95-6673. The National Priorities List for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites; Deletion Policy for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facilities  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 1995)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 14641-14645]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-6673]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 300
    
    [FRL-5173-4]
    
    
    The National Priorities List for Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste 
    Sites; Deletion Policy for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
    Facilities
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
    
    ACTION: Notice of policy statement.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'') is announcing a 
    policy relating to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances 
    Contingency Plan (``NCP''), 40 CFR part 300, which was promulgated 
    pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
    Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (``CERCLA'') (amended by the 
    Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (``SARA'')) and 
    Executive Order 12580 (52 FR 2023, January 29, 1987). CERCLA requires 
    that the NCP include a list of national priorities among the known 
    releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants or 
    contaminants throughout the United States, and that the list be revised 
    at least annually. The National Priorities List (``NPL''), initially 
    promulgated as Appendix B of the NCP on September 8, 1983 (48 FR 
    40658), constitutes this list.
        This document describes a policy for deleting sites from the NPL 
    and deferring them to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
    (``RCRA''), as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 
    1984 (``HSWA'') corrective action program, if they meet the eligibility 
    criteria for deletion set out in the NCP. EPA requested public comment 
    on this policy on December 21, 1988 (53 FR 51421). The policy applies 
    to sites on the NPL that are RCRA-regulated facilities engaged in 
    treatment, storage or disposal of hazardous waste (``TSDs'' under the 
    RCRA program).
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: This policy is effective on April 19, 1995.
    
    ADDRESSES: Comments received and the Agency's responses to them are 
    contained in the Headquarters Superfund Docket. The Headquarters 
    Superfund Docket is located at the U.S. Environmental Protection 
    Agency, Crystal Gateway #1, 12th Floor, 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
    Arlington, VA. It is available for viewing by appointment only from 
    9:00 a.m. to 4:00 [[Page 14642]] p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 
    Federal holidays, Telephone 703/603-8917.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Superfund Hotline, phone 800/424-
    9346 (or 703/412-9810 in the Washington, DC metropolitan area).
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Table of Contents
    
    I. Introduction
    II. Policy for Deleting RCRA Sites from the NPL Based Upon RCRA 
    Deferral
    III. Appendix A: Summary of NPL Deletion/Deferral Policies
    
    I. Introduction
    
    A. Purpose of CERCLA
    
        In 1980, Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
    Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601, et seq. (``CERCLA'' or 
    ``the Act''), in response to the dangers of uncontrolled or abandoned 
    hazardous waste sites. CERCLA was amended in 1986 by the Superfund 
    Amendments and Reauthorization Act (``SARA''), Pub. L., No. 99-499, 100 
    Stat. 1613. To implement CERCLA, the Environmental Protection Agency 
    (``EPA'' or ``the Agency'') promulgated the National Oil and Hazardous 
    Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (``NCP''), 40 CFR part 300, on 
    July 16, 1982 (47 FR 31180), pursuant to CERCLA section 105 and 
    Executive Order 12316 (46 FR 42237, August 20, 1981). The NCP, further 
    revised most recently by EPA on March 8, 1990 (55 FR 8664), sets forth 
    guidelines and procedures for responding under CERCLA to releases and 
    threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or 
    contaminants.
        The National Priorities List (``NPL''), initially promulgated as 
    Appendix B of the NCP on September 8, 1983 (48 FR 40658), constitutes 
    this list.
        EPA requested public comment on this policy on December 21, 1988 
    (53 FR 51421).
    
    B. Purpose of the NPL
    
        Section 105(a)(8)(A) of CERCLA requires that the NCP include 
    criteria for ``determining priorities among releases or threatened 
    releases throughout the United States for the purpose of taking 
    remedial action and, to the extent practicable taking into account the 
    potential urgency of such action.'' Section 105(a)(8)(B) of CERCLA 
    requires that those criteria be used to prepare a list of national 
    priorities among the known releases or threatened releases of hazardous 
    substances, pollutants, or contaminants throughout the United States. 
    The list, which is Appendix B of the NCP, is the National Priorities 
    List (``NPL''). A site may undergo Fund-financed remedial action only 
    after it is placed on the NPL. See 40 CFR 300.425(b)(1).
        The Hazard Ranking System (``HRS''), which EPA promulgated as 
    Appendix A of the NCP (47 FR 31219, July 16, 1982), and amended (55 FR 
    51532, December 14, 1990), is the principal tool upon which the Agency 
    relies to determine the priority sites for possible remedial actions 
    under CERCLA. 40 CFR 300.425(c)(1). In addition to the HRS scoring 
    method, a site also may be listed if designated as a state's highest 
    priority, or if the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 
    (``ATSDR'') has issued a health advisory for the site, and EPA 
    determines that the site poses a significant threat to public health 
    and that it will be more cost effective to use the Agency's remedial 
    authority than to use removal authority to respond to a release. Id. at 
    40 CFR 300.425(c) (2) and (3).
    
    II. Policy for Deleting Sites from the NPL Based Upon RCRA Deferral
    
    A. Purpose of Today's Notice
    
        This notice announces the Agency's 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. EPA must also be satisfied, 
    based either on an evaluation of a petition from a person outside the 
    Agency or via a unilateral Agency determination, that the site, as 
    defined by the CERCLA program, falls within the criteria for deferral.
        The terms ``deferral'' and ``deletion'' as used in the context of 
    the NPL refer to the following: Deferral refers to the decision not to 
    list a site on the NPL, or not retain a site on the NPL, to allow 
    another authority (RCRA corrective action in this case) to handle the 
    remediation of the site in lieu of CERCLA. Deletion is the act of 
    taking a site off the NPL, which may occur because cleanup at a site is 
    complete or because another authority (such as RCRA corrective action) 
    can be used to bring about remediation at the site and further CERCLA 
    action is not needed. Please see Appendix A for a summary of the 
    development of deferral policies.
    
    B. Rationale for Deleting Sites Based Upon RCRA Deferral Under NCP 
    Deletion Criteria
    
        EPA believes it is appropriate to delete sites from the NPL based 
    upon deferral to RCRA under certain circumstances. Deletion of sites 
    from the NPL to defer them to RCRA Subtitle C corrective action 
    authorities would free CERCLA's oversight resources for use in 
    situations where another authority is not available, as well as avoid 
    possible duplication of effort and the need for an owner/operator to 
    follow more than one set of regulatory procedures. Eliminating 
    regulation under two separate authorities also will eliminate public 
    and owner/operator confusion over which authority has primacy. 
    Moreover, since the CERCLA and RCRA programs have comparable cleanup 
    goals, RCRA Subtitle C facilities requiring remediation appropriately 
    may be deferred to RCRA corrective action authorities unless deletion 
    would interfere with the remediation of the site.
        However, today's RCRA deletion policy does not pertain to Federal 
    facility sites. Federal facility sites will not be deleted from the NPL 
    based upon deferral to RCRA, even if such facilities are also subject 
    to the corrective action authorities of Subtitle C of RCRA. One of the 
    primary goals of deferral--maximizing the use of limited Fund monies--
    does not apply to Federal facility sites since Federal facilities 
    typically are not eligible for Fund-financed remedial action. 
    Furthermore, the goal of avoiding duplication of efforts can be 
    resolved through the use of comprehensive Inter-Agency Agreements (54 
    FR 10522, March 13, 1989).
    
    C. Proposed Criteria for Deleting Sites from the NPL Based on Deferral 
    to RCRA
    
        The following are the criteria proposed in the December 21, 1988 
    Federal Register notice for determining whether a site may be deleted 
    from the NPL based upon deferral to another authority such as RCRA:
        i. A site on the NPL is currently being addressed by another 
    regulatory authority under an enforceable order or permit requiring 
    corrective action or the PRPs have entered into a CERCLA consent order 
    to perform the RD/RA;
        ii. Response is progressing adequately;
        iii. Deletion would not otherwise disrupt an ongoing CERCLA 
    response action; and
        iv. All criteria for deferral to that authority have been met 
    (i.e., the requesting party must meet all conditions for deferral to 
    that authority in addition to the three specific criteria set out above 
    for deletion based upon deferral).
    
    D. Final Criteria for Deleting Sites
    
        EPA believes that it is appropriate to apply different and more 
    stringent [[Page 14643]] criteria to actions to delete based on 
    deferral to RCRA for sites that are on the NPL than to sites that are 
    candidates for deferral prior to NPL listing. For NPL sites, EPA has 
    completed its listing process, identified the site as a potential 
    problem requiring further attention, and often has commenced CERCLA 
    response actions. In addition, the listing itself has created public 
    anticipation of a response under CERCLA. Thus, EPA and the public will 
    generally have an interest in seeing that these sites are addressed by 
    the Superfund program, particularly in cases where significant 
    Superfund resources already have been expended at a site. Thus, it is 
    in the best interest of the public to apply different and more 
    stringent criteria.
        In today's notice, EPA is finalizing the criteria enumerated below 
    for use in identifying sites eligible for deletion based upon deferral 
    to RCRA corrective action authorities. A site should satisfy all of 
    these criteria to be eligible for deletion. Where there is uncertainty 
    as to whether the criteria have been met, deletion generally will be 
    inappropriate. The criteria are the following:
        1. If evaluated under EPA's current RCRA/NPL deferral policy,1 
    the site would be eligible for deferral from listing on the NPL.
    
        \1\ The term ``current RCRA/NPL deferral policy'' refers to the 
    policy in effect at the time the deletion decision is made. As past 
    Federal Register notices demonstrate, the RCRA/NPL deferral policy 
    has changed, and may continue to change based upon the Agency's 
    continued evaluation of how best to implement the statutory 
    authorities of RCRA and CERCLA.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        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.
        4. Deletion would not disrupt an ongoing CERCLA response action.
    
    E. Discussion of Each Criterion
    
        The first criterion states that sites generally will not be 
    eligible for deletion from the NPL based upon deferral to RCRA 
    corrective action if similarly situated sites would not be deferred 
    from listing on the NPL.
        Two types of sites may be eligible for deletion: 1) sites that 
    would be eligible for deferral under current deferral criteria, but 
    were not deferred because the deferral policy at the time of listing 
    was different; and 2) sites that were not eligible for deferral when 
    listed, but now may be eligible because of changed conditions at the 
    site (e.g., they no longer are in bankruptcy, or they now are in 
    compliance with a corrective action order). For RCRA facilities within 
    the second category, the Agency will review the original listing 
    rationale (e.g., unwillingness, bankruptcy) together with current 
    information to ascertain whether conditions at the site have changed 
    sufficiently to warrant deletion from the NPL. Where there is 
    uncertainty about whether the criteria have been met, deletion 
    generally will be inappropriate. Persons who submit petitions for 
    deletion will have to bear the burden of demonstrating that they meet 
    the current criteria for deletion based upon deferral, and that the 
    conditions that justified the listing no longer exist and are not 
    likely to recur.
        The second criterion states that the site is being addressed by 
    RCRA corrective action authorities under an existing order or permit. 
    The criterion specifies that the requirement applies to sites as 
    defined by CERCLA, and that the authority addressing the site is RCRA 
    Subtitle C corrective action.
        Under the second criterion, corrective action orders or permits 
    issued by EPA or an authorized state program that address corrective 
    action at the facility must generally be in place as a condition of 
    deletion. This criterion serves as an objective indicator that 
    contamination at a site is addressable under RCRA corrective action 
    authorities. The term ``addressable'' in this context means that a 
    CERCLA site is fully remediable by a permit or order with a schedule of 
    compliance, whether or not actual cleanup has begun.
        Corrective action permits or orders should require the cleanup of 
    all releases at the CERCLA site (e.g., if contamination stemming from 
    the CERCLA ``release'' extends beyond the boundaries of a particular 
    RCRA facility, such releases must be addressed under RCRA sections 
    3004(v) and 3008(h) or other enforcement authority under RCRA);2 
    otherwise, the CERCLA site would not be a candidate for deletion. There 
    may be circumstances where modification of corrective action orders or 
    permits may be necessary before a facility can be considered for 
    deletion from the NPL. For example, a facility owner/operator who has 
    been doing remedial work under CERCLA and intends to pursue deletion 
    from the NPL, generally must obtain modification of RCRA permits or 
    orders if existing permits and orders do not contain corrective action 
    requirements for all operable units. Likewise, the implementing agency 
    intending to unilaterally pursue deletion would need to modify orders 
    or permits if necessary. This should enable the facility to meet the 
    second criterion by ensuring that the entire CERCLA-defined facility is 
    subject to RCRA corrective action.
    
        \2\ Under CERCLA, the term ``facility'' is meant to be 
    synonymous with ``site'' or ``release'' and is not meant to suggest 
    that the listing is geographically defined (56 FR 5600, February 11, 
    1991). The size or extent of a facility listed on the NPL may extend 
    to those areas where the contamination has ``come to be located.'' 
    (See CERCLA section 101(9)). On the other hand, a ``facility'' as 
    defined under RCRA is ``all contiguous property under the control of 
    the owner or operator seeking a Subtitle C permit'' (58 FR 8664, 
    February 16, 1993). Thus, a RCRA site relates more to property 
    boundaries, and a CERCLA site/facility/release includes 
    contamination irrespective of RCRA facility boundaries.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Under the third criterion, EPA evaluates whether response under 
    RCRA is progressing adequately. The RCRA/NPL deferral policy currently 
    looks to compliance with corrective action orders or permits as the 
    primary indicator of whether an owner/operator is willing to undertake 
    corrective action. Under this criterion, noncompliance with corrective 
    action orders and permits generally would be regarded as an indicator 
    that response under RCRA is not progressing adequately. The Agency's 
    evaluation may not end there, however. Even if an owner/operator is in 
    compliance with a corrective action order or permit, EPA may determine 
    that response is not progressing adequately based upon other factors. 
    For example, the Agency may consider whether there has been a history 
    of protracted negotiations due primarily to an uncooperative owner or 
    operator.
        Under the fourth criterion, EPA evaluates on a site-by-site basis 
    whether deletion would disrupt an ongoing CERCLA response action. 
    Consistent with the deletion criterion set forth in the NCP, the fourth 
    criterion in today's notice is satisfied only where one of the 
    following two circumstances exist: 1) no CERCLA response has been 
    undertaken; or 2) CERCLA response has been discontinued (e.g., where 
    CERCLA response action has reached a logical point of transfer to the 
    RCRA program and has been discontinued). Response actions being 
    undertaken under CERCLA generally will not be discontinued solely to 
    allow for deletion.
        In cases where EPA determines that a CERCLA response, or a CERCLA 
    response combined with a RCRA response, is the most effective approach 
    for addressing contamination at a site, the site will be retained on 
    the NPL. In addition, a site generally will not be eligible for 
    deletion based upon deferral to RCRA if such deletion would cause a 
    significant delay in the response resulting in a threat to human health 
    or the environment. [[Page 14644]] 
    
    F. Process for Deleting Sites From the NPL
    
        In order for a site to be deleted from the NPL based upon deferral 
    to RCRA, that site will be evaluated by EPA, as well as the relevant 
    state authority. Deferral will be accomplished only after a coordinated 
    review has occurred and concurrence has been achieved. As with any 
    deletion, a decision to delete a site based upon deferral to RCRA would 
    be made only after EPA publishes a Notice of Intent to Delete in the 
    Federal Register and comment is taken. In addition, EPA's regulations 
    allow a site to be deleted only if ``the state in which the release was 
    located has concurred on the proposed deletion'' (40 CFR 
    300.425(e)(2)).
        The process of deletion may begin either by a petition by a party 
    outside the Agency, such as a facility owner/operator, or via a 
    unilateral action from EPA. Petitions and inquiries about them should 
    be directed to the appropriate Regional Administrator. The petitioner 
    must demonstrate that the site has met the four criteria to the 
    satisfaction of EPA, as well as the state in which the release has 
    occurred. If necessary, the Agency may request additional information 
    from the petitioner before making a decision.
        Finally, if, after deletion, EPA later determines that a site is 
    not being addressed adequately under RCRA, and that CERCLA remedial 
    action is necessary at the site, the site would remain eligible for 
    CERCLA Fund-financed remedial action. (40 CFR 300.425(e)(3)). Under 
    such circumstances, and in accordance with the NCP, the site also may 
    be eligible for relisting on the NPL.
    
    III. Appendix A: Summary of NPL Deletion/Deferral Policies
    
    1. NCP Criteria for Deleting Sites From the NPL
        Section 300.425(e)(1) (i)-(iii) of the NCP addresses deletion of 
    sites from the NPL. Pursuant to that section, releases may be deleted 
    from the NPL where EPA determines that no further response is 
    appropriate. In making that determination, EPA must consider, in 
    consultation with the state, whether any of the following criteria have 
    been met:
        (i) Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all 
    appropriate response actions required;
        (ii) All appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been 
    implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is 
    appropriate; or
        (iii) The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses 
    no significant threat to public health or the environment and 
    therefore, taking remedial measures is not appropriate.
    
    2. Current Deferral Policies
    
        When the initial NPL was promulgated (48 FR 40658, September 8, 
    1983), the Agency announced certain listing policies relating to sites 
    that might qualify for the NPL, but instead could be ``deferred'' to 
    another authority for cleanup. These deferral policies included sites 
    that can be addressed by the corrective action authorities of RCRA 
    Subtitle C, or that are subject to regulation by the Nuclear Regulatory 
    Commission.\3\ (Id. at 40661-62).
    
        \3\In 1988, the Agency proposed to defer to a number of other 
    authorities, namely Subtitles D and I of RCRA, the Surface Mine 
    Control and Reclamation Act (``SMCRA''), the Federal Insecticide, 
    Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (``FIFRA''), and States, and to allow 
    responsible parties voluntarily to clean up sites under CERCLA 
    without listing (53 FR 51415, December 21, 1988). Final decisions 
    have not been made on those proposals, and they are not addressed in 
    this notice.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    3. RCRA Deferral Policy
    
        In the preamble to the final rule promulgating the initial NPL (48 
    FR 40662, September 8, 1983), EPA announced the RCRA/NPL deferral 
    policy, which provided that ``where a site consists of regulated units 
    of a RCRA facility operating pursuant to a permit or interim status, it 
    will not be included on the NPL but will instead be addressed under the 
    authorities of RCRA.'' Since that time, EPA has amended the RCRA/NPL 
    deferral policy on a number of occasions. (For a more detailed 
    discussion of the components of the RCRA/NPL deferral policy, see the 
    Federal Register notice referenced below.\4\)
    
        \4\On March 13, 1989 (54 FR 10520), EPA announced the policy of 
    including on the NPL Federal facility sites that may be eligible for 
    listing (e.g., they have an HRS score of 28.5 or higher) even if 
    such facilities are also subject to the corrective action 
    authorities of Subtitle C of RCRA. The elements of the RCRA/NPL 
    deferral policy are not revised in today's notice.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Prior to enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 
    1984 (HSWA) only releases to ground water from regulated units, i.e. 
    surface impoundments, waste piles, land treatment areas, and landfills 
    were subject to corrective action requirements under RCRA. The 
    enactment of HSWA greatly expanded RCRA Subtitle C corrective action 
    authorities. For example, under RCRA section 3004(u), hazardous waste 
    treatment, storage, and disposal facilities seeking RCRA permits must 
    address all releases of hazardous constituents to any medium from solid 
    waste management units, whether active or inactive. HSWA also provided 
    new authority in RCRA section 3004(v) to address releases that have 
    migrated beyond the facility boundary. In addition, section 3008(h) 
    authorizes EPA to compel corrective action or any response necessary to 
    protect human health or the environment when there is or has been a 
    release of hazardous waste at a RCRA interim status facility.
        In light of the new authorities, the Agency proposed in the 
    preamble to the April 10, 1985 proposed rule (50 FR 14118), a revised 
    policy for listing of RCRA-related sites on the NPL. Under the proposed 
    policy, listing on the NPL of RCRA-related sites would be deferred 
    until the Agency determined that RCRA corrective action measures were 
    not likely to succeed due to factors outlined in the following 
    paragraph.
        On June 10, 1986 (51 FR 21057), EPA announced several new 
    components of the RCRA/NPL deferral policy for placing RCRA-regulated 
    facilities on the NPL. Certain RCRA facilities at which Subtitle C 
    corrective action authorities are available would generally be listed 
    if they had an HRS score of 28.50 or greater and fell within at least 
    one of the following categories: (1) Facilities owned by persons who 
    have demonstrated an inability to finance a cleanup as evidenced by 
    their invocation of the bankruptcy laws; (2) facilities that have lost 
    authorization to operate, or for which there are additional indications 
    that the owner or operator will be unwilling to undertake corrective 
    action; or (3) facilities, analyzed on a case-by-case basis, whose 
    owners or operators have a clear history of unwillingness to undertake 
    corrective action.
        The Agency also recognized that facilities clearly not subject to 
    RCRA Subtitle C corrective action authorities would be eligible for 
    listing on the NPL, including those that ceased treating, storing or 
    disposing of hazardous wastes prior to November 19, 1980 (the effective 
    date of the RCRA hazardous waste regulations), and sites at which only 
    material exempted from the statutory or regulatory definition of solid 
    waste or hazardous waste are managed. Id. In addition, RCRA hazardous 
    waste handlers to which Subtitle C corrective action authorities do not 
    apply, such as hazardous waste generators or transporters not required 
    to have interim status or a final RCRA permit, also are eligible for 
    listing. Id.
        On June 24, 1988 (53 FR 23980) and October 4, 1989 (54 FR 41004), 
    EPA revised the NPL/RCRA deferral policy by identifying four new 
    categories of RCRA sites eligible for listing on the NPL: (1) Non- or 
    late filers; (2) pre-HSWA permittees; (3) protective filers; 
    [[Page 14645]] and (4) converters.\5\ In the June 24, 1988, revision, 
    EPA also recognized that sites where RCRA corrective action may not 
    apply to all contamination are eligible for listing (53 FR 23982).
    
        \5\Non- or late filers are facilities that were treating, 
    storing or disposing of hazardous waste after November 19, 1980, but 
    did not file a Part A permit by that date and have little or no 
    history of compliance with RCRA. Pre-HSWA permittees are facilities 
    that have permits in place that pre-date the 1984 corrective action 
    requirements of HSWA. The protective filer category includes 
    facilities which have filed Part A permit applications for 
    treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes as a 
    precautionary measure only, and were never actually engaged in 
    hazardous waste management activities subject to RCRA Subtitle C 
    corrective action. Converters are facilities that at one time were 
    treating or storing RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste but have since 
    converted to generator-only status, or are engaged in no other 
    hazardous waste activity for which interim status is required (53 FR 
    22992, June 24, 1988).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        On August 9, 1988 (53 FR 30002), EPA proposed additional revisions 
    to the policy concerning criteria to determine if an owner or operator 
    is unable to pay for corrective action. No final Agency action has been 
    taken on those proposed revisions.
        On August 9, 1988 (53 FR 30005), in a separate Federal Register 
    notice, EPA also further revised a portion of the NPL/RCRA deferral 
    policy relating to the determination of unwillingness. The Agency 
    specified that circumstances under which RCRA sites may be listed on 
    the NPL if an owner/operator's unwillingness to undertake corrective 
    action is established through noncompliance with one or more of the 
    following: (1) A Federal or substantially equivalent state unilateral 
    administrative order requiring corrective action, after the facility 
    owner/operator has exhausted administrative due process rights; (2) a 
    Federal or substantially equivalent State unilateral administrative 
    order requiring corrective action, if the facility owner/operator did 
    not pursue administrative due process rights within the specified time; 
    (3) an initial Federal or State preliminary injunction or other 
    judicial order requiring corrective action; (4) a Federal or State RCRA 
    permit condition requiring corrective action after the facility owner/
    operator has exhausted administrative due process rights; or (5) a 
    final Federal or State consent decree or administrative order on 
    consent requiring corrective action after the exhaustion of dispute 
    resolution procedures.
        EPA also may depart from the above criteria on a case-by-case basis 
    where CERCLA authorities are determined to be more appropriate than 
    RCRA authorities for cleaning up a site. (See, e.g., 56 FR 5602, 
    February 11, 1991).
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
    
        Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, 
    Hazardous materials, Intergovernmental relations, Natural resources, 
    Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, 
    Waste treatment and disposal, Water pollution control, Water supply.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9605; 42 U.S.C. 9620; 33 U.S.C. 1321(C)(2); 
    E.O. 11735, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp., p. 793; E.O. 12580, 3 CFR, 1987 
    Comp., p. 193.
    
        Dated: March 8, 1995.
    Elliott P. Laws,
    Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
    [FR Doc. 95-6673 Filed 3-17-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
4/19/1995
Published:
03/20/1995
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Notice of policy statement.
Document Number:
95-6673
Dates:
This policy is effective on April 19, 1995.
Pages:
14641-14645 (5 pages)
Docket Numbers:
FRL-5173-4
PDF File:
95-6673.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 300