EPA540-R-10-004
Superfund, TRI, EPCRA, RMP & Oil
Information Center Monthly Report
May 2010
Services in support of OSRTI, OIAA, and OEM
National Toil-Free No.: (800) 424-9346 Local: (703) 412-9810
TDD National Toll-Free No.: (800) 553-7672 Local: (703) 412-3323
This report is prepared and submitted in support of Contract No. EP-W-06-018.
Latosha Thomas, Project Officer
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
Availability
The complete text of all Monthly Reports, beginning with November 1991, may be accessed on
the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/contacts/infocenter.
The Information Center maintains an electronic mailing list named callcenter_oswer.
Subscribers receive Information Center announcements and Monthly Reports via e-mail at no
charge.
• To subscribe to the Information Center electronic mailing list, send a blank e-mail to:
join-callcenter_oswer@lists.epa.gov
• To unsubscribe from an EPA electronic mailing list send a blank e-mail to:
leave-listname@lists.epa.gov
For example, leave-callcenter_oswer@lists.epa.gov
-------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
OIL POLLUTION PREVENTION
Q: Pursuant to 40 CFR §112.7(d), if a
facility owner or operator finds that
secondary containment methods are not
practicable, the SPCC Rule allows for
alternative modes of protection to prevent
and contain oil discharges if additional
requirements are met. How might
determining impracticability under
§112.7(d) affect a facility's FRP
requirements under Part 112 Subpart D?
A: An impracticability determination under
the SPCC regulations may affect the
applicability of the FRP requirements as
well as the calculation of the worst case
discharge volume identified in the FRP,
which may impact the amount of resources
required to respond to a worst case
discharge scenario. Regarding applicability,
the owner or operator of any non-
transportation related onshore facility that
could reasonably be expected to cause
substantial harm to the environment by
discharging oil into or on the navigable
waters or adjoining shorelines shall prepare
and submit an FRP to the Regional
Administrator (§ 112.20(a)). If a facility
determines that secondary containment is
impracticable and does not have secondary
containment for each above ground storage
area that is sufficiently large to contain the
capacity of the largest aboveground oil
storage tank within each storage area plus
sufficient freeboard to allow for
precipitation, and the facility's total oil
storage capacity is greater than or equal to
one million gallons, it could be expected to
cause substantial harm to the environment as
outlined in §112.20(f)(l).
Additionally, pursuant to §112.20(h)(5)(i),
an FRP must include a discussion of specific
planning scenarios for a worst case
discharge, as calculated using the
appropriate worksheet in Part 112, Appendix
D. An impracticability determination may
affect the calculation of the worst case
discharge volume; specifically, if adequate
secondary containment does not exist, it can
increase the worst case discharge volume to
be used for response planning in Appendix
E (specifically in Attachment E-l) for the
facility.
Additional information about the FRP
regulations is available at the following
URL:
http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/content/frp
s
Q: In the SPCC regulations in 40 CFR Part
112, what is the difference between a Tier I
and Tier II qualified facility? How did EPA
establish the multi-tiered approach for
qualified facilities ?
A: A Tier II qualified facility is one that has
an aggregate aboveground oil storage
capacity of 10,000 U.S. gallons or less and
meets the oil discharge history criteria in
§112.3(g)(2). To qualify as a Tier I
qualified facility, in addition to meeting the
eligibility criteria for a Tier II qualified
facility, a facility must have no individual
aboveground oil storage containers with a
capacity greater than 5,000 U.S. gallons
(§112.3(g)(l)). The owner or operator of
either a Tier I or Tier II qualified facility
may self-certify the facility's SPCC Plan, as
provided in §112.6. The owner or operator
of a Tier I qualified facility also has the
option to complete and implement a
streamlined, self-certified SPCC Plan
template available in Part 112, Appendix G.
The template does not include certain
requirements that are inapplicable or
unnecessary, and Tier I qualified facilities
are subject to streamlined requirements for
1
-------
Questions and Answers
May 2010
failure analysis, bulk storage secondary
containment, and overfill prevention
EPA established and modified the multi-
tiered approach through three separate
rulemakings. On December 26, 2006, EPA
finalized an amendment to the SPCC Rule to
allow the owner or operator of a qualified
facility to self-certify his SPCC Plan (71 FR
77266). EPA did not adopt a multi-tiered
approach at that time, but did indicate that it
intended to explore the approach. On
December 5, 2008 (73 FR 72436), EPA
designated a subset of qualified facilities as
Tier I qualified facilities and established the
additional criterion for an individual oil
storage container. On November 13, 2009,
EPA published technical corrections to the
Tier I qualified facility provisions and the
Part 1 12, Appendix G template (74 FR
58784).
Q: Qualified facilities are eligible for
streamlined regulatory requirements in 40
CFR §112.6, which include self-certification
of SPCC Plans. What criteria do oil
production facilities have to meet in order to
be considered qualified facilities?
A: Oil production facilities, like all other
facilities, must meet the criteria in
§1 12.3(g)(l) or (2) to be considered Tier I or
Tier II qualified facilities. .
Additional information about the November
2009 rule is available at the following URL:
http://www.epa.gov/emergencies/content/sp
cc/spcc nov09amend.htm
Q: In the 2008 Amendments to the SPCC
Rule, EPA provided a template for the
owner or operator of a Tier I qualified
facility to create an SPCC Plan. Does EPA
require a Tier I qualified facility to use the
template in 40 CFR Part 112, Appendix G?
Does EPA allow a Tier I qualified facility to
modify the template if they use it to create a
Plan?
A: The owner or operator of a Tier I
qualified facility may use the template in
Part 112, Appendix G to comply with the
streamlined requirements for Tier I qualified
facilities; however, EPA emphasizes that the
use of this template is optional. When the
owner of operator of a qualified facility does
not follow the Appendix G template, then an
equivalent Plan must be prepared in writing
that meets all applicable requirements as
described in §1 12.6(a)(l). If the owner or
operator chooses to use the Appendix G
template, it may be used as a model and
modified as necessary to meet the facility-
specific needs, as long as all applicable rule
requirements are included in the SPCC Plan
and a cross-reference is provided.
Additionally, a Tier I qualified facility
owner or operator may choose to prepare
and implement a Plan meeting the Tier II
qualified facility requirements in §1 12.6(b)
or prepare and implement a full PE-certified
SPCC Plan instead of a self-certified one
RMP
Q. When using RMP *Comp to conduct an
of/site consequence analysis (OCA), a
facility must specify the quantity released.
What quantity should be entered for a
regulated toxic substance in an aqueous
solution, the total quantity of the aqueous
solution or just the quantity of the toxic
substance?
A: The entire quantity of the aqueous
solution should be entered as the quantity
released. For example, when using
RMP*Comp to analyze a scenario involving
20,000 pounds of a 30% solution of
ammonia in water, the chemical should be
identified as "ammonia (water solution),"
the initial concentration should be identified
-------
Questions and Answers May 2010
as 30%, and the quantity released should be
specified as 20,000 pounds.
Q: A facility subject to the risk management
program regulations must submit its risk
management plan (RMP) to EPA via the
RMP*eSubmit system. Does EPA confirm
receipt of the facility's RMP?
A: When a facility's certifying official
submits a complete RMP to EPA using
RMP*eSubmit, the system will
automatically generate and send an e-mail to
the certifying official confirming the
system's receipt of the RMP. The
submission receipt can also be viewed in the
certifying official's CDX account. The
submission receipt will contain a transaction
ID number and the date the RMP was
certified and sent to EPA. If the certifying
official does not receive a submission
receipt, he or she should contact the RMP
Reporting Center directly at (703) 227-7650.
-------
NEW PUBLICATIONS
How to order...
NTIS Publications are available by calling (800) 553-6847 or (703) 605-6000, or writing NTIS,
5301 Shawnee Rd, Alexandria, VA 22312. Use the NTIS Order Number listed under the document.
NSCEP Publications are available by calling (800) 490-9198 or by writing USEPA/NSCEP, PO Box 42419,
Cincinnati, OH 45242-0419. Use the EPA Order Number listed under the document.
CERCLA
TITLE: Celebrating Success: MacGillis &
Gibbs / Bell Lumber & Pole Company
PUBLICATION DATE: May 2010
EPA ORDER No. :NA
AVAILABILITY: Internet
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/rec
ycle/pdf/macgillis_success.pdf
This fact sheet describes the clean-up and
redevelopment of a mixed-use Superfund
site by the city of New Brighton, EPA
Region 5, the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA), and other partners. Clean
up activities included stabilization and
removal of metals contaminated soils, either
biotreatment or capping of organic
contaminated soils, and a group water pump
and treat system. The majority of cleanup
operations were completed by 2001. Today,
the redevelopment includes manufacturing
and distribution businesses as well as
commercial office space, retail shops and
restaurants, legal and medical services, a
post office, and a 120-unit condominium
development.
CROSS-PROGRAM
TITLE: Fiscal Year 2009 Annual Report:
Emergency Management: Prevention,
Preparedness, Response
PUBLICATION DATE: May 2010
EPA ORDER No.: EPA540-R-09-005
AVAILABILITY: Internet
http://www.epa.gov/oem/docs/chem/annrptf
y09.pdf
This report provides an overview of the
work that EPA's Office of Emergency
Management has accomplished during
Fiscal Year 2009. The report reviews
several highlights from the year: the launch
of RMP*eSubmit, the completion of 368
emergency responses and removals, a report
on the nationwide survey of Local
Emergency Planning Committees, the
release of technical guidance for
methamphetamine (meth) lab cleanup, and
the initiation of a large-scale recruitment
effort for the Environmental Response
Laboratory Network. Strategic priorities for
the next five years were also outlined in the
document. The priorities are identified for
four key program areas: Emergency
Response and Removal; Chemical
Emergency Preparedness and Prevention;
Oil Spill Prevention, Preparedness, and
Response; and Homeland Security.
-------
FEDERAL REGISTERS
Availability
You may order copies of Federal Registers by calling the
Superfund, TRI, EPCRA, RMP & Oil Information Center
National Toll-Free No.: (800) 424-9346 Local: (703) 412-9810
TDD National Toll-Free No.: (800) 553-7672 Local TDD: (703) 412-3323
EPA Federal Registers are accessible via the Internet at: http://www.regulations.gov
FINAL RULES
CERCLA
"National Oil and Hazardous
Substance Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List"
May 11, 2010 (75 FR 26131)
EPA announced the deletion of the
Asbestos Dump Superfund Site from the
National Priorities List (NPL). The
effective date of this rulemaking is July 12,
2010, unless EPA receives adverse
comments by June 10, 2010.
"National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List:
Deletion of the Ruston Foundry
Superfund Site"
May 14, 2010 (75 FR 27192)
EPA announced the deletion of the Ruston
Foundry Superfund Site from the NPL. The
effective date of this rulemaking is July 13,
2010, unless EPA receives adverse
comments by June 14, 2010.
PROPOSED RULES
CERCLA
"National Oil and Hazardous
Substance Pollution Contingency
Plan National Priorities List"
May 11, 2010 (75 FR 26166)
EPA announced its intent to delete the
Asbestos Dump Superfund Site from the
NPL. Comments must be received by June
10,2010.
"National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Intent
to Delete the Ruston Foundry
Superfund Site"
May 14, 2010(75 FR 27255)
EPA announced its intent to delete the
Ruston Foundry Superfund Site from the
NPL. Comments must be received by June
14,2010.
SETTLEMENT AND CONSENT
DECREES
"Proposed Consent Decree; United
States of America v. AGO Flat Glass
North America, Inc., et al."
May 5, 2010(75 FR 24744)
-------
Federal Registers May 2010
"Proposed Consent Decree; United
States of America et al. v. The Boeing
Company"
May 11, 2010 (75 FR 26275)
"Proposed Consent Decree; United
States v. T. Frank Flippo & Sons, LLC"
May 19, 2010 (75 FR 28062)
"Proposed Consent Decree; United
States v. AK Steel et al."
May 24, 2010 (75 FR 28819)
"Proposed Consent Decree; United
States v. Precious Metals, Inc."
May 24, 2010 (75 FR 28820)
"Proposed Consent Decree; United
States v. Schurkman, et al."
May 26, 2010(75 FR 29583)
------- |