MONTHLY HOTLINE REPORT March 1995 EPA530-R-95-002C/PB95-922 403 Hotline Questions and Answers RCRA 1. Signing the Manifest as an Agent When Importing Hazardous Waste A waste broker in Mexico arranges to collect hazardous waste from several different Mexican generators, and exports 1500 kilograms of hazardous waste for disposal at a U.S. facility. The RCRA regulations under Part 262, Subpart F require an importer to initiate a manifest when hazardous waste enters the United States. Since the broker from Mexico accepts all responsibility for the hazardous waste from the generator facilities and handles the hazardous waste for the U.S. disposal facility, can the broker sign the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest as an agent of the U.S. disposal facility that is importing the waste? The regulations for imports of hazardous waste allow the importer or his/her agent to sign the generator certification statement on the manifest in place of the generator (262.60(b)(2)). The only requirement for an agent signing the manifest is that the agent must be somehow legally affiliated with the EPA identification number used on the manifest. The Mexican broker could sign the manifest certification only if the broker s company has a U.S. EPA identification number (requiring a U.S. address) or the broker is legally related to the importer (e.g., a subsidiary). A broker signing as an agent because of a legal relation to the importer must place the U.S. address and U.S. EPA identification number of the importer on the manifest. 2. Export Requirements for Transportation Through Transit Countries A facility generates hazardous waste in Alaska. The generator arranges to send the hazardous waste to a disposal facility in California. In the process of transportation, the hazardous waste will pass through Canadian territory. Will the facility be required to comply with any of the export regulations found under Part 262, Subpart E? In this scenario, RCRA export regulations do not apply. The regulations for exports of hazardous waste in Part 262, Subpart E apply to any person who meets the definition of a primary exporter. Primary exporter is defined under 262.51 as generally, any person required to initiate a hazardous waste manifest which designates a treatment, storage, or disposal facility in a receiving country. Receiving country is subsequently defined under 262.51 as a foreign country to which a hazardous waste is sent for the purpose of treatment, storage or disposal (except short-term storage incidental to transportation) . In the above scenario, there are no treatment, storage, or disposal facilities in a receiving country that are designated on the manifest, rather, the waste simply passes through a foreign country. RCRA does not require that transit countries be notified. 3. Hotel Dry Cleaning Waste and the Household Waste Exclusion A hotel generates spent solvents from its on-site dry cleaning facility. For purposes of the 40 CFR 261.4(b)(1) household waste exclusion, EPA defines households to include hotels and motels. Will hotel dry cleaning wastes be excluded from RCRA Subtitle C regulation as household waste? Wastes produced by a hotel dry cleaning facility are not household wastes and therefore will not be excluded from RCRA hazardous waste regulation. A waste has to meet two conditions to be excluded as household waste. Household waste must be generated on the premises of a temporary or permanent residence and be comprised primarily of materials generated by consumers in their homes. In general, wastes from hotels and motels will be excluded as household waste as long as the waste is similar to the type of waste that consumers generate in their home. Even though generated on premises of a temporary residence (i.e. hotel), dry cleaning waste is not household waste because the spent solvents from the dry cleaning operations are not similar to wastes typically produced by a consumer in the home. The dry cleaning wastes produced by the hotel do not meet both criteria for household waste and will not qualify for the household waste exclusion per 261.4(b)(1) (49 FR 44978; November 13, 1984). 4. Definition of Formerly Bevill Exempt Wastes According to 40 CFR 268.1(e)(3), wastes identified or listed as hazardous waste after November 8, 1984, are not subject to land disposal restrictions (LDR) until EPA promulgates prohibitions or treatment standards. For purposes of LDR, certain mineral processing wastes which were formerly exempt under the Bevill Amendment, but lost that exemption are considered to be newly identified and therefore not subject to LDR until EPA promulgates standards specific to this category of wastes. What wastes are included within this category of formerly exempt Bevill wastes? On November 19, 1980, EPA promulgated an exclusion from regulation under RCRA Subtitle C for, solid waste from the extraction, beneficiation, and processing of ores and minerals (including coal), including phosphate rock, and overburden for the mining of uranium ore (45 FR 76618, 76620). This is one of the exclusions commonly referred to as a Bevill exclusion. In this Federal Register, EPA clarified that the exclusion covered ...solid waste from the exploration, mining, milling, smelting and refining of ores and minerals (45 FR 76619). On September 1, 1989, EPA published a final rule that narrowed the scope of the exclusion as it applies to mineral processing (54 FR 36592). Specifically, EPA finalized the exclusion for five mineral processing wastes and conditionally excluded twenty wastes pending additional studies. After completing a study of the twenty wastes, EPA removed five of the wastes that had been subject to the September 1, 1989, conditional exclusion, bringing the total number of excluded mineral processing wastes to twenty (55 FR 2322; January 23, 1990). On June 13, 1991, EPA finalized this list of twenty exempt mineral processing wastes in 261.4(b)(7) (56 FR 27300). All other mineral processing wastes are subject to RCRA Subtitle C. Wastes from the extraction/beneficiation of ores and minerals remain covered by the exclusion generally, and are not subject to Subtitle C. EPA considers all mineral processing wastes which are not currently listed in 261.4(b)(7), to be newly identified wastes and therefore not subject to LDR requirements until treatment standards are promulgated. Treatment standards for these wastes are currently being developed as part of the court-ordered LDR Phase IV Proposed Rule. UST 5. Underground Storage Tank Piping The regulations for new or upgraded Underground Storage Tank (UST) systems require piping that routinely contains product and is in contact with the ground to be constructed or installed in a manner that protects the pipes from leaking into the environment. Fiberglass-reinforced plastic piping automatically meets this requirement, while metal piping requires cathodic protection, or certification that there is no threat of a release due to corrosion of the metal. Would the owner or operator of a tank system using fiberglass-reinforced piping with metal T and L joints that routinely contain product and are in contact with the ground be required to provide additional protection to these joints, or provide certification of protection? Yes. The UST regulations require corrosion protection of operational underground piping and components including joints (53 FR 37128; September 23, 1988). The corrosion prevention provision for piping construction at 40 CFR 280.20(b) makes no exception for metal piping joints. Although metal pipe joints are but a minor portion of a tank system, they must have cathodic protection (280.20(b)(2)), be installed at a site that is determined not to require corrosion protection (280.20(b)(3)), or be determined not to show a potential for release or threatened release of regulated substances (280.20(b)(4)). Because pipe joints make up such a relatively small portion of a tank system, one of the latter two protection measures is usually most efficient. For metal piping to meet the 280.20(b)(3) conditions, the piping must be installed at a site that is determined by a corrosion expert to not be corrosive enough to cause the piping to have a release due to corrosion during its operating life. The regulations note two standards which may be used to comply with this requirement (National Fire Protection Association Standard 30, and National Association of Corrosion Engineers RP-01-69), although other appropriate methods may be used. The owner or operator must maintain records that demonstrate compliance with this requirement. The implementing agency must approve of the construction and corrosion protection of the piping to meet the requirements of 280.(20)(b)(4). Depending on the requirements of the implementing agency, pipe construction may be approved via specific industry standards, state regulatory requirements, or on a case-by- case basis. CERCLA 6. Clarification of the Definition of On-Scene Coordinator The hazardous substance response requirements under Subpart E of the National Contingency Plan (NCP) provide EPA the authority and mechanisms to conduct removal and remedial activities at Superfund sites. The lead agency (usually EPA) may designate an On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) to direct response for a removal action or a Remedial Project Manager (RPM) to coordinate the cleanup response for the remedial action. At a site where both remedial and removal responses are required, must the lead agency designate two coordinators? The lead agency conducting a Superfund cleanup has great flexibility in designating either an OSC, a RPM, or both to oversee the response action. Where both the OSC and RPM are designated to lead response actions at one site, the responsibilities of the OSC will generally be to lead removal activities, while the RPM will generally oversee remedial activities. Because this situation may promote duplication of information collected or activities performed at some sites, oversight by either an OSC or a RPM of both removal and remedial activities at one site is an option. The definition of RPM in 40 CFR 300.5, clearly indicates that a RPM has the authority to oversee remedial activities as well as other response actions under Subpart E (i.e., removal actions). In contrast, the definition of an OSC did not explicitly extend the same authority for that individual to oversee any action beyond a removal action until a recent clarification in the July 14, 1994, Federal Register (59 FR 35852). This clarification amended the definition of OSC to explain that he or she can direct removal or, other response actions under Subpart E of the NCP. Thus, a lead agency can designate one OSC or RPM to oversee both types of response activities under Subpart E of the NCP. EPCRA 7. Reporting Requirements for Chemically Treated Wood Under EPCRA 311 and 312 Until recently, OSHA exempted wood and wood products from the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) program. On February 9, 1994, OSHA amended its HCS to no longer exempt certain wood and wood products (59 FR 6126). The revised exemption found at 29 CFR 1910.1200(b)(6)(iv) applies only to wood and wood products for which the hazard potential is limited to its flammability or combustibility. Wood that has been chemically treated is now subject to the HCS and thus requires a facility to maintain a material safety data sheet (MSDS) for the wood product. In addition, the wood product is potentially subject to EPCRA 311 and 312. A manufacturer of creosote-treated wood stores various sizes of treated lumber, which it sells to retailers and wholesalers. The facility never stores more than 10,000 pounds of creosote prior to being incorporated into the wood. Would the consumer product exemption found at 40 CFR 370.2 apply to the creosote-treated wood? If the treated wood in storage is subject to EPCRA 311 and 312, does the facility apply the total weight of the wood products towards the 10,000 pound threshold, or just the weight of creosote contained in the wood? EPCRA 311 and 312 apply to any facility that is required to prepare or have available a MSDS and has a hazardous chemical, as defined by OSHA, present in excess of 10,000 pounds, or has an extremely hazardous substance in excess of 500 pounds or the threshold planning quantity (TPQ), whichever is lower (40 CFR 370.20). Despite the new applicability of OSHA s HCS to chemically treated wood, the wood may not be subject to EPCRA 311 and 312 if certain exemptions apply. A manufacturer of creosote-treated wood would not have to count the wood products in storage towards the 10,000- pound threshold if the treated wood is in the same form and concentration as a product distributed to the general public (40 CFR 370.2). If, however, the wood products are treated with levels of creosote not typically used in consumer products, then the wood products in storage must be counted in the threshold determination. Likewise, any wood products in sizes not typically available to the general public must be counted towards threshold calculations. A facility subject to the requirements of EPCRA 311 and 312 has two options for reporting mixtures. An owner or operator may meet the requirements by either providing the required information on each component of a mixture or by providing the information on the mixture itself (40 CFR 370.28(a)). If the manufacturer of creosote-treated wood knows the concentration of the creosote in the wood, the manufacturer can apply the weight of creosote contained in the wood along with any other creosote on site towards the 10,000-pound threshold. The owner or operator may prefer, however, to simply apply the total weight of the wood products towards the threshold. The owner/operator may choose which reporting option to use, but the option chosen must be consistently applied for purposes of reporting under EPCRA 311 and 312 (40 CFR 370.28(a)(2)). 8. Federal Facilities and the Consumer Product Exemption Under EPCRA 311 and 312 Executive Order 12856 required federal facilities to comply with all aspects of EPCRA (58 FR 41981; August 6, 1993). Prior to this action, EPCRA did not apply to federal facilities. Consequently, interpretive language previously issued as guidance for non-federal facilities often does not address issues specific to federal facilities. For example, the federal government produces many of its own products (i.e., scouring powder, bleach) for use by its own service people. These products are similar in form and concentration to analogous products manufactured by private companies for distribution to the general public. Many of the federal government s products are packaged in comparable quantities to those produced in the private sector. EPCRA provides an exemption at 40 CFR 370.2 for consumer products present in the same form and concentration as products packaged for distribution and use by the general public. The federal government s products, however, are not available to the general public. Would the federal products be exempt under the consumer product exemption if they are packaged in the same form and concentration as those manufactured in the private sector, even though they are not available for purchase by the general public? Yes. Products manufactured by the federal government that are packaged in the same form (i.e., package size) and concentration as products manufactured by private industry are exempt from EPCRA 311/312 reporting requirements. The federal products need not be available to the general public to meet this exemption. The exemption applies either to the extent a product is used for personal, family, or household purposes, or is present in the same form and concentration as a product used by the general public (whether or not it is actually used by the general public (40 CFR 372.2)). For further guidance on specific scenarios, federal agencies should look to their respective Executive Order implementing offices to determine the extent of reporting. Some federal agencies have agreed to disregard certain exemptions even though their facilities may qualify for them in order to demonstrate the Federal Government s leadership role in source reduction and pollution prevention. 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 Hotline National Toll-Free No.: 800-424-9346 Local: 703-412-9810 TDD National Toll-Free No.: 800-553-7672 RCRA TITLE: "Update Released on Solid Waste Management in the United States" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-F-94-042 This fact sheet summarizes the report entitled Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1994 Update. The report analyzes municipal solid waste generation and management trends in the United States from 1960 to 1993 and the benefits of source reduction and recycling. It provides information about the amounts of solid waste generated by volume as well as weight, and it includes projections for solid waste generation to the year 2000. This document is also available on the Internet. TITLE: "Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1994 Update; Executive Summary" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-S-94-042 This document summarizes the report entitled Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1994 Update. The report analyzes municipal solid waste generation and management trends in the United States from 1960 to 1993 and the benefits of source reduction and recycling. This document is also available on the Internet. TITLE: "Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1994 Update" AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB95-147 690 This report analyzes municipal solid waste generation and management trends in the United States from 1960 to 1993 and the benefits of source reduction and recycling. It provides information about the amounts of solid waste generated by volume as well as weight, and it includes projections for solid waste generation to the year 2000. The document is also available on the Internet. TITLE: "Reusable News (Winter 1995 Edition)" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-N-95-001 Reusable News is a quarterly newsletter that reports on municipal solid waste management issues. The Winter 1995 edition contains an article about the findings of the report entitled Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1994 Update. It also contains information about Washington's "Buy-Recycled" campaign, and the 1994 household hazardous waste management conference. The newsletter also provides information to home builders about construction and demolition wastes, and includes an insert listing the various EPA publications concerning municipal solid waste available to the public. TITLE: "State Program Advisory Number Fifteen" AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB95-191 219 This document updates the State Authorization Manual (SAM) which assists states and regions in authorizing states for the RCRA program. This advisory covers the period July 1, 1993, through June 30, 1994. It provides new revision checklists including consolidated checklists for the land disposal restrictions, boilers and industrial furnaces, and the Bevill exclusion for mining wastes. The advisory also contains model language from the Attorney General's Statement. TITLE: "Inside the Hotline: A Compilation of 1994 Monthly Hotline Reports" AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB95-179 388 This document is a compilation of questions and answers and Federal Register summaries from individual Monthly Hotline Reports for the period covering January through December 1994. It includes indices arranged by subject, regulatory citation, and statutory citation. This document is also available on the Internet. TITLE: "Index to the Monthly Hotline Report Questions (June 1982 to December 1994)" AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB95-179 396 This document provides four indices to the questions and answer section of the Monthly Hotline Reports from June 1982 through December 1994. The first index is a chronological listing of question titles by year and month. The second index organizes the questions by regulatory citation. The third index organizes the questions by statutory citation, and the fourth index organizes the questions by key work or subject. The document replaces Index to the Monthly Hotline Report Questions (June 1982 to December 1992). This document is also available on the Internet. TITLE: "Report to Congress on Flow Control and Municipal Solid Waste" AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: PB95-179 263 In September 1992, Congress directed the EPA to develop and submit a Report to Congress on flow control as a means of municipal solid waste management. This report presents a comparison of states with and without flow control authority, and it identifies the impact of flow control ordinances on protection of human health and the environment. Specifically, it identifies the impact of flow control on the development of state and local waste management capacity and the achievement of goals for source reduction, reuse and composting, waste-to-energy, and landfill market segments. The report is also available on the Internet. TITLE: "Report to Congress on Flow Control and Municipal Solid Waste: Executive Summary" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA530-S-95-008 This document summarizes the Report to Congress on Flow Control and Municipal Solid Waste. The report presents a comparison of states with and without flow control authority, and identifies the impact of flow control ordinances on protection of human health and the environment. The document is also available on the Internet. UST TITLE: "State-EPA Strategy for Encouraging Early Compliance with UST Upgrade/Replace/Closure Requirements" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: N/A EPA's Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) has developed a strategy to encourage early compliance with the December 1998 deadline for upgrading existing underground storage tank (UST) systems. The document outlines many steps that state and local agencies can take to encourage early compliance. EPCRA TITLE: "Toxic Chemical Release Inventory Reporting Form R and Instructions: Revised 1994 Version" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA745-K-95-051 This document is the reporting form and instructions used by facilities to provide EPA with certain information required by 313 of EPCRA The document also contains the 313 Toxic Chemical List and Federal Facility reporting information. State designated 313 contacts and instructions for submitting the automated Form R are also included in the document. TITLE: "Compliance with the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 as Required Under Executive Order 12856: Questions and Answers" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: N/A This document is designed to assist federal facilities in complying with EPCRA as directed by Executive Order 12856, entitled Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements. The document contains background information about EPCRA and the executive order, and it provides questions and answers that provide technical assistance in understanding regulatory issues. Lists of useful reference materials and regional contacts are also provided in the document. TITLE: "Guidance for Implementing Executive Order 12856: Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: N/A This document contains information used by EPA to assist federal facility compliance with Executive Order 12856, entitled Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements. The document contains guidance developed by EPA to provide consistent interpretation of the language found in the executive order. Appendices to the document also provide discussion of the regulatory practices unique to compliance with community right-to-know regulations. TITLE: "1993 Toxics Release Inventory Public Data Release: Executive Summary" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA745-S-95-001 This document summarizes the information contained in the 1993 Toxics Release Inventory Public Data Release. The report is generated from information contained in the TRI database. It summarizes the data collected for calendar year 1993, and provides comparisons to basic data for 1991 and 1992. The report contains information about releases and transfers of toxic chemicals and prevention and management of toxic chemicals in waste. The summary is also available on the Internet. TITLE: "1993 Toxics Release Inventory Public Data Release: State Fact Sheets" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA745-F-95-002 This document is designed as a companion volume to EPA's 1993 Toxics Release Inventory Public Data Release. The fact sheets in the document summarize the 1993 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data for each state. Each fact sheet includes a map of the state indicating the location of each facility reporting to the TRI, the amount of on-site releases, and the five chemicals with the largest quantity of releases. Contacts for additional information are also presented. The document and is also available on the Internet. TITLE: "1993 Toxics Release Inventory Public Data Release" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: EPA745-R-95-010 This document, which is generated from information contained in the TRI database, summarizes data collected for calendar year 1993 and compares basic data from 1991 and 1992. It includes information about releases and transfers of toxic chemicals, prevention and management of toxic chemicals in waste, and year-to-year comparisons of the data. It also contains questions and answers relating to TRI, and a list of state contacts for additional information. This document is available on the Internet. TITLE: "Fact Sheet: Supplemental Notice to Proposed Rule for Risk Management Planning; CAA 112(r)" AVAILABILITY: Hotline EPA ORDER NO.: N/A This fact sheet outlines the information contained in the supplemental notice to the proposed rule for risk management planning under the CAA 112(r). The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on October 20, 1993. In response to public comments, EPA has issued a supplemental notice proposing modifications and additions to the proposed rule. EPA is requesting additional comments on several issues pertaining to facility and hazard assessment requirements as well as state implementation of the rule. OTHER TITLE: "Monthly Hotline Report" AVAILABILITY: NTIS NTIS ORDER NO.: See below Yearly Subscription PB95-922 400 530-R-95-002 January 1995 PB95-922 401 530-R-95-002a February 1995 PB95-922 402 530-R-95-002b March 1995 PB95-922 403 530-R-95-002c The reports contain questions that required EPA resolution or were frequently asked, publications availability, Federal Register summaries, and Hotline call statistics. The Monthly Hotline Report Questions and Answers are also available for downloading at no charge from CLU-IN 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) FEDERAL REGISTERS FINAL RULES RCRA "Iowa; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program" March 7, 1995 (60 FR 12630) EPA has made the decision that Iowa's application for final approval of its underground storage tank program under Subtitle I of RCRA satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final approval. As a consequence, EPA intends to grant final approval to the state to operate its program in lieu of the federal program. Final approval shall be effective at 1:00 pm eastern time on May 8, 1995. "Iowa; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program" March 7, 1995 (60 FR 12631) EPA is codifying its approval of the Iowa underground storage tank program in 40 CFR Part 282. Only those provisions of the Iowa program for which approval has been granted by EPA will be incorporated by reference for enforcement purposes. EPA retains the authority under 9005 and 9006 of Subtitle I to undertake inspections and enforcement actions in Iowa, therefore the approved Iowa enforcement authorities will not be incorporated by reference. This regulation is effective May 8, 1995, unless EPA publishes a prior Federal Register notice withdrawing this immediate final rule. All comments on this codification of Iowa's underground storage tank program must be received on or before April 6, 1995. "Utah; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program" March 8, 1995 (60 FR 12709) EPA has made the decision that Utah's application for final approval of its underground storage tank program under Subtitle I of RCRA satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final approval. As a consequence, EPA intends to grant final approval to the state to operate its program in lieu of the federal program. Final approval shall be effective at 1:00 pm eastern time on April 7, 1995. "South Dakota; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program" March 16, 1995 (60 FR 14334) EPA has made the decision that South Dakota's application for final approval of its underground storage tank program under Subtitle I of RCRA satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final approval. As a consequence, EPA intends to grant final approval to the state to operate its program in lieu of the federal program. Final approval shall be effective at 1:00 pm eastern time on May 15, 1995. "South Dakota; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program" March 16, 1995 (60 FR 14334) EPA is codifying its approval of the South Dakota underground storage tank program in 40 CFR Part 282. Only those provisions of the South Dakota program for which approval has been granted by EPA will be incorporated by reference for enforcement purposes. EPA retains the authority under 9005 and 9006 of Subtitle I to undertake inspections and enforcement actions in South Dakota, therefore the approved South Dakota enforcement authorities will not be incorporated by reference. This regulation is effective May 15, 1885, unless EPA publishes a Federal Register notice withdrawing this immediate final rule. All comments on this codification of South Dakota's underground storage tank program must be received on or before April 17, 1995. "Texas; Final Approval of State Underground Storage Tank Program" March 17, 1995 (60 FR 14372) EPA has made the decision that Texas' application for final approval of its underground storage tank program under Subtitle I of RCRA satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final approval. As a consequence, EPA intends to grant final approval to the state to operate its program. Final approval shall be effective at 1:00 pm eastern time on April 17, 1995. CERCLA "National Priorities List; Kent City Mobile Home Park Site" March 20, 1995 (60 FR 14645) EPA announced the deletion of the Kent City Mobile Home Park Site, located in Kent City, Michigan, from the National Priorities List. The Agency published a notice of its intent to delete the site on November 8, 1994 (59 FR 55606). EPA and the State of Michigan 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 March 20, 1995. "National Priorities List; Crystal City Airport Superfund Site" March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15247) EPA announced the deletion of the Crystal City Airport Superfund Site in Crystal City, Texas, from the National Priorities List. EPA published a notice of intent to delete the site on January 4, 1995 (59 FR 422). EPA and the State of Texas 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 March 23, 1995. "National Priorities List; Radium Chemical Company" March 24, 1995 (60 FR 15489) EPA announced the deletion of the Radium Chemical Company Site in Woodside, New York, from the National Priorities List. The closing date for comments on the Notice of Intent to Delete was December 9, 1994. EPA received no verbal or written comments. EPA and the State of New York 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 March 24, 1995. "National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; CERCLIS Definition Change" March 29, 1995 (60 FR 16053) EPA is adopting new procedures for maintaining its Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS). The Agency has decided to remove from CERCLIS those sites that do not warrant further evaluation under Superfund. EPA is formally amending the CERCLIS definition in 40 CFR 300.5 to implement this procedural change. The effective date of this rule is March 29, 1995. EPCRA "Toxic Chemical Release Reporting; Technical Amendment" March 10, 1995 (60 FR 13047) In the November 30, 1994, Federal Register (59 FR 61432), EPA added 286 chemicals to the 313 list of toxic chemicals. The Agency is correcting seven errors and clarifying one listing from this final rule. Specifically, EPA is correcting five typographical errors, removing the listing for flumetralin, which the Agency has deferred for listing, and correcting the chemical formula for the polychlorinated alkanes category. In addition, EPA is clarifying the listing for the polychlorinated alkanes category. These corrections are effective March 10, 1995. PROPOSED RULES RCRA "Land Disposal Restrictions; Decharacterized Wastewaters, Carbamate and Organobromine Wastes, and Spent Potliners." March 2, 1995 (60 FR 11702) As part of its Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) program, EPA is proposing treatment standards for wastes derived from the production of carbamate pesticides, organobromine flame- retardants, and luminum. In addition, the Agency is also proposing to revise the treatment standards for characteristic hazardous wastes. Currently, these wastes are not regulated, once the characteristic is removed, when managed in Clean Water Act/Clean Water Act-equivalent systems, or when injected into deepwells regulated under the Safe Drinking Waster Act. EPA proposes to revise its treatment standards to require treatment to remove the characteristic, as well as to treat any underlying hazardous constituents that are in the waste. EPA is also proposing to codify that filling in holes in the ground with hazardous waste is illegal disposal. Finally, the Agency is proposing to codify its policy prohibiting the combustion of certain metal-bearing wastes under the dilution prohibition. "Federal Facilities Compliance Act of 1992 Amendments" March 22, 1995 (60 FR 15208) The Federal Facility Compliance Act of 1992 (FFCA) clarified that EPA has explicit authority to issue administrative enforcement orders to other federal agencies that are in violation of RCRA. Further, it provides that no administrative enforcement order issued to a department, agency, or instrumentality of the federal government becomes final until the department, agency, or instrumentality has an opportunity to confer with the EPA Administrator. EPA is proposing a technical revision of its administrative rules of practice to provide a federal department, agency, or instrumentality, which is the subject of an administrative enforcement order, with the opportunity to confer with the Administrator as required by the FFCA. Comments on this proposed rule must be received on or before April 21, 1995. CERCLA "National Priorities List; Dakhue Sanitary Landfill Site" March 15, 1995 (60 FR 13944) EPA announced its intent to delete the Dakhue Sanitary Landfill Site, located in Dakota County, Minnesota, from the National Priorities List. EPA and the State of Minnesota 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. Comments concerning the site may be submitted on or before April 14, 1995. "National Priorities List; Koch Refining Company Site" March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15273) EPA announced its intent to delete the Koch Refining Company Site, located in Rosemount, Minnesota, from the National Priorities List. EPA and the State of Minnesota 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. Comments concerning the site may be submitted on or before April 24, 1995. NOTICES RCRA "Ores and Minerals; Additional Data Available on Wastes from Extraction and Beneficiation" March 1, 1995 (60 FR 11089) EPA announces the availability of several documents concerning the mining industry. In particular, the Agency is making available documents on the extraction and beneficiation practices of various mineral sectors, mining waste management and engineering practices, and the history of EPA's mining waste activities. The documents will be available in hard copy as well as will be accessible on the Internet. In addition, EPA anticipates making several of the documents available in Spanish by May 1995. "Extension of Comment Period for the Proposed Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Dye and Pigment Industries" March 7, 1995 (60 FR 12525) EPA is extending the comment period on the December 22, 1994 (59 FR 66072), proposal to list several wastes generated during the production of dyes and pigments. The comment period, originally scheduled to close on March 22, 1995, will now end on July 19, 1995. "Postponement of Public Hearing on the Proposed Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Dye and Pigment Industries" March 7, 1995 (60 FR 12525) EPA is postponing the public hearing on the December 22, 1994 (59 FR 66072), proposal to list several wastes generated during the production of dyes and pigments. The hearing was previously scheduled for March 15, 1995. The Agency has not set a new date for the meeting. "New York; Final Determination of Full Program Adequacy of State Municipal Solid Waste Permit Program" March 14, 1995 (60 FR 13722) Pursuant to RCRA 4005(c)(1)(C), EPA gave notice of a final determination approving the adequacy of New Hampshire's municipal solid waste landfill permit program. The effective date of this determination is March 14, 1995. "Paper Products Recovered Materials Advisory" March 15, 1995 (60 FR 14182) EPA is announcing the availability of a draft Paper Products Recovered Materials Advisory Notice (RMAN) and Draft Paper Products RMAN-Supporting Analyses. The RMAN contains recommendations for procuring agencies to use when purchasing paper and paper products in accordance with 6002 of RCRA. The supporting analyses contain detailed information concerning the recommendations found in the RMAN. Comments on the draft RMAN must be submitted to EPA on or before May 15, 1995. "Flow Control and Municipal Solid Waste" March 21, 1995 (60 FR 14937) The 102nd Congress directed EPA to review flow control as a form of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) management. Flow controls are legal provisions that allow state and local governments to designate where MSW must be taken for processing, treatment, or disposal. Specifically, Congress asked EPA to review and compare states with and without flow control authority, to identify the impact of flow controls on human health and the environment, and to identify the impact of flow controls on human health and the environment. In addition, Congress directed EPA to describe the impacts of flow control on the development of state and local waste management and on the achievement of state and local goals set for source reduction, materials reuse, and recycling. EPA is announcing the availability of its completed Report to Congress on these issues. The document is available in hard copy from the National Technical Information Service, as well as electronically on the Internet. "Maryland; Partial Program Adequacy Determination of the Municipal Solid Waste Permit Program" March 21, 1995 (60 FR 14938) Pursuant to RCRA 4005(c)(1)(C), EPA gave notice of a tentative determination, public hearing, and public comment period concerning the adequacy of Maryland's municipal solid waste landfill permit program. The public hearing is scheduled for May 17, 1995. Comments must be submitted on or before May 19, 1995. "Science Advisory Board; Hazardous Waste Identification Rule (HWIR) Subcommittee; Open Meeting" March 27, 1995 (60 FR 15761) The Hazardous Waste Identification Rule (HWIR) Subcommittee of the Science Advisory Board will hold an open meeting on April 26 and 27, 1995, in Washington, DC. The purpose of the meeting is to review the Agency's draft multi-media, multi-pathway risk analysis being developed to support HWIR. RCRA/CERCLA "National Priorities List for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites; Deletion Policy for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Sites" March 20, 1995 (60 FR 14641) EPA is announcing its policy of deleting RCRA facilities from the NPL before a cleanup is complete if the site is being, or will be, adequately addressed by the RCRA corrective action program under an existing permit or order. This deletion policy applies to sites on the NPL that are RCRA-regulated facilities engaged in treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste, but does not apply to federal facility sites. The Agency requested comment on this policy on December 21, 1988 (53 FR 51421). In order to be eligible for deletion from the NPL based on deferral to RCRA corrective action authorities, a site must meet the following criteria: 1) if evaluated under EPA's current RCRA/NPL deferral policy, the site would be eligible for deferral from listing on the NPL; 2) the CERCLA site is currently being addressed by RCRA corrective action authorities under an existing enforceable order or permit containing corrective action provisions; 3) response under RCRA is progressing adequately; and 4) deletion would not disrupt an ongoing CERCLA response action. This policy is effective April 19, 1995. CERCLA "Proposed Administrative Settlement; Arkla Hunnewell Compressor Station Site" March 1, 1995 (60 FR 11084) EPA proposed to enter into an administrative settlement under CERCLA 122(h). The proposed settlement requires the settling party to reimburse the Hazardous Substance Superfund $130,938.25 for response costs incurred in connection with the Arkla Hunnewell Compressor Station Site in Hunnewell, Kansas. The Agency will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "Proposed Consent Decree; Bailey Waste Disposal Site" March 1, 1995 (60 FR 11113) A Consent Decree in United States v. Allied Signal Inc., et al., was lodged with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas on February 16, 1995. The proposed settlement requires the settling parties to reimburse the Hazardous Substance Superfund for response costs incurred in connection with the Bailey Waste Disposal Site in Orange County, Texas. In particular, the settling parties will pay either 85.3 percent of 20 percent of those funds expended by the Bailey Task Force in completing its remedial action, pursuant to a Consent Decree entered in a related action, United States v. BFI or $2,600,000, whichever is greater. If the claims submitted by the Bailey Task Force total less than $2,600,000, then the settling parties shall pay the United States 100 percent of the total claims submitted under the Mixed Funding Consent Decree. DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "Proposed Consent Decree; New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit Superfund Site" March 2, 1995 (60 FR 11679) A Consent Decree in United States v. Cape Fear Community College, et al., was lodged with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina on February 21, 1995. The proposed settlement requires the settling parties to reimburse the Hazardous Substances Superfund for 100 percent of the response costs incurred in connection with the New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit Superfund Site. DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "Proposed Administrative Settlement; Rockaway Borough Well Field Superfund Site" March 3, 1995 (60 FR 11974) EPA proposed to enter into an administrative settlement under CERCLA 122(h). The proposed settlement requires the settling parties to reimburse the Hazardous Substance Superfund $859,365 for response costs incurred in connection with the Rockaway Borough Well Field Superfund Site, in Rockaway, New Jersey. The Agency will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "Proposed Partial Consent Decree; Smuggler Mountain Superfund Site" March 13, 1995 (60 FR 13451) A Partial Consent in United States v. Smuggler-Durant Mining Corporation, et al., was lodged with the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, on February 10, 1995. The proposed settlement requires the settling parties to reimburse the Hazardous Substance Superfund $1,700,000 for costs incurred in connection with the Smuggler Mountain Superfund Site in Aspen, Colorado. The decree provides the settling parties a covenant not to sue for past and future response costs or response actions at the site, as well as a limited covenant for natural resource damages on Operable Unit 1 of the site. In addition, the decree resolves potential counterclaims by the settling parties against the United States for any activities conducted on-site by any instrumentality of the United States. DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "Proposed Consent Decree; Missouri Electric Works, Inc. Superfund Site" March 16, 1995 (60 FR 14305) A Consent Decree in United States v. Missouri Electric Works, Inc. et al., was lodged with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Southeastern Division, on March 9, 1995. The proposed settlement requires the settling parties to pay $190,000 and one half of the net proceeds over $75,000 resulting from the sales of the inventory of Missouri Electric Works Inc. These payments will reimburse the Hazardous Substance Superfund for costs incurred in connection with the Missouri Electric Works, Inc. Superfund Site in Cape Girardeau, Missouri. DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "Proposed Consent Decree; Arrowhead Refining Co. Site" March 21, 1995 (60 FR 14963) A Consent Decree in United States v. Arrowhead Refining Co., et al., was lodged with the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota on March 9, 1995. The proposed settlement requires 44 settling parties to perform one component of the remedial action at the Arrowhead Refining Co. Site at an estimated cost of $12.52 million. In addition, these parties must pay an additional $134,800 to federal and state natural resource trustees for use in habitat restoration projects. One hundred and sixty-five other parties will contribute financially to the 44 settling parties' performance of the remedial action. This settlement was part of EPA's Mixed Funding Pilot Project. DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "Proposed Modification of Consent Decree; Libby Groundwater National Priorities List Superfund Site" March 21, 1995 (60 FR 14963) A Modification of Consent Decree in United States v. Champion International Corporation was lodged with the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana on February 27, 1995. The Consent Decree was originally entered on October 18, 1989, and required the settling party, inter alia, to implement the remedial actions outlined in the December 1988, Record of Decision for the Libby Groundwater National Priorities List Superfund Site, located in Libby, Montana. The proposed Modification of Consent Decree requires the settling party to implement the September 1993, Explanation of Significant Difference (ESD). This ESD waives the soil remediation levels for certain constituents as well as selects monitoring and institutional controls on usage as a final remedy for the deep aquifer. DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "Proposed Consent Decree; Arrowhead Plating Superfund Site" March 21, 1995 (60 FR 14964) A Consent Decree in United States v. Scovill, Inc. was lodged with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, on March 2, 1995. The proposed settlement requires the settling parties to reimburse the Hazardous Substances Superfund $339,811.48 for response costs incurred at the Arrowhead Plating Superfund Site in Montross, Virginia. The decree reserves the right of the United States to recover future response costs and to seek further injunctive relief against the settling defendants for conditions at the site that are unknown at the time of entry of this decree. DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "Proposed Consent Decree; Montie Drum Site" March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15308) A Consent Decree in United States v. Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co. was lodged with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on March 8, 1995. The proposed settlement requires the settling party to reimburse the Hazardous Substances Superfund $1,100,000 for response costs incurred in connection with the Montie Drum Site in Belleville, Michigan. In addition, the settling party must pay $50,000 to settle civil penalty claims arising from its alleged failure to fully and accurately respond to information requests from EPA. DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "National Priorities List; United States Army Fort Lewis Landfill No. 5 Site" March 27, 1995 (60 FR 15737) EPA announced its intent to delete the United States Army Fort Lewis Landfill No. 5 Site, located in Pierce County, Washington, from the National Priorities List. EPA and the State of Washington 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. Comments concerning the site may be submitted on or before April 26, 1995. "Proposed Administrative Settlement; Lorentz Barrel and Drum Superfund Site" March 29, 1995 (60 FR 16135) EPA proposed to enter into a de minimis administrative settlement under CERCLA 122(g). The proposed settlement requires the 88 settling parties to pay $1,853,545.51 to EPA and $1,273,062.71 to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control for response costs incurred in connection with the Lorentz Barrel and Drum Site in San Jose, California. The Agency will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. If the Agency receives a request for a public hearing within 30 days following the date of publication, EPA will hold a public hearing to afford the public an opportunity to comment on the proposed settlement. "Proposed Administrative Settlement; Sparks Solvent Fuel Site" March 29, 1995 (60 FR 16136) EPA proposed to enter into an administrative settlement under CERCLA 122(h). The proposed settlement requires the settling party to reimburse EPA its proportional share of the response costs incurred in connection with the Sparks Solvent Fuel Site in Sparks, Nevada. The Agency will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. "Proposed Settlement Agreement; Buckeye Reclamation Landfill Site" March 30, 1995 (60 FR 16503) A proposed Settlement Agreement was lodged with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Pennsylvania on March 16, 1995. The proposed Settlement Agreement resolves certain claims of the United States and the State of Ohio under CERCLA and under state law relating to the Buckeye Reclamation Landfill Site in Belmont County, Ohio. In addition, the agreement resolves certain claims of the United States for pre-petition penalties under the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Clean Air Act (CAA). Under the Settlement Agreement, inter alia, the EPA will have an allowed general unsecured claim of $1,252,846. DOJ will receive comments for a period of 30 days from the date of publication. ATSDR "List of Hazardous Substances; Toxicological Profiles" March 30, 1995 (60 FR 16478) As mandated by CERCLA 104(i)(2), EPA and ATSDR maintain a list, in order of priority, of the hazardous substances found at NPL sites posing the most significant potential threat to human health. This listing is called the Priority List of Hazardous Substances that will be the Subject of Toxicological Profiles. ATSDR published the list of the first 100 substances in 1987 (52 FR 12866), and has published additional substances or reviewed the list annually since this original Federal Register notice. Because the list has remained rather stable during the past few years, as well as because of the substantial resources needed to publish and review the list, ATSDR is announcing a proposed change in its publication schedule. According to the proposal, the list would be shifted to a 2-year publication schedule with a yearly informal review and revision. The informal review would result in an informal list that would not be published in the Federal Register, but would be made available upon request. Comments on this notice must be received on or before May 1, 1995. Environmental Justice "Environmental Justice Community/University Partnership Grants Program" March 16, 1995 (60 FR 14281) EPA is requesting applications for its Environmental Justice Community/University Partnerships Grants Program. The main objective of the program is to link members of a community, who are directly affected by adverse environmental conditions, with an academic institution's staff. A minimum of four, $300,000 grants will be awarded for the Fiscal Year 1995. Applications must be postmarked on or before May 17, 1995. Science Advisory Board "Radiation Advisory Committee; Notification of Public Advisory Committee Meetings" March 3, 1995 (60 FR 11971) The Science Advisory Board (SAB) announced that several of its committees will hold meetings, including the Radionuclide Cleanup Standards Subcommittee (RCSS) of the Radiation Advisory Committee. RCSS will meet on March 27, 1995, to continue its review of the technical basis for the Agency's cleanup standards for radionuclides. The committee will be reviewing the draft documents Radiation Site Cleanup Regulations: Technical Support Document for the Development of Radionuclide Cleanup Levels for Soil, Review Draft and Radiation Site Cleanup Regulations: Technical Support Document for the Development of Radionuclide Cleanup Levels for Soil, Appendices. TSCA "Disposal of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Informal Hearing" March 10, 1995 (60 FR 13095) EPA intends to conduct an informal public hearing on the December 6, 1994 (59 FR 62788), proposal to amend the TSCA rules for PCBs. The hearing will take place on May 2, 1995, in Arlington, Virginia. Requests to participate in the hearing must be received on or before April 6, 1995. HOTLINE STATISTICS CALLER PROFILE RCRA/UST Hotline Regulated Community 7,214 Citizens 276 State & Local Govt./Native American 352 Federal Agencies 164 Educational Institutions 170 EPA 83 Media 26 Interest Groups 37 Congress 7 International 4 Other 92 Referrals* 553 Transfers to EPCRA/Superfund Hotline* 447 Document Retrieval Line* 301 Message Retrieval Line* 522 TOTAL 10,248 EMERGENCY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT/ SUPERFUND HOTLINE Manufacturers Food/Tobacco 82 Textiles 26 Apparel 14 Lumber & Wood 33 Furniture 21 Paper 39 Printing & Publishing 43 Chemicals 198 Petroleum & Coal 125 Rubber and Plastics 38 Leather 14 Stone, Clay & Glass 35 Primary Metals 52 Fabricated Metals 87 Machinery (Excluding Electrical) 24 Electrical&Electronic Equipment 70 Transportation Equipment 22 Instruments 18 Misc. Manufacturing 166 Subtotal 1,107 Consultants/Engineers 2,379 Attorneys 391 Citizens 305 Public Interest Groups 41 Educational Institutions 109 EPA 93 Federal Agencies 161 GOCOs 9 Congress 1 State Officials/SERCs 97 Local Officials/LEPCs 82 Fire Departments 21 Hospitals/Laboratories 74 Trade Associations 57 Union/Labor 7 Farmers 6 Distributors 25 Insurance Companies 9 Media/Press 27 Native Americans 4 International 3 Other 119 Transfers to RCRA/UST Hotline* 426 Document Retrieval Line* 44 Message Retrieval Line* 81 Referrals* 321 TOTAL 5,999 *No caller profile data available HOTLINE TOPICS RCRA RCRA GENERAL 983 SUBTITLE C Hazardous Waste Id. - General 1,918(1) Toxicity Characteristic (TC) 276 Wood Preserving Wastes 32 Listing of Used Oil 37 Fluff 1 Mercury-Containing Lamps 432 Radioactive Mixed Waste 43 Delisting Petitions 21 Hazardous Waste Recycling 365(1) Generators 754(1) Small Quantity Generators 316 Transporters 97 Exports/Imports 38 TSDF General 635(1) Treatment 92 Storage 124 Disposal 85 Siting Facilities 13 Capacity 8 Land Disposal Restrictions 1,078(1) Permits and Permitting 172 Corrective Action 337 Liability/Enforcement 162 Test Methods 188 Health Effects 31 Combustion - General 166 Permitting 33 Tech. Standards/Combustion Units 77 Waste Minimization 75 Risk Assessment 13 Waste Minimization/Pollution Prevention 183 State Programs 119 Hazardous Waste Data 50 Military Munitions 9 SUBTITLE D Household Hazardous Wastes 273 Subtitle D - General 549(1) Siting Facilities 22 Combustion 121 Industrial Waste 36 Solid Waste Recycling - General 529(1) Aluminum 16 Batteries 21 Glass 11 Paper 25 Plastics 35 Tires 37 Used Oil 193 Composting 22 Markets - General 40 Aluminum 3 Batteries 14 Compost 9 Glass 12 Paper 7 Plastics 15 Tires 21 Used Oil 71 Procurement General 94 Building Insulation 5 Cement/Cement Products with Fly Ash 8 Paper and Paper Products 117 Re-Refined Lubricating Oil 8 Retread Tires 13 Source Reduction/Pollution Prevention 78 Grant and Financing 8 OTHER WASTES Ash 62 Bevill Amendment (Mining Waste) 68 Medical Waste 217 Oil and Gas 15 TOTAL 11,738* * Includes 3,549 RCRA document requests. UST General/Misc. 311(1) Applicability/Definitions 165 Regulated Substances 61 Standards for New Tank Systems 58 Tank Standards and Upgrading 103 Operating Requirements 36 Release Detection 156 Release Reporting & Investigation 49 Corrective Action for USTs 122 Out-of-Service/Closure 86 Financial Responsibility 59 State Programs 18 Liability/Enforcement 45 LUST Trust Fund 21 TOTAL 1,290* * Includes 565 UST document requests. EMERGENCY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW General: General Title III Questions 539(1) Trade Secrets 13 Enforcement 35 Liability/Citizen Suits 15 Training 30 Chemical-Specific Information 47 Emergency Planning (301-303): General 82 Notification Requirements 40 SERC/LEPC Issues 36 EHSs/TPQs 72 Risk Communication/ Hazards Analysis 20 Exemptions 10 Emergency Release Notification (304): General 71 Notification Requirements 63 Reportable Quantities 96 CERCLA 103 vs. SARA 304 52 ARIP/AHEDB/ERNS 7 Exemptions 15 Hazardous Chemical Reporting (311-312): General 157 MSDS Reporting Requirements 106 Tier I/II Requirements 343 Thresholds 147 Hazard Categories 28 Mixtures Reporting 58 Exemptions 124 Toxic Chemical Release Inventory (313): General 463 Reporting Requirements 261(1) Thresholds 189 Form R Completion 514(1) Supplier Notification 44 NOTEs/NOSEs/NONs 7 Voluntary Revisions 25 Pollution Prevention 33/50 19 Public Access to Data 108 TRI Database 109 Petitions 57 TRI Expansion 209 Exemptions 96 Special Topics: CAA 112 General 144(1) RMPs 114(1) List of Regulated Substances 47 Federal Facilities Executive Order 74 TOTAL 4,904 *Includes 1,401 Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know document requests SUPERFUND General/Misc. 269 Access & Information Gathering 46 Administrative Improvements General 84 Environmental Justice/Brownfields 149(1) SACM/Presumptive Remedies 138 Soil Screening Levels 89 Administrative Record 12 ARARs 129 CERCLIS 151 Citizen Suits 16 Claims Against Fund 2 Clean-Up Costs 45 Clean-Up Standards 139 Community Involvement 83 Contract Lab Program (CLP) 31 Contractor Indemnification 9 Contracts 12 Definitions 18 Enforcement 87 Federal Facilities 59 Hazardous Substances 127 HRS 36 Liability 141 Local Gov't Reimbursement 12 Natural Resource Damages 19 NCP 54 Notification 76 NPL 261(1) Off Site Rule 16 OSHA 9 PA/SI 38 PRPs 45 RD/RA 30 Reauthorization 24 Remedial 135 Removal 38 RI/FS 50 Risk Assess./Health Effects 87 ROD 42 RQ 270(1) Settlements 50 SITE Program 45 State Participation 18 State Program 12 TAGs 9 Taxes 8 Special Topics Oil Pollution Act 9 SPCC Regulations 26 Radiation Site Cleanup 20 TOTAL 3,275* *Includes 1,128 Superfund document requests. TOTAL HOTLINE QUESTIONS, DOCUMENT REQUESTS AND REFERRALS: 21,207 (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.