UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: RCRA/Superfund Hotline Monthly Status Report — January 1985
FROM: Carolyn Barley, Project Officer
Office of Solid Waste (382-2217)
Barbara Hostage, Project Officer
Office of Emergency and Remedial
Resp			
TO:
Addressees
I.	ACTIVITIES
The Hotline reponded to 3,919 questions and requests for documents in January.
Callers have been particularly interested in the new definition of solid waste
and how it affects hazardous waste recycling. The final solid waste definition
and new recycling standards were promulgated on January 4, 1985 (50 FR 614).
Callers are also extremely interested in the proposed Part 266 standards for
hazardous waste fuels and used oil fuels burned for energy recovery in boilers
and industrial furnaces (50 FT* 1684, January 11, 1985). These standards would
prohibit non-industrial boilers from burning hazardous waste and off-specifi-
cation used oil. Also proposed are administrative controls on persons who
market or burn hazardous waste and used oil for energy recovery, as well as
storage standards for processed or blended hazardous waste fuels.
II.	SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS AND RESOLVED ISSUES
1. The New York State Health Department deemed a house unfit for habitation
due to excessive chlordane levels in the soil around the house. The soil
contaminated with chlordane was removed and placed in 55-gallon drums.
The removal resulted in 45 drums of contaminated soil with an average
concentration of 50 ppm. Is this contaminated soil a RCRA hazardous
waste?
A. RCRA

-------
-2-
The contaminated soil is not a RCRA listed hazardous waste. Chlordane
could only be considered a RCRA hazardous waste if it was discarded
prior to use or was a container or spill residue. If chlordane met
any one of these criteria, it would be a listed hazardous waste (U036),
as listed and described in 40 CFR §261.33. In this situation, however,
none of these criteria were met because chlordane was applied as a
ccrmercial chemical product. The generator must still determine if
the contaminated soil exhibits any of the four RCRA characteristics
(EP toxic, ignitable, corrosive, reactive). If the soil does not
exhibit a characteristic, then it is neither a listed nor a charac-
teristic hazardous waste. Although the contaminated soil is not a
RCRA hazardous waste (assuming it does not meet a characteristic),
the generator must be cognizant of potential liability under CERCLA
if the waste is not managed properly.
Source: Alan Corson (202) 382-4770
2.	Drainage frcm an active coal mine is collected in a large pond to be
treated. The drainage is quite acidic due to the high concentration of
iron sulfides (pyrite) in the coal. Both bacterial action and rain
oxidize the pyrite material to form sulfuric acid. The coal mine owner
has developed a sodium hydroxide (caustic) feeder system to neutralize
the acid mine drainage prior to discharge. At one point, however, the
feeder system added too much caustic to the pond. This caused a caustic
sludge layer to form on the bottom of the pond. The pH of the sludge
is generally above 12.5. The facility wants to remove the sludge and
dispose of it. Would such removal be considered generation of a RCRA
hazardous waste?
The sludge meets the characteristic of corrosivity (D002) due to its
pH being above 12.5 (§261.22) and its aqueous, semi-sludge state.
A corrosive solid is not a hazardous waste unless it exhibits another
characteristic or contains a listed waste (see 45 FR 33109, May 19,
1980). Section 261.4(b)(7) excludes wastes from the "... extraction,
beneficiation and processing of ores and minerals (including coal)..."
Pollution control residues from the treatment of mining wastes are
also exempted. Since the caustic sludge is a pollution control
residue from the treatment of a mining waste, its generation and
management is exempt frcm RCRA. Even though the waste is excluded
fran regulation, however, it should still be managed properly.
Source: Meg Silver (202) 382-7709
3.	A facility has a surface impoundment which has not been used to store
hazardous waste since July 1983. The facility is still operating under
interim status as a generator of hazardous waste. Although the surface
impoundment has not been closed in accordance with interim status require-
ments, the owner/operator of the facility canceled the liability insurance
for the surface impoundment. Is the facility in compliance with Part 265
Subpart H of RCRA?

-------
-3-
The facility is not in compliance with RCRA. The facility should
have sudden and nonsudden liability insurance for the surface
impoundment until certification of closure is received either by
the Regional Administrator or State Director, depending on which
has program authorization (§265.147(e)). Certification of closure
is addressed more fully in $265,115.
Source: Carole Ansheles (202) 382-4761
4.	Section 213 of the RCRA amendments requires that owners/operators of land
disposal facilities operating under interim status submit Part B permit
applications certify compliance with applicable groundwater monitoring
and financial responsibility requirements by November 8, 1985. If these
requirements are not met, interim status is terminated. Would an owner/
operator with a treatment surface impoundment operating under interim
status fall under the requirements of Section 213 and, therefore be re-
quired required to submit a Part B and an appropriate certification by
November 8, 1985?
Yes; the owner/operator of a treatment surface impoundment must
comply with the requirements of Section 213. The definition of
land disposal units includes all land based hazardous waste manage-
ment units. Therefore, owner/operators of facilities with landfill^,
surface impoundments, waste piles, and land treatment units must
comply with Section 213.
Source: Bryan Wilson (202) 382-4534
5.	An owner/operator of a hazardous waste management facility operating under
interim status is considering expanding the facility to incorporate new
technologies. Section 270.72(e) states that changes to such a facility
cannot occur if the changes amount to reconstruction of the facility.
Section 270.72(e) further states that "Reconstruction occurs when the
capital investment in the changes to the facility exceeds fifty percent
of the capital cost of a comparable entirely new hazardous waste management
facility." Does this fifty percent apply to each expansion at the facility
or to total expansion costs over the interim status period?
The fifty percent of capital cost pertains to the total expansion
costs over the interim status period, not to each individual expansion.
Expansion costs would include the cost of the land and construction,
but not design and engineering costs. Further information on this
topic is contained in RIL #98 (Regulatory Interpretive Letter)
available through the Hotline.
Source: Debbie Wblpe (202) 382-4754
B. CERCIA
1. An owner/operator is considering cleaning up contaminated soil at her
facility. The earner/operator would like to use the same methods EPA
employs in its Superfund program. Specifically, the owner/operator is
interested in information regarding site control to limit access to
contaminated areas and reduce the potential of exposure. What basic
guidelines are followed at EPA cleanups?

-------
-4-
EPA follows procedures outlined in "Standard Operating Safety Guides
November 1984. This document is available from Ton Sell of EPA in
Cincinnati, Ohio, at (513) 684-7537. The section applicable to
controlled access to contaminated sites is Section 6, "Site Control-
Work Zones." Briefly, this section describes the establishment of
three work zones: Exclusion Zone; Contamination Reduction Zone; and
Support Zone. The Exclusion Zone contains the contaminated areas.
Access points in and out of this zone should be strictly controlled.
Also, persons entering this zone should have proper protection, (i.e.,
respiratory protection, protective clothing, hard hat, etc.).
Depending on the type of site, the Exclusion Zone may contain sub-
areas containing contaminants of differing types and risks. The
outermost part of the site is the Support Zone. Hie Support Zone is
considered the clean area where the command post, equipment storage,
and staging area are located. Connecting the Support Zone and Exclusion
Zone is the Contamination Reduction Zone. The Contamination Reduction
Zone is a transition area where workers are decontaminated and access
is controlled. For more information on work zones and other Superfund
cleanup guidelines, the abovementioned document should be consulted.
Source: Hans Crump (202) 382-2188
2.	EPA ranks uncontrolled hazardous waste sites to determine risk and possible
inclusion on the National Priorities List (NPL) by using the Hazard Ranking
System (HRS). Appendix A of The National Contingency Plan (47 re 31180,
July 16, 1982) contains a users* manual for the HRS. When applying the
HRS, may only CERCLA hazardous substances be used or may pollutants and
contaminants, as mentioned in CERCLA Section 104 (a)(1), also be used?
When evaluating sites using the HRS, EPA considers both hazardous
substances and pollutants or contaminants. A list of the CERCLA
hazardous substances may be found at 48 re 23552, May 25, 1983.
Source: Joe Gearo (202) 382-4485
3.	A RCRA permitted land disposal facility accepts many different kinds of
hazardous waste. Recent investigations reveal that there may be non-
permitted releases of hazardous waste and hazardous waste constituents
frcm the landfill. The cwner/operator is considering closing the facility
because it is leaking. If this facility became a Superfund site in the
future, would a generator who had placed hazardous waste there be liable
under Superfund for the cleanup?
Yes; the generator would share liability for such a Superfund cleanup.
Under CERCLA Section 107 (a)(3), a generator would be liable for
removal and remedial action costs as well as for damages to natural
resources. The generator would share liability with other generators,
transporters who selected the disposal site, and past and present
owners and operators of the RCRA disposal site.
Source: Gail Cooper (202) 382-7700

-------
-5-
III. PUBLICATIONS
RCRA
1.	"Test Method to determine Hydrogen Cyanide and Hydrogen Sulfide Released
fran Wastes (draft)." Available from Paul Friedman at (202) 382-4796.
2.	"Minimum Technology Guidance on Double Liner Systems for Landfills and
Surface Impoundments (draft)," December 1984. Available from the RCRA
docket. The Hotline will accept requests for this document.
3.	"Permit Guidance Manual on Hazardous Waste Land Treatment Demonstrations
(draft)," December 1984, EPA/530-SW-84-015 and "Permit Guidance Manual on
Unsaturated Zone Monitoring for Hazardous Waste Land Treatment Units
(draft)," December 1984, EPA/530-SW-84-016. The Hotline will accept
requests for these two publications.
CERCLA
1.	"Guidance Document for Feasibility Studies under CERCXA (Draft)," November
15, 1983, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, FS-GUID-D. $30.00
copying charges, available fran the CERCLA docket at (202) 382-3046.
2.	"Remedial Investigations Guidance Document (Draft)," August 6, 1984, Office
of Emergency and Remedial Response, RI-GUID-D. $36.80 copying charges,
available from the CERCLA docket at (202) 382-3046.
3.	"Standard Operating Safety Guides," November 1984. This document provides
guidance on the health, safety, site control, and decontamination aspects
of Superfund cleanups. Available frcm Torn Sell of EPA at (513) 684-7537.

-------
III. ANALYSES OF QUESTIONS
-6-
The Hotline responded to 3,919 questions and requests for documents in January. Of tht
questions asked, the percentage of callers was:
Generators	23.4%
Transporters	2.0%
TSDF' s	11.8%
EPA HQ's	2.3%
State Agencies	9.6%
Consultants	33.3%
Press	<1%
EPA Regions
4.1%
Federal Agencies 3.9%
Trade Associations 2.2%
Citizens	
Others
3.4%
4.0%
More calls were received fran Region 3 than from any other Region. Breakdown by Region:
1 5.2%	 3 27.0%	 5 18.0%	7	3.2%	9 8.1%
2 13.7% 4 9.7%
6 9.2% 8 4.1% 10 2.5%

Canada <1%



RCRA

TSDF

General Information
435
A-Scope/Applicability
50
Notification (3010)
22
^-General Facility Standards
25
Definitions (260.10)
46
C-Preparedness Prevention
3
Petitions/belisting (260.22)
69
D-Contingency Plans
|
Definitions (261.2 &.3)
161
E-Ma n i f es t/Recordkeep i nq/Report i nq

Exclusions (261.4)
39
F-Groundwater Monitoring
36
Stall Quantity Generator (261.5)
66
G-Closure/Pos t-Closure
35
Recycle/Reclaim (261.6)
140
H-Financial Requirements
46
Container Residues (261.7)
16
I-Containers
16
Waste ID (261 C&D)
266
J-Tanks
35
262 Generator

K-Surface Impoundments
49
Manifest Info
54
L-Waste Piles
3
Pre-transport
11
M-Land Treatment
30
Accumulation
49
N-Landfills
32
Recordkeeping & Reporting
18
O-Incinerators
21
International Shipments
2
P-Thermal Treatment
3
263 Transporter
33
Q-Chemical, Physical, Biological Treat.
0
270 B - Permit Application
71
R-Underqround Iniection
3
D - Chanqes to Permits
6
X-Miscellaneous Facility
0
F - Special Permits
2
Y-Experimental
0
G - Interim Status
32
266/267
65
271 State Programs
80


124 Decision Making
12
CERCLA General
132


Hazardous Substances/RQ
88
Liability/Enforcement
19
Hazardous SiteAlPL/104
74
Other/Referrals
319
NCP
92
Document Reguests
403
Taxes/IRS
5
RCRA Reauthorization
682



-------
-7-
V. FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES
January 3,1985 50 n* 273
January 3, 1985 50 FR 343
January 4, 1985 50 FR 614
January 7, 1985 50 FT* 775
January 10, 1985 50 FT* 1238
January 11, 1985 50 FR 1513
January 11, 1985 50 FR 1515
January 11, 1985 50 FR 1684
January 11, 1985 50 FR 1550
EPA plans to hold two public meetings in February
explaining recent changes in the delisting program
resulting frcm the RCRA amendments
EPA provides notice of proposed information
collection requests (ICRs) that have been forwarded
to the Office of Management and Budget for review.
Final rule amending the definition of solid
waste in 40 CFR 261.2. Hie rule clarifies the
extent of EPA's jurisdiction over hazardous
waste recycling activities and sets forth the
regulatory regime for recycling activities. The
rule amends 40 CFR Parts 260, 261, 264, 265, and
266.
EPA grants final authorization to Vermont for
the RCRA program, effective January 21, 1985.
EPA announces availability of two draft Permit
Guidance Manuals for public cannent. The manuals
are (1) Permit Guidance Manual on Hazardous Waste
Land Treatment Demonstrations [EPA/530-SW-84-015],
and (2) Permit Guidance Manual on Unsaturated
Zone Monitoring for Hazardous Waste Land Treatment
Units [EPV530-SW-84-016]. The manuals provide
guidance for ccnplying with 40 CFR 264, Subpart M
standards.
EPA grants final authorization to Arkansas for
the RCRA program, effective January 25, 1985.
EPA grants final authorization to New Mexico for
the RCRA program, effective January 25, 1985.
EPA proposes RCRA regulations for hazardous
wastes and used oil burned for energy recovery
in boilers and industrial furnaces. Hie proposal
contains substantive controls on burning and
administrative controls on marketing and burning
both hazardous wastes and off-specification used
oil. Garments will be accepted until March 12,
1985.
The Department of Interior (DOI) is drafting
natural resource damage assessment regulations
under the CERCLA act of 1980. The DOI requests
additional cements on the development of these
regulations.

-------
-8-
January 14,	1985	50 ra 1978
January 17,	1985 50 FT* 2550
January 22,	1985 50 FR 2820
January 22,	1985 50 FR 2821
January 22,	1985 50	FT* 2857
January 24,	1985	50	FR 3342
January 24,	1985	50	FT* 3343
January 24,	1985	50	FR 3344
January 24,	1985	50	FR 3345
January 24,	1985	50 FR 3347
Final rule listing as RCRA hazardous wastes
certain wastes containing particular chlorinated
dioxins, -dibenzofurans, and -phenols and specifying
management standards for these wastes. The rule
amends 40 CFR 261.31 and 261.33(f).
EPA grants final authorization to Kentucky for
the RCRA program, effective January 31, 1985.
EPA grants final authorization to Tennessee for
the RCRA program, effective February 5, 1985.
EPA extends Missouri's Phase I interim authorization
for the RCRA program until January 31, 1986, or
until the date the State receives final authori-
zation, whichever is earlier.
EPA announces the availability of videotapes for
purchase of the teleconference held December 11^
1984, discussing the 1984 amendments to RCRA.
EPA extends Iowa's Phase I interim authorization
for the RCRA program until January 31, 1986, or
until the date the State receives final authori-
zation, whichever is earlier.
EPA extends Kansas' Phase I interim authorization
for the RCRA program until January 31, 1986, or
until the date the State receives final authori-
zation, whichever is earlier.
EPA grants final authorization to Massachusetts
for the RCRA program, effective February 7, 1985.
EPA grants final authorization to Nebraska for
the RCRA program, effective February 7, 1985.
EPA extends interim authorization for the RCRA
programs in Pennsylvania and West Virginia until
January 31, 1986, or the date which these States
receive final authorization, whichever is earlier
In addition, the existing interim authorized
program in Maryland is extended until February
28, 1985, and in the District of Columbia until
March 31, 1985, or the date which these States
receive final authorization, whichever is earlier

-------
-9-
January 24,	1985	50	FR 3348
January 25,	1985	50	FR 3511
January 28,	1985	50	FR 3756
January 28,	1985	50	ER 3758
January 28, 1985 50 FR 3759
January 29, 1985 50 FR 3908
January 30, 1985 50 HI 4213
EPA grants final authorization to Louisiana for
the RCRA program, effective February 7, 1985.
EPA grants final authorization to Maryland for
the RCRA program, effective February 11, 1985.
EPA grants final authorization to Minnesota for
the RCRA prgram, effective February 11, 1985.
EPA extends Puerto Rico's Phase I interim authori-
zation for the RCRA program until January 31,
1986, or until the date Puerto Rico receives
final authorization, whichever is earlier.
EPA extends Rhode Island's Phase I and II A
interim authorization until January 31, 1986,
or until the date Rhode Island receives final
authorization, whichever is earlier.
EPA grants final authorization to Florida for
the RCRA program, effective February 12, 1985.
EPA extends Phase I RCRA authorization for
Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin until
January 31, 1986, or until the date these States
receive final authorization, whichever occurs
earlier.

-------
-10-
ADDRESSEES
John Skinner, WH-562
Kike Cook, VH-562
Eileen Claussen, WH-562
Revert Knox, WH-562
Iantha Gilmore, WH-562
Christina Parker, WH-562
Cora Beebe, W1-562A
Jack McGraw, WH-562A
John Lehman, WH-565
Fred Lindsey, WH-565
Bruce Weddle, WH-563
Clem Rastatter, W&-563
Elizabeth Cotsworth, WH-563
Penny Hansen, WH-565
Alan Corson „ WH-565
Ken Shuster, WH-565
Dale Ruhter, iffl-565
William Sanjour, WH-563
Walter Kovalick, VH548
Truett DeGeare, WH-563
Steve Levy, VK-563
Peter Guerrero, WH-563
John Thompson, WH-563
Mike Shannon, WH-563
Susan Mann, WH-563
George Garland, WH-562
William Hederaan, WH-548
Elaine Stanley, WH-548
Linda Garczymski, WH-548
Conrad Kleveno, WH-548A
James Makris, WH-548A
Jim Jowett, WB-548B
Henry Van Cleave, DOD/DLA
Donald Kraft; WH-54BD
Ross Wyer, WH-548E
Bill Hanson, WH-548E
Pat Cohn, WH-548D
Carol Lawson, A-107
Marc Jones, PM-220
Barry Garelick, PM-223
Sam Napolitano, PM-220
Gene Lucero, WH-527
Frank Biras, WH-527
Lee Herwig, A-104
Tbny Montrone, WH-527
Mike Kosakowski, WH-527
Barbara Elkus, WH-527
Hotline Staff
Alvin K. Joe, Jr., Geo/fcesource
Sue Moreland (ASTSVMO)
Diane McCreary, Region III Library
Joyce Baker, Region III Library
Lisa Frie&nan, LE-132S
Steve Dorrler, EPA - Edison, iU
John Gilbert, EPA - Cincinnati, OH
Thad Juszczak, WH-562A
Jack Stanton, WH-527
Tim Fields, VB-548 ,
John Riley, WB-548B
Jack Kooyocnjian, VK-548B
Rick Horner, WH-548B
John Bosky, EPA - Kansas City, KS
Peter Cook, WH-527
Elaine Fitzback, WH-527
Jerry Kotas, WH-527
Betti Harris, EPA-Region VII
Hazardous Waste Division Directors, Regions I-X
Hazardous Waste Management Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X

-------