to such
records. If. after six years from the date
of the reimbursement from the
Superfund. EPA has not initiated a cost
recovery action, the applicant need
retain the records no longer. The
applicant must, however, notify EPA
and allow EPA the opportunity to take
possession of the records before they
are destroyed.
§ 310.80 Payment of approved
reimbursement requests.
A reimbursement from the Superfund
can be paid only when Superfund
monies are available. An approved
request m excess of Superfund
appropriations available to EPA may be
paid only when additional money is
appropriated. As appropriations in the
Superfund become available.
reimbursements will be made in the
order in which approved requests are
ranked, according to relative financial
burden.
§ 310.90 Disputes resolution.
The procedures in this section apply
to reviews of denial of reimbursement
and reviews of amount of
reimbursement
(a) The EPA reimbursement official's
decision constitutes final Agency action
unless the requester files a request for
review by registered mail within 60
calendar days of the date of decision.
(b) The request for review of the EPA
reimbursement official's final written
decision must be filed with the disputes
decision official identified in the final
written decision.
(c) The request for review must
include:
(1) A copy of the EPA reimbursement
official's final decision.
(2) A statement of the amount in
dispute
(3) A description of the issues
involved and
(4) A concise statement of the
requester's objection to the final
decision.
(d) After filing for review, the
requester:
(1) Is entitled to an informal
conference with the EPA disputes
decision official.
(2) May be represented by counsel
and may submit documentary evidence
and bnefs for inclusion in a written
record and
(3) Is entitled to a written decision
from the disputes decision official.
Appendix I—EPA Regions and NRC
Telephone Lines
n— M«~ V0rk
ill— pniiattionia
IV—AtUIK.
V-Chieago . .._ _
VI — Dalian
VII— rfansas Oiy I
VIII— Danvar
IX— San Francisco
x— Searae .
NitoiMl Pfscorae Conor
al— toll tree) 426-2675
(Washington DC)
Slain in region
ME. NH. VT. MA. Rl. CT.
NJ. NY. PR. VI
PA. OE MD. DC. VA. WV.
NC. SC. TN. MS. AL. GA.
FLKY
OH IN. IL Wl MN Ml
AR. LA. TX. OK. NM.
IA. MO KS NE.
CO UT, WY. MT NO SO
AZ. CA. NV. AS. HI, GU. TT.
10. OR. WA, AK.
BILLING CODE 6580-50-M
-------
39400 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules dnd Regulations
Appendix II—Application for reimbursement to local governments for emergency response to Hazardous Substance Releases
Under CERCLA Section 123
Please tvoe or onnt afl information
Un.teo Stales Environmental Protection Agency
Washington. DC 20-60
Application for Reimbursement
to Local Governments for
Emergency Response to Hazardous
Substance Releases Under CERCLA Sec. 123
Form Appro/ed
OMB No xxxx-xxxn
Expires XX-M-M
1. Local Government identification
a. Name ot Local Government
b Contact Name and Te'eonone Number
c Official Address
d Date ol Application
Release Description
a Date and Time ol Occurrence or Discover/ b Location
c Source or Cause of Release
d. Hazardous Substances Released and Quantity
e. Threats to Human health and Environment
Anacl anv acoilional material oeonent to the re'ease
3. Response Description
a Date and Tme ot Response Action
b. Contact Made Witn (Check one]
DCDA I I National
EPA | | Response Center
Other (Specify)
c EPA Region
a. Date and Time Contact Made
e Date ol Response Completion
Jurisdiction in Which Response Occurred
g Is This Junsciction Covered by a Ti!!e ill Emergency Response P'an'
(Check one) I |v" | |No
n Fessond-ng Agencies and Junscictions
EPA Form 9310-1 (10-87)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 203 / Wednesday. October 21. 1987 / Rules and Regulations 39401
3i. Summary of Response Acaons
I Temporary Emergency Measures tor Which Reimbursement Is Sought
Demonstration that Costs Claimea Do Not Supplant Local Funos Normally Provided lor Response and Exceed Resources Committed in
Local Emergency Response Plan
I Attach anv additional material pertinent to the resoonse
4. Cost Information
a. Total Response Cost
s
b Total Reimbursement Requested
$
c. Complete and Attach Table 1. "Detailed Cost Breakdown*
d. Attach Evidence of Attempt To Recover Costs
e. Attach Other Pertinent Financial Information (See Instructions)
5. Certifications and Authorization
I hereby certify that (1) all costs are accurate and were incurred specifically for the response for which
reimbursement is being requested: (2) the requirement to inform EPA or the U.S. Coast Guard of the response
has been met: (3) reimbursement for costs incurred for response activities does not supplant local funds
normally provided for response; (4) all other available sources of funds have been pursued and (5)
reimbursement funds for which costs are later recovered will be returned to EPA. I further certify that I am
authorized to reouest this reimbursement and to receive funds from the Federal Government.
Pnnteo or Typed Name of Authorized Representative
rnie
EPA Form 9310-1 (10-87) Reverse
Signature of Authorized Representative
Oa:e
-------
Table 1
Detailed Cost Breakdown
Temporary Emergency Measure
Cost Incurred By
Cost Element
Amount
n
o.
n
n
I
n
o_
III
I
50
sf
o'
ui
EPA ropn 9310-1 (10-87)
||'R Doc. Q7-Z-I33H pilcij 10-20-87;
BILLING CODE 656O-90-C
Alldch sup)>oillng documentation, a g.. Involcoa, sales receipts, rental agreements
-------
United States Office of Emergency October 1987
Environmental and Remedial Response
Protection Agency Washington, DC 20460
FACT SHEET: EPA
REIMBURSEMENT TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS FOR EMERGENCY
RESPONSE TO HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE RELEASES
Introduction
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA), originally enacted in 1980, provides broad Federal authority and resources to
respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may
endanger human health or the environment. The original $1.6 billion Hazardous Substance
Response Trust Fund (the Superfund) was designed to pay for the cleanup of releases of
hazardous substances and uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. EPA is primarily
responsible for implementing the Superfund program.
On October 17, 1986, the President signed into law the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA). These amendments authorize an $8.5 billion
Superfund and broaden the Federal Government's response authority. Section 123 of the
new law authorizes EPA to reimburse local governments for expenses incurred in carrying
out temporary emergency measures in response to hazardous substance threats. These
measures must be necessary to prevent or mitigate injury to human health or the
environment. EPA published an interim final regulation for reimbursing local governments in
the Federal Register on October 21, 1987. This fact sheet provides a summary of the
requirements and procedures set forth in this regulation.
What Is the Intent of the Reimbursement Program?
The intent of the reimbursement program is to alleviate significant financial burden on a
local government resulting from temporary emergency measures taken in response to
hazardous substance threats. Temporary emergency measures may include such activities
as erecting security fencing to limit access, responding to fires and explosions, and other
actions that require immediate response at the local level. EPA will distribute the
reimbursement money to those applicants who demonstrate the greatest financial burden.
The law specifies that not more than 0.1 percent of the total amount appropriated to the Fund
be used for local government reimbursement. This represents a maximum of. $8.5 million
over a four-year period, or approximately $2 million per year for all requests received
nationwide.
-1-
-------
After receiving completed applications from local governments, EPA will screen each
application for compliance with basic reimbursement criteria and filing procedures. Requests
for reimbursement must demonstrate that responses comply with CERCLA, the NCR and
where applicable, the local comprehensive emergency response plan completed under the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986. Screened applications will
be reviewed twice yearly. A Review Panel will evaluate each reimbursement request on its
own merit, and with respect to the financial burden demonstrated by other requests received
during the previous six months. The Review Panel will ensure that costs for which
reimbursement is being sought are allowable and do not supplant local funds normally
provided for emergency response. Further guidance on evaluation of reimbursement
requests can be found in section 310.60 of the interim final regulation.
Based upon the financial burden ranking for each request and the funds available for
reimbursement, a request may be reimbursed, denied or held over for reconsideration. A
request may be reconsidered during a subsequent review period if it represents a significant
financial burden but scores lower than other requests during a particular review period.
How Much Can Be Reimbursed?
CERCLA specifically limits reimbursement to $25,000 per single response. This
$25,000 cap plus the limited availability of funds for the program may not allow EPA to
reimburse local governments for all response costs that may qualify.
For Further Information
For general information on CERCLA and reimbursement application packages contact:
RCRA/Superfund Hotline
1-800-424-9346 (toll free)
1-202-382-3000 (in the Washington, DC area)
For specific information on the Local Government Reimbursement Program contact:
Karen Burgan, Project Officer
Emergency Response Division (WH-548B)
U.S. EPA
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
-3-
-------
39770
Corrections
Federal Register
Vol. 52. No. 205
Friday. October 23. 1987
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains editorial corrections of previously
published Presidential. Rule. Proposed
Rule, and Notice documents and volumes
of the Code of Federal Regulations.
These corrections are prepared by the
Office of the Federal Register. Agency
prepared corrections are issued as signed
documents and appear in the appropriate
document categories elsewhere in the
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 372
[OPTS-400002, FRL-3183-9]
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting;
Community Right-To-Know
Correction
In proposed rule document 87-12388
beginning on page 21152 in the issue of
Thursday. June 4.1987. make the
following corrections:
PART 372—{CORRECTED |
§372.45 [Corrected]
The table in § 372.45(a) should be
corrected as follows:
1. On page 21170. in the second
column, in the 17th line from the bottom.
"115-52-2" should read "115-32-2".
2. On page 21171. in the second
column, in the 29th line. "764-01-or
should read "7647-01-0". and in the 14th
line from the bottom, "624-85-9" should
read "624-83-9".
BILLING CODE 150J-01-O
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[OPTS-51695; FRL-3274-5]
Certain Chemicals Premanufacture
Notices
Correction
In notice document 87-23304 beginning
on page 37836 in the issue of Friday.
October 9.1987. make the following
corrections:
1. On page 37836. in the third column.
under P 87-1820, in the second line.
"Polyoxyalkylate" was misspelled.
2. On page 37837—
a. In the first column, under/*87-1827.
in the third line, after Chemical., insert
"(G)": and in the fifth line, "salts" was
misspelled.
b. In the same column, under P 87-
1831. in the fifth line, "ink or" should
read "ink on".
c. In the second column, under P 87-
1837. in the fifth line. "2-methyl-e-
propenoate," should read "2-methyl-2-
propenoate,".
3. On page 37838—
a. In the first column, under P 87-1848,
in the fifth line. "Import" was
misspelled.
b. In the third column, under P 87-
1868. in the ninth line. "<100 parts per
million" should read ">100 parts per
million".
BILLING CODE 150S-01-O
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
fOPTS-51696; FRL-3275-4]
Certain Chemicals Premanufacture
Notices
Correction
In notice document 87-23447 beginning
on page 37833 in the issue of Friday.
October 9.1987. make the following
corrections:
On page 37834. in the third column—
1. Under P 87-1881. in the last two
lines. "Non-sensitizer" was misspelled.
2. Under P 87-1882. in the 7th line.
"polyurethanes" was misspelled: and in
the 15th line. "Non/Mutagenic:" should
read "Non-mutagenic;".
BILLING CODE 1SOS-01-O
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[OPP-30000/5S; FRL-3273-1]
Initiation of Special Review;
Oxydemeton-Methyl
Correction
In notice document 87-22919 beginning
on page 37248 in the issue of Monday.
October 5.1987. make the following
corrections:
1. On page 37248—
a. In the first column, under DATE:, in
the last line, the date should read
"January 4.1988".
b. In the second column, in the last
paragraph, in the first line. "This"
should read 'The".
c In the third column, in the fifth line.
"of should read "or".
2. On page 37249—
a. In the second column, in the last
paragraph, in the firsr line, remove the
period between "A" • nd "two": and in
the second line, "by" should read "to".
b. In the third column, in the fifth line.
"has" should read "had".
3. On page 37250. in the second
column, in paragraph ii.. in the seventh
line, "three" should read "these": and in
the last line, "months." should read
"months].".
4. On page 37251. in the second
column, in the ninth line, "hematology"
was misspelled.
5. On page 37253—
a. In Table 2. the fifth and sixth
columns of the fourth entry should read
".00003-.0005'' and "179-2975"'.
b. In the second column, in the 13th
line, "associates" should read
"associated".
6. On page 37256—
a. In the second column, in paragraph
e.. in the first line, "of should read
"on".
b. In the third column, in the last
paragraph, in the eighth line, the date
should read "January 4.1988.".
7. On page 37257. in the third column.
in paragraph (16). in the second line.
"Metasystox-*" should read
"Metasystox-R*".
BILLING CODE 1S05-01-O
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[OPTS-51694; FRL-3263-21
Toxic and Hazardous Substances;
Certain Chemicals Premanufacture
Notices
Correction
In notice document 87-22149 beginning
on page 36096 in the issue of Friday,
September 25.1987. make the following
corrections:
1. On page 36097. in the second
column—
a. In the second line. "LC™*1 should
read "LCM".
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 205 / Friday. October 23. 1987 / Corrections 39771
b. In the third line. "EC™*' should
read "EC»".
2. On page 36098—
a. In the first column, under P 87-1772.
in the eighth line. "l.l^-methylene"
should read "l.l'-methylene".
b. In the third column, under P 87-
1789. in the third line, "sulfonyl" was
misspelled.
3. On page 36099. in the second
column, under P 87-1800. in the second
line. "Phenol" was misspelled.
BILLING CODE 1505-01-O
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[OPTS-59833; FRL-3268-31
Toxic and Hazardous Substances
Control; Certain Chemicals
Premanufacture Notices
Correction
In notice document 87-22148
appearing on page 36100 in the issue of
Friday. September 25.1987. majce the
following correction: ' -
-In the second column, under Y 87-253.
in the fo~uriH1ine.-"acide" should read
"acids".
BILLING CODE 150S-01-O
-------
-------
44920 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 225 / Monday. November 23. 1987 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
.AGENCY
40 CFR PART 52
(FRL-3293-6]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri; Stack Heights
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rulemaking (PRM).
SUMMARY: In this document. EPA
proposes to approve a revision to the
Missouri state air pollution control
regulations as part of the Missouri State
Implementation Plan (SIP). The purpose
of this revision is to limit the use of
dispersion techniques rather than
emission reductions to meet ambient air
quality standards in the vicinity of
major sources of air pollution. The use
of certain dispersion techniques is
prohibited by section 123 of the Clean
Air Act. The purpose of this document is
to advise the public of EPA's
preliminary finding and to invite
comments on EPA's proposed approval.
DATE: Comments must be received by
December 23.1987.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent
to Larry A. Hacker. Environmental
•Protection Agency. 726 Minnesota
Avenue. Kansas City. Kansas 66101. The
state submission is available at the
abpve address and at the Missouri
Department of Natural Resources. Air
Pollution Control Program. 205 Jefferson
Street, Jefferson City. Missouri 65101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Larry A. Hacker at (913) 236-2893 (FTS
757-2893).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July
8,1985 (50 FR 27892), EPA published
final rules regulating the manner in
which techniques for dispersion of air
pollutants from smokestacks may be
considered in setting limits on the
emissions of pollutants into the air.
These rules are required by section 123
of the Clean Air Act and are codified in
40 CFR Part 51. All states are required to
adopt consistent requirements for
regulating sources of air pollution within
their borders.
The purpose of section 123 is to
prevent sources of air pollution from
using tall smokestacks or other
dispersion techniques to meet air quality
standards. Air quality standards are to
be met in the vicinity of sources of air
pollution by using continuous emission
reduction techniques which actually
reduce the amount of pollution emitted
into the air. Dispersing pollutants high
into the air simply moves the pollution
without controlling it. Pollutants being
dispersed from tall stacks are suspected
of contributing to the acid rain
phenomenon. The rules are required to
limit the amount of stack height that can
be credited in evaluating permit
applications and setting emission limits
but no attempt is made to limit physical
stack height.
The state of Missouri has submitted
regulations which EPA believes satisfy
the requirements of 40 CFR Part 51
regarding the use of dispersion
techniques. The submission consists of
three regulatory changes. One is a new
rule. 10 CSR 10-6.140. Restriction of
Emissions Credit for Reduced Pollutant
Concentrations for the Use of Dispersion
Techniques, which limits the credit that
can be allowed for the use of tall stacks
by existing sources to what is known as
good engineering practice. A change to
the permit rule, 10 CSR 10.060. Permits
Required, limits the allowable stack
height credit for new sources and for
major modifications of existing sources.
A series of supporting definitions have
been adopted or revised in 10 CSR 10-
6 020. Definitions.
These regulations were adopted by
the Missouri Air Conservation
Commission on March 20.1986,
following reasonable notice and public
hearing. They were submitted as a
revision to the Missouri SIP by the
Governor's designated representative on
August 18.1986. The state submittal also
included source-specific stack height
analyses. EPA is not proposing any
action on these analyses today as there
will be addressed in a future Federal
Register action.
In order to be approvable. state
regulations must adhere closely to their
Federal counterparts. This is to ensure
that sources in all parts of the country
are treated consistently. In adopting its
stack height requirements. Missouri has
closely followed the language of the
applicable EPA regulations.
The state has adopted definitions of
the terms "dispersion techniques".
"emission limitation", "excessive
concentration", "good engineering
practice stack height", and "nearby"
that are identical, or substantially
similar to the corresponding Federal
definitions.
The state has adopted permit
provisions meeting the requirements of
40 CFR 51.160 and 40 CFR 51.166.
limiting the allowable credit for tall
stacks for new or modified sources.
These Federal regulations limit stack
height credit for sources subject to
general new source review permit
procedures and for sources subject to
evaluation against Prevention of
Significant Deterioration requirements.
The new state revisions implement these
Federal requirements at the state level.
The regulations adopted by the state
of Missouri do not include EPA's
definitions of "stack" and "stack in
existence" found at 40 CFR 51.100(ff)
and 51.100(gg). respectively. On October
8.1987. the state pro\ided EPA with a
letter committing to adopt definitions of
these terms consistent with EPA's
requirements and to apply EPA's
definitions of these terms until the
adoption action is complete. EPA
proposes to incorporate the state's
committal letter as part of the SIP in the
final rulemaking. unless the
aforementioned definitions are adopted
and submitted prior to final rulemaking.
The state has also adopted a general
regulation limiting the credit that can be
allowed for stack heights at existing
facilities. As with the other provisions.
this rule follows the applicable
requirements, in this case those of 40
CFR 51.118(a) and (b).
For further information on the specific
requirements of the Federal stack height
requirements, the reader is referred to
the July 8.1985. rulemaking. Additional
information on the Missouri rules can be
obtained at the addresses given above.
This state submission constitutes a
proposed revision to the Missouri SIP.
The Administrator's decision to approve
or disapprove this proposed revision
will be based on the comments received
and on a determination of whether or
not the revision meets the requirements
of sections 110 and 123 of the Clean Air
Act and of 40 CFR Part 41. Requirements
for Preparation. Adoption, and
Submittal of State Implementation
Plans.
Under 5 U.S.C. 605(b). I certify that
this SIP revision will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The Office of Management and Budget
has exempted this rule from the
requirements of section 3 of Executive
Order 12291.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control. Sulfur oxides.
Nitrogen dioxide. Lead. Particulate
matter. Intergovernmental relations.
Reporting and recordkeepmg
requirements.
Authority: 42 U S.C. 7401-7M2
Dated: March 9.1987.
Morris Kay.
Regional Administrator.
Editorial Note: This document was received
at the Office of the Federal Register
November 18. 1987.
[FR Doc. 87-20913 Filed 11-20-87. 8 45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-SO-M
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 225 / Monday. November 23. 1987 / Proposed Rules 44921
40 CFR Part 355
.. (FRL-3293-7]
Extremely Hazardous Substances List
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of availability:
Bacitracin.
SUMMARY: On November 17,1986 EPA
proposed (he deletion of 40 substances
from the list of "extremely hazardous
substances" promulgated by the Agency
under Section 302 of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right to Know
Act of 1986. Title III of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986. EPA has undertaken further
study of these substances, and has
completed review of the toxic effects
induced after short-term exposure of one
of these substances, bacitracin. Today,
EPA is providing notice of the
availability of this study of bacitracin.
including the approach used to
determine if it should be considered
"extremely hazardous", for public
review and comment.
DATES: Comments on the bacitracin
study will be accepted on or before
January 7.1988.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the bacitracin
study and other materials relevant to the
- November 17.1986 proposal are
_ -ailable for public review in the
ouperfund Docket located in Room
Lower Garage at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460. The docket is
available for inspection, by appointment
only, between the hours of 9:00 a m. and
4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
excluding federal holidays. The docket
phone number is (202) 382-3046. As
provided in 40 CFR Part 2. a reasonable
fee may be charged for copying services.
Written comments should be
submitted to Preparedness Staff.
Superfund Docket Clerk. Attention:
Docket Number 300PQ. Superfund
Docket Room Lower Garage. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Mail
Stop WH-548D, 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dr. Diane Seal. Health and
Environmental Review Division, Office
of Toxic Substances, or Carrie Wehling,
Office of General Counsel. U S.
Environmental Protection Agency, or the
Chemical Emergency Preparedness
Hotline at 1-800-535-0202. in
Washington. DC at 1-202-479-2449.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
October 17.1986. President Reagan
signed into law the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 ("SARA"). Pub. L. No. 99-J99
(1986). Title III of SARA established a
program designed to encourage state
and local planning and preparedness for
spills or releases of hazardous
substances and to provide the public
and local governments with information
concerning potential chemical hazards
in their communities. The program is
codified as the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986.
42 U.S.C. 11001-11050.
Title III is organized into three
subtitles. Subtitle A. sections 301-305,
establishes the framework for local
emergency planning. Under section 302.
a facility which has present an
"extremely hazardous substance" in
excess of its "threshold planning
quantity" must notify its State
emergency planning commission and
participate, as necessary, in local
emergency planning activities.
Section 302 directed EPA to publish
the list of extremely hazardous
substances within 30 days of the
enactment of SARA. Section 302(a)(2)
required that this list be identical to the
list compiled by EPA in 1985 as part of
the Agency's Chemical Emergency
Preparedness Program. Under section
302(a](4), EPA is authorized to revise the
list but any such revisions must take
into account the toxicity of the
substance. The term "toxicity" is
defined to include "any short- or long-
term health effect which may result from
a short-term exposure to the substance."
EPA published the list of 402
extremely hazardous substances and
threshold planning quantities in an
interim final rule on November 17.1986.
51 FR 41,570. This list was identical to
the November, 1985 list compiled by *
EPA. which had been originally
established by the Agency to help
communities identify chemical
substances present in the community
that could cause acute health effects
when released. Because EPA was aware
that, based on information received
since 1985, several substances did not
meet the acute toxicity criteria, on
November 17.1986. the Agency also
proposed to delete 40 substances from
the list. Because the statute required
EPA to also consider the long-term, as
well as acute, effects from short-term
exposure in revising the list. EPA
requested data on such long-term effects
and solicited comment on how such
effects should be incorporated into
criteria for revising the list.
Based on public comment on this
proposal. EPA announced on April 22,
1987 that it had deferred the proposed
delisting of these substances, pending
an evaluation of the long-term effects
from short-term exposure to each of the
substances proposed for delisting. 52 FR
13.388.
On June 5.1987. EPA received a
petition from A.L. Laboratories. Inc.
requesting a delisting of bacitracin. a
substance it manufactures. In response
to that petition. EPA has developed an
approach to assess the toxicity of
bacitracin and to determine whether it
should be considered an "extremely
hazardous substance" under section 302
of Title III. Under this approach. EPA
used a weight-of-evidence evaluation to
identify any life-threatening or
irreversible effects that bacitracin may
induce in humans exposed for a short
time. The approach also defines the
concentration or dose of bacitracin at or
below which any severe adverse effect
identified needed to occur for bacitracin
to be considered "extremely
hazardous".
Evaluation of readily available
literature indicates that, although
bacitracin may induce two types of
adverse health effects, the likelihood of
any such effects resulting from an
exposure to a release of bacitracin into
the environment is extremely remote.
This information thus supports EPA's
proposal to delist bacitracin from the list
of extremely hazardous substances. EPA
has no information which would
indicate that bacitracin should remain
on the list of extremely hazardous
substances on the basis of its toxicity or
other characteristics.
EPA will make a final determination
on whether to revise the list of
extremely hazardous substances under
section 302 of Title III to remove
bacitracin, as proposed on November 17,
1986, after consideration of any public
comment received on this study. Review
of the other 39 substances is also
underway.
Dated: October 17.1987.
I. Winston Porter,
Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and
Emergency Response.
[FR Doc. 87-26914 Filed 11-20-87. 8 45 am|
BILLING CODE 6S60-50-M
-------
-------
Thursday
December 17, 1987
Part VI
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 355
Extremely Hazardous Substances List;
Final Rules
-------
48072 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 242 / Thursday, December 17, 1987 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 355
[FRL—3303-31
Extremely Hazardous Substances Ust
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency tEPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY; On November 17.1986. the
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
' (EPA) proposed the deletion of 40
substances from the list of "extremely
• hazardous substances" promulgated by
the Agency under section 302 of the
Emergency Planning and Community
RighMo-Know Act of 1986, Title HI of
the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthonzation Act of 1986. Today's
final rule removes one of those
substances, bacitracin. from the list of
extremely hazardous substances.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule becomss
effective on December 17,1987.
ADDRESS: The record supporting this
rulemaking is contained in the
Superfund Docket located in Room
Lower Garage at the U.S. EPA. 401 M
Street. SW., Washington, DC. 20460. The
docket is available for inspection by
appointment only between the hours of
9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday, .excluding federal holidays. The
docket phone number is 202-382-3046.
\ As provided in 40 CFR Part 2. a
' reasonable fee may be charged for
copying services.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carrie Wehling. Office of General
Counsel. LE-132S. U.S. EPA. 401 M
Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
(202) 382-7708. The Chemical Emergency
'.Preparedness Hotline can also be
contacted for further information at 1-
800-535-0202. in Washington. DC at 1-
202-479-2449.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are listed
in the following ojtline:
I. Statutory Authority
II. Delistmg of Bacitracin
HI. Effective Date
IV. Regulatory Analyses
.1. Statutory Authority
This regulation is issued under
sections 302 and 328 of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Act of 1986 ("the Act").
II. Delisting of Bacitracin
On October 17.1986. the President
signed into law the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 {"SARA"). Pub. L. No. 99-499
(1966). Title III of SARA established a
program designed to encourage state
and local planning and preparedness for
spills or releases of hazardous
substances and to provide the public
and local governmerts with information
concerning potential chemical hazards
in their communities This program is
codified as the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986. •
42 U.S.C. 11001-11050.
Subtitle A of the Act establishes the
framework for local emergency
planning. Under section 302. a facility
which has present an "extremely
hazardous substance" in excess of its
"threshold planning quantity" (*TPQ"J
must notify the State emergency
planning commission ard carticipate. as
necessary, in local emergency planning
activities.
On November 17.1986, EPA published
the statutorily-designated list of
"extremely hazardous substances" and
their associated TPQs in an interim final
Pile, as required-by section 302.51FR
41570. On the same day, EPA proposed
the deletion of a number of substances.
including bacitracin, from the list of
extremely hazardous substances based
on the fact that they did not meet the
Agency's criteria for acute toxicity. 51
FR 41593.
On November 23,1987, EPA published
a notice of availability of its further
study on the long-term toxicity of
bacitracin. 52 FR 44921. In that notice.
EPA stated that based on its analysis of
the toxicity of bacitracin. the Agency
has no reason to believe that the
substance should remain on the list of
extremely hazardous substances.
Also on November 23,1987. the
District Court for the District of
Columbia issued an order in A.L
Laboratories. Inc. V. Environmental
Protection Agency, Civ. Action No. 87-
1991-OG (and consolidated cases)
requiring EPA to remove bacitracin from
the list of extremely hazardous
substances under section 302 of the Act
As a result of the Court's order and in
light of the absence of information
suggesting that bacitracin may result in
toxic or other effects upon exposure to a
release of the substance
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 242 / Thursday,• JteeembeF: 17.^987 -J . Rujeg,
CAS No
Chem cat
name
iiOS-87-4
Bacitracm
Appendix B—[Amended]
3. Appendix B to Part 355 is amended
to remove the following entry
CAS NO
Chemical
name
UOS-B7-4
Baolracm
|FR Ooc 87-29097 Filed 12-10-87.9 27 am|
BILLING CODE 6S60-SO-y
40 CFR Part 355
Extremely Hazardous Substances List
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: On November 17.19B6, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) proposed the deletion of 40
substances from the list of "extremely
hazardous substances" promulgated by
the Agency under section 302 of the
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act of 1986, Title III of
the Superfund Amendments and
Rcauthorization Act of 1986. Today EPA
is taking final action to remove three of
those substances from the list of
extremely hazardous substances
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule becomes
effective on December 17.1987.
ADDRESS: The record supporting this
rulemaking is contained in the
Superfund Docket located in Room
Lower Garage at the U.S. EPA. 401 M
Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20460. The
docket is available for inspection by
appointment only between the hours of
9-00 a m. and 4:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday, excluding federal holidays. The
docket phone number is 202-382-3046.
As provided in 40 CFR Part 2. a
reasonable fee may be charged for
copying services.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Carrie Wehling. Office of General
Counsel. LE-132S. U.S. EPA. 401 M
Street. SW.. Washington. DC 20460 (202)
382-7706. The Chemical Emergency
Preparedness Hotline can also be
contacted for further information at 1-
800-535-0202. in Washington. DC. at 1-
202-179-2449.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are listed
m the following outline-
I Statutory Authority
II Today's Rulemaking
III Effective Date
IV Regulatory Analyses
I. Statutory Authority . .
This regulation is issued under section
302 and 328 of the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act of
1986 ("the Act").
II. Today's Rulemaking
On October 17.1986. the President
signed into law the Superfund' .
Amendments and Reauthorization Act
of 1986 ("SARA").'Pub. L. No. 99-499
(1986). Title III of SARA established a
program designed to encourage state
and local planning and preparedness for
spills or releases of hazardous '
substances and to provide'the public
and local governments with information
concerning potential chemical hazards
in their communities.'This program is
codified as the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986.
42 U.S.C. 11001-11050. Subtitle A of the
Act establishes the framework for local
emergency planning. Under section 302.
a facility which has present an
"extremely hazardous substance" in
excess of its "threshold planning
quantity" ('TPQ") must notify the State
emergency planning commission
andparticipate. as necessary, in local
emergency planning activities.
On November 17.1988. EPA published
the statutorily-designated list of 402
"extremely hazardous substances" and
their associated TPQs in an interim final
rule, as required by section 302.51 FR
41570. On the same day, EPA proposed
the deletion of 40 substances from the
list of extremely hazardous substances
based on the fact that they did not meet
the Agency's criteria for acute toxicity.
51 FR 41593.
Based on public comment on this
proposal. EPA announced on April 22.
1987. that it had deferred the proposed
delisting of these substances, pending
an evaluation of the long-term effects
from short-term exposure to each of the
substances proposed for delisting. 52 FR
13388.
On November 23.1987. the District
Court for the District of Columbia issued
an order in A.L. Laboratories. Inc. v.
Environmental Protection Agency. Civ.
Action No. B7-1991-OG (and
consolidated cases) requiring EPA to
remove four of the substances proposed
for delisting from the list of extremely
hazardous substances under section 302
of the Act.' The basis for the Court's
order was jts reasoning that Congress
did not intend to include in the
statutorily-designated list substances
listed due to clerical error.
In response to the L»~. ,»^..,__y,y-..
has published a final rule removfng one
of those subslances.'bacU&pJBrjfrom the
section 302 list. Today EPA is taking
final action to delist the tdm'ainihg .three
substances subject to the Court's order
Dibulyl phthalate. tiimethyl'p'Hlhafdte.
and dioctyl phthalate. In ao/^pn, EPA
believes that the remaining 36
substances originally proposed for
delisting on November.l7..198'6.are
indistinguishable frora'tbe/ous.j,
substances subject tc.the Gotirt-'s order
with respect to their-status on'fhe'list of
1 "extremely hazardous substances". As a
result. EPA intends to issuer final rule
within the next 30 days deleting the
other 36 substances pYoppBed for
delisting on November 17.1986. Upon
the effective date of;tKat rule, those
substances'will no'lohge'r be subfect to
the emergency planning and notification
requirements under the'Act
III. Effective Date ,
As indicated in the opening section of
this preamble, this rule is effe'MivTe
immediately. Section 553(d) of the
Administrative Procedure Act ("APA")
generally requires the publication of a
rule no less than 30 days prior to its
effective date. However, under section
553(d)(l). the Agency may suspend the
30 day effective date requirement^ for a
rule which relieves a restrictiorf.
Because this rule provides, relief from
regulatory requirements previously
applicable to persons handling.large
amounts of these substances. EPA is
suspending the 30 day effective date
requirement for this delisting.
IV. Regulatory Analyse!)
Because this delisting is'npj.a""major"
rule as defined under Executive Order
12291. no regulatory impact analysis has
been prepared in connection with this
final rule. ,
In addition, because this dehsiing will
not have a significant impact, on a
substantial number of small entities, no
analysis of the impacts of this rule on
small entities is required u.nder,}he
Regulatory Flexibilrty Act of 1980.
List of Subjects in 40 OPR Part 355
Chemicals. Hazardptifc substances.
Extremely hazardous substances,
Community right-to-know. Chemical
accident prevention. Chemical''
emergency preparedness. Threshold
. planning quantity^Repo^tabJe quantity.
Community emergency resppnse plan.
Contmgency.-planmng. Reporting and
recordkeeping.requirements. • ,
-------
48074 Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 242 / Thursday. December 17, 1987 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: December 10.19B7 Appendix A—[Amended] Appendix B—(Amended]
Lee M. Thomas. , Appendix A to Part 355 is amended 3. Appendix B to Part 355 is amended
Administrator. ,0 remove tj,e following entries:
Fur the reasons set out in the
Predmble. Part 335 of Title 40 of the r»=^ owmcai
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
to remove the following entries:
CAS NO
CAS No
as follows:
PART 355—EMERGENCY PLANNING
AND NOTIFICATION
l. The authority citation for Part 355
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11002.11003.11004.
11025.11026.11028, and 11029(1986).
64-74-2 . .
131-11-3
Mwryl
Pttttalate
Phthaiate
84-74-Z
117-84-0
131-11-3
Oociyi
Ptitnaiaie
Dmttiyl
PntftttaM
m-64-o
. . . ----- Oactyt
PMhaHM
(FR Doc 87-29098 Filed 12-16-87:9.28 am)
BILLING CODE USt-SO-M
-------
-------
Wednesday
January 13, 1988
Part III
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 373
Reporting Hazardous Substance Activity
When Transferring Federal Real Property;
Proposed Rule
-------
.federal Register / ydE. 53. No. 8 / Wednesday. January 13. 1988 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL-PROTECTION-
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 373
(SWHFRL-3279-9)'
Reporting Hazardous Substance ••' • '
Activity When Transferring Federal-
Real Property
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency. , . .
ACTION; ProBpsed. rule.. . . ~ . .
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protectio'rY
Agency (EPA) is-to'day proposing • • ' '
regulations ih'Tesponse fo requirements
established-by section1 K0(h) of the
Comprehensive -Environmental
Response. Compensation and Liability
Act (CERGLA1."aB'amended-by the
Superfund Amendments and • • ".n/,
Reauthomation Achof 1986 (Pub. L. 99-,
499). Ujider section KQ(h),; whenever.
any agency, department, or 1 •„ -...
instrumentality.^^ United §tat£s .
enters uito any .-contract forthe.sa.le or. •
ottiertransfqr of real property which is
owned by the United States, and on
which/any hazardous substance was
stored for one year or more, known to
have been released, or disposed of. the
contract must include notice of the type
and quantjty.of such hazardous
substanqe\ and '(he time at which such
storage, release, or disposal took place.
EPA is to prescribe the form and manner
of such notice. Today's notice would
define when these" requirements apply.
as well'as'prescnbe the form and
manner of notice,' as required'by section
120(h). "•'
DATE'. Ccirrtmerftsiftrihis proposed rule '
musf'be'received ort or before February
12.1088. "r-! •,',"""
ADDRESSES: Cflmmerlters mlist each
send an original and two copies of thieir
comments to EPA' Sup'erfund Docket
(WH-562). Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street. SW.. Washington.
DC'20460-. Place the'-Docket Number -•
l2oFP-TR'on!the comments: The docket
is'located in'tHe'EPA Superfund Docket
Room (LC 500);'401'M Street SW..
Washington SC 20460. The docket is
open from 9:00 to 4:00. Monday through
Friday except1 for. public holidays. To
review 'docket materials, make an
appointment bycallmg 202-382-3046.
The public may;obtain copies of docket,
materials: a&provided for in 40 CFR Part
2. A fee may be charged for copying
services.- •<..-..
FOA FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: •
For generai information contact the
tCRA-/CEJ*|3LA Hotjtne at 1-800-424-
9346 (toll-free) or in the Washington
Metropolitan Area at 202-382-3000. For
information on specific aspects of this
proposed rule, contact Richard Dailey.
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
(WH-527). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency; 401 M Street SW..
Washington. DC 20460. 202-382-5647
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority • :,
B. Interagency Qoqrdination.
II Content of the Bui?.' ' .
A. Definition of. "Department. Agency, or
' Instrumentality" • ' ' '
B. The'Cdncept of "Real Property" '
C Proposed Exclusion for Residential
Properly • ----- -e
D. Requirement-ID Search Agency Files
E. Definition- of "Hazardpus Substances"
F Definitions of the terms" "Storage.
Release, and Disposal"
1. Definition of'"Storage"
2. Storage Trigger' •<
3.'Definition of "Release" 1-.
4. -Definition of "Disposal" ' •
C. Fomvand Manner, of.Notice
III Regulalory,Analyses
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis '
B Regulatory. Flexibility Analysis
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
IV. References ' " '
I. Introduction
A. Statutory Authority '
The Superfund Amendments.and
Reauthorization Act (SARA). Pub. L.
99-499, amended the Comprehensive
Environmental ReSp'pnse', . '.
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA). 42U.S.C. 9601 et seq. SARA
added section 120(h)(l) of CERCLA
which states that "* * * whenever any
department, agency, or instrumentality
of the United States enters, irifd any
contract for the sale or other transfer of
real property which is owned by the
United States and on which any
hazardous substance was stored for one
year or more, known to be released, or
disposed of. the head of such
department, agency, or instrumentality
shall include in such contract notice of
the type and quantity of such'hazardous
substance and notice of the time a't
which such storage, release, or disposal
took place, to the extent such
information is available on the basis of
a complete search of agency Tiles."
Section 120(h)(2) requires the'
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to promulgate regulations specifying the
form and manner of such notice no later
than IB months after enactment of
SARA or. in other words.'by April 17.
198B. The notice requirement goes into
effect six months after the effective date
of the regulation.
1'n addition to the notice requirements
specified by section 120(hnil-described
above, section l20(h](3)(B) requires '
covenants to be included in deeds
transferring certain property owned by
the United States. Specifically, in the
case of any real property owned by the
United States on which any hazardous
substance was stored for one year or
more, known to have been released or
disposed of. each deed entered into for
transfer of the property by the United
Slates to any other person or entity must
contain covenants warranting that (1) all
remedial action necessary to protect
human health and the environment with
respect to any such substance remaining
on the property has been taken before
the date of transfer and (2) any
additional remedial action found to be
necessary after the date of such transfer
shall be conducted by the United States.
However, this provision does not apply
in any case in which the person or entity
to whom the property is transferred is a
potentially responsible party with
respect to such real property. There is
no statutory requirement that EPA
promulgate rules to implement the
requirements for deeds in CERCLA -
section 120(h)(3). and EPA does not plan
to issue such rules.
B. Interagency Coordination
The statute specifies that EPA is to
develop the notice regulations required
bv section 120(h)(2) in consultation with
the Administrator of the General
Services Administration (GSA). The
Agency has worked closely with GSA in
the development of this proposal, and
uill continue to consult with GSA
throughout the rulemaking process.
Additionally. EPA has solicited
information and comment from other
potentially affected agencies. EPA
encourages any affected agencies of the
United States that have not been
consulted to contact the person named
above under the section titled "FURTHER
INFORMATION," and to comment on the
specific provisions of this proposal.
II. Content of the Rule
Section 120(h) of CERCLA states that
its requirements apply to the sale or
other transfer of real property owned by
the'United States by any department.
agency, or instrumentality of the United
States As noted above, section 120(h)
requires EPA to consult with the
General Services Administration (GSA)
in the development of these rules. Such
consultation is appropriate because, in
many cases. GSA serves as the agency
through which other federal agencies
transfer or convey title to their real
property However, it is important to
note that many agencies have
independent authority to dispose of their
own real property as well: today's
-------
Federal Register / j-Vol. $3. No, 8, / Wednesday. }aguary
/
proposed rules would apply to all
agencies, departments or.
instrumentalities of the United States .
involved in the sale or other transfer of
real property. It should be noted that
EPA presumes that the term "transfer"
in the statute is used pursuant to its
definition in the Federal Property
Management Regulations found at 41
CFR101-47. and that today's proposed
regulations apply to agencies
undertaking the activity defined therein.
A. Definition of "Department. Agency.
or Instrumentality"
For the purposes of this rule.
"department agency, or instrumentality
of the United States" means those
entities or organizations created or
chartered by the legislative, executive or
judicial branches of the federal
government, including those
corporations that are chartered by the
federal government.
B. The Concept of "Real Property"
The concept of real property has
evolved over hundreds of years and. is
generally used to "designate both things
which are permanent, fixed, and
immovable, as lands, and rights arising
out of. or connected with, lands: and
includes land and whatever is affixed
thereto, and rights arising out of, or
annexed to or exercisable within or
about, the land (73 C.J.S. Property
section 16,1985). The Federal
Acquisition Regulation, developed in
accordance with the requirements of the
Office of Federal Procurement Policy
Act of 1974. as amended by Pub. L. 96-
83. defines real property as "land and
rights in land, ground improvements.
utility distnbution systems and
buildings and other structures. It does
not include foundations and other work
necessary for installing special tooling.
special test equipment, or plant
equipment."
C. Proposed Exclusion for Residential
Property
Because section 120(h) states that its
requirements apply to any real property
"owned" by the United States, the ,-
requirements of this section appear to
extend to property that federal agencies
own because they lent funds or
guaranteed certain loans, and then
acquired the property after default •
through foreclosure. Agencies which
may take title to real property through
foreclosure include, among others, the
Small Business Administration (SBA),
the Economic Development
Administration (EDA), the Farmers
Home Administration (FmHA), the
Veterans Administration (VA). and the
Federal Housing Administration (FHA).
While there is a paucity eC legislative.
history on section 12Q(h), EPA belieye?
that it is unlikely thaj Gongress. intended
the notice and covenant requirements of
this section apply to properties;obtained
by the United States through foreclosure
and held in ajCustodiaLmanneijAUJtil.,,,_,,
sale. Nevertheless, EPA believe's"that
the statute and the requirement^ 'n '•
proposed today should apply'to' some of
those properties. For example. EPA
believes that it:is appropriate tif&pply'
section ]2Q(h) to agencies, such1 is the
FmHA, when it acquires ,farnV.prppVrty •
on which pesticides or other chemicals '
may have .been disposed, or the SBA, -
EDA. or any other agency when it takes
title to a commercial or industrial ••"•
interest wifh'previpus hazardous '
substance activity. Because EPA
believes that the. types'of properties
described above "have.the-poljyitiai to
present a threat to human health and the
environment, the'Agency also believes
that compliance with the proposed "" -
regulations is both prudent and
appropriate. ...<•>
However, the FmHA, V/V. ajnigLFHA"
acquire through foreclosure and ,,, .'<
subsequently sell or transfer over
125.000 pieces of property p^FyteaT that
are exclusively residential. The EPA
expects that most small, residential
properties would not be the sfte of arn
significant hazardous substances
activity, and that any" protection that
may be afforded human'health' arid th •
environment by'application oHKe ,
statute to such properties would be
mmimal^Additibnally. the Agency
believes that the record-checking and
notice ,req\iiremen,(s for the'volume of
properties' transferred"by fhese,agencies
would be unnecessarily burdensome. .
and that',, in'any case, the^atute was
probably not'intended ib cover'these
types of properties.
Based on these considerations. EPA
today is proposing to exclude from the
notice requirements specified in section
120,(hJ]2^certain,smaH', residential,..
properties Jhsjt are acquired* and sold by
agencies such'as trip VA. FHA. and the
FmHA. . - • -
,,EPA,.has-examined a provision in a,
Commonwealth of Massachusetts _
proposed Senate .bill (no. 2054) that
excluded residential property Trom
hazardous.substance disclosure and
liability requirements of_}he! ,'
Massachusetts Superfunq1 law. As in. the
Massachusetts till EPA today proposes
to exclude from the, section 12Q[h)(2)
notice, requirement those properties that
are owned by the United States as a
result of foreclosure, and that are one- to
{pur-family residences thlat are used,.tp.,
provide ne\ mqrefthan four, dwelling ,",,
units, i
buildings or improvements incidqiga^jte s
such dwellings. EPA believes that using
this definition for the proposeds^
exclusion for residential property _js
appropriate, because it is coWisteVit
with theiax;t.
Housing,agd
considers one-to-four familj'ruijjt.J, ,
dwellings as single family residences for'
the purposes of mwtgafe irisur^c'e'*22^
under the National Housing Act
While not
aspeqt
requirements,
exclusion, from
of 120(h)(l) would e$ten4,an]exclu.s'o£i, .,
to the covenanJ*.requJFeddvld,e5,i
120(h)(3).
The EPA teqitests*coBBnehL3a3L ,
whether it istapptopviateibirakdude .
certain federatty-5owried, residential
properties from tHB^recfui#ententB(df
section 120(h). feiKfttrso^whether the
Agency's-proposed 'approach^
reasonable: EPA kl86'PSfu63ts comments
that any extlufiidtfi fro'{i?lth8rt; "'-'
requiremenls of sect
to the requiremehts'
D. Requirement to Search Agency^Etles ,
As stated above, section, 12d/h)(i)'
provides tHa'\ any cpntract;to^|jl o^
transfer prop*r,ty P,w5e? J?y^| fyffi
States shall give npdce.pf tyeJyiKafid ,
quantify oj'any ba?ardous,siii)s}9Jice's, '
that have beefl stored for.o'jQe.y^arjOr
more. known)tp."jhave been, r^easep^jor
disposed of. and the time that such .
storage, release.,9tdi^posal|cipk.placej. .
"to,the. extetit Aat^uffh infcgn^tiprf.is .
available on the basis of a complete,
searqh pf asencjcf.les^lPA tfyfe._ .
proposes thaUfor/(the purppse.s.pftfijs
rule, a "complete search -of agency files ,
shall consist of a thorough ^©view,by the
transferring,agency of-a,py and .all file?
and rec w^s-.Oncludjn^aKhjfresj^d *gj
the agency. -a nd,.ifapp,ljcaibl^.therpatgn^
agency, that relate, to
use(s) o&the reaj
sold or transfemed.The ..,
agency 'shall make BJ diHgent effort tP- ,
examine all relevantiQhia byqsBerchjngl
the areas where files retedng-tcrthe use-
and>history of th&proper^ toe-normaUji
kept, with particuIacemphaBi9'upoB •
rec6rds he Id' Or obtaihaWwwtthout ;
undue burden thfatSfelate-lo (ha? -
environmental compliance obligation^ of
the "(Winer oftKe l«&hy>%3 tfsHtrfftgtd^
or on behalf of the selling1, or tramsferrinv
agency.
prop'osed definition',
-------
_Fed«rrf:B«gtoter /
/Wednestfay. January 13/1968 f Proposed Rute»
Istlinff 120MM ntfer»-tp'tfa«»tDregfc,
release, and* diipnrat of "haonkMsr
substances/* Secuo»rim(tHof the. Act •
define** Ml of "hazardws* sobstanees"
by refewasate substance* designated
by EPA- uadec other environmental - .
statutes. EPA'*, list currently contains
717 gubatancea. The Agency may
designate additional substances as''~
hazardous under section 1092 of •• "
CfiKULA.
1. Paftiifimi ear). EPA believes that
requiring federal agencies disposing of
real property to report on very small
quantities of hazardous substance* thai
have been stored on the property would
be burdensome that probably would not
contribute, significantly'to the protection
of human rleallfrano* the environment.
Additionally: ff>e Agency believes that
thestoWg^ of hazardous substances is
not'tiintaTridurif td-rtiefr release and/or
disp'ds^f ttid. in turn, may present less:
of e«-e^ivftpnftental threat. EPA '
believtfs-'trnitthfspdsitioif is consistent
with. a'ndlbgicaRy derives front,'the
statutoiyfangtiBgefouttd hi section
3081fdX6) of thb Hiesouree- ConservaUoh'
and Recovery A'ct'fR£ftA). Section
WOl(dMB) of RCRA outlines the stok-oge.'
reatrnfint/ahd Disposal requSremenTs for
generate^ bt'siHalPquantitiiM of ' ""
an
hazardous! waste: mat is. thos* entities
that generate between 100 and 1000
kilograms (kg) per month of hazardous
waste-By statute.smauquantity - •
" generators may store 6000 kilograms of
hazardous wastejm-site for up to 180
days (or 270 days if the generator must
ship or haul suchTwastes over 209 Biles)
without sabmtan^an application for.*
punui bo become amntemn- storage
facility. Since these tbnits on
statutory,, jt appears; that, Congress OKI
not consadfT.the storage of hazudoas
wastes (aU.of whim are intruded in
CERCLA's defhntipttjC^bazajdbs}*.
- substances) ig. be as significant •
, problem as the disposal and/or rates**
of those same wastes. ,
'However, the: Agency believes that
: establishing, eouftkiiogranis as-the level
'below, which the section 120(1 "
)airBinent_for, tne storage
inapprqp^l'e. Fir^lfeapowied-RCRA.^
. storage period
wastes ^ six
6000 kg oi hazardous
than the '
one-year pen'od mandated by sectipn
120(h). Additionally. 6000 kg ia
approximately six tons (or aroimd'mnty.
55-gallon barrels), which is a snbstannal
amount. There/ere. EPA believes that a ,
6000 kg cutoff would be inconsistent .
with the intent of section 120(h)..' '
Under RCRA. generators of no more -
than 10O kilograms (about 22O po'nnds or
25 gallons) of hazardous waste in any
. calendar month are cbnkidered'
conditionally'eixempf small quantity' •>
generators.'Because such generators are
exempt from many of the RCRA •'
hazardous waste 'requirements. EPA-'
considered us'ing-lOO kilograms as the'
1 cutoff for reporting the storage (for one
year or more) of hazardous substances
under section 120(h). However, since
generators 'of 100 kilograms or less per
month of hazardous waste are allowed
to store up to 1000 kilograms on site.
EPA believes that 1000 kilograms would
be a more appropriate trigger level for
the section 120(h) notice requirement for
the storage of hazardous substances;
Therefore. EPA today proposes that
the notice requirement for reporting the
storage of hazardous substances under
section 120(h) apply only to those
1 hazardous substances that have been
stored' for one year-ox more at quantities
of greater than or equal to 1000 ' -
kilograms-The exception to this would
be for the storage of those substances
that are considered acutely Hazardous
wastes under RCRA (40 CFR 26L30).
The storage reporling'requirement for
acutely hazardous wastes under 120(h)
would be one kilogram.-
The'Agency-requests comment on-lhe-
proposed'tian'nitkMFof storageton /-"
whether the concept of a qomtmttHre
trigger for the storage notice
11 requirement is appropriate, and on the
• proposed 1000-kilogram storage trigger.
3. Definition of "Release"
The term "release" is defined under
section 101(22) of CERCLA to mean any
spilKng; leaking, pumping, pouring.
emitting', emptying, discharging,
injecting, escaping, leaching, dumping,
or disposing into the environment
(including the abandonment or
discarding of barrels, containers, and
other closed receptacles containing any
. hazardous substances or pollutant or
contaminant). The definition also
excludes certain categories of releases
from the requirements of CERCLA (see
CERCLA section 101(22)].
4. Definition of "Disposal"
The'term "disposal" is not defined
under CERCLA. Therefore. EPA
proposes- to use- the definition of the
term in RCRA. again by substituting the
word "substances" for the word
"wastes." Thus, the term "disposal." lot
the purposes of implementing 120(h), is*
proposed to mean the discharge.
deposit, injection, dumping, spilling.
leaking, or placing of any hazacdous
substance into or on any land os water
• so that such hazardous substance or any
constituent thereof may enter the
environment or be emitted into the air or
discharged into any waters, including
groundwater. The Agency requests
comment on this proposed definition of
the term "disposal."
G. Form and Manner of Notice
Section 120(h)(2) requires EPA to
promulgate regulations specifying the
form and manner of the notice of
hazardous substance activity that is to
be included in the contract of sale or
transfer of real property owned by the
United States. EPA is proposing one
approach and describing an alternative
approach to the form and manner of the
notice required by section 120(h). Both
approaches are explained below.
The proposed approach would require
that the notice for reporting hazardous
substance activity under CERCLA
section 120(h) contain information
similar to that required for reporting the
release of hazardous substances under
CERCLA section 102 and by 4O CFR
302.4. While the notice would not
necessarily have to take the form of the
sample provided, the notice would at a
minimum, be required to list the name of
the hazardous substance: the Chemical
Abtracts Services Registry Number
(CASRN)wherp applicable: the
regulatory synonym (where applicable)
-------
Federal Register / Vtfl "53,. Ncy^a ^WeAieajiay,
as found in 40 GFR302.4; the RCRA - '•? ,
hazardous waste number, (where •
applicable) as found at 40 CFR 26a30.
and the quantity, if greater than 1.000
kilograms (or one kilogram for acutely
hazardous wastes), of each hazardous
substance stored for one year or more,
or released or disposed of on the ••>
property, and dates of such-storage, - '
release, or disposal. The notice would
be required to carry the following :
statement, prominently displayed: "The
information contained in this notice is1 'r
requiredunder the authority of '
regulations promulgated by the
Environmental Protection Agency under;'
section 120(h) of the Comprehensive ~ ] '
Environmental Response. J
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA or "Superfund")."
Under the alternative approach that
EPA is considering, agencies would use „
GSA form SF 118b to comply with
section 120(h)(l). Column i on GSA form ,
HBb requires "a description of any ,
reservations or exceptions running with
the land or imposed by the holding
agency," such as outstanding mineral
rights, easements, rights-of-way.
railroads, and contamination. If GSA
form 118b is used, EPA would require
that the disposing agency provide (in an
addendum to 118b(i). if necessary), at a
minimum, the same information required
in the proposed approach described
above. The notice would also contain
the statement described above
indicating that the notice and the
information contained in it was
generated in response to requirements
promulgated under section 120(h) of
CERCLA. The Agency requests
comments on both approaches to the
form of the notice required by section
120(h), and also requests submission of
any appropriate alternative approaches.
during the comment period.
III. Regulatory Analysis
A. Regulatory Impact Analyses
Executive Order 12291 requires EPA
to assess the effect of contemplated .
Agency actions during the development
of regulations. Such an assessment
consists of a quantification of the
potential benefits and costs of the rule. . ,
as well as a description of any
beneficial or adverse effects that cannot •
be quantified in monetary terms. In ,
addition. Executive Order 12291 requires
that regulatory agencies prepare an .-
analysis of the regulatory impact of
major rules. Major rules are defined as
those likely to result in:
1. An annual cost to economy ofrSlOO.
million or more; or ~ .. :•
2. A-major uaea«e wcoeU oc prigei,
for consumers or individual industries*
or --••-....
: 3. SignififiHnradverteTBf fects on ' d
competitfonrtfrnploymein; investment,
innovation, o? international trade. '
Because this proposed' rule affects *
'only agencies, 'd£partnicints.i>r ' •
instrumentalities of'ihe-UnitedStates;
no formal Regulatory frffpacrArialysis
was conducted HoweVer7 EPA has-
attempted i6 a
costs 01 the BWJpo
several 6f the 'po8sibJe
alternative's. As*^rbpb'seH.-the" '• * '*-
regulation* WbuM cBaf the^goVemmflMf- '
approxmialely #Oo.ttt>lH**ear/If tfie *
proposed notice exclusion" *» rOfdehlial
properties is not included, thfe'-cost-ptef '
year to the gpVfemmenUr approximately
$2.ooo.Od6Vfen Increase of approxtmatet?
1 ' "'"
,-,. .- ,
instrumentalities qf-theUnitedStates..
no regulatory flexibility analysis is,, ,,
requireATherefore, EPA certifies that
the rule will not have significant ,
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
C. Paperwork 'Reductibn Act :'
i — - - - - ,r/
This proposed nitaonly^affects- -
entities of ibe Federal government.
Therefore, tfaeirepbrtingflad notification
requirements contained in^this rule are -
not subject to approval by-the Office of
Management arid Budget (OMB) under .
provisions of theJPaperwork Reduction.
Act-otl980.44 U.I '
IV. References '
*»>' ». * IL. ._ _ ._ - ,-
(1) U.S.EPA. "Babkferound Document for
the Federal ReatrRrapertyTransfer -•
Regulatitififf at Authorized by section 120(h)
of the Comprehensive Environmental..
Respdnse,
•373.4,
AuAottt^ Stfcnajjhjjrf-rt*-' vii'.A ,?
Comprehensive Environ«ient'aHta»part»«na)
amended. 42 U^.C. 9601 ef ^eg. .
5373.1 General requirement, r1
Effective October 17^ 198d.' whehewr ",
- any department, agency, or
3 instrumentality of the Uni1§&6tIte*8TC»c? "
enters into any.coQfcafityfpr tegfatapj^
' other I
i owne
which any haaardfluapubsfaneftw^, nt
. stored foe. one yeex or«n>w8f.Jg»qfj{B1JWn i;
have been reteM#i>
-------
85* _ Fedaal Reyator / Vol 53. Nag /Wednesday. January 13. 1968:/ Proposed Ru>»
more oT hazardous svbotaace* appBe*
only when hazardous substances are or
have been stored in quantities greater
than or equal to lOOOkitograois. except
that hazardous substances that are also-
listed under 40 CFR 281-30 as acutely
hazardous wastes, and that are stored
for one year or more, are subject to the
notice requirement when stored in
quantities greater than oreqtxat to one
kilogram. '
$37X3 Contort of notfc*..
The nc4ior required by 40 CFR 373.1
must coatau the fallowing infcnnati0a:
(a) The name-of tfafchazanious. .
substance: the Chemical Abstracts
; Services RegUtry Nsxaber fCASRN)
where applicable: the regulatory
synonym fortheJnzaniom aubstante.
as listed i*4»eF* 30K4t where
applicable^ the-RCRA hazjBrdon* waste-
number specified »4O GPR 201.3ft
where applicable: the quantity in.
kilograms and pounds of the hazardous
substance that has been stored lot one
year or more, or released or disposed of
• on*the property, and the date(s]rthat
such storage, release, or disposal took
place.
(b)The following statement
prommentiy displayed: "The
information contained in this notice is
required under the authority of
regulations promulated under section
120(h) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response. Liability, and
Compensation Act (CERCLA or
"Superfuad").
537*4
For the purposes of implementing this
regulation, the following definitions
apply:
(a) "Department, agency, or
Instrumentality- mean* those entities- or
organization* created or chartered by
the legislative, executive or fvdiciai
branches of the Federal government.
including those-corporations that are
chartered by the Federal government
(b) "Hazardous- substances'* means'
that group otsubstance* defined at
hazardous under CERCLA section
101(14). and that appear at 40 CFR 3O2A
(c) "Storage" means the holding of
hazardous-substances fora temporary
period at the end of which the
hazardous substance is either used
neutralized, disposed of, or stored
elsewhere.
(d) "Release1' is defined a* specified
by CERCLA section 101(22).
(e) "Disposal" means the discharge.
deposit, injection, dumping, spilling.
leaking or placing of any hazardous
substance into or on any land or water
so that such hazardous substance or any
constituent thereof may enter the
environment or be emitted into the air or
discharged into any waters, including
ground water.
ff) "Complete search of agency files'*
means a thorough review by the
transferring agency of any and all Tiles
and records, including archives, held by
the agency and parent agency relating to
the present and past useUJ-of the real
property being sold or transferred The
transferring agency must search the
areas where fifes relating to the history
and use of the property are normally
kept, with particular emphasis' npon-
records held or obtainable w itliuut
undue burden that relate to the
environmental compliance obugatians-of
the owner of the reakty as discharged by
or on behalf of the agency.
[FR Doc. 88-601 Filed 1-12-Uc 8:45 anf *
------- |