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 ------- |