August 1995 Hotline Monthly Report
EPA530-R-95-002h
PB95-922 408
MONTHLY HOTLINE REPORT AVAILABILITY
The Monthly Hotline Report can be ordered through NTIS at (703)
487-4650. The NTIS order numbers are as follows:
Yearly Subscription PB95-922 400
January 1995 PB95-922 401
February 1995 PB95-922 402
March 1995 PB95-922 403
April 1995 PB95-922 404
May 1995 PB95-922 405
June 1995 PB95-922 406
July 1995 PB95-922 407
August 1995 PB95-922 408
EPA and State personnel can order the Monthly Hotline Report from
the RCRA Docket at (202) 260-9327. The order number for the 1995
yearly subscription is EPA530-R-95-002.
ELECTRONIC AVAILABILITY
The Monthly Hotline Report Questions and Answers are also
available for downloading at no charge from the CLU-IN bulletin
board at (301) 589-8366.
The complete text of the 1993, 1994, and 1995 Monthly Hotline
Reports may be accessed via the Internet using a gopher. From
the EPA Core Server at gopher.epa.gov, follow this pathway: EPA
Offices & Regions --> Office of Solid Waste & Emergency Response
--> OSW (RCRA) --> RCRA: General --> RCRA/UST, Superfund & EPCRA
Hotline Reports.
(Note: Office of Solid Waste, OSW, was renamed Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, ORCR, on January 18, 2009)
The Hotline maintains an electronic mailing list named
HOTLINE_OSWER. Subscribers will have Hotline announcements and
Monthly Hotline Reports e-mailed to them as they are released, at
no charge.
To subscribe to the Hotline electronic mailing list send an
e-mail to:
Listserver@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov
Subject: SUBSCRIBE TO LISTSERVERS
Message: SUBSCRIBE HOTLINE_OSWER
last name>
For example, SUBSCRIBE HOTLINE_OSWER JOHN SMITH
To receive the Help file with useful commands for users send
an e-mail to:
Listserver@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov
Subject: HELP
Message: HELP
___________________________________________________________________
OMB Control No. 2090-0019
Expires on 10/31/97
RCRA/UST, Superfund and EPCRA Hotline
Customer Satisfaction Survey on the Monthly Hotline Report
We would like to ensure that we are serving our customers by
providing the most useful information in the Monthly Hotline
Report. Please take a few moments to answer the following
questions.
1) How long have you been reading the Monthly Hotline Report?
____ More than one year
____ Less than one year
____ This is my first time
2) Characterize the manner in which you read the Monthly
Hotline Report
____ Thoroughly, from cover to cover
____ I glance through it occasionally
3) How do you generally use the Report's information?
4) Please indicate what sections of the Monthly Hotline Report
you generally read and how useful they are to you:
A. Questions and Answers
Do you read the Questions and Answers section?___Yes___ No
If yes, please indicate how useful this section is to you:
____ Very useful
____ Somewhat useful
____ Not very useful
____ Not useful at all
Comments:
B. New Publications
Do you read the New Publications section?____ Yes____ No
If yes, please indicate how useful this section is to you:
____ Very useful
____ Somewhat useful
____ Not very useful
____ Not useful at all
Comments:
C. Federal Registers
Do you read the Federal Register section?____ Yes____ No
If yes, please indicate how useful this section is to you:
Final Rules Proposed Rules Notices
________ ________ ______ Very useful
________ ________ ______ Somewhat useful
________ ________ ______ Not very useful
_________ _______ ______ Not useful at all
Because the FR notices are from the previous month, comment
periods for proposed rules have often passed. Is this
information still useful to you?____ Yes____ No
Comments:
D. Call Analysis (statistics)
Do you read the Call Analyses section?____ Yes____ No
If yes, please indicate how useful this section is to you:
____ Very useful
____ Somewhat useful
____ Not very useful
____ Not useful at all
Comments:
5) What additions or changes would you recommend to make the
Monthly Hotline Report a more useful tool?
Please return this survey to:
Carie VanHook
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street
Mailcode 5305W
Washington, DC 20460
Thank you for your time.
Public reporting burden is estimated to average 15 minutes per
response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
gathering information, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden
estimate or any other aspects of this collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Chief,
Information Policy Branch (2136), 401 M Street, SW, Washington,
DC 20460 and to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
Hotline Questions and Answers
RCRA
1. Purpose and Applicability of Speculative Accumulation
Provision
RCRA regulates secondary materials that are defined as solid
wastes when recycled. Whether or not a given material meets the
definition of solid waste when recycled depends primarily on how
the material is categorized (e.g., spent material, sludge,
commercial chemical product) and the means of recycling (e.g.,
burning for energy recovery, reclamation, use or reuse). The
RCRA Subtitle C regulations also indicate that materials which
are accumulated speculatively prior to recycling are solid
wastes (261.2(c)(4)). What is the purpose of this speculative
accumulation provision? To which materials does the provision
apply?
EPA created the speculative accumulation provision to
mitigate the risk posed by facilities that overaccumulate
hazardous secondary materials prior to recycling. The provision
serves as a safety net, preventing recyclable materials that are
not otherwise regulated under RCRA from being stored indefinitely
and potentially causing environmental damage. EPA subjects
persons who accumulate speculatively (i.e., persons who fail to
recycle a sufficient percentage of a recyclable material during
the calendar year or fail to demonstrate that a feasible means of
recycling exists) to immediate regulation as hazardous waste
generators or storage facilities. (50 FR 614, 650; January 4,
1985).
The speculative accumulation provision generally applies to
secondary materials that are not solid wastes when recycled
(261.1(c)(8), 261.2(c)(4), and 261.2(e)(2)(iii)). In other
words, certain secondary materials that are otherwise excluded
from the definition of solid waste become regulated as solid and
hazardous waste if accumulated speculatively. Among the
materials subject to this provision are:
Materials that are not solid wastes when recycled according to
261.2(e), including materials used or reused in an industrial
process to make a product; used or reused as effective
substitutes for commercial products; or returned to the
original process from which they are generated, without first
being reclaimed
Materials that are not solid wastes when reclaimed according
to 261.2, Table 1, such as by-products and sludges which
exhibit a characteristic of hazardous waste
Materials identified under 261.4(a) as exempt from the
definition of solid waste when reclaimed, including pulping
liquors that are reclaimed in a pulping liquor recovery
furnace and then reused in the pulping process (261.4(a)(6))
and spent sulfuric acid used to produce virgin sulfuric acid
(261.4(a)(7)).
The speculative accumulation provision generally does not
apply to materials that are defined as solid waste when recycled.
Speculative accumulation is thus not a factor in determining the
regulatory status of spent materials that are being reclaimed,
secondary materials burned for energy recovery, materials used in
a manner constituting disposal, or scrap metal (50 FR 614, 635).
Since EPA already exerts the appropriate level of regulatory
control over these solid wastes, as provided under 261.6 and
Part 266, the safety net provided by the speculative accumulation
provision is not needed.
There are two exceptions to the rule that speculative
accumulation applies to all materials that are not solid wastes
when recycled and does not apply to materials that are solid
wastes when recycled. Commercial chemical products are not solid
wastes when reclaimed (261.2, Table 1), or when they are burned
for energy recovery or used in a manner constituting disposal if
that is their normal manner of use (261.2(c)(1)(ii) and
261.2(c)(2)(ii)). Commercial chemical products are not, however,
subject to the speculative accumulation provision. EPA has not
placed any time constraint on the accumulation of commercial
chemical products prior to reclamation (50 FR 614, 636). In
addition, precious metal-containing materials are defined as
solid wastes when recycled but are also subject to accumulation
restrictions. If accumulated speculatively prior to reclamation,
precious metals become subject to full RCRA regulation, rather
than the reduced standards of Part 266, Subpart F (266.70(d)).
UST
2. Statistical Inventory Reconciliation for Underground
Storage Tank Leak Detection
Statistical inventory reconciliation (SIR) is a leak
detection method which analyzes product inventory, delivery, and
dispensing data collected over a period of time to determine
whether or not an underground storage tank (UST) system is
leaking. Pursuant to 40 CFR 280.41, petroleum USTs monitoring
monthly for leaks are required to use a method listed in 40 CFR
280.43(d)-(h). SIR is not one of the methods listed in
280.43(d)-(g). Is SIR an allowable alternative method for leak
detection under 280.43(h)?
Yes. Provided that a SIR method is capable of detecting a
0.2 gallon per hour leak rate or a release of 150 gallons within
a month, and meets federal requirements for probabilities of
detection (0.95) and false alarm (0.05), SIR is a valid method
for monthly monitoring (280.43(h)(1)).
For a SIR method, data are gathered daily and submitted
periodically to a SIR vendor for analysis. When first applied to
an UST system, SIR may not produce conclusive results. When
initiating use of a SIR method, or when transitioning from
another form of leak detection to SIR, owners/operators should
employ a backup method for leak detection to ensure compliance
with the leak detection regulations under 280.41 until the SIR
method provides conclusive results that the performance criteria
in 280.43(h) are being met.
CERCLA
3. Deferral of NPL Listing While States Oversee Response
Action
The June 23, 1993, Superfund Administrative Improvements,
Final Report (OSWER 9200.0-14-2) identified numerous initiatives
to improve the Superfund process, including enhancing the role of
states in the cleanup process. The report recommended developing
a program to encourage qualified states and tribes to address,
using their own laws, sites that are currently in the queue to be
considered for inclusion on the National Priorities List (NPL).
The report suggested that a state deferral program would
accelerate cleanup, minimize duplication of federal and state
efforts, and encourage potentially responsible parties (PRPs) to
undertake response actions. To implement the recommendations of
the report, on May 3, 1995, EPA issued Guidance on Deferral of
NPL Listing Determinations While States Oversee Response Actions
(OSWER 9375.6-11). How are sites deferred to states, and what
criteria or guidelines must be followed?
To be eligible to participate in the deferral program, a
state or tribe should meet certain criteria to assure that
response actions at deferred sites will be successfully
implemented. An EPA Region and state should enter into a generic
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that certifies that the state has:
1) adequate statutory, regulatory, or administrative provisions
to select protective remedies and to pursue necessary enforcement
actions; and 2) adequate program and resource capabilities to
select actions, conduct enforcement action, oversee cleanup
activities, and provide for community participation at deferred
sites. Having met all these criteria, a state may implement a
full-scale or area-wide deferral program. If the eligibility
criteria cannot be met sufficiently for a state to implement a
full-scale deferral program, the state may still be able to
participate in the deferral program on a site-specific basis,
provided the eligibility criteria are met for each site that is
deferred. EPA Regional offices and states should determine
eligibility for deferral based on the following criteria:
The state must express an interest in having the site
deferred.
The site proposed for deferral must be included in EPA s
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and
Liability Act Inventory System (CERCLIS).
The deferred site must be NPL caliber as defined in
Additional Guidance on Worst Sites and NPL Caliber Sites
to Assist in SACM Implementation (OSWER Directive 9320.2-
07A; October 12, 1993).
Viable and cooperative PRPs generally must be available to
conduct the response actions at the deferred sites. The
PRPs should be willing to enter into an enforceable
agreement with the state to conduct all response actions
(including providing for operation and maintenance) at the
site and repay any state and fund financed response costs
related to the deferral.
Generally, the site proposed for deferral should not yet
have been entered into the Hazard Ranking System (HRS)
package development process. If a task or work assignment
to develop the HRS package for the site has already been
issued, the site could be deferred if the state provides a
compelling reason why the listing process should be
terminated. A site on the final NPL is not eligible for
deferral.
If a Region, after consulting with the state, determines the
affected community or other parties have significant, valid
objections to the deferral of the site that cannot be
resolved, the Region should not defer the site.
The deferral program guidance also identifies certain
requirements with which a state must comply when taking
responsibility for the response action at a deferred site.
Generally, the remedies selected for deferred sites should be
protective within the 10-4 to 10-6 risk range and must comply with
all applicable federal and state requirements. Site-specific
agreements between states and EPA should describe the roles and
responsibilities of the different agencies, including EPA s
review and oversight functions, and schedules for conducting
response actions.
Under the deferral program, the state is responsible for
acquiring the necessary resources to conduct response actions.
EPA does not anticipate using Fund resources to conduct response
actions at deferred sites. Under limited circumstances, however,
states may receive funds through cooperative agreements to
conduct site-specific activity or to develop their capability to
participate in the deferral program.
EPCRA
4. SARA Title III on Indian Lands
In 1986, Congress passed the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), also known as Title III of
the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), to help
local communities, including Indian reservations, protect public
health and the environment from chemical hazards by informing
citizens about the chemicals present in their communities. On
July 26, 1990, EPA published a rulemaking in the Federal Register
designating Indian Tribes and their chief executive officers as
the implementing authority for SARA Title III on all Indian lands
(55 FR 30632). What is EPA s policy regarding the implementation
of the different provisions of SARA Title III on Indian lands?
EPA s policy is to work with Tribes on a government to
government basis in implementing the requirements of SARA Title
III. SARA Title III contains four major provisions: planning
for chemical emergencies, emergency notification of chemical
accidents and releases, reporting of hazardous chemical
inventories, and toxic chemical release reporting. The emergency
planning provisions of SARA Title III 301-303 are designed to
help Indian Tribes prepare for, and respond to chemical
emergencies occurring on Indian lands that involve extremely
hazardous substances (EHSs), found at 40 CFR Part 355, Appendix A
and B. The chief executive officers of federally recognized
Tribes must appoint Tribal Emergency Response Commissions
(TERCs), responsible for carrying out the provisions of EPCRA in
the same manner as State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs).
Alternatively, Tribal leaders can join a Tribal Coalition which
functions as the TERC, or establish a Memorandum of Understanding
with a State to participate under the SERC. TERCs establish
emergency planning districts and can appoint Local Emergency
Planning Committees (LEPCs) or act as TERCs/LEPCs, performing the
functions of both. LEPCs use information collected under SARA
Title III to develop local emergency response plans to respond
quickly to chemical accidents. The chief executive officer
should ensure that TERCs maintain a broad-based representation,
including Tribal public agencies and departments dealing with
environmental, energy, public health and safety issues, as well
as other tribal community groups with interest in SARA Title III.
The Tribal LEPC should also be representative of the community,
and should include elected Tribal officials, fire chiefs, Indian
Health Services officials, Bureau of Indian Affairs officials,
Tribal elders and leaders, representatives of industries on or
near the reservation, and members of the general community.
The emergency release notification provisions of SARA Title
III 304 require facilities to immediately notify TERCs and LEPCs
of releases in excess of reportable quantities of EHSs and CERCLA
hazardous substances, found at 40 CFR 302.4. Facilities must
also provide written follow-up reports on the actions taken to
respond to releases and possible health effects of the released
substances. The emergency release notification provisions cover
releases from commercial, municipal, and other facilities on
Tribal lands, including those owned by the Tribe, and those from
accidents on transportation routes within the reservation.
Substances covered by this section include not only EHSs, but
also hazardous substances subject to the emergency release
notification requirements of CERCLA 103. CERCLA requires
notification of releases to the National Response Center. In
cases where releases from facilities located on Indian lands may
affect areas outside Indian jurisdiction, the legislation under
SARA Title III 304(b)(1) requires that notice be provided to all
SERCs and LEPCs likely to be affected by the releases. Response
to such releases will be handled by cooperation between the
affected jurisdictions. EPA encourages Indian Tribes, SERCs, and
LEPCs to participate in joint planning efforts to prepare for
such potential emergencies.
The hazardous chemical right-to-know provisions of SARA
Title III 311 and 312, require facilities that prepare material
safety data sheets (MSDSs) for hazardous chemicals under OSHA,
and have hazardous chemicals or EHSs present above applicable
threshold levels, to submit these MSDSs, or lists of such
chemicals to TERCs, LEPCs, and local fire departments.
Facilities are also required to submit hazardous chemical
inventory forms which detail the amounts, conditions of storage,
and locations of hazardous chemicals and EHSs to TERCs, LEPCs,
and local fire departments. It is the responsibility of TERCs
and LEPCs to make this information available to the public.
Toxic chemical release reporting under SARA Title III 313,
requires covered facilities to submit annual reports on routine
and accidental toxic chemical releases to EPA and the Tribal
environmental, health, or emergency response agency which
coordinates with the TERC. TERCs and EPA make this information
available to the community through the national Toxic Release
Inventory (TRI) database. The data is also released to the
public annually in national and state TRI reports.
The information collected under SARA Title III enables TERCs
and LEPCs to paint a picture of the hazardous substances,
chemicals, and toxics found on Indian lands. It also allows the
Tribal communities to work with industries to reduce the use and
releases of toxic chemicals into the environment and prevent
chemical accidents. EPA recognizes that resources are often
limited on Indian lands, and is committed to helping Indian
tribes comply with SARA Title III. EPA provides technical
assistance, guidance, and training tailored to the needs and
capabilities of Indian tribes. EPA s Office of Chemical
Emergency Preparedness and Prevention (CEPPO) can provide TERCs
with grants/cooperative agreements to aid in the implementation
and effectiveness of their SARA Title III programs. To be
eligible for consideration under this grant program, a tribe or
Tribal Coalition must function as an independent TERC. To the
extent that Tribes have these functions performed by states, they
are not eligible for these grants. Tribal agencies can also
apply for training grants provided by FEMA under SARA Title III
305(a) to gain or improve skills needed for carrying out
emergency planning and preparedness programs. These grants are
provided through the TERCs or other agencies. The Hazardous
Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act of 1990 (HMTA) also
includes funding grants for Indian tribes for training public
sector employees in emergency response activities. HMTUSA
provides planning grants for developing, improving, and
implementing Title III plans, and for developing a training
curriculum for TERCs and LEPCs. Tribes should contact their EPA
Regional office for information on how to apply for these grants.
Enforcing the provisions of SARA Title III is key to
providing Tribal communities with the information necessary to
prepare for and prevent chemical accidents. EPA provides
assistance to Tribal communities for specific enforcement actions
against violators of 302, 311, and 312. Since EPA does not
receive or process information under these sections, actions
should be initiated at the tribal and district levels.
5. SERC Recordkeeping Requirements
Owners or operators of facilities that meet the requirements
of 40 CFR 372.22, but that do not qualify for the alternate
threshold (40 CFR 372.27), must report on the releases and
transfers of toxic chemicals using the Form R. Sections 8.1
through 8.7 of the Form R require chemical-specific release and
transfer information from the current reporting year, the
previous reporting year, and estimates for the subsequent two
reporting years. How should the owner or operator of a facility
complete Sections 8.1 through 8.7 for the previous reporting year
if she or he were not required to report on a toxic chemical in
the past (i.e., the facility did not previously exceed a
threshold specified in 40 CFR 372.25, or the chemical is newly
listed and release information was not previously collected)?
The owner or operator of a facility filing a Form R for a
toxic chemical for the first time, but who managed the toxic
chemical in the previous reporting year, should use the best
information available to make estimates of the amount of the
toxic chemical involved in waste management activities specified
in Section 8.1 through 8.7. In reporting year 1991, and
beginning again with reporting year 1994, if the owner or
operator has no information with which to make an estimate, she
or he may put NA in Column A of Sections 8.1 through 8.7. For
reporting years 1992 and 1993, facilities were required to
estimate prior year quantities. If no waste management
activities involving the toxic chemical occurred during the
reporting year, facilities were required to enter 0 in column A.
NEW PUBLICATIONS
HOW TO ORDER...
NTIS Publications are available by calling (703) 487-4650, or
writing NTIS,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. Use the NTIS Order
Number listed under the document.
EPA Publications are available through the Hotline. Use the EPA
Order Number listed under the document.
RCRA/UST, Superfund, and EPCRA
National Toll-Free No.: 800-424-9346
Local: 703-412-9810
TDD National Toll-Free No.: 800-553-7672
RCRA
TITLE: The National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report (Based
on 1993 Data): National Analysis
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB95-243 127
This document contains the findings of EPA s 1993 Biennial
Reporting System (BRS) data collection efforts. The report is
divided into five parts, each dealing with a different component
of the information that was reported. The audience for the
document includes government agencies, the regulated community,
and the public. The national analysis contains information on
the types of waste managed in each state, the total amount
generated, and the management techniques that are implemented
throughout the United States.
TITLE: The National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report (Based
on 1993 Data): State Detail Analysis
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB95-243 135
In cooperation with states, EPA collects information regarding
the generation, management, and final disposition of hazardous
waste regulated under RCRA, and this document contains the
findings of EPA s 1993 Biennial Reporting System (BRS) data
collection efforts. The state detail analysis presents a
thorough look at each state s waste handling practices, including
overall totals for generation, management, and shipments and
receipts, as well as totals for the fifty largest facilities.
TITLE: The National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report (Based
on 1993 Data): List of Large Quantity Generators in the United
States
AVAILABILITY: Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-R-95-039a
3.5-inch diskette: EPA530-C-95-002
In cooperation with the states, EPA collects information
regarding the generation, management, and final disposition of
hazardous waste regulated under RCRA, and this document contains
the findings of EPA s 1993 Biennial Reporting System (BRS) data
collection efforts. The list of large quantity generators
contains the EPA ID number, company name, location, and tons of
waste generated for every facility in the United States that
reported as a large quantity generator in 1993.
TITLE: The National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report (Based
on 1993 Data): Complete Set
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB95-243 093
This set contains the findings of EPA's Biennial Reporting System
(BRS) data collection efforts. The report is divided into five
volumes, each dealing with a different component of the
information that was reported. Specifically, the complete set
contains the following volumes: the list of large quantity
generators, the state detail analysis, the state summary
analysis, the national analysis, and the list of treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities.
TITLE: The National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report (Based
on 1993 Data): List of Treatment, Storage, and Disposal
Facilities in the United States
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB95-243 119
In cooperation with states, EPA collects information regarding
the generation, management, and final disposition of hazardous
waste regulated under RCRA, and this document contains the
findings of EPA s 1993 Biennial Reporting System (BRS) data
collection efforts. The list of treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities contains the EPA ID number, facility name, location,
and tons of waste managed for each facility in the United States
that reported itself to be a treatment, storage, or disposal
facility in 1993.
TITLE: The National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report (Based
on 1993 Data): State Summary Analysis
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
NTIS ORDER NO.: PB95-243 143
In cooperation with states, EPA collects information regarding
the generation, management, and final disposition of hazardous
waste regulated under RCRA, and this document contains the
findings of EPA s 1993 Biennial Reporting System (BRS) data
collection efforts. This report provides two-page overview of
the generation and management practices of the individual states.
The information includes total number of large quantity
generators, total quantity of RCRA hazardous waste generated, and
quantity of waste generated that was only a characteristic waste.
TITLE: Environmental Fact Sheet: EPA Proposes Hazardous Waste
Regulations Associated with Clean Water Act Treatment
Equivalency, Treatment Standards for Wood Preserving Wastes, and
TC Metal Wastes
AVAILABILITY: Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-F-95-017
This fact sheet provides an overview of the Land Disposal
Restrictions (LDR) Phase IV Proposed Rule (August 22, 1995 60 FR
43654). The document provides background information leading to
the proposal and an overview of the regulations being proposed by
EPA. It also includes directions on how to access the Federal
Register notice electronically.
TITLE: Spotlight on Waste Prevention: EPA s Program to Reduce
Solid Waste at the Source
AVAILABILITY: Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-K-95-002
This document provides information on various solid waste
prevention methods. It lists the benefits of waste prevention
for business and industry, tips to prevent waste, and examples of
successful waste prevention efforts. The document also describes
how EPA is assisting businesses in their waste prevention
efforts, and it includes a list of documents which contain
additional information on waste prevention.
TITLE: Recycling Means Business
AVAILABILITY: Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-K-95-004
This booklet introduces EPA s strategy for supporting the
national effort to expand markets for recycled materials. It
includes information about the benefits of recycling versus waste
disposal and the importance of market development. The document
also contains a list of EPA resource centers which provide
additional information on recycling.
TITLE: Environmental Fact Sheet: Recycling Municipal Solid Waste:
1994 Facts and Figures
AVAILABILITY: Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-F-95-005
This fact sheet provides information on recycling as a component
of integrated waste management systems. It lists eight primary
components of the municipal solid waste (MSW) stream, along with
their rate of generation, the percentage of the MSW stream they
represent, and their recovery rate. The document also provides a
short summary for each component which describes how it can be
integrated into a recycling program.
TITLE: Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste: Physical/Chemical
Methods Third Edition Proposed Update III
AVAILABILITY: NTIS
EPA ORDER NO.: PB95-255 113
This packet contains new and revised material which is being
proposed for inclusion in Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste
Physical/Chemical Methods: Third Edition (SW-846). Specifically,
the packet includes a cover sheet, instructions that describe how
this update relates to the rest of SW-846, a table of contents
for the entire SW-846, and specific chapters containing the new
and revised test methods.
UST
TITLE: 璑o Espere Hasta El 1998! Medidas De Proteccion Para
Evitar Derrames, Sobrellenados Y La Corrosion De Los Tanques De
Almacentamiento Soterrados
AVAILABILITY: Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA510-B-95-008
This booklet is a Spanish version of Don t Wait Until 1998:
Spill, Overfill, and Corrosion Protection for Underground Storage
Tanks. The booklet was developed to assist owners and operators
in meeting the upgrade requirements for existing underground
storage tanks. Federal regulations require that existing
underground storage tanks have spill protection, overfill
protection, and corrosion protection by December 22, 1998.
EPCRA
TITLE: Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Section
313: List of Toxic Chemicals within the Chlorophenols Category
AVAILABILITY: SARA Title III Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: 745-B-95-004
EPCRA 313 requires certain facilities to make threshold
determinations for chemical categories based on the chemicals in
the category that are manufactured, processed, or otherwise used.
This guidance document provides a list of chemical names and CAS
numbers to assist covered facilities in determining whether
reporting is necessary for the chlorophenols category.
TITLE: Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Section
313: Guidance for Reporting Aqueous Ammonia
AVAILABILITY: SARA Title III Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA745-R-95-012
On June 30, 1995, EPA finalized four actions in response to a
petition received in 1989 to delete ammonium sulfate (solution)
from the list of toxic chemicals subject to reporting under EPCRA
313. This document summarizes the four actions taken and
assists facilities with the reporting of aqueous ammonia. It
contains information on determining thresholds, releases, and
sources of ammonia along with guidance for reporting aqueous
ammonia generated from anhydrous ammonia, the dissociation of
ammonium salts, and ammonium nitrate solutions. Included in the
document is a list of CAS numbers and molecular weights for some
chemical sources of aqueous ammonia.
TITLE: Chemicals in the Environment: Public Access Information
AVAILABILITY: SARA Title III Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA749-R-95-002
EPA maintains a wide range of environmental information. This
publication is a source to assist the general public in accessing
EPA s information products related to chemicals that are
manufactured at industrial facilities, released into the
environment, or that the public is exposed to on a regular basis.
This document provides information on a number of major Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) products and services
available to the public. The document notifies people of the
information products available, what they can do for the public,
and how to access the information.
TITLE: Executive Order 12969 Press Release
AVAILABILITY: SARA Title III Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: N/A
This document is a package of information compiled from President
Clinton s speech at Fort Armistead Park in South Baltimore. It
contains a summarized version of the discussion on President
Clinton s Acts to Secure Our Nation s Community Right-to-Know
Laws, the 18 riders to the House Appropriations Proposal,
proposed House budget cuts, a factsheet on Community Right-to-
Know Laws, a biography of Doris McGuigan, and a discussion
pertaining to safeguarding public health over the last 25 years.
TITLE: Proceedings: Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Data Use
Conference: Building TRI and Pollution Prevention Partnerships
AVAILABILITY: SARA Title III Hotline
EPA ORDER NO.: EPA749-R-95-001
In December 1994, EPA held the annual TRI Data Use Conference in
Boston, Massachusetts. This document compiles the proceedings of
the 1994 conference and is organized in the three tracks
discussed at the conference. The three tracks included using TRI
in pollution prevention efforts, partnerships using TRI, and
innovative uses of TRI data. The Pollution Prevention Track
discussion covers methods to use TRI for pollution prevention
planning (from both the industry and Agency perspective), for
measuring progress in pollution prevention, and for use of
additional data collection by some states. The Partnerships
Track discussion considers how TRI can be and is used by LEPCs,
community groups, and other media programs. The Innovative Uses
Track examines the many different ways that TRI is being used in
both the public and private sectors. The proceedings also include
all papers submitted by the plenary and keynote speakers at the
conference.
FEDERAL REGISTERS
FINAL RULES
RCRA
Financial Assurance Criteria for Owners and Operators of
Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Facilities
August 7, 1995 (60 FR 40104)
EPA corrected typographical errors in the Financial Assurance
Criteria (40 CFR Part 258, Subpart G) for owners and operators of
municipal solid waste landfills.
Reinterpretation of Carbamate Production Waste Listing
August 14, 1995 (60 FR 41817)
EPA reinterpreted the scope of the K156 and K157 carbamate wastes
listings to specifically exclude non-carbamate intermediates that
are produced at a site other than the ultimate site of carbamate
production. Wastes from the production of such intermediates
will no longer be covered by the listings. The effective date
for this rule is August 8, 1995.
Alabama Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions
August 14, 1995 (60 FR 41818)
EPA has reviewed Alabama s hazardous waste program revisions and
has made the decision, subject to public review and comment, that
Alabama s hazardous waste program revisions satisfy all the
requirements necessary to qualify for final RCRA authorization.
EPA therefore intends to approve the revisions to Alabama s
hazardous waste program under RCRA. Final authorization will be
effective October 13, 1995, unless EPA publishes a prior action
withdrawing this immediate final rule. Comments must be received
on or before September 13, 1995.
South Carolina Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste
Management Program Revisions
August 15, 1995 (60 FR 42046)
EPA intends to approve revisions to South Carolina s hazardous
waste program under RCRA. Final authorization will be effective
October 16, 1995, unless EPA publishes a prior action withdrawing
this immediate final rule. Comments must be received on or
before September 14, 1995.
Tennessee Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste
Management Program Revisions
August 24, 1995 (60 FR 43979)
EPA has reviewed Tennessee s hazardous waste program revisions
and has made the decision, subject to public review and comment,
that Tennessee s hazardous waste program revisions satisfy all
the requirements necessary to qualify for final RCRA
authorization. EPA therefore intends to approve the revisions to
Tennessee s hazardous waste program under RCRA. Final
authorization will be effective
October 23, 1995, unless EPA publishes a prior action withdrawing
this immediate final rule. Comments must be received on or
before September 25, 1995.
Incorporation by Reference of Arizona s Approved State Hazardous
Waste Program Revisions
August 25, 1995 (60 FR 44278)
EPA intends to incorporate by reference in 40 CFR Part 272
revisions to Arizona s authorized state program. EPA uses Part
272 to provide notice of the authorization status of state
programs, and to incorporate by reference those provisions of the
state statutes and regulations that EPA will enforce under RCRA
3008.
Georgia Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions
August 30, 1995 (60 FR 45069)
EPA has reviewed Georgia s hazardous waste program revisions and
has made the decision, subject to public review and comment, that
Georgia s revisions to the regulations concerning the burning of
hazardous waste in boilers and industrial furnaces satisfy all
the requirements necessary to qualify for final RCRA
authorization. EPA therefore intends to approve the revisions to
Georgia s hazardous waste program under RCRA. Final
authorization will be effective October 30, 1995, unless EPA
publishes a prior action withdrawing this immediate final rule.
Comments must be received on or before September 29, 1995.
Mississippi Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste
Management Program Revisions
August 30, 1995 (60 FR 45071)
EPA has reviewed Mississippi s hazardous waste program revisions
and has made the decision, subject to public review and comment,
that Mississippi s hazardous waste program revisions satisfy all
the requirements necessary to qualify for final RCRA
authorization. EPA therefore intends to approve the revisions to
Mississippi s hazardous waste program under RCRA. Final
authorization will be effective October 30, 1995, unless EPA
publishes a prior action withdrawing this immediate final rule.
Comments must be received on or before September 29, 1995.
CERCLA
National Priorities List Northwestern States Portland Cement
Company Superfund Site
August 31, 1995 (60 FR 45343)
EPA announced the deletion of the Northwestern States Portland
Cement Company Superfund Site, located in Mason City, Iowa, from
the National Priorities List. The Agency published a notice of
its intent to delete the site on October 19, 1995 (59 FR 52747).
EPA and the State of Iowa have determined that no further cleanup
under CERCLA is appropriate and that remedial actions at the site
have been protective of public health, welfare, and the
environment. The effective date of this action is August 31,
1995.
DOT
Amendment of DOT Hazardous Materials Regulations
August 2, 1995 (60 FR 39608)
DOT s Research and Special Programs Administration amended the
Hazardous Materials Regulations by revising the List of
Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities which appears in
an appendix to the Hazardous Materials Table. The intended
effect of this action is to enable shippers and carriers to
identify CERCLA hazardous substances and to comply with all
applicable HMR requirements to make notifications in the event of
a hazardous substances discharge. This amendment is effective on
February 2, 1996, although immediate compliance with the
regulations as amended is authorized.
PROPOSED RULES
RCRA
Small and Arid or Remote Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
(MSWLFs) Alternatives To Groundwater Monitoring And Delay Of
General Effective Date
August 10, 1995 (60 FR 40799)
EPA proposed to allow approved States and Tribes the flexibility
to consider site-specific alternatives to conventional
groundwater monitoring requirements for small MSWLFs located in
either dry or remote areas. The Agency is accepting public
comment on this proposal for a 90-day period, beginning on August
10, 1995. In addition, EPA solicited comment on delaying the
general compliance date for small MSWLFs located in either dry or
remote areas. The Agency is also accepting public comment on
delaying the general compliance date for a 30-day period,
beginning on August 10, 1995.
Organic Air Emission Standards for Tanks, Surface Impoundments,
and Containers Data Availability
August 14, 1995 (60 FR 41870)
EPA announced the availability of additional data that are being
considered in revising the proposed air emission standards for
large quantity generators and hazardous waste treatment, storage,
and disposal facilities (59 FR 62896 December 6, 1994). The
additional data are available for public inspection at the RCRA
Docket Office. Comments on the additional data will be accepted
through October 13, 1995.
Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV
August 22, 1995 (60 FR 43654)
In LDR Phase IV, EPA continues to address the LDR implications of
characteristic hazardous wastes which are diluted so they no
longer exhibit a characteristic(s), and are then managed in
centralized wastewater management land disposal units. A D.C.
Circuit court decision concluded such management is legal if it
can be demonstrated that hazardous constituents are reduced,
destroyed, or immobilized to the same extent they would be
pursuant to equivalent LDR treatment standards.
In the Phase IV proposal, EPA addressed whether such treatment in
surface impoundments results in cross-media releases via leakage,
air emissions, or disposal of untreated sludges, that can be so
excessive that the impoundment effectively functions as a
disposal unit.
EPA proposed treatment standards in the Phase IV rule for wood
preserving wastes and for toxicity characteristic metal wastes.
These treatment standards, when finalized, must be met prior to
land disposal of these hazardous wastes. Comments on this
proposed rule must be submitted by November 20, 1995.
CERCLA
National Priorities List Ossineke Groundwater Contamination
Superfund Site
August 11, 1995 (60 FR 41051)
EPA announced its intent to delete the Ossineke Groundwater
Contamination Site, located in Ossineke, Michigan, from the
National Priorities List. EPA and the State of Michigan have
determined that using the Hazardous Substances Superfund to fund
further remedial action under CERCLA at this site is not
appropriate. Either EPA s Office of Underground Storage Tanks or
the State of Michigan will undertake any necessary corrective
actions at the site under the authorities of the Michigan Leaking
Underground Storage Tank Statute, the Michigan Environmental
Response Act, or Subtitle I of RCRA. Comments concerning the
proposed deletion will be accepted on or before September 11,
1995.
National Priorities List Woodbury Chemical Superfund Site
August 21, 1995 (60 FR 43424)
EPA announced its intent to delete the Woodbury Chemical Site,
located in Princeton, Florida, from the National Priorities List.
EPA and the State of Florida have determined that no further
cleanup by responsible parties is appropriate and that remedial
actions at the site have been protective of public health,
welfare, and the environment. Comments concerning the proposed
deletion will be accepted on or before September 20, 1995.
National Priorities List Anderson Development Company Site
August 30, 1995 (60 FR 45117)
EPA Region 5 announced its intent to delete the Anderson
Development Company Site from the National Priorities List. EPA
and the State of Michigan have determined that no further cleanup
by responsible parties is appropriate and that remedial actions
at the site have been protective of public health, welfare, and
the environment. Comments concerning the proposed deletion will
be accepted through September 29, 1995.
CERCLA/EPCRA
Administrative Reporting Exemptions for Certain Radionuclide
Releases
August 4, 1995 (60 FR 40042)
EPA announced a notice of proposed rulemaking requesting comments
on broader administrative exemptions from the release reporting
requirements under CERCLA and EPCRA. In particular, the Agency
is proposing to grant reporting exemptions for releases of
naturally occurring radionuclides associated with land
disturbance incidental to extraction activities at certain kinds
of mines, and with coal and coal ash piles at all kinds of sites.
These reporting exemptions are being proposed in response to
comments on a November 30, 1992 proposed rule on administrative
reporting exemptions (57 FR 56726). The exemptions would be
consistent with the Agency s common sense goals in that they
would eliminate unnecessary reporting burdens and allow EPA to focus its resources on the most serious releases. Comments may
be submitted on or before October 3, 1995.
EPCRA
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting Di-(2-ethylhexyl) Adipate
August 1, 1995 (60 FR 39132)
EPA is proposing to grant a petition to delist di-(2-ethylhexyl)
adipate (DEHA), also known as bis-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (CAS
number 103-23-1), from the reporting requirements under 313 of
EPCRA. This action is based on EPA s preliminary conclusion that
DEHA meets the deletion criteria of EPCRA 313(d)(3) based upon
its potential effects on human health and the environment.
Comments on this proposed deletion must be received by October 2,
1995.
NOTICES
RCRA
Maryland Adequacy Determination of State/Tribal Municipal Solid
Waste Permit Program
August 2, 1995 (60 FR 39385)
Pursuant to RCRA 4005(c)(1)(C), EPA has concluded that the State
of Maryland s municipal solid waste landfill permitting program
satisfies a major portion of the statutory and regulatory MSWLF
requirements established by RCRA. EPA has therefore granted a
final determination of partial program adequacy for Maryland s
municipal solid waste permit program. The determination of
partial adequacy for Maryland will be effective on August 2,
1995.
Proposed Consent Decree ThermalKEM s Commercial Hazardous Waste
Incinerator, Rock Hill, South Carolina
August 3, 1995 (60 FR 39772)
A Consent Decree in United States v. ThermalKEM Inc. was lodged
with the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina
on July 26, 1995. The complaint alleged that ThermalKEM violated
the metal feed rate limits and mass feed rate limit contained in
the Rock Hill Incinerator s permit. The proposed decree would
require ThermalKEM to pay a civil penalty of $750,000 and follow
an approved protocol for monitoring and limiting the rate of
hazardous wastes that are fed to the incinerator. DOJ will
receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of
publication.
Joint Nuclear Regulatory Commission/EPA Guidance on the Storage
of Mixed Radioactive and Hazardous Waste
August 7, 1995 (60 FR 40204)
NRC and EPA published joint guidance on the storage of mixed
radioactive and hazardous waste (mixed waste). Compliance issues
in four situations were clarified: (1) decay-in-storage (2)
inspection/surveillance requirements (3) allowable storage
practices and (4) waste compatibility, segregation, and spacing equirements. EPA also restated its LDR storage prohibition
enforcement policy for mixed waste in storage.
Proposed Consent Decree Horsehead Industries Inc., Palmerton,
Pennsylvania Facility
August 31, 1995 (60 FR 45493)
A Consent Decree in United States and Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania v. Horsehead Industries Inc. was lodged with the
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania on
August 23, 1995. The complaint alleged that Horsehead Industries
Inc., who engage in the recycling of electric arc furnace dust,
violated the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and RCRA. Horsehead
ndustries Inc. have agreed to pay a civil penalty of $5.6
million, and invest in extensive capital improvements and
operational changes at the facility. DOJ will receive comments
relating to the proposed consent decree for a period of 30 days
from the date of publication.
RCRA/DOE
Availability of Draft No-Migration Variance Petition Department
of Energy Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)
August 8, 1995 (60 FR 40379)
EPA announced the availability for public comment of a draft no-
migration variance petition submitted by DOE for its Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant. The WIPP is a geological repository
intended for the disposal of mixed hazardous and radioactive
waste. The hazardous portion of the waste is subject to LDR.
DOE s no-migration petition is intended to demonstrate that
hazardous constituents will not migrate out of the WIPP for as
long as the wastes remain hazardous (up to 10,000 years).
Availability of Draft DOE Compliance Certification Application
for the Waste Isolation Pilot Program
August 16, 1995 (60 FR 42566)
EPA announced the availability of a draft compliance
certification application by DOE for the Waste Isolation Pilot
Plant (WIPP). WIPP is a deep geological repository that DOE is
proposing to use for the disposal of transuranic radioactive
waste generated by nuclear defense activities. EPA wishes to
consider public comments when conducting a staff-level technical
review of the draft document. Comments must be received by
October 16, 1995.
RCRA/CERCLA
Proposed Consent Decree Peterson/Puritan, Inc. Superfund Site
August 10, 1995 (60 FR 40857)
A proposed consent decree in United States v. CCL Custom
Manufacturing, Inc., was lodged on July 27, 1995, with the U.S.
District Court for the District of Rhode Island. Under the
proposed Consent Decree, the defendants have agreed to implement
the selected remedy for the first operable unit at the
Peterson/Puritan, Inc. Superfund Site in Providence County, Rhode
Island. The defendants have also agreed to reimburse the United
States for past and future response costs incurred in connection
with the site and to make a payment to the United States in
settlement of a potential claim for natural resource damages at
the site. The proposed Consent Decree includes a covenant not to
sue by the United States under 106 and 107 of CERCLA and under
7003 of RCRA.
Also embodied in the proposed Consent Decree is a settlement of
certain claims of the State of Rhode Island against the
defendants in relation to the site. DOJ will receive comments
for a period of 30 days from the date of publication.
CERCLA
Proposed Settlement Agreement Nelson McCoy Pottery Superfund
Site
August 2, 1995 (60 FR 39392)
EPA is proposing to settle a claim under 107 of CERCLA for
response costs incurred during removal activities at the Nelson
McCoy Pottery Site in Roseville, Ohio. Under the proposed
Settlement Agreement, the respondents have agreed to pay EPA
$125,000. Comments on this proposed settlement must be received
by September 1, 1995.
Proposed Consent Decree
August 3, 1995 (60 FR 39771)
A proposed Consent Decree in United States v. Chemical Leaman
Tank Lines, Inc., was lodged on July 10, 1995, with the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Under
the proposed Consent Decree, Chemical Leaman Tank Lines, Inc.,
will perform the remaining site remedy and reimburse EPA for
costs incurred and to be incurred in association with the site.
DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date
of publication.
Proposed Administrative Settlement Commercial Decal, Inc.,
Superfund Site
August 7, 1995 (60 FR 40175)
EPA proposed to enter into an Administrative Settlement to
resolve potential claims under CERCLA against Commercial Decal,
Inc., in relation to response costs incurred by EPA at the
Commercial Decal, Inc., Site in Mount Vernon, New York. Comments
may be submitted on or before September 6, 1995.
Proposed Administrative Settlement Pike County Drum Superfund
Site
August 7, 1995 (60 FR 40176)
Under 122(h)(4) of CERCLA, EPA has offered 12 parties at the
Pike County Drum Site in Osyka, Mississippi an opportunity to
enter into a Cost Recovery Agreement to settle claims for past
and future response costs at the site. EPA will consider public
comment on the proposed settlement for 30 days from the date of
publication.
Damage Settlement Sharon Steel and Midvale Slag Superfund
Sites
August 8, 1995 (60 FR 40386)
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced the availability of
the Final Conceptual Restoration Plan for restoration of
migratory bird resources injured by the release of hazardous
substances from the Sharon Steel and Midvale Slag Superfund Sites
in Salt Lake County, Utah. The Conceptual Restoration Plan
outlines a process for preparing, identifying, and selecting
cooperative riparian habitat restoration projects and includes
application requirements. Cooperative project proposals will be
accepted until November 1, 1995.
Proposed Settlement City Industries Superfund Site
August 10, 1995 (60 FR 40841)
EPA has agreed to settle claims for response costs at the City
Industries Superfund Site in Winter Park, Florida, with Storage
Technology Corporation. Comments on the proposed Settlement will
be accepted through September 9, 1995.
Consent Decree Peterson/Puritan Superfund Site
August 10, 1995 (60 FR 40857)
A proposed Consent Decree in United States v. CCL Custom
Manufacturing, Inc., was lodged on July 27, 1995, with the U.S.
District Court for the District of Rhode Island. Under the
proposed Consent Decree, the defendants will reimburse the United
States for past and future response costs, as well as natural
resource damages, in connection with the Peterson/Puritan
Superfund Site in Providence County, Rhode Island. The proposed
Consent Decree includes a covenant not to sue by the United
States under 106 and 107 of CERCLA and under 7003 of RCRA.
DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date
of publication.
Consent Decree Delaware Sand & Gravel Superfund Site
August 10, 1995 (60 FR 40858)
Two Consent Decrees in United States v. Hercules, et al., were
lodged on July 26, 1995, with the U.S. District Court for the
District of Delaware. The Consent Decrees settle claims brought
by the United States against Avon Products, Inc., and MRC
Holdings, Inc., who have agreed to reimburse EPA for costs
incurred in connection with the Delaware Sand & Gravel Site,
located in New Castle County, Delaware. DOJ will receive
comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication.
Proposed Prospective Purchaser Agreement San Gabriel Valley
Superfund Sites
August 14, 1995 (60 FR 41888)
EPA executed a proposed Prospective Purchaser Agreement
associated with the San Gabriel Valley Superfund Sites in Los
Angeles County, California, on May 26, 1995, which has since
been approved by DOJ. The Prospective Purchaser Agreement
resolves certain potential claims of the United States under
106 and 107 of CERCLA and 7003 of RCRA against the purchaser,
Sargent Fletcher, Inc. The agreement requires the purchaser to
pay EPA a one-time payment of $500,000, and to implement state
lead response actions and a multi-media environmental program at
the purchased property. Comments may be submitted on or before
September 13, 1995.
Proposed Prospective Purchaser Agreement Denver Radium Superfund
Site
August 18, 1995 (60 FR 43148)
EPA executed a proposed Prospective Purchaser Agreement
associated with the Denver Radium Superfund Site in Denver,
Colorado, on July 26, 1995. The Prospective Purchaser Agreement
would resolve certain potential claims under CERCLA 106 and 107
against Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., the prospective purchaser. The
settlement requires the purchaser to conduct a portion of the
remedial action and operation and maintenance at the site, to
maintain institutional controls, and to provide EPA and the state
access to the site. Comments will be received through September
18, 1995.
ATSDR Public Health Assessments
August 22, 1995 (60 FR 43597)
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry published a
quarterly announcement containing a list of proposed and final
NPL sites for which it has completed public health assessments or
issued addenda to previously completed public health assessments
between January and March, 1995.
Proposed Administrative Settlement I.J. Stephens Farm Superfund
Site
August 23, 1995 (60 FR 43796)
Under 122(h) of CERCLA, EPA proposed to settle claims against
Sunbeam Outdoor Products, Inc., in relation to response costs
incurred at the I.J. Stephens Farm Site in Newton County,
Missouri. The settlement requires the settling party to pay
$30,000 to the Hazardous Substances Superfund. Comments relating
to the settlement may be submitted for a period of 30 days from
the date of publication.
Proposed Consent Decree California Gulch Superfund Site
August 23, 1995 (60 FR 43817)
A proposed Consent Decree in United States v. Apache Energy and
Minerals Co., et al., was lodged on August 10, 1995, with the
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. Under the
terms of the settlement, a monetary judgement will be entered
against Atlas Mortgage Company in favor of the United States in
the amount of $1 million for the government s past response costs
in connection with the California Gulch Site near Leadville,
Colorado. In addition, Atlas Mortgage Company will be
responsible for all future response costs incurred at the site.
In exchange, the United States covenants not to sue Atlas for
liability at the site under 106 and 107 of CERCLA and 7003 of
RCRA. DOJ will accept comments on the proposed Consent Decree
for a period of 30 days from the date of publication.
Proposed Administrative Settlement Kramer Superfund Site
August 24, 1995 (60 FR 44029)
Under 122(h) of CERCLA, EPA proposed to settle a claim against
Alumax Foils, Inc., in relation to response costs incurred at the
Kramer Superfund Site in Elvins, Missouri. The settlement
requires the settling party to pay $235,000 to the Hazardous
Substances Superfund. Comments relating to the settlement may be
submitted for a period of 30 days from the date of publication.
Proposed Consent Decree North Hollywood Landfill Superfund Site
August 24, 1995 (60 FR 44047)
Two proposed Consent Decrees in United States v. Velsicol
Chemical Corporation, et al., were lodged on August 15, 1995,
with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Tennessee. The proposed Consent Decrees settle an action brought
under 107 of CERCLA against Velsicol Chemical Corporation, the
City of Memphis, and The Proctor & Gamble Cellulose Corporation
for recovery of costs incurred by the United States in responding
to the release of hazardous substances at the North Hollywood
Landfill Site, located in Memphis, Tennessee. DOJ will receive
comments relating to the two proposed Consent Decrees for a
period of 30 days from the date of publication.
Proposed Consent Decree Alaskan Battery Enterprises Superfund
Site
August 24, 1995 (60 FR 44048)
A proposed Consent Decree in United States v. Alaskan Battery
Enterprises, Inc., et al., was lodged on July 19, 1995, with the
U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska. The Consent
Decree resolves the United States claims against K & K
Recycling, Inc., the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service,
and the Army & Air Force Exchange Service, each of whom has
agreed to reimburse the United States for response costs incurred
in connection with the Alaskan Battery Enterprises Site in
Fairbanks, Alaska. DOJ will receive comments relating to the
proposed Consent Decree for a period of 30 days from the date of
publication.
Proposed Consent Decree City of Marianna Municipal Airport
Industrial Park
August 24, 1995 (60 FR 44048)
A proposed Consent Decree in United States v. City of Marianna,
Florida was lodged on August 9, 1995, with the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Florida, Panama City Division.
The Consent Decree settles a claim for reimbursement of response
costs brought against the City of Marianna under CERCLA 107(a)
in response to the release or threatened release of hazardous
substances from a facility located at the City of Marianna
Municipal Airport Industrial Park. The Consent Decree also
settles counterclaims brought by the City of Marianna against the
United States. DOJ will receive comments relating to the
proposed Consent Decree for a period of 30 days from the date of
publication.
Proposed Administrative Settlement Emory Plating Company
Superfund Site
August 25, 1995 (60 FR 44346)
Under 122(h) of CERCLA, EPA proposed to enter into an
Administrative Settlement to resolve claims under CERCLA against
Kent E. Easterday, Richard Hansen, and Emory Liquidation, Inc.,
for response costs incurred at the Emory Plating Company
Superfund Site in Des Moines, Iowa. The proposed settlement
provides that the settling parties will make their best effort to
sell the property located at the site and turn over the proceeds
from the sale. In exchange, EPA will covenant not to sue the
settling parties under CERCLA 107(a) for reimbursement of
response costs incurred in connection with the site. Comments
will be accepted on or before September 25, 1995.
State Deferral Guidance
August 28, 1995 (60 FR 44488)
EPA announced the availability of two documents concerning the
newly established Superfund State Deferral program: Guidance on
Deferral of NPL Listing Determinations While States Oversee
Response Actions and Response to Comments on the 1988 Proposed
NCP Deferral Policy Concept, both issued on May 3, 1995.
Proposed Administrative Settlement Cedartown Landfill Superfund
Site
August 31, 1995 (60 FR 45409)
Under 122(h) of CERCLA, EPA has proposed to settle claims for
response costs associated with the Cedartown Landfill Site,
located in Cedartown, Georgia, with several PRPs at the site.
Comments will be accepted on or before October 2, 1995.
Proposed Administrative Settlement Daytona Antifreeze Superfund
Site
August 31, 1995 (60 FR 45409)
Under 122(h) of CERCLA, EPA has proposed to settle claims for
response costs associated with the Daytona Antifreeze Site,
located in Marietta, Georgia, with approximately 50 PRPs at the
site. Comments will be accepted on or before October 2, 1995.
EPCRA
Expediting Community Right-To-Know Initiatives
August 11, 1995 (60 FR 41791)
President Clinton issued a memorandum addressed to the
Administrator of EPA and the Heads of Executive Departments and
Agencies regarding the Toxics Release Inventory under EPCRA 313.
The memorandum directs the EPA Administrator to complete the TRI
industry (phase II) expansion rulemaking process on an
accelerated schedule and to develop and implement an expedited
process for consideration of a chemical use inventory (phase III)
expansion. Executive department and agency heads are instructed
to assist EPA in implementing this directive as quickly as
possible.
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory Phase 3 Expansion Chemical Use
August 22, 1995 (60 FR 43595)
EPA announced that it will hold a public meeting to receive
comments on whether to expand the reporting requirements of the
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory to include chemical use data.
The meeting is scheduled for September 19 and 20, 1995.
Toxic Chemical Release Reporting Manganese and Manganese in
Slags
August 24, 1995 (60 FR 44000)
EPA denied a petition to delete manganese and manganese compounds
contained in iron making and carbon steel making slags from the
list of toxic chemicals subject to 313 of EPCRA. EPA has
concluded that manganese and manganese compounds in slags do not
meet the EPCRA 313(d)(3) deletion criteria.
EXECUTIVE ORDER
Federal Acquisition and Community Right-To-Know
August 10, 1995 (60 FR 40989)
President Clinton Issued Executive Order 12969 requiring all
federal agencies, to the maximum extent practicable, to contract
with companies that report in a public manner on toxic chemicals
released to the environment. Under the Executive Order, Federal
agencies are to include in contract solicitations as an
eligibility criterion for the award of competitive acquisition
contracts expected to equal or exceed $100,000 with Federal
contractors who are currently subject to EPCRA 313, the
requirement that such contractors must file (and continue to file
for the life of the contract) a Form R for each toxic chemical
manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in excess of the
applicable annual threshold level by the contractor at a
facility. For the purposes of this Executive Order, the list of
toxic chemicals includes all substances on the list described in
EPCRA 313(c) as the list exists on the effective date of this
order. The Executive Order indicates that EPA will publish
guidance for compliance with the Order, including applicability
with respect to subcontractors, no later than September 30, 1995.
This Order is effective immediately.
CALLER PROFILE
RCRA/UST Hotline
Regulated Community 5,609
Citizens 242
State & Local Govt./Native American 231
Federal Agencies 111
Educational Institutions 104
EPA 196
Media 16
Interest Groups 16
Congress 2
International 6
Other 134
Referrals* 468
Transfers to EPCRA/Superfund Hotline* 261
Document Retrieval Line* 190
Message Retrieval Line* 972
TOTAL 8,558
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act/Superfund
Hotline
Manufacturers
Food/Tobacco 34
Textiles 26
Apparel 13
Lumber & Wood 25
Furniture 15
Paper 27
Printing & Publishing 28
Chemicals 81
Petroleum & Coal 41
Rubber and Plastics 24
Leather 13
Stone, Clay & Glass 26
Primary Metals 33
Fabricated Metals 45
Machinery (Excluding Electrical) 31
Electrical&Electronic Equipment 18
Transportation Equipment 37
Instruments 16
Misc. Manufacturing 189
Subtotal 722
Consultants/Engineers 2,084
Attorneys 276
Citizens 250
Public Interest Groups 20
Educational Institutions 58
EPA 59
Federal Agencies 107
GOCOs 2
Congress 0
State Officials/SERC 66
Local Officials/LEPCs 81
Fire Departments 11
Hospitals/Laboratories 21
Trade Associations 20
Union/Labor 0
Farmers 1
Distributors 7
Insurance Companies 2
Media/Press 21
Native Americans 0
International 2
Other 119
Referrals* 211
Transfers to RCRA/UST Hotline* 342
Document Retrieval Line* 0
Message Retrieval Line* 841
TOTAL 5,323
Hotline Topics
RCRA
RCRA GENERAL 1,623
SUBTITLE C
Hazardous Waste Id. - General 2,145(1)
Toxicity Characteristic (TC) 276
Wood Preserving Wastes 86
Listing of Used Oil 62
Fluff 2
Mercury-Containing Lamps 514(1)
Radioactive Mixed Waste 29
Delisting Petitions 28
Hazardous Waste Recycling 706(1)
Generators 760(1)
Small Quantity Generators 187
Transporters 81
Exports/Imports 14
TSDF General 570(1)
Treatment 94
Storage 77
Disposal 60
Siting Facilities 11
Capacity 2
Land Disposal Restrictions 952(1)
Permits and Permitting 163
Corrective Action 278
Liability/Enforcement 112
Test Methods 188
Health Effects 23
Combustion - General 147
Permitting 28
Tech. Standards/Combustion Units 27
Waste Minimization 49
Risk Assessment 7
Waste Minimization/Pollution Prevention 93
State Programs 94
Hazardous Waste Data 42
Military Munitions 10
SUBTITLE D
Household Hazardous Wastes 224
Subtitle D - General 321(1)
Siting Facilities 28
Combustion 29
Industrial Waste 19
Solid Waste Recycling - General 420(1)
Aluminum 40
Batteries 52
Glass 37
Paper 54
Plastics 48
Tires 25
Used Oil 135
Composting 139
Markets - General 28
Aluminum 15
Batteries 24
Compost 4
Glass 6
Paper 5
Plastics 12
Tires 10
Used Oil 59
Procurement General 160(1)
Building Insulation 8
Cement/Cement Products with Fly Ash 7
Paper and Paper Products 33
Re-Refined Lubricating Oil 8
Retread Tires 6
Source Reduction/Pollution Prevention 78
Grant and Financing 11
OTHER WASTES
Ash 49
Bevill Amendment (Mining Waste) 27
Medical Waste 161
Oil and Gas 57
TOTAL 11,879*
* Includes 3,103 RCRA document requests.
UST
General/Misc. 266(1)
Applicability/Definitions 138
Regulated Substances 45
Standards for New Tank Systems 201(1)
Tank Standards and Upgrading 237
Operating Requirements 68
Release Detection 94
Release Reporting & Investigation 53
Corrective Action for USTs 282
Out-of-Service/Closure 168
Financial Responsibility 258(1)
State Programs 41
Liability/Enforcement 50
LUST Trust Fund 27
TOTAL 1,928*
* Includes 1,157 UST document requests.
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW
General:
General Title III Questions 446(1)
Trade Secrets 10
Enforcement 34
Liability/Citizen Suits 5
Training 1
Chemical-Specific Information 45
Emergency Planning (301-303):
General 75
Notification Requirements 30
SERC/LEPC Issues 76
EHSs/TPQs 53
Risk Communication/
Hazards Analysis 32
Exemptions 10
Emergency Release Notification (304):
General 96
Notification Requirements 57
Reportable Quantities 75
CERCLA 103 vs. SARA 304 53
ARIP/AHEDB/ERNS 2
Exemptions 6
Hazardous Chemical Reporting
(311-312):
General 106
MSDS Reporting Requirements 73
Tier I/II Requirements 111
Thresholds 54
Hazard Categories 26
Mixtures Reporting 25
Exemptions 57
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (313):
General 347(1)
Reporting Requirements 380(1)
Thresholds 159(1)
Form R Completion 362(1)
Supplier Notification 39
NOTEs/NOSEs/NONs 36
Voluntary Revisions 609(1)
Pollution Prevention 33/50 4
Public Access to Data 96
TRI Database 54
Petitions 98
TRI Expansion 149
Exemptions 121(1)
Special Topics:
CAA 112
General 40(1)
RMPs 37(1)
List of Regulated Substances 29
Federal Facilities Executive Order 42
TOTAL 4,157
*Includes 946 Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
document requests
SUPERFUND
General/Misc. 196
Access & Information Gathering 32
Administrative Improvements
General 136
Environmental Justice/Brownfields 289(1)
SACM/Presumptive Remedies 118
Soil Screening Levels 47
Administrative Record 31
ARARs 102
CERCLIS 117
Citizen Suits 6
Claims Against Fund 7
Clean-Up Costs 39
Clean-Up Standards 46
Community Involvement 39
Contract Lab Program (CLP) 22
Contractor Indemnification 5
Contracts 12
Definitions 50
Enforcement 48
Federal Facilities 17
Hazardous Substances 159
HRS 20
Liability 82
Local Gov't Reimbursement 14
Natural Resource Damages 7
NCP 59
Notification 89
NPL 158(1)
Off Site Rule 7
OSHA 7
PA/SI 17
PRPs 81
RD/RA 20
Reauthorization 33
Remedial 100
Removal 51
RI/FS 43
Risk Assess./Health Effects 61
ROD 44
RQ 527(1)
Settlements 30
SITE Program 41
State Participation 6
State Program 9
TAGs 3
Taxes 6
Special Topics
Oil Pollution Act 3
SPCC Regulations 21
Radiation Site Cleanup 37
TOTAL 3,094*
*Includes 821 Superfund document requests.
TOTAL HOTLINE QUESTIONS, DOCUMENT
REQUESTS AND REFERRALS: 21,058
(1) Hot topics for this month
Topics are calculated as the summation of all questions received
by the Hotline. A single call may result in multiple questions.
|