CERCLA 108(b)

Review of Existing Financial Responsibility Laws
Potentially Applicable to Facilities in the Chemical
Manufacturing Industry (NAICS 325)


-------
This page intentionally left blank.


-------
Contents

I.	Introduction	1

II.	Background on the Chemical Manufacturing Industry (NAICS 325)	3

III.	Findings	4

Appendix A - State-by-State Listing of Identified FR Programs Potentially Applicable to NAICS Code 325	A-l

Appendix B - Methodology for Selecting States Reviewed	B-l


-------
This page intentionally left blank.


-------
II. Introduction.

On January 6, 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified three industries -the
Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution industry (NAICS 2211), the Petroleum and Coal
Products Manufacturing industry (NAICS 324), and the Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325) - as
including classes of facilities for which EPA planned to develop, as necessary, proposed regulations
identifying appropriate financial responsibility (FR) requirements under CERCLA 108(b).1

To help inform potential CERCLA 108(b) rulemakings and the level of risk associated with these identified
classes of facilities, EPA assessed existing State and Federal FR programs that cover a wide range of
liabilities (e.g., closure, post-closure care, corrective action, third-party personal injury/property damage,
natural resource damages). EPA focused on these types of FR programs for two reasons. First, these
categories of damages, actions, and costs are similar to those that could be covered by any future CERCLA
108(b) rulemaking and thus may inform the need for CERCLA 108(b) FR for these industries. Secondly, the
existence of FR requirements can help incentivize better environmental performance broadly speaking. For
example, closure FR increases compliance with end-of-life facility closure and remediation requirements.
FR, depending on the program design, can also encourage safer environmental practices because firms
may have an incentive to lower required FR amounts or lower the risk their facilities pose in the eyes of
financial institutions (e.g., insurers, sureties). Additionally, EPA is identifying State funds that are partially
funded by industry, including the industries of interest in this report (e.g., through a tax on generated
hazardous wastes), and that could cover future CERCLA liabilities that may arise at the facilities of interest
in this report.

To support those efforts, EPA tasked ICF with preparing three reports reviewing and describing existing FR
laws and certain State funds potentially applicable to each of the three CERCLA 108(b) additional classes in
25 States selected by EPA. The States reviewed were intended to be the same States reviewed in EPA's
report regarding existing State regulatory and voluntary programs (excluding FR programs) that may be
applicable to the additional classes. See Appendix B for the State selection methodology. The States in the
review include the following: Alaska, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma,
Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

This report provides ICF's findings in performing a broad review of FR laws applicable to facilities in the
Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325), including laws that would cover CERCLA liabilities and those
covering other environmental liabilities at regulated facilities. Findings of this research are presented as
categories of different types of FR requirements found within the States included in ICF's review.

In addition to State programs, ICF also reviewed existing FR requirements in the following Federal
programs: (1) EPA RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste, (2) TSCA commercial PCB waste facilities, and (3) EPA
Safe Drinking Water Act Underground Injection Control wells. ICF did not include State regulations that are
counterparts to these programs because such State FR programs tend to mirror the Federal counterpart FR
regulations, whereas the State programs described in this report often are very different in many respects
and have not been designed in most cases by reference to a Federal model.

1 75 Fed. Reg. 816 available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-01-06/pdf/E9-31399.pdf. These three
industries were identified by EPA after EPA identified the hardock mining industry as the class of facility to be the
subject of the first CERCLA 108(b) rulemaking effort.

1


-------
Additionally, the following FR programs were considered to be outside of the scope of this review:

•	FR for solid waste management.

•	FR programs solely covering releases at off-site facilities (e.g., off-site disposal facilities) other than
the facilities where the hazardous substance was generated or initially utilized in a production
process.

•	Transportation FR, which often includes coverage for liabilities associated with releases occurring
during the loading and unloading of hazardous materials at the additional classes of facilities. Such
transport FR can apply to different types and capacities of vessels, trucks, pipelines, and railroads.

•	FR programs related to releases solely of oil (crude and refined) applicable to facilities such as
petrochemical manufacturing as well as associated storage.2

•	FR for aboveground or underground storage tanks of oil/petroleum.3

•	Programs that impose FR requirements on non-power reactor nuclear materials licensees (i.e., FR
for decommissioning of facilities that have used radioactive materials), technologically enhanced
naturally occurring radioactive materials, or low-level radioactive waste.

In addition to this introduction, this report includes three sections:

•	Section 2 provides background information on the Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325).

•	Section 3 presents findings from the research performed, including identification of types of FR
programs that have been identified to which facilities within NAICS 325 codes could be subject.

2	Petroleum is excluded from coverage under CERCLA, with certain exceptions:

"(14) The term "hazardous substance" means

(A)	any substance designated pursuant to section 1321(b)(2)(A) of title 33 [Clean Water Act],

(B)	any element, compound, mixture, solution, or substance designated pursuant to section 9602 of
this title [CERCLA],

(C)	any hazardous waste having the characteristics identified under or listed pursuant to section 3001
of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6921) (but not including any waste the regulation of which under
the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) has been suspended by Act of Congress),

(D)	any toxic pollutant listed under section 1317(a) of title 33 [Clean Water Act],

(E)	any hazardous air pollutant listed under section 112 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412), and

(F)	any imminently hazardous chemical substance or mixture with respect to which the Administrator
has taken action pursuant to section 2606 of title 15 [Toxic Substances Control Act],

The term does not include petroleum, including crude oil or any fraction thereof which is not otherwise specifically
listed or designated as a hazardous substance under subparagraphs (A) through (F) 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 of
natural gas and such synthetic gas)" (emphasis added). 42 U.S.C. § 9601(14).

3	The Federal underground storage tank (UST) regulations apply to UST systems storing either petroleum or
hazardous substances. The Federal UST program includes FR requirements to assure that, in the event of a leak or a
spill of petroleum, an owner or operator will have the resources to pay for costs associated with cleaning up releases
and compensating third parties. The Federal UST FR requirements apply to releases of petroleum, not hazardous
substances. (40 CFR §§ 280.90 - 280.116, available at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-

idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40cfr280_main_02.tpl&SID=2fa2adfcdfd0ddc5b78752elb2b6083e&m=06&d=01&y=201
6&pd=20150101&pitd=20150101&submit=GO.)The Federal regulations allow State UST program approval by EPA to
operate in lieu of the federal program. States may have more stringent regulations than the Federal FR
requirements. As of September 2017, 38 States, plus DC and Puerto Rico had approved UST programs.

2


-------
•	Appendix A provides a State-by-State listing of the FR programs identified in each State, including
identification of the trigger for the FR requirement or the mechanism by which the facilities in the
additional classes of industry would be required to contribute to a State clean-up fund, and the
liabilities covered.

•	Appendix B describes the methodology used to identify the sub-set of States that is covered by this
report.

II. Background on the Chemical Manufacturing Indu	3 325).

This section provides background on the Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325)/ one of the
industries for which EPA planned to develop, as necessary, proposed regulations identifying appropriate FR
requirements under CERCLA 108(b). This section identifies NAICS code 325 sub-categories. NAICS code
sub-categories are identified to inform the reader of the classes of facilities covered by each NAICS code.

NAICS code 325 is organized into the following five-digit NAICS code sub-categories:

NAICS 5-Digit Classification

NAICS Code Industry Description

32511

Petrochemical manufacturing: Establishments manufacturing acyclic
hydrocarbons (e.g., ethylene, propylene, butylene) and cyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (e.g., benzene, toluene, styrene, xylene, ethyl benzene, cumene)
from refined petroleum or liquid hydrocarbons

32512

Industrial gas manufacturing: Establishments manufacturing industrial gases in
compressed, liquid, and solid forms

32513

Inorganic and synthetic organic dye and pigment manufacturing

32518

Basic inorganic chemical manufacturing: Establishments manufacturing alkalis
(e.g., chlorine, sodium hydroxide), carbon black, and other inorganic chemicals

32519

Basic organic chemical manufacturing: Establishments manufacturing gum and
wood chemicals (e.g., tall oil, tanning materials, charcoal briquettes), cyclic crudes,
ethyl alcohol, and other basic inorganic chemicals

32521

Plastics material, resin, and synthetic rubber manufacturing

32522

Organic fiber manufacturing: Establishments manufacturing and/or texturizing
cellulosic fibers and filaments (e.g., monofilament, filament yarn, tow), and
noncellulosic fibers and filaments (e.g., nylon, polyolefin polyester)

32531

Fertilizer manufacturing: Establishments manufacturing nitrogenous fertilizers,
phosphatic fertilizers, and fertilizers mixed with ingredients made elsewhere than
the manufacturing facility

32532

Pesticide and agricultural chemical manufacturing

4The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) was developed under the direction and guidance of the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as the standard for use by Federal statistical agencies in classifying business
establishments for the collection, tabulation, presentation, and analysis of statistical data describing the U.S.
economy. Use of the standard provides uniformity and comparability in the presentation of these statistical data.
NAICS is based on a production-oriented concept, meaning that it groups establishments into industries according to
similarity in the processes used to produce goods or services.

3


-------
NAICS 5-Digit Classification

NAICS Code Industry Description

32541

Biological product manufacturing: Establishments manufacturing medical and
botanical chemicals, pharmaceutical preparations (e.g., in-vivo diagnostic
substances), in-vitro diagnostic substances (e.g., radioactive substances), and
other biological products (e.g., vaccines, toxoids, blood fractions, culture media of
plant or animal origin)

32551

Paint and coating manufacturing: Establishments that mix pigments, solvents, and
binders into paints and other coatings (e.g., stains, varnishes, lacquers), and
manufacture allied paint products (e.g., putties, paint and varnish removers, paint
brush cleaners)

32552

Adhesive (e.g., glues, caulking compounds) manufacturing

32561

Surface active agent manufacturing: Establishments manufacturing soap,
detergents, polish, specialty cleaning goods, bulk surface active agents (e.g.,
wetting agents, penetrants), and textiles and leather finishing agents

32562

Toilet preparation (e.g., perfumes, shaving preparations, hair preparations, face
creams, lotions, sunscreens) manufacturing

32591

Printing ink and inkjet cartridge manufacturing

32592

Explosives manufacturing

32599

Miscellaneous chemical products and preparation manufacturing: Establishments
manufacturing plastics resins through custom mixing and blending of plastics
resins made elsewhere than the facility, photographic film, sensitized paper
sensitized cloth, sensitized plates, toners, and other miscellaneous chemical
products

III. Findings.

This section describes the findings of the review performed to identify types of existing FR programs that
may be applicable to the Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325). The initial findings described are
the results of a review of the statutes and regulations of 25 States, as well as select Federal FR programs
described in the introduction. The types of FR programs identified include the following:

(1)	FR for petrochemical manufacturing facilities

(2)	FR for phosphatic fertilizer manufacturing facilities

(3)	FR for hazardous waste management facilities

(4)	FR for underground injection of hazardous wastes that might pollute drinking water or threaten
human health and the environment

(5)	FRfor PCB storage or disposal facilities

(6)	Corrective action FR for discharges/releases of hazardous substances or their constituents

(7)	Facility remediation FR associated with transfer in ownership or facility closure

(8)	FR for storage tanks containing hazardous substances

(9)	Other broad authorities to require FR to assure compliance with orders

Each is discussed in more detail below.

In addition to identifying types of FR programs that may be applicable, this section provides example
Federal and State FR programs that have been found. Additional research could be performed to review
the FR programs in the remaining 25 States and could lead to the identification of additional examples and
additional types of existing FR programs. See Appendix A for a State-by-State listing of the FR programs

4


-------
identified in each State, including identification of the trigger for the FR requirement or mechanism by
which the facilities in NAICS Code 325 would be required to contribute to a State clean-up fund, and the
liabilities covered.

(1) FR for petrochemical manufacturing facilities

States may have FR programs focused specifically on liabilities (e.g., closure, post-closure care, corrective
action, and/or other liability) associated with petrochemical manufacturing facilities.

Relevance to Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325) and CERCLA 108(b)

NAICS codes subject to
requirement

Petrochemical manufacturing facilities [NAICS 32511] are a sub-category
of the chemical manufacturing category of facilities.

Use or production of CERCLA
hazardous substance at
covered facilities/equipment

The processes and products involved in petrochemical manufacturing
involve handling of various CERCLA hazardous substances.

Likelihood that scope of FR
program covers clean up of
CERCLA hazardous substance

Program dependent.

State Example

Alaska has FR requirements prohibiting the operation of a petrochemical facility unless the person has
furnished proof of financial ability to control a hazardous waste that will be used in, produced by, or
disposed of at the petrochemical facility. [AS § 46.03.8301.

(2) FR for phosphatic fertilizer manufacturing facilities

States may have FR programs focused specifically on liabilities (e.g., closure, post-closure care, corrective
action, and/or other liability) associated with phosphatic fertilizer manufacturing facilities.

Relevance to Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325) and CERCLA 108(b)

NAICS codes subject to
requirement

Phosphatic fertilizer manufacturing facilities [NAICS 325312] are a sub-
category of the chemical manufacturing category of facilities.

Use or production of CERCLA
hazardous substance at
covered facilities/equipment

The processes involved in the production of phosphatic fertilizer involve
handling of various CERCLA hazardous substances.

Likelihood that scope of FR
program covers clean up of
CERCLA hazardous substance

Program dependent.

State Example

Florida has FR requirements covering closure, long-term care, and water management applicable to
phosphogypsum stacks at phosphatic fertilizer manufacturing facilities. [FAC 62-673.640(2)(a)1.

5


-------
(3) FR for hazardous waste management facilities

Federal FR requirements are triggered by the operation of a hazardous waste storage, treatment, or
disposal facility.5 All covered RCRA hazardous waste management facilities are subject to decontamination
and closure FR as well as liability coverage for third-party personal injury or property damage outside of
the property line. Covered RCRA disposal facilities also are subject to FR for post-closure maintenance and
monitoring. RCRA itself requires FR for completing corrective action at permitted solid waste management
units (SWMUs), including permitted hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal units.

Relevance to Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325) and CERCLA 108(b)

NAICS codes subject to
requirement

All facilities in NAICS code 325 would be subject to these requirements
if they stored, treated, or disposed of hazardous wastes or were
SWMUs covered by the corrective action program.

Use or production of CERCLA
hazardous substance at
covered facilities/equipment

RCRA hazardous wastes are defined by CERCLA as hazardous
substances.

Likelihood that scope of FR
program covers clean up of
CERCLA hazardous substance

Likely.

(4) FR for underground injection of hazardous wastes that might pollute drinking water or threaten
human health and the environment

Federal FR requirements are triggered by the allowable underground injection of a hazardous waste (Class
I). All Class I wells for injecting hazardous wastes are subject to closure, plugging, and abandonment FR as
well as FR for post-closure care.6 RCRA also requires FR for completing corrective (i.e., remedial) actions at
permitted SWMUs including hazardous waste injection wells. Class VI facilities for underground
containment of captured carbon dioxide provide FR for well plugging, "corrective action" of wells in the
area of review, site closure and post-injection site care, and emergency and remedial response.7 However,
captured carbon dioxide is conditionally not a RCRA hazardous waste8 nor a CERCLA hazardous substance.

5	40 CFR § 264, Subpart H; 40 CFR § 265, Subpart H.

6	See 40 CFR Part 144 (Subpart F) and corresponding sections in 40 CFR Part 146.

7	See 40 CFR § 146.85.

8	See EPA, "Hazardous Waste Management System: Conditional Exclusion for Carbon Dioxide (C02) Streams in
Geologic Sequestration Activities (Final Rule)," 78 Fed. Reg. 350 (January 3, 2014).

6


-------
Relevance to Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325) and CERCLA 108(b)

NAICS codes subject to
requirement

All facilities in NAICS codes 325 would be subject to these requirements
if they injected hazardous wastes.

Use or production of CERCLA
hazardous substance at
covered facilities/equipment

RCRA hazardous wastes are defined by CERCLA as hazardous
substances.

Likelihood that scope of FR
program covers clean up of
CERCLA hazardous substance

Likely.

(5) FR for PCB storage or disposal facilities

Federal FR requirements are triggered by the operation of a commercial PCB storage facility.9 Commercial
PCB storage facilities are subject to Federal closure FR. States may also have FR requirements for PCB
storage facilities that are not exclusively applicable to commercial facilities, cover additional types of
liabilities, and also apply to PCB disposal facilities.

Relevance to Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325) and CERCLA 108(b)

NAICS codes subject to
requirement

All facilities in NAICS code 325 would be subject to these requirements
if they stored or disposed of PCBs.

Use or production of CERCLA
hazardous substance at
covered facilities/equipment

TSCA PCBs are defined by CERCLA as hazardous substances.

Likelihood that scope of FR
program covers clean up of
CERCLA hazardous substance

Likely.

State Example

Indiana has FR requirements for closure and post-closure care costs for facilities owning or operating PCB
landfills or alternative disposal areas. [329 IAC 4.1-121.

(6) Corrective action FR for discharges/releases of hazardous substances or their constituents

States may have FR requirements that are triggered by a release of hazardous substances that are
intended to assure the proper clean up of the release. States may also have clean-up funds that are not
industry-specific but that are partially funded by industry, including the industries within the additional
classes of facilities of interest in the review, that can be used to fund the clean up of a release of hazardous
substances.

9 See 40 CFR§ 761.65.

7


-------
Relevance to Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325) and CERCLA 108(b)

NAICS codes subject to
requirement

All facilities in NAICS code 325 could be subject to these requirements if
they produced or released hazardous substances covered by the
program that required remediation.

Use or production of CERCLA
hazardous substance at
covered facilities/equipment

This criterion would depend upon the extent to which the hazardous
substances covered by the program were CERCLA hazardous
substances.

Likelihood that scope of FR
program covers clean up of
CERCLA hazardous substance

Likely.

State Examples
Corrective action FR

Alaska may require FR that covers the costs of operation and maintenance, including compliance
monitoring and corrective measures, of institutional controls for a discharge or release of a hazardous
substance [18 AAC 75.375(e)!.

As part of an order requiring corrective action for the release of hazardous substances, Georgia may
require FRfor corrective action [GA. Code Ann. § 12-8-951.

Georgia may require participants in a voluntary remediation program to demonstrate FRto cover clean up
and remediation of hazardous and regulated substances at properties that are not listed on the NPL or
currently undergoing remediation [GA. Code Ann. § 12-8-1071.

As part of a court determination that contamination of usable ground water poses a threat to the public
health and that evaluation or remediation is required to protect the usable ground water, Louisiana has FR
requirements covering the implementation of a plan for evaluating and remediating the contamination
and protecting usable ground water [La. R.S. § 30:2015.11.

Michigan has FR for an environmental remediation program for monitoring, operation and maintenance,
oversight, and other costs determined necessary by the department to assure the effectiveness and
integrity of a remedial action for a release of hazardous substances [MCL 324.20114d(4)(b)1.

Minnesota also has FR requirements for corrective action and response costs if or when there is an order
associated with a responsible party's response to a hazardous substance release [Minn. Stat. 115E.01 and
Minn Stat. § 115E.051.

In New Jersey, a State agency or court can require a demonstration of FR to cover the cost of clean up and
removal of hazardous substances or hazardous waste discharges [N.J. Stat. § 58:10B-1.31. New Jersey also
has FR requirements that are applicable at the discretion of the Department covering operation,
maintenance, and inspection of engineering controls and related system installed as part of a remedial
action of a contaminated site [N.J. Stat. § 58:10C-191.

8


-------
North Carolina has FR requirements triggered by the remediation of a contaminated site, including those
requiring remediation pursuant to CERCLA, RCRA, and the Oil Pollution and Hazardous Substance Control
Act, among other laws. The FR covers implementation and maintenance of the actions or controls
specified in an approved remedial action plan for the site [N.C. Gen. Stat. § 130A-310.69; N.C. Gen. Stat §
130A-309.721.

Texas has FR requirements that cover post-response action care for releases of chemicals of concern, as
defined by a number of Texas environmental programs, that are addressed by Remedy Standard B [30 TAC
§ 350.33; 30 TAC § 37.40211. Within the same Texas Risk Reduction Program, Texas also has FR
requirements triggered by the establishment of a Facility Operations Area to address multiple sources of
chemicals of concern, which may include CERCLA hazardous substances, within an operational chemical or
petroleum manufacturing plant which is required to perform corrective action pursuant to industrial solid
waste regulations. These FR requirements cover post-response action care [30 TAC § 350.134; 30 TAC §
37.40311.

In Washington the Department can require FR after a release of a hazardous substance where the clean-up
action includes engineering and/or institutional controls. The FR covers operation and maintenance of the
clean-up action, including institutional control, compliance monitoring, and corrective actions [WAC § 173-
340-4401. Washington also has corrective action FR requirements associated with owning or operating a
facility with releases of dangerous wastes, which include hazardous substances and their constituents
[WAC 5 173-303-64620: WAC 5 173-303-6451.

Wisconsin has an FR requirement that covers remedial actions at sites with residual contamination after
approving an interim action, a remedial action, or a case close letter if residual contamination remains on a
site after conclusion of an interim action or a remedial action [Wis. Stat. § 292.12(2)(d)(2)1. Wisconsin also
has an FR requirement triggered by an application for approval of a voluntary response based on natural
attenuation or additional remediation needed for contaminated sediments. The latter FR covers response
and restoration [Wis. Stat. § 292.15(2)(ae); Wis. Stat. § 292.15(2)(af); Wis. Admin. Code § NR 754.11(3)1.

Wyoming has an FR requirement that covers the performance and maintenance of engineering controls
and any monitoring activities required in remedy agreements, after entering a voluntary remedy
agreement with the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality [WY Stat § 35-ll-1607(b)(i)1.

State clean-up funds

Alaska has a State release prevention and response fund that can be used to contain, clean up, and take
other necessary action, such as monitoring and assessing, to address a release or threatened release of a
hazardous substance. Funding comes in part from a per barrel of oil production surcharge, as well as fines,
penalties, or damages recovered under AS 46.08.005-46.08.080 or other law for costs incurred by the state
as a result of a release or threatened release of a hazardous substance. [AS § 46.08.020; AS § 46.08.0251.

California has a State clean-up fund for the following liabilities at facilities contaminated with hazardous
substances: removal or remedial action, site operation and maintenance, 10% State share of CERCLA
costs, and certain third-party compensation of costs and losses. Funding comes in part from monies from
State cost recoveries, fees, fines, or penalties incurred or received from responsible parties during
enforcement actions. [Cal HS Code 6.8-20 § 25300-25395.451.

Georgia has a State hazardous waste trust fund for the investigation, detoxification, removal, and disposal

9


-------
of any hazardous wastes, hazardous constituents, or hazardous substances at sites where corrective action
is necessary to mitigate a present or future danger to human health or the environment. The fund can also
be used to cover emergency actions the director considers necessary to protect public health, safety, or
the environment whenever there is a release of hazardous wastes, hazardous constituents, or hazardous
substances. Funds can also be used for CERCLA response actions. Funding comes in part from hazardous
waste management fees paid by hazardous waste generators. [GA. Code Ann. §§ 12-8-91 - 12-8-951.

Florida has a State water quality assurance trust fund that may be used for the assessment, clean up,
restoration, monitoring, and maintenance of any site involving spills, discharges, or escapes of pollutants
or hazardous substances which occur as a result of procedures taken by private and governmental entities
involving the storage, transportation, and disposal of pollutants or hazardous substances. Funds can also
be used for CERCLA response actions. Funding comes in part from a tax imposed on those engaged in the
production of motor fuel, diesel fuel, aviation fuel, and/or other pollutants, as well as environmental
enforcement actions. [Fla. Stat. § 376.3071.

Illinois has a State hazardous waste fund for preventative and corrective action in response to the release
of hazardous substances. Funding comes in part from a tax on the disposal of hazardous wastes. [415 ILCS
5/22.21.

Indiana has a State hazardous substances response trust fund that may be used for State responses to
hazardous releases. Funding comes in part from fees on the disposal of hazardous waste by generators. [IN
Code 5 13-25-41.

Iowa has a State hazardous substance remedial fund that provides funds for corrective action and
remediation of hazardous substance disposal sites, includes financing of clean up, remediation, and post-
closure operation and maintenance costs. Funding comes in part from fees from hazardous waste
generators and transporters in the State. [Iowa Code § 455B.423(6)1.

Louisiana has a State hazardous waste site clean-up fund providing funds for the remediation of hazardous
wastes, and the assessment, clean up, and other costs associated with nonhazardous waste sites
determined to be priority sites by the Secretary. Funding is provided in part from a tax on the disposal of
hazardous wastes. [La. R.S. § 30:22051.

Minnesota has a State fund that may be used for corrective action to address releases of hazardous
substances and for environmental response actions at qualified landfill facilities. Funding comes in part
from cost recoveries and natural resources damages. [Minn Stat. § 116.1551.

Missouri has a State hazardous waste fund that may be used for clean up of hazardous substances, site
remediation activities, and post closure operation and maintenance costs. Funding comes in part from fees
paid by the generators of hazardous wastes. [Mo. Ann. Stat. § 260.3911.

New Jersey has a State fund that may be used for the removal and clean up of hazardous substances,
natural resource damages restoration and replacement, compensation for damage and/or destruction of
real or personal property and associated lost income, compensation for loss of tax revenue, and interest
on loans. Funding comes in part from taxes on the owners or operators of major facilities receiving the
transfer of petroleum and/or hazardous substances, assessed according to the volume of the substance
transferred. [N.J. Stat. § 58:10-23.11g; N.J. Stat. § 58: 10-23.11M.

10


-------
New Jersey has another State fund that may be used for remediation of a hazardous substance or waste.
Funding comes in part from a surcharge on parties required to remediate a hazardous substance or waste,
per N.J. Stat. § 58: 10B-11, and appropriations, subrogation recoveries, and investment earnings. [N.J. Stat.
5 58:10B-3: N.J. Stat. 5 58:10B-201.

New Mexico has a State hazardous waste emergency fund for clean up and corrective action of hazardous
substance releases, disposal of hazardous substances, and necessary repairs of State property. Funding
comes in part from penalties collected by the Division against responsible parties for hazardous substance
incidents. [NM Stat. 74-4-71.

Texas has a State fund for removal and remediation of hazardous substances or solid waste. Funding
comes in part from fees imposed on the owners and operators of hazardous waste facilities. [Texas Health
And Safety Code § 361.1331.

Utah has a State hazardous substances mitigation fund for emergency actions, remedial investigations, and
the amounts required by the federal government as the State's portion of the cost of clean ups under
CERCLA. It is funded in part by waste disposal fees [Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-307 1.

Washington has a State fund for hazardous waste clean up, spill response, and hazardous waste planning,
management, regulation, and enforcement. It is funded in part by a percentage pollution tax on the
wholesale value of possessed hazardous substances by holders of hazardous substances [Rev. Code Was. §
70.105D.0701.

(7) Facility remediation FR associated with transfer in ownership or facility closure

States may have FR requirements assuring the remediation of specified classes of facilities triggered by a
prospective transfer in ownership or facility closure.

Relevance to Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325) and CERCLA 108(b)

NAICS codes subject to
requirement

Program dependent.

Use or production of CERCLA
hazardous substance at
covered facilities/equipment

Program dependent.

Likelihood that scope of FR
program covers clean up of
CERCLA hazardous substance

Likely.

State Example

The New Jersey Industrial Site Recovery Act requires a demonstration of FRto cover facility remediation
from owners or operators of "industrial establishments" planning to close or transfer ownership or
operations. [NJAC 7:26B1.

11


-------
(8) FR for storage tanks containing hazardous substances

States may have programs requiring a demonstration of FRto cover liabilities associated with releases
from aboveground or underground storage of hazardous substances in tanks. These FR requirements
would be imposed upon owners/operators prior to a release.

Relevance to Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325) and CERCLA 108(b)

NAICS codes subject to
requirement

Many facilities in NAICS code 325 are likely to have storage tanks
containing hazardous substances at their facilities and therefore be
subject to these FR requirements.

Use or production of CERCLA
hazardous substance at
covered facilities/equipment

This criterion would depend upon the extent to which the hazardous
substances covered by the program were CERCLA hazardous
substances.

Likelihood that scope of FR
program covers clean up of
CERCLA hazardous substance

Likely.

State Examples

Florida has FR requirements covering liabilities associated with the pollution of surface and ground waters,
discharge removal, and damage to natural resources from above or underground storage tanks containing
hazardous substances [Fla. Stat. § 376.309(1)1.

Michigan has FR requirements for monitoring, operation, and maintenance of corrective action
remediation plans for leaking underground storage tanks containing regulated substances, which includes
a sub-set of CERCLA hazardous substances [MCL 324.21309a(2)(f)1.

New Jersey has FR requirements to which those servicing underground storage tanks containing CERCLA
hazardous substances are subject covering remediation and compensating third parties for bodily injury
and property damage [N.J. Stat. § 58:10A-24.4; N.J. Stat. § 58:10A-25a(8)1.

New Mexico has a State fund that may be used for corrective action at above and underground storage
tanks to pay for the costs of a site assessment, the State's share of the federal leaking underground
storage tank trust fund, and to make payments to or on behalf of owners or operators for corrective
action. New Mexico has an FR requirement for corrective action and remediation if the owner or operator
receives notification of incapacity of the corrective action fund to cover corrective action and remediation
of contamination from above and below ground storage tanks [NM Stat. 74-6B-71.

Pennsylvania has FR requirements for corrective action and compensation for bodily injury and property
damage caused by accidental releases of regulated substances from storage tanks. [Note: Although the
authorizing Statute grants authority to impose FR requirements on both aboveground and underground
storage tanks, implementing regulations apply only to underground storage tanks.] [35 P.S. § 6021.701 and
25 PA. Code Chapter 2451

Washington has FR requirements that are triggered by submitting a license application for an UST system
that contains regulated substances, which include hazardous substances and mixtures of petroleum and

12


-------
hazardous substances. The FR requirement covers remediation and compensation of third parties for
bodily injury and property damage due to sudden and non-sudden accidental releases [Rev. Code Was. §
90.76: WAC 5 173-360A-0200: WAC 5 173-360A-1000 et seal.

(9) Other broad authorities to require FR to assure compliance with orders

States may have broad authority to require FR to assure compliance with an agency order.

Relevance to Chemical Manufacturing industry (NAICS 325) and CERCLA 108(b)

NAICS codes subject to
requirement

Program dependent.

Use or production of CERCLA
hazardous substance at
covered facilities/equipment

Program dependent.

Likelihood that scope of FR
program covers clean up of
CERCLA hazardous substance

Program dependent.

State Example

In New Jersey, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has the authority to require FR to assure
good faith compliance with an order to correct a violation of DEP regulations [N.J. Stat. § 13:lD-9(u)l.

13


-------
Appendix A - State-by-Ste i li;iih i Identified FR Progr in, I i ntially Applicable

i . 11 •!« < 25.

The following table provides an alphabetical State-by-State listing of the FR programs identified in each
State, including identification of the trigger for the FR requirement and the liabilities covered. For each
program, a hyperlink is provided for a publicly available version of the statute and/or regulation describing
the program. Links to authorizing statutes and/or implementing regulations are included in the table. The
trigger for the FR requirement is the activity or action that subjects an individual or company to an FR
requirement. The trigger for the FR requirement may be (1) ownership or use of a specific piece of
equipment or product (e.g., ownership of an underground storage tank that contains regulated
substances) or (2) engagement in a specified activity (e.g., a release of a hazardous substance). Where
State Funds are identified, the "Trigger for FR requirement" column identifies the mechanisms (e.g., fee on
the generation of hazardous waste) by which the facilities in NAICS Code 325 would be required to
contribute to the fund. The covered liabilities described in the table are the full scope of liabilities that are
discussed for the program, but are subject to various limitations and exclusions that are not discussed in
detail in this report.

Program name

(including hyperlink to
publicly available version
of statute and/or
regulation)

Trigger for FR requirement

Covered liabilities

Alaska

Financial Responsibility
Required for
Petrochemical Facility

AS § 46.03.830

Operating a petrochemical facility.

Control of hazardous wastes that
will be used, produced, or
disposed of at the petrochemical
facility.

Release Prevention and
Response Fund (State
fund)

AS § 46.08.020
AS § 46.08.025

Funding comes in part from a per
barrel of oil production surcharge, as
well as fines, penalties, or damages
recovered under AS 46.08.005-
46.08.080 or other law for costs
incurred by the State as a result of a
release or threatened release of a
hazardous substance.

Contain, clean up, and take other
necessary action, such as
monitoring and assessing, to
address a release or threatened
release of a hazardous substance.

Discharge Reporting,
Clean Up, and Disposal of
Hazardous Substances

18 AAC 75.375(e)

Department determination associated
with institutional controls for a
discharge or release of a hazardous
substance.

Costs of operation and
maintenance, including
compliance monitoring and
corrective measures, for any
institutional control.

A-l


-------
Program name

(including hyperlink to
publicly available version
of statute and/or
regulation)

Trigger for FR requirement

Covered liabilities

California





Hazardous Substances
Account Act (State Fund)

Cal HS Code 6.8-20 §
25300-25395.45

Funded in part by monies from State
cost recoveries, fees, fines, or
penalties incurred or received from
responsible parties during
enforcement actions.

Removal or remedial action, site
operation and maintenance, 10%
State share of CERCLA costs,
certain third-party compensation
of costs and losses.

Florida





Pollutant Discharge
Prevention - Water
Quality Assurance Trust
Fund (State Fund)

Fla. Stat. § 376.307

Funding comes in part from (1) a tax
imposed on those engaged in the
production of motor fuel, diesel fuel,
aviation fuel, or other pollutants and
(2) moneys recovered by the State as
a result of actions initiated against a
person for a violation of Florida
Statutes Chapter 403, Environmental
Control, that result in injury to the air,
waters, or property, including animal,
plant, and aquatic life.

Assessment, clean up,
restoration, monitoring, and
maintenance of any site involving
spills, discharges, or escapes of
pollutants or hazardous
substances which occur as a
result of procedures taken by
private and governmental
entities involving the storage,
transportation, and disposal of
pollutants or hazardous
substances. Funds can also be
used for CERCLA response
actions.

Facilities, Financial
Responsibility

Fla. Stat. § 376.309(1)

Owning an underground tank over
110 gallons that contains any
hazardous substances or pollutants or
owning an aboveground tank with
storage capacity more than 550
gallons that contain any pollutants.

Liabilities incurred under the
Statute, including liabilities
associated with pollution of
surface and ground waters,
discharge removal, and damage
to natural resources.

Phosphogypsum
Management Program

Owning or operating a
phosphogypsum stack system.

Closure of the site, long-term
care, and water management.

Fla. Stat. §§ 403.4154 -
403.4155





Fla. Admin. Code Ann. r.
62-673.640





Georgia





Georgia Hazardous Waste
Trust Fund (State Fund)

GA. Code Ann. §§ 12-8-91
_ 12-8-95

Funding comes in part from hazardous
waste management fees paid by
generators of hazardous waste,
hazardous substance release reporting
fees, and cost recovery from
corrective actions and enforcement.

Investigation, detoxification,
removal, and disposal of any
hazardous wastes, hazardous
constituents, or hazardous
substances at sites where
corrective action is necessary to

A-2


-------
Program name

(including hyperlink to
publicly available version
of statute and/or
regulation)

Trigger for FR requirement

Covered liabilities





mitigate a present or future
danger to human health or the
environment. Emergency actions
the director considers necessary
to protect public health, safety,
or the environment whenever
there is a release of hazardous
wastes, hazardous constituents,
or hazardous substances. Funds
can also be used for CERCLA
response actions.

Georgia Corrective Action
Order Financial Assurance

GA. Code Ann. § 12-8-95

An order requiring corrective action
for the release of hazardous
substances.

Corrective action.

Voluntary Remediation
Program - Hazardous
Wastes

GA. Code Ann. § 12-8-107

Participating in voluntary remediation
program for sites contaminated with
hazardous and regulated substances.

Clean up and remediation of
hazardous and regulated
substances at properties that are
not listed on the NPL or currently
undergoing remediation. Includes
soil and water remediation and
reclamation.

Illinois





Hazardous Waste Fund
(State Fund)

415 ILCS 5/22.2

Funding comes in part from a tax on
the disposal of waste, per unit of
volume, at hazardous waste facilities.
The tax is collected from the owners
and operators of disposal facilities
according to the amount of waste
they process.

Preventative and corrective
action in response to the release
of hazardous substances, State
compliance with CERCLA, and
groundwater protection
activities.

Indiana





Disposal of Wastes
Containing PCBs

329 IAC 4.1-12

Owning or operating facilities that
dispose of PCBs in landfills or
alternative disposal areas.

Closure and post-closure care.

Hazardous Substances
Response Trust Fund
(State Fund)

Funding comes in part from a fee on
the disposal of hazardous waste by
generators.

State responses to hazardous
releases.

IN Code § 13-25-4





A-3


-------
Program name

(including hyperlink to
publicly available version
of statute and/or
regulation)

Trigger for FR requirement

Covered liabilities

Iowa





Iowa Hazardous
Substances Remedial Fund
(State Fund)

Iowa Code § 455B.423(6)

Funding comes from fees from
hazardous waste generators and
transporters, as well as enforcement
penalties.

Corrective action and
remediation of hazardous
substance disposal sites. Includes
financing of clean up,
remediation, and post-closure
operation and maintenance
costs.

Kansas





No relevant programs identified.

Kentucky





No relevant programs identified.

Louisiana





Remediation of Usable
Ground Water

La. R.S. § 30:2015.1

Court determination that
contamination of usable ground water
exists which poses a threat to the
public health and that evaluation or
remediation is required to protect
usable ground water.

Implementation of a plan for
evaluating and remediating the
contamination and protecting the
usable ground water consistent
with the health, safety, and
welfare of the people.

Hazardous Waste Site
Clean-up Fund (State
Fund)

La. R.S. § 30:2205

Funding comes in part from a tax on
the disposal of hazardous waste.

In addition to providing for the
remediation of hazardous waste,
the assessment, clean up, and
associated costs of nonhazardous
waste sites determined to be
priority sites by the Secretary. No
further guidance as to the
determination of priority sites
was identified in Louisiana
hazardous and solid waste law.

Michigan





Environmental
Remediation Statute - No
further action report

MCL 324.20114d(4)(b)

Submission of a no further action
report associated with a remedial
action for a release of hazardous
substances, which requires a
proposed post-closure agreement.

Monitoring, operation and
maintenance, oversight, and
other costs determined
necessary by the department to
assure the effectiveness and
integrity of the remedial action.

Leaking Underground
Storage Tanks - Corrective
Action Plan

Creation of a corrective action plan for
a release of regulated substances,
which includes a sub-set of CERCLA

Monitoring, operation, and
maintenance necessary to assure
the effectiveness and integrity of

A-4


-------
Program name

(including hyperlink to
publicly available version
of statute and/or
regulation)

Trigger for FR requirement

Covered liabilities

MCL 324.21309a(2)(f)

hazardous substances, from an
underground storage tank system, if
the corrective action plan includes the
operation of a mechanical soil or
groundwater remediation system or
both. [Note: No implementing
regulations were identified pursuant
to this statute.]

the corrective action remediation
system.

Minnesota





Hazardous Substance
Discharge Preparedness

Minn Stat. § 115E.01
Minn Stat. § 115E.05

An order associated with a responsible
party's response to a hazardous
substance release.

Corrective action and response
costs.

Minnesota Remediation
Fund (State Fund)

Minn Stat. § 116.155

Funding comes in part from cost
recoveries and natural resource
damages.

Corrective action to address
releases of hazardous substances
and for environmental response
actions at qualified landfill
facilities.

Missouri





Hazardous Waste Fund
(State Fund)

Mo. Ann. Stat. § 260.391

Funding comes in part from fees paid
by the generators of hazardous
wastes.

Clean up of hazardous
substances, site remediation
activities, and post closure
operation and maintenance
costs.

New Jersey





Powers of the Department
of Environmental
Protection

An order of the NJ Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP)to
correct a violation of DEP regulations.

Good faith compliance with the
order.

N.J. Stat. § 13:lD-9(u)





Spill Compensation Fund
(State Fund)

N.J. Stat. § 58:10-23.lie
N.J. Stat. § 58: 10-23.llh

Funding comes in part from taxes on
the owners or operators of major
facilities receiving the transfer of
petroleum and/or hazardous
substances, assessed according to the
volume of the substance transferred.

Removal and clean up of
hazardous substances, natural
resource damages restoration
and replacement, compensation
for damage and/or destruction of
real or personal property and
associated lost income,
compensation for loss of tax
revenue, and interest on loans.

A-5


-------
Program name

(including hyperlink to
publicly available version
of statute and/or
regulation)

Trigger for FR requirement

Covered liabilities

Underground Storage
Tank Regulations

N.J. Stat. § 58:10A-24.4
N.J. Stat. § 58:10A-25a(8)

Servicing an underground storage tank
containing CERCLA hazardous
substances.

Remediation and compensating
third parties for bodily injury and
property damage.

Hazardous Discharge Site
Remediation

N.J. Stat. § 58:10B-1.3

Directive or order by a State agency or
court to clean up and remove a
hazardous substance or hazardous
waste discharge.

Remediation.

Remediation Guarantee
Fund (State Fund)

N.J. Stat. § 58:10B-3
N.J. Stat. § 58:10B-20

Funding comes in part from a
surcharge on parties required to
remediate hazardous substance or
waste, per N.J. Stat. § 58: 10B-11, and
appropriations, subrogation
recoveries, and investment earnings.

Remediation.

Site Remediation
Professional Licensing and
Regulation

N.J. Stat. § 58:10C-19

At the discretion of the department,
the operation, maintenance, and
inspection of engineering or
institutional controls and related
systems installed as part of a remedial
action of a contaminated site.

Operation, maintenance, and
inspection of engineering
controls as part of a remedial
action of a contaminated site for
the period that such controls are
required.

Industrial Site Recovery
Act Rules

N.J.A.C. 7:26B et subsa.

Proposing closure or transferring an
industrial establishment in need of
remediation to a new owner or
operator.

Site remediation, meaning the
investigation and/or clean up of
any known or suspected
discharge of hazardous waste,
substance, or pollutant into the
lands or waters of the State.

New Mexico





Corrective Action Fund -
Storage Tanks (State Fund
and FR requirement)

NM Stat. 74-6B-7

Funding comes in part from yearly
fees from owners and operators of
above and below ground storage
tanks containing regulated
substances, which include a sub-set of
CERCLA hazardous substances (State
fund).

Corrective action at above and
underground storage tanks to
pay for the costs of a site
assessment, the State's share of
the federal leaking underground
storage tank trust fund, and to
make payments to or on behalf
of owners or operators for
corrective action.

A-6


-------
Program name

(including hyperlink to
publicly available version
of statute and/or
regulation)

Trigger for FR requirement

Covered liabilities



Receipt by the owner or operator of
notification of incapacity of the
corrective action fund to cover
corrective action and remediation of
contamination from above and below
ground storage tanks (FR
requirement).

Corrective action and
remediation.

Hazardous Waste
Emergency Fund (State
Fund)

NM Stat. 74-4-7

Funding comes in part from penalties
collected by the Division against
responsible parties for hazardous
substance incidents.

Clean up and corrective action of
hazardous substance releases,
disposal of hazardous substances,
and necessary repairs of State
property.

North Carolina





Risk Based Environmental
Remediation of Sites

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 130A-
310.69:

N.C. Gen. Stat § 130A-
309.72

Conducting remediation of a
contaminated site, including those
requiring remediation pursuant to
CERCLA, RCRA, and the Oil Pollution
and Hazardous Substance Control Act,
among other laws.

Implementation and
maintenance of the actions or
controls specified in an approved
remedial action plan for the site.

Ohio





No relevant programs identified.

Oklahoma





No relevant programs identified.

Pennsylvania





Storage Tank and Spill
Prevention

35. P.S. §6021.701

25 PA. Code Chapter 245

Owning or operating a storage tank
containing regulated substances, which
include a sub-set of CERCLA hazardous
substances. [Note: Although the
authorizing Statute grants authority to
impose FR requirements on both
aboveground and underground storage
tanks, implementing regulations apply
only to underground storage tanks.]

Corrective action and bodily
injury and property damage
caused by releases arising from
operation of storage tank.

A-7


-------
Program name

(including hyperlink to
publicly available version
of statute and/or
regulation)

Trigger for FR requirement

Covered liabilities

Texas





Texas Hazardous and Solid
Waste Remediation Fee
Account (State Fund)

Funding comes in part from fees
imposed on the owners and operators
of hazardous waste facilities.

Removal and remediation of solid
waste or hazardous substances.

Texas Health And Safety
Code § 361.133





Texas Risk Reduction
Program, Remediation
Standard B

30 TAC § 350.33
30 TAC § 37.4021

Releasing chemicals of concern, as
defined by a number of Texas
environmental programs, and
developing a response action pursuant
to Remedy Standard B.

Post-response action care.

Texas Risk Reduction
Program, Facility
Operations Area

30 TAC § 350.134
30 TAC § 37.4031

Establishing a Facility Operations Area
to address multiple sources of
chemicals of concern, which may
include CERCLA hazardous substances,
within an operational chemical or
petroleum manufacturing plant which
is required to perform corrective action
pursuant to industrial solid waste
regulations.

Post-response action care.

Utah





Hazardous Substances
Mitigation Fund (State
Fund)

Utah Code Ann. § 19-6-
307

Funded in part by waste disposal fees.

Emergency actions, remedial
investigations, and the amounts
required by the federal
government as the State's
portion of the cost of clean ups
under CERCLA.

Virginia





No relevant programs identified.

Washington





State Toxics Control
Accounts (State Fund)

Rev. Code Was. §
70.105D.070

Funded in part by a percentage
pollution tax on the wholesale value of
possessed hazardous substances by
holders of hazardous substances.

Hazardous waste clean up, spill
response, hazardous waste
planning, management,
regulation, and enforcement.

A-8


-------
Program name

(including hyperlink to
publicly available version
of statute and/or
regulation)

Trigger for FR requirement

Covered liabilities

Releases from Regulated
Units

WAC § 173-303-64620
WAC § 173-303-645

Owning or operating a facility with
releases of dangerous wastes, which
include hazardous substances and their
constituents.

Corrective action.

Model Toxics Control Act
WAC § 173-340-440

Department order after release of a
hazardous substance where the clean-
up action includes engineering and/or
institutional controls.

Operation and maintenance of
the clean-up action, including
institutional control, compliance
monitoring, and corrective
actions.

Underground Storage
Tanks - Storage of
Regulated Substances

Rev. Code Was. § 90.76

Submitting a license application for an
UST system that contains regulated
substances, which include hazardous
substances and mixtures of petroleum
and hazardous substances.

Remediation and compensation
of third parties for bodily injury
and property damage due to
sudden and non-sudden
accidental releases.

WAC § 173-360A-0200
WAC § 173-360A-1000 et
seq.





Wisconsin





Sites with Residual
Contamination from
Hazardous Substances

Wis. Stat. §
292.12(2)(d)(2)

Approving an interim action, a remedial
action, or a case close letter if residual
contamination remains on a site after
conclusion of an interim action or a
remedial action.

Remedial action at site with
residual contamination.

Voluntary Remediation

Wis. Stat. § 292.15(2)(ae):
Wis. Stat. § 292.15(2)(af)

Application for approval of a voluntary
response based on natural attenuation
or additional remediation needed for
contaminated sediments.

Response and restoration.

Wis. Admin. Code § NR
754.11(3)





Wyoming





Voluntary Remediation of
Contaminated Sites

WY Stat § 35-ll-1607(b)(i)

Entering a voluntary remedy
agreement with the Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality.

Performance and maintenance of
engineering controls and any
monitoring activities required in
remedy agreement.

A-9


-------
Append	thodology for Selecting States Reviewed

The following sections summarize findings about the geographic distribution of facilities within the 50
States and the District of Columbia for each of the NAICS classes of interest. EPA relied upon EPA
rulemakings, industry sources, and the U.S. Census Bureau's County Business Pattern data to generate the
results. The Census Bureau collects data on the number of "establishments" within each geographic area;
it defines an "establishment" as "a single physical location at which business is conducted or services or
industrial operations are performed."10

The Census Bureau collects establishment information by the number of employees at each establishment
(i.e., number of establishments in a given State with 1-4 employees, number of establishments in a given
State with 5-9 employees, etc.). For the purposes of generating a representative sample of States for
regulatory information collection, EPA included all of the establishments in a given State, regardless of
employment, in its findings.

The sections below discuss in detail the method for identifying representative samples of States from
which to collect FR regulatory information. In summary, the States identified that had significant number
of facilities in each industry include:

•	NAICS 2211 (221112 - Coal-Fired Electric Utility Power Plants): Pennsylvania, Michigan, Indiana,
Illinois, Missouri, Texas, Kentucky, Iowa, Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida, Minnesota, and North Carolina.

•	NAICS 324 (324110 - Petroleum Refineries, and 324199 - All Other Petroleum and Coal Products
Manufacturing): Texas, Louisiana, California, Alaska, Oklahoma, Utah, Washington, Wyoming,
Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Virginia.

•	NAICS 325 - Chemical Manufacturing: California, Texas, Illinois, Florida, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
New York, and Georgia.

EPA included every State that appeared at least once in the above lists. This resulted in EPA reviewing the
following 25 States to identify existing FR programs:

Alaska, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas,

Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

NAICS 221112: Fossil Fuel Powered Utility Plants

NAICS 221112 includes all fossil fuel powered electric power generation facilities. The data from EPA's coal
combustion residuals rulemaking is specific to coal-fired plants, while the Census Bureau data on NAICS
221112 establishments reflects the geographic distribution of all fossil fuel powered plants.

Table 1, below, summarizes the geographic distribution of the affected universe of coal-fired utility plants
from EPA's 2015 coal combustion residuals rulemaking and presented in EPA's 2018 RCRA disposal of coal
combustion residuals rulemaking.

10 U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns, Glossary, accessed July 27, 2018 at:
https://www.census.gov/programs-survevs/cbp/about/glossarv.html.

B-l


-------
Table 1. Coal-Fired Electric Utility Plants Affected by the 2015 CCR Rule by State

Row

State

Plants

% of Total
Plants

Cumulative %

1

Pennsylvania

24

5.8%

5.8%

2

Michigan

23

5.6%

11.4%

3

Indiana

21

5.1%

16.5%

4

Illinois

19

4.6%

21.1%

5

Missouri

19

4.6%

25.7%

6

Texas

18

4.4%

30.0%

7

Kentucky

17

4.1%

34.1%

8

Iowa

16

3.9%

38.0%

9

Ohio

16

3.9%

41.9%

10

Wisconsin

16

3.9%

45.8%

11

Florida

14

3.4%

49.2%

12

Minnesota

14

3.4%

52.5%

13

North Carolina

14

3.4%

55.9%

14

Colorado

12

2.9%

58.8%

15

Virginia

12

2.9%

61.7%

16

Wyoming

11

2.7%

64.4%

17

Alabama

10

2.4%

66.8%

18

Georgia

10

2.4%

69.2%

19

West Virginia

10

2.4%

71.7%

20

California

8

1.9%

73.6%

21

New York

8

1.9%

75.5%

22

South Carolina

8

1.9%

77.5%

23

Kansas

7

1.7%

79.2%

24

Maryland

7

1.7%

80.9%

25

North Dakota

7

1.7%

82.6%

26

Nebraska

7

1.7%

84.3%

27

Tennessee

7

1.7%

86.0%

28

Arizona

6

1.5%

87.4%

29

Oklahoma

6

1.5%

88.9%

30

Arkansas

5

1.2%

90.1%

31

Mississippi

5

1.2%

91.3%

32

Montana

5

1.2%

92.5%

33

New Jersey

5

1.2%

93.7%

34

Utah

5

1.2%

94.9%

35

Louisiana

4

1.0%

95.9%

36

New Mexico

4

1.0%

96.9%

37

Hawaii

2

0.5%

97.3%

38

Massachusetts

2

0.5%

97.8%

39

New Hampshire

2

0.5%

98.3%

40

Nevada

2

0.5%

98.8%

41

South Dakota

2

0.5%

99.3%

42

Alaska

1

0.2%

99.5%

B-2


-------
Row

State

Plants

% of Total
Plants

Cumulative %

43

Connecticut

1

0.2%

99.8%

44

Maine

1

0.2%

100.0%

45

District of Columbia

0

0.0%

100.0%

46

Delaware

0

0.0%

100.0%

47

Idaho

0

0.0%

100.0%

48

Oregon

0

0.0%

100.0%

49

Rhode Island

0

0.0%

100.0%

50

Vermont

0

0.0%

100.0%

51

Washington

0

0.0%

100.0%

52

Total

413

100%



Source: Regulatory Impact Analysis: EPA's 2018 RCRA Proposed Rule Disposal of Coal Combustion
Residuals from Electric Utilities; Amendments to the National Minimum Criteria (Phase One), U.S. EPA,
Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, March 2018.

Table 2, below, summarizes the geographic distribution of NAICS 221112 establishments from the Census
Bureau's 2016 County Business Patterns data, which include all fossil fuel powered electric power
generation facilities.

Table 2. NAICS 221112 Establishments by State, 2016 U.S. Census County Business Patterns Data

Row

State

Establishments

% of Total
Establishments

Cumulative %

1

Texas

155

10.4%

10.4%

2

Louisiana

79

5.3%

15.7%

3

California

72

4.8%

20.5%

4

Ohio

71

4.8%

25.3%

5

Pennsylvania

70

4.7%

30.0%

6

North Carolina

60

4.0%

34.0%

7

New York

56

3.8%

37.8%

8

Georgia

54

3.6%

41.4%

9

Florida

47

3.2%

44.6%

10

Colorado

46

3.1%

47.7%

11

Oklahoma

45

3.0%

50.7%

12

Kentucky

44

3.0%

53.6%

13

Missouri

41

2.8%

56.4%

14

Illinois

40

2.7%

59.1%

15

Indiana

38

2.6%

61.6%

16

New Jersey

38

2.6%

64.2%

17

Michigan

36

2.4%

66.6%

18

Minnesota

35

2.3%

68.9%

19

Wisconsin

33

2.2%

71.1%

20

Alabama

27

1.8%

73.0%

21

Utah

27

1.8%

74.8%

22

Massachusetts

26

1.7%

76.5%

23

Arkansas

23

1.5%

78.1%

B-3


-------
Row

State

Establishments

% of Total
Establishments

Cumulative %

24

Kansas

22

1.5%

79.5%

25

Maryland

22

1.5%

81.0%

26

Alaska

21

1.4%

82.4%

27

Virginia

21

1.4%

83.8%

28

Mississippi

20

1.3%

85.2%

29

Iowa

18

1.2%

86.4%

30

South Carolina

18

1.2%

87.6%

31

West Virginia

18

1.2%

88.8%

32

New Mexico

16

1.1%

89.9%

33

Nevada

13

0.9%

90.7%

34

North Dakota

13

0.9%

91.6%

35

Arizona

12

0.8%

92.4%

36

Connecticut

12

0.8%

93.2%

37

Delaware

12

0.8%

94.0%

38

Hawaii

12

0.8%

94.8%

39

Wyoming

11

0.7%

95.6%

40

Idaho

9

0.6%

96.2%

41

Nebraska

8

0.5%

96.7%

42

South Dakota

8

0.5%

97.2%

43

Washington

8

0.5%

97.8%

44

New Hampshire

7

0.5%

98.3%

45

Oregon

6

0.4%

98.7%

46

Montana

5

0.3%

99.0%

47

Rhode Island

5

0.3%

99.3%

48

Maine

4

0.3%

99.6%

49

District of Columbia

3

0.2%

99.8%

50

Vermont

2

0.1%

99.9%

51

Tennessee

1

0.1%

100.0%

52

Total

1490

100%



Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 County Business Patterns Data for NAICS 221112, accessed July 27, 2018
at: https://www.census.gov/programs-survevs/cbp/data/tables.html.

EPA collected State FR regulatory information from the 13 States with the most coal-fired plants that
constitute over 50 percent of the affected universe (by facility count): Pennsylvania, Michigan, Indiana,
Illinois, Missouri, Texas, Kentucky, Iowa, Ohio, Wisconsin, Florida, Minnesota, and North Carolina.

NAICS 324: Petroleum Refineries (NAICS 3 24110) and All Other Petroleum and Coal
Manufacturing (NAICS 324199)

Table 3, below, summarizes the geographic distribution of petroleum refineries in the United States as of
January 1, 2018 from the Energy Information Administration (EIA)'s 2018 Refinery Capacity Report.

B-4


-------
Table 3. Petroleum Refineries by State, 2018 EIA Refinery Capacity Report

Row

State

Refineries

% of Total
Refineries

Cumulative %

1

Texas

29

21.5%

21.5%

2

Louisiana

17

12.6%

34.1%

3

California

16

11.9%

45.9%

4

Alaska

5

3.7%

49.6%

5

Oklahoma

5

3.7%

53.3%

6

Utah

5

3.7%

57.0%

7

Washington

5

3.7%

60.7%

8

Wyoming

5

3.7%

64.4%

9

Illinois

4

3.0%

67.4%

10

Montana

4

3.0%

70.4%

11

Ohio

4

3.0%

73.3%

12

Pennsylvania

4

3.0%

76.3%

13

Alabama

3

2.2%

78.5%

14

Kansas

3

2.2%

80.7%

15

Mississippi

3

2.2%

83.0%

16

Arkansas

2

1.5%

84.4%

17

Hawaii

2

1.5%

85.9%

18

Indiana

2

1.5%

87.4%

19

Kentucky

2

1.5%

88.9%

20

Minnesota

2

1.5%

90.4%

21

New Jersey

2

1.5%

91.9%

22

New Mexico

2

1.5%

93.3%

23

North Dakota

2

1.5%

94.8%

24

Colorado

1

0.7%

95.6%

25

Delaware

1

0.7%

96.3%

26

Michigan

1

0.7%

97.0%

27

Nevada

1

0.7%

97.8%

28

Tennessee

1

0.7%

98.5%

29

West Virginia

1

0.7%

99.3%

30

Wisconsin

1

0.7%

100.0%

31

Arizona

0

0.0%

100.0%

32

Connecticut

0

0.0%

100.0%

33

District of Columbia

0

0.0%

100.0%

34

Florida

0

0.0%

100.0%

35

Georgia

0

0.0%

100.0%

36

Idaho

0

0.0%

100.0%

37

Iowa

0

0.0%

100.0%

38

Maine

0

0.0%

100.0%

39

Maryland

0

0.0%

100.0%

40

Massachusetts

0

0.0%

100.0%

41

Missouri

0

0.0%

100.0%

42

Nebraska

0

0.0%

100.0%

B-5


-------
Row

State

Refineries

% of Total
Refineries

Cumulative %

43

New Hampshire

0

0.0%

100.0%

44

New York

0

0.0%

100.0%

45

North Carolina

0

0.0%

100.0%

46

Oregon

0

0.0%

100.0%

47

Rhode Island

0

0.0%

100.0%

48

South Carolina

0

0.0%

100.0%

49

South Dakota

0

0.0%

100.0%

50

Vermont

0

0.0%

100.0%

51

Virginia

0

0.0%

100.0%

52

Total

135

100%



Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Petroleum Refinery Capacity Report, as of January 1,
2018, accessed July 27, 2018 at: https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/refinervcapacitv/.

Table 4, below, summarizes the geographic distribution of NAICS 324110 establishments in the United
States from the Census Bureau's 2016 County Business Patterns data.

Table 4. NAICS 324110 Establishments by State, 2016 U.S. Census County Business Patterns Data







% of Total



Row

State

Establishments

Establishments

Cumulative %

1

Texas

38

19.3%

19.3%

2

California

24

12.2%

31.5%

3

Louisiana

20

10.2%

41.6%

4

Oklahoma

9

4.6%

46.2%

5

Pennsylvania

9

4.6%

50.8%

6

Illinois

6

3.0%

53.8%

7

New Jersey

6

3.0%

56.9%

8

Ohio

6

3.0%

59.9%

9

Washington

6

3.0%

62.9%

10

Wyoming

6

3.0%

66.0%

11

Alaska

5

2.5%

68.5%

12

Utah

5

2.5%

71.1%

13

Indiana

4

2.0%

73.1%

14

Mississippi

4

2.0%

75.1%

15

Montana

4

2.0%

77.2%

16

Alabama

3

1.5%

78.7%

17

Arkansas

3

1.5%

80.2%

18

Kansas

3

1.5%

81.7%

19

Kentucky

3

1.5%

83.2%

20

Michigan

3

1.5%

84.8%

21

New York

3

1.5%

86.3%

22

Colorado

2

1.0%

87.3%

23

Florida

2

1.0%

88.3%

24

Hawaii

2

1.0%

89.3%

25

Iowa

2

1.0%

90.4%

B-6


-------
Row

State

Establishments

% of Total
Establishments

Cumulative %

26

Massachusetts

2

1.0%

91.4%

27

Minnesota

2

1.0%

92.4%

28

Missouri

2

1.0%

93.4%

29

Nevada

2

1.0%

94.4%

30

New Mexico

2

1.0%

95.4%

31

North Carolina

2

1.0%

96.4%

32

North Dakota

2

1.0%

97.5%

33

Delaware

1

0.5%

98.0%

34

Georgia

1

0.5%

98.5%

35

Tennessee

1

0.5%

99.0%

36

West Virginia

1

0.5%

99.5%

37

Wisconsin

1

0.5%

100.0%

38

Arizona

0

0.0%

100.0%

39

Connecticut

0

0.0%

100.0%

40

District of Columbia

0

0.0%

100.0%

41

Idaho

0

0.0%

100.0%

42

Maine

0

0.0%

100.0%

43

Maryland

0

0.0%

100.0%

44

Nebraska

0

0.0%

100.0%

45

New Hampshire

0

0.0%

100.0%

46

Oregon

0

0.0%

100.0%

47

Rhode Island

0

0.0%

100.0%

48

South Carolina

0

0.0%

100.0%

49

South Dakota

0

0.0%

100.0%

50

Vermont

0

0.0%

100.0%

51

Virginia

0

0.0%

100.0%

52

Total

197

100%



Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 County Business Patterns Data for NAICS 324110, accessed July 27, 2018
at: https://www.census.gov/programs-survevs/cbp/data/tables.html.

Table 5, below, summarizes the geographic distribution of NACIS 324199 establishments in the United
States from the Census Bureau's 2016 County Business Patterns data.

Table 5. NAICS 324199 Establishments by State, 2016 U.S. Census County Business Patterns Data

Row

State

Establishments

% of Total
Establishments

Cumulative %

1

Pennsylvania

15

15.0%

15.0%

2

Texas

11

11.0%

26.0%

3

Louisiana

10

10.0%

36.0%

4

California

6

6.0%

42.0%

5

Illinois

6

6.0%

48.0%

6

Virginia

5

5.0%

53.0%

7

Colorado

4

4.0%

57.0%

8

Missouri

4

4.0%

61.0%

B-7


-------
Row

State

Establishments

% of Total
Establishments

Cumulative %

9

Alabama

3

3.0%

64.0%

10

Massachusetts

3

3.0%

67.0%

11

Michigan

3

3.0%

70.0%

12

Ohio

3

3.0%

73.0%

13

Connecticut

2

2.0%

75.0%

14

Florida

2

2.0%

77.0%

15

Georgia

2

2.0%

79.0%

16

Indiana

2

2.0%

81.0%

17

Kansas

2

2.0%

83.0%

18

Kentucky

2

2.0%

85.0%

19

Mississippi

2

2.0%

87.0%

20

Nevada

2

2.0%

89.0%

21

Oklahoma

2

2.0%

91.0%

22

South Carolina

2

2.0%

93.0%

23

Wisconsin

2

2.0%

95.0%

24

Idaho

1

1.0%

96.0%

25

Maryland

1

1.0%

97.0%

26

North Carolina

1

1.0%

98.0%

27

Utah

1

1.0%

99.0%

28

Wyoming

1

1.0%

100.0%

29

Alaska

0

0.0%

100.0%

30

Arizona

0

0.0%

100.0%

31

Arkansas

0

0.0%

100.0%

32

Delaware

0

0.0%

100.0%

33

District of Columbia

0

0.0%

100.0%

34

Hawaii

0

0.0%

100.0%

35

Iowa

0

0.0%

100.0%

36

Maine

0

0.0%

100.0%

37

Minnesota

0

0.0%

100.0%

38

Montana

0

0.0%

100.0%

39

Nebraska

0

0.0%

100.0%

40

New Hampshire

0

0.0%

100.0%

41

New Jersey

0

0.0%

100.0%

42

New Mexico

0

0.0%

100.0%

43

New York

0

0.0%

100.0%

44

North Dakota

0

0.0%

100.0%

45

Oregon

0

0.0%

100.0%

46

Rhode Island

0

0.0%

100.0%

47

South Dakota

0

0.0%

100.0%

48

Tennessee

0

0.0%

100.0%

49

Vermont

0

0.0%

100.0%

50

Washington

0

0.0%

100.0%

51

West Virginia

0

0.0%

100.0%

52

Total

100

100%



B-8


-------
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 County Business Patterns Data for NAICS 324119, accessed July 27, 2018
at: https://www.census.gov/programs-survevs/cbp/data/tables.html.

From a NAICS 324 perspective, EPA decided to include in its review of existing FR programs, eight States
with the most refineries that constitute greater than 50 percent of the refineries in the United States from
the ElA's Refinery Capacity Report data, as well as the three additional States that have the most number
of NAICS 324199 establishments that constitute greater than 50 percent of the NAICS 324199
establishments in the United States from the U.S. Census's County Business Patterns data. Together, those
11 States are: Texas, Louisiana, California, Alaska, Oklahoma, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, Pennsylvania,
Illinois, and Virginia.

NAICS 3 25: Chemical Manufacturing

Table 6, below, summarizes the geographic distribution of NAICS 325 establishments from the Census
Bureau's 2016 County Business Patterns data.

Table 6. NAICS 325 Establishments by State, 2016 U.S. Census County Business Patterns Data

Row

State

Establishments

% of Total
Establishments

Cumulative %

1

California

1657

12.3%

12.3%

2

Texas

1119

8.3%

20.6%

3

Illinois

685

5.1%

25.7%

4

Ohio

678

5.0%

30.7%

5

Florida

606

4.5%

35.2%

6

New Jersey

594

4.4%

39.6%

7

Pennsylvania

576

4.3%

43.9%

8

New York

568

4.2%

48.1%

9

Georgia

483

3.6%

51.7%

10

North Carolina

448

3.3%

55.0%

11

Michigan

381

2.8%

57.8%

12

Wisconsin

345

2.6%

60.4%

13

Massachusetts

335

2.5%

62.9%

14

Indiana

324

2.4%

65.3%

15

Missouri

310

2.3%

67.6%

16

Minnesota

268

2.0%

69.6%

17

Tennessee

253

1.9%

71.4%

18

Washington

251

1.9%

73.3%

19

South Carolina

245

1.8%

75.1%

20

Louisiana

235

1.7%

76.9%

21

Oregon

224

1.7%

78.5%

22

Colorado

212

1.6%

80.1%

23

Kentucky

194

1.4%

81.5%

24

Iowa

191

1.4%

83.0%

25

Alabama

190

1.4%

84.4%

26

Utah

173

1.3%

85.6%

27

Arizona

171

1.3%

86.9%

28

Virginia

165

1.2%

88.1%

29

Connecticut

162

1.2%

89.3%

B-9


-------
Row

State

Establishments

% of Total
Establishments

Cumulative %

30

Maryland

153

1.1%

90.5%

31

Kansas

140

1.0%

91.5%

32

Oklahoma

136

1.0%

92.5%

33

Arkansas

101

0.7%

93.3%

34

Mississippi

99

0.7%

94.0%

35

Nebraska

89

0.7%

94.7%

36

Nevada

84

0.6%

95.3%

37

West Virginia

79

0.6%

95.9%

38

New Hampshire

73

0.5%

96.4%

39

Idaho

65

0.5%

96.9%

40

Maine

57

0.4%

97.3%

41

Delaware

54

0.4%

97.7%

42

Rhode Island

53

0.4%

98.1%

43

New Mexico

50

0.4%

98.5%

44

Montana

40

0.3%

98.8%

45

South Dakota

40

0.3%

99.1%

46

Vermont

36

0.3%

99.3%

47

Wyoming

35

0.3%

99.6%

48

Hawaii

25

0.2%

99.8%

49

North Dakota

13

0.1%

99.9%

50

Alaska

10

0.1%

100.0%

51

District of Columbia

5

0.0%

100.0%

52

Total

13480

100%



Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016 County Business Patterns Data for NAICS 325, accessed July 27, 2018 at:
https://www.census.gov/programs-survevs/cbp/data/tables.html.

From a NAICS 325 perspective, EPA wanted to ensure it collected FR regulatory information from the nine
States with the most establishments that constitute over 50 percent of the total establishments in the
United States: California, Texas, Illinois, Ohio, Florida, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, and Georgia.

EPA created a comprehensive list representing every State that appeared in a least one of the additional
classes industry lists. This list included 25 States and were the 25 States that were reviewed to identify
existing FR programs potentially applicable to one or more of the CERCLA 108(b) additional classes. The list
includes: Alaska, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas,

Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

B-10


-------