o. f o UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 SEPTEMBER 21, 1984 MEMORANDUM office of SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE SUBJECT: RCRA/Superfund Hotline Monthly Status Report -- August 1984 FROM: Carolyn Barley, Project Officer ( /- ^ Office of Solid Waste (382-5235) /T^ =i Barbara Hostage, Project Officer Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (382-2186) TO: Addressees I. ACTIVITIES The Hotline responded to 3,506 questions and requests for documents in August. II. SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS AND RESOLVED ISSUES A. RCRA 1. A facility generates a baghouse dust from remelting primary produced steel. The remelting occurs in electric furnaces. The baghouse dust contains fluoride neutralized by calcium carbonate and the heavy metals: lead and selenium. The baghouse dust has been analyzed for the heavy metals (50.66ppm lead and 18 ppm selenium). The analytical methods used were 8.56 and 8.59, respectively, in SW-846 (not the EP toxicity test). Assuming that the baghouse dust will fail the EP toxicity test, should the waste be K061 (even though it is not primary smelting) or should it be D008 and D010? The waste generated from this process is K061. Although steel is being remelted, this process is considered primary production for the purposes of RCRA. Source: Matt Straus Research: Gordon Davidson 2. Is the disposal of off-specification, undetonated explosives used in oil exploration governed by the exclusion in Part 261.4(b)(5)? The explosives are not included in the exemption because they are not uniquely associated with exploration. There- fore, disposal of these explosives is a regulated activity. Source: Penny Hansen Research: Tom Gainer ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline August 1984 Report Page 2 3. A company recycles methyl chloroform (F002) through a distillation process. Often after distillation, the recovered methyl chloroform does not meet market specifications and must be disposed. Is this waste listed as F002 or U226? Off-specification solvents produced from the distillation of listed solvent hazardous waste would be treated as an off-specifiction commercial chemical product if discarded according to 261.33 of Title 40 and considered U226 for regulatory purposes. Source: Penny Hansen Research: Tom Gainer 4. EP Toxic leachate from a sanitary landfill (non-hazardous) is collected and pumped back into the landfill. Is the landfill a RCRA TSD facility? Once the leachate is collected, its subsequent management is regulated by the RCRA TSDF requirements. Source: Mark Greenwood Research: Tom Gainer 5. An aqueous waste containing small amounts of an organic compound flashes in a Pensky-Martens Closed Cup Tester. Is this waste RCRA ignitable or is it excluded from that definition because it "contains less than 24% alcohol?" The waste has no alcohol in it. If an aqueous waste contains no alcohol, it is not excluded from the definition of ignitable as 1s wine or latex paint. Hence, if the flashpoint is less than 140°F, the aqueous waste is deemed ignitable. EPA is working on developing a test for such wastes to determine if they would sustain coirbustion or only flash in the Closed Cup Tester. Source: Florence Richardson Research: Denise Wright 6. Does the professional engineer (P.E.) who certifies information for a permit application have to be licensed in the same state where the facility is located? No; the RCRA regulations do not indicate so, and it would seem excessive for EPA to require that. Source: Terry Grogan Research: Denise Wright 7. A new landfill will have a separate owner and operator. While both parties will sign the permit, a) is one party chosen as the "permittee"? ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline August 1984 Report Page 3 b) which party is liable i) during the operating life? ii) during closure/post-closure? a) Both the owner and operator are the "permittees" on the permit; however, it is common for the operator to assume responsibility for meeting permit conditions. b)i) Both the owner and operator are liable during the facility's operating life. ii) Both the owner and operator are liable during closure/ post-closure of the facility, unless the closure/post-closure plans specify that the owner of the facility is becoming the operator as well as the owner. This action would be accompanied by a permit modification and relieve the original operator from liability (under RCRA) during the closure/postclosure period. Source: Chaz Miller Research: Tom Gainer 8. An interim status facility undergoes a transfer of stock while the name of the owner/operator remains the same and the facility operations do not change. Does this change require a modified Part A permit application under §270.72(a)? If stock is transferred from an interim status facility, the transaction must be scrutinized by the Agency. In situations where a majority of the company's stock is transferred to another company, operational control and the financial status of the company may change. In these situations, it is appropriate to require a modified Part A. If, however, only a minority interest is transferred, operational control and financial status may not change. In these cases a modified Part A is not necessary (assuming no name change). Source: Susan Schmedes Research: Tom Gainer II. B. CERCLA 1. After a notice letter is sent to a responsible party in a CERCLA case, what correspondence follows if there is no response? There is no uniform procedure of correspondence in dealing with a responsible party. Typically a notice letter is sent to the party when EPA has determined that a 104 ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline August 1984 Report Page 4 response action is necessary. EPA may send more than one notice letter if there is no response to the initial letter. In the event of no response or successful negotiation, EPA may issue a 106 administrative order to clean up the site, sue the party for clean up, or elect to clean up the site itself and recover costs later. The decision rests on negotiations at the time and urgency of removal or response action. If the notice letter includes a request for information which is ignored, this can be followed with a RCRA 3008 order to obtain the information. Source: Barbara Elkus Research: Denise Wright 2. What is a Record of Decision (ROD) under CERCLA? After the remedial investigation/feasibility study is completed at a National Priorities List site, a remedy is chosen. A Record of Decision (ROD) is the document that describes the selected remedy and the basis for selecting the remedy. Action memos or Records of Decision for Initial Remedial Measures (IRMs) are approved by the Regional Administrators. All remedial actions are approved by the Assistant Administrator (AA) for OSWER. Source: Bill Hanson Research: Tom Gai ner 3. Is a public hearing required after a Superfund site Feasibility Study is completed? The Superfund Community Relations Policy Memo (Lee Thomas, May 9, 1983) specifies that a three week comment period follow the completion of a Feasability Study. A public meeting is generally provided by the Regions. Source: Daphne Gernnill Research: Tom Gai ner 4. What is the effective date for recovering state expenditures for Superfund-type cleanup activities before CERCLA was enacted? Under Section 104(c)(3) of CERCLA, States shall be granted credit against the share of costs for which it is responsi- ble for any documented funds expended or obligated by the State between January 1, 1978, and December 11, 1980. Source: Sam Gutter Research: Tom Gainer ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline August 1984 Report Page 5 ' III. ANALYSES OF QUESTIONS The Hotline responded to 3,506 questions and requests for documents in August. Of the questions asked, the percentage of callers was: Generators 25.5% State Agencies 7.5% Transporters 2.7% Consultants 28.2% TSDF's 12.5% Press 0.7% EPA HQ's 1.6% Trade Associations 1.1% EPA Regions 6.7% Citizens 5.9% Federal Agencies 3.0% Others 4.2% More calls were received from Regions 3 than in any other Region. Breakdown by Region: 1 7.3% 3 20.6% 5 19.4% 7 3.8% 9 9.4% 2 14.1% 4 11.6% 6 7.1% 8 3.9% 10 2.7% Canada <1% RCRA TSDF General Information 298 A-Scope/Applicabi 1 ity 93 (Notification (3010) 37 B-General Facility Standards 20 Definitions (260.10T~ 50 C-Preparedness -revention 7 Petitions/Delisting (260.22) 28 D-Contingency Plans 11 Definitions (261.2 & 3) 94 E-Manifest/Recordkeeping/Reporting 7_ Exclusions (261.4) 46 F-Groundwater Monitori ng 39 Small Quantity Generator (261 .5) 72 G-Closure/Post-Closure 6b Recycle/Reclaim (261.6) 95 H-Financial Requirements 24 Container Residues (261 .7) 27 I-Containers 36 Waste ID (261 C&D) 265 J-Tanks 47_ 262 Generator K-Surface Impoundments 34 Manifest Info 149 L-Waste Piles 13 Pre-transport 22 M-Land Treatment 3_ Accumulation 94 N-La ndf ills 20 Recordkeeping & Reporting 34 O-Incinerators 19 International Shipments 10 P-Thermal Treatment 4_ 263 Transporter 60 Q-Chemical, Physical, Biological Treat. 5 270 B - Permit Application 78 R-Underground Injection 6_ D - Changes to Permits 21 X-Misc. Facility 0_ F - Special Permits 4 Y-Experimental 0_ G - Interim Status 60 266/267 1__ 271 State Programs 111 124 Decision Making 5 CERCLA General 165 Hazardous Substances/RQ 109 General Hazardous Site/NPL/104 98_ Liability/Enforcement 39 NCP 15_ Other/Referral; 300 Taxes/IRS 7_ Document Request? 352 ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline August 1984 Report Page 6 IV. PUBLICATIONS A. RCRA 1. "Ground-Water Protection Strategy", August 1984, presents EPA's policies for protecting groundwater which impact on all agency programs. Copies are available from the Office of Ground-Water Protection at 382-7077. 2. "National Permits Strategy," August 1984, EPA 530/SW-84-007, is available from the RCRA docket. B. CERCLA 1. Copies of the "CERCLA Compliance/Enforcement Policy Compendium," February, 1984, are not readily available due to the size of this document. However, a copy of the table of contents may be obtained from John Cross at 382-4829 so that a particular memo may be selected and then requested under the Freedom of Information Act. V. FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES August 3, 1984 49 FR 31094 August 6, 1984 49 FR 31301 August 7, 1984 49 FR 31417 August 16, 1984 49 FR 32766 August 20, 1984 49 FR 33018 Correction to the proposed rule regarding class permits for above- ground storage of hazardous waste in containers and tanks at the generator site (49 FR 29524). EPA tentatively intends to grant final authorization to Colorado to operate its hazardous waste program in lieu of the federal program provided all EPA concerns are addressed by the State. EPA grants Georgia final authorization to operate its own program in lieu of the federal proyram, effective August 21, 1984. The EPA Notice lists petitions received by EPA between the previous listing of February 28, 1983 (48 FR 8278) and July 1, 1984. The petition covers requests for general changes to the regulations and specific requests to exclude on a site-specific basis wastes from regulation as hazardous. EPA grants a further extension to allow Arizona, California, Nevada, and the Territory of Guam to submit their com- plete applications for Phase II interim authorization by January 26, 1985. ------- RCRA/Superfund Hotline August 1984 Report Page 7 ADDRESSEES John Skinner, WH-562 Mike Cook, WH-562 Eileen Claussen, WH-562 Robert Knox, WH-562 Carl Reeverts, WH-562 Cora Beebe, WH-562A Jack McGraw, WH-562A John Lehman, WH-565 Fred Lindsey, WH-565 Bruce Weddle, WH-563 CI em Rastatter, WH-563 Elizabeth Cotsworth, WH-563 Penny Hansen, WH-565 Alan Corson, WH-565 Ken Shuster, WH-565 Dale Ruhter, WH-565 William Sanjour, WH-563 Truett DeGeare, WH-563 Steve Levy, WH-563 Peter Guerrero, WH-563 John Thompson, WH-563 Mike Shannon, WH-563 Susan Mann, WH-563 George Garland, WH-562 William Hedeman, WH-548 Elaine Stanley, WH-548 James Makris, WH-548A Robert Landers, WH-548A Jim Jowett, WH-548B Henry Van Cleave, DOD/DLA Russ Wyer, WH-548E Bi 11 Hanson, WH-548E Mary Ann Froehlich, WH-548D Carol Lawson, A-107 Marc Jones, PM-220 John Palmisano, PM-223 Sam Napolitano, PM-220 Gene Lucero, WH-527 Frank Biras, WH-527 Lee Herwig, A-104 Tony Montrone, WH-527 Pete Rosenberg, WH-527 Mike Kosakowski, WH-527 Barbara Elkus, WH-527 Hotline Staff Alvin K. Joe, Jr., Geo/Resource Sue Moreland (ASTSWMO) Diane McCreary, Region III Library Joyce Baker, Region III Library Li sa Friedman, LE-132S Steve Dorrler, EPA - Edison, NJ Thad Juszczak, WH-562A John Gilbert, EPA - Cincinnati, OH Jack Stan:on, WH-548B John Riley, WH-548B Mike Flaherty, WH-548B Jack Kooyoomjian, WH-548B Rick Horner, WH-548B John Bosky, EPA - Kansas City, KS Hazardous Waste Division Directors, Regions I-X Hazardous Waste Management Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X ------- |