DONALD W. MOOS Governor JOHN SPELLMAN

sTATE OF WASHINGTON

# [j)@@~UWJ~tQ) DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY 

## SEpe.,

# 271984
Mail Stop PV-l1 0 Olympia, Washington 98504 0 (206) 459-6000 N( SlCl\ON

### ~ROGRAM O[V[LOPMl

.
•**_::..I"~--;;-.** September 24, 1984

### M01V~lS'N'wav lVNOJIE :10**3~:1:JO** ' Ms. Ernesta B. Barnes Regional Administrator 

### MiS 533 

## v8St lIDO u.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth Avenue 

# U.. Seattletif{A._

### ~~1~~ , Dear The purpose of this letter is to transmit changes to the state of Washington RCRA Final Authorization Application in response to your agency comments in your letter dated July 27, 1984. Amendments to the state application sections (program description, memorandum of agreement and attorney general's statement) have been drafted into those documents and are included as an attachment to this letter. Where actual amendment of the documents were not required, a state position, explanation or**clarifi~** cation is a part of this letter. A. EPA comments on "Attorney General's (AG) Statement" comments 1 through 5. See Attachment A - memo from C. Douthwaite to C. Roe, Assistant Attorney General, dated August 24, 1984.
B. EPA Comments on "Program Description."
1. The term "Department"" in the state's dangerous waste regulations refers to the Director of the WDOE in all matters requiring regulatory actions. The directors' authority is delegated within the agency through authority letters per ch. 173-06-030 WAC. The agency has not been challenged on delegation authority to date. 

# t. 2. Other reactive and ignitable wastes must be stored in accordance with the Uniforin Fire Code (UFC) or National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Pamphlet Number 30. In many cases, UFC and NFPA require storage distances in excess of fifty' feet from the nearest property line. In other cases, a distance of less than fifty feet is allowed, but these reductions are frequently linked to certain conditions such as: one or two hour fire restrictive walls; sprinkler systems; availability of fire response teams; etc. Such conditions assure that, even with reduced storage distances, adequate protection of public safety and property is provided. In all cases, WDOE believes that: the knowledge and expertise of UFC and NFPA have been established over many years;

# • Ms. Ernesta B. Barnes September 24, 1984 Page 2

that their rules and guidance provide adequate protection for storage and handling of every day hazardous materials (which far exceed by many orders of magnitude the volumes of hazardous wastes produced) to which the public is exposed; that UFC and NFPA rules can be applied properly to the storage and handling of reactive and ignitable wastes; and that storage distances and buffer zones established in accordance with these national guidelines provide protection equivalent to, and at times, more stringent than EPA's fifty foot setback. (See page 

### 11-6) 3. Resource Assessment The following lists the WDOE position titles and number of personnel in those positions to implement RCRA. The adequacy of these will be addressed in the capability assessment. No. Positions in RCRA Tasks
E Environmentalist 8 

# ( ,.'



# ...•. EP Environmental Planner 1**~:;.;~.;.** , .. AQE Air Quality Engineer 1 SE Sanitary Engineer 1 GO Geologist 1

A Attorney (Available) CE Chemist 1 ..:
.....<... ."."

(d) Existing FTE's will be trained (as necessary) to perform the necessary functions to implement RCRA in accordance with all agreements with EPA. (e) Any expertise needed for permit review or review of specialized documents during inspections will be available within the headquarters section. The following is a listing of areas of expertise that will be available to implement RCRA.WDOE Position Current Staffing Expertise Title Status
1. Chemical Engineering AQE on staff 2. Ground Water Quality GO/E/SE on staff 

# • 3. Ground Water Geology GO on staff 

### &training 

### 4. Geology GO on staff 

### 5. Industrial Processes E/SE on staff 

### 6. Data Management E/EP on staff 

### 7. Regulatory Development E/EP on staff

# • Ms. Ernesta B. Barnes September 24, 1984 Page 3



# f.**~.** 8. Public Participation E/EP onstaff 9. Financial Assurance EP onstaff 

### &training 10. Policy/Management E on staff 11. Legal A legal services available 12. Enforcement E/A/SE on staff 13. Budget Analyst E/EP budgeting services available 14. Chemist CE on staff 15. Permit Writing E/EP/AQE/SE on staff 

### &training 16. Notification/Tracking E/EP on staff 17. Reporting E/EP on staff (See pages 11-18 

### & 19) 4. A process is established between the inspectors and permit writers in the regional offices and the permit coordinator in the Dangerous Waste Section whereby all enforcement actions taken, compliance dates established and met, and permit milestones are reported and monitored by the agency ADP system for compliance monitoring and permit tracking. Monthly status reports are provided to managers and supervisors and compliance tickler reports. are provided to inspectors for compliance follow-up. (See page 11-44) 5. The state inspection procedures have been submitted with the original authorization package as a checklist and a narrative on pages 11-35 

### & 36. The checklist is being updated to account for amendments to the administrative code through the end of July 1984. The narrative is now on pages 11-37 

### &38. Compliance with key facility requirements (i.e., closure/postcleanup plans) are evaluated by the regional inspector assigned to the site. Depending on the inspector's personal procedure, the plan may be requested prior to the inspection for pre-review or during the inspection for review back at the office. In this way inspectors are able to request assistance with review as needed, to ensure the quality of the review.
6. What follows is a description of general definitions and procedures as presented in the current WDOE Enforcement Guidelines and Procedures Manual (September 1978). The current enforcement guidelines are presently in a process of revision to reflect a stronger and more definitive enforcement policy for the dangerous waste program. The new policy will be implemented immediately upon adoption. It should be recognized that during this period of transition from the current policy to the new enforcement policy a shift in the state's dangerous waste enforcement posture

# • Ms. Ernesta B. Barnes September 24, 1984 Page 4

is emerging. This shift is showing a trend toward more immediate stronger enforcement actions in the use of serious violations and accelerated levels of enforcement in other non-compliance situations. The new policy is targeted to be developed in draft by the end of September, 1984. The following is inserted starting at page 111-13) Provisions for Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring Upon final authorization, the state has primary responsibility for compliance and enforcement actions within the approved state program and under state statutory and regulatory authority. EPA retains responsibility for ensuring fair and effective enforcement of federal requirements and a credible national deterrence to non-compliance through an effective state/federal partnership and an oversight role. The state and EPA agree that the following elements are mandatory for an effective enforcement and compliance monitoring program under final authorization; 1) clear oversight criteria specified in advance for program performance evaluation, 2) clear criteria for direct federal enforcement 

# (- specified in advance with written procedures for advance consultation and notification, and 3) adequate state reporting, to ensure effective oversight. 

### 1. State



# • The state agrees to carry out a timely and effective program for monitoring the compliance of generators, transporters, and facilities with applicable program requirements. As part of this program, the state will conduct compliance inspections to assess compliance with generator and transporter standards (including manifest requirements), facility standards, permit requirements (including late or deficient Part B applications) compliance schedules, and all other program requirements, including violations detected by state or federal compliance inspections. A compliance and enforcement tracking system is operated by the state to insure timely and appropriate enforcement actions, adequate compliance followup, monitor compliance rates, assess categories of violations and report necessary, accruate and timely compliance and enforcement information to EPA for the purposes of oversight and program performance evaluation. Compliance monitoring and enforcement activities, priorities and reporting requirements will be specified in the annual state work program and shall be consistent with applicable federal requirements and with the state's program description.

# • Ms. Ernesta B. Barnes September 24, 1984 Page 5

2. EPA EPA's primary role in enforcement and compliance monitoring under final authorization shall be that of oversight as described in Section II-A and in accordance with oversight criteria and measures and oversight procedures and protocols as set forth in this agreement. EPA has the right to inspect any hazardous waste generator, transporter or TSD facility or any enforcement action in accordance with Section 3008(a)(2) of RCRA.
For the purposes of oversight of compliance inspections and enforcement EPA shall maintain a policy of "no surprises" to insure the productive use of limited state and federal resources and an effective "partnership" in achieving compliance. This principle should be applied to all aspects of compliance and enforcement program covering inspections, enforcement activities, press releases, public information, and management data summaries upon which state and national performance are assessed.
In order to guarantee that there is ample advance notification, EPA agrees to confer with the state to establish agreement in writing and reach a clear, consistent understanding on the following matters: Advance notification of intended inspections and enforcement actions; Specific identification of who will be notified; How the notification will be done; When the notification will occur; Define the process for state/federal consultation and dispute resolution on enforcement actions and policy and regulatory interpretation. The written agreement to be established on the above matters is incorporated by reference in this memorandum of agreement. EPA also agrees to inform the state in writing of any national or regional policy changes or program direction changes and in all cases will allow the state a minimum of 90 days to implement those changes. 

# • At a minimum, the following will be adhered to by EPA. EPA shall attend a maximum of 10 percent of the state's compliance inspections to evaluate the state's techniques, followup activities, enforcement actions.

# • Ms. Ernesta B. Barnes September 

### 24, 1984 Page 6

7. The agency permit processing timeframes provided on page 11-32 represent an average based upon past experiences. 8. The department is in the process of transferring EPA tapes (data base) to its own data base system. There is still some confusion over the EPA input of regulated vs. non-regulated notifiers. The selection criteria, data dictionary defining the criteria and input (i.e., in many cases no waste "quantity" was input) is unclear.
We are attempting to clean up the data base to determine 1) RCRA/state regulated notifiers, 2) state only regulated notifiers, and 3) state and/or RCRA small quantity generators. Once thatinformation is separated out, we will be able to define the size of the "regulated" community as defined by RCRA. Until then, the EPA regional office must provide that information. If you refer to the 

### 1982 annual report (attached to our original application), information on generators and TSD's reporting 

# e\ regulated quantities of waste is summarized.
':. ..' 9. WAC 

### 173-303-9901 and 

### 173-303-9902 provide a flowchart and narrative description of the designation process. However, these sections do not precisely describe the designation process because they were not amended (at the same time as the actual designation procedures of WAC 

### 173-303-070 through 

### 173-303-103) due to time constraints. The flowchart and narrative will be amended at a future date to correspond to the designation procedures. In the meantime, WAC 

### 173-303-070 through 

### 173-303-103 supersede the appendices which are for illustrative purposes only. 

### 10. The waste handling codes found in WAC 

### 173-303-380, Table 

### 2, will be modified to represent the codes used for RCRA reporting. When the department submits reports to EPA, all information will be formatted in our ADP system to what is required in your report instructions. C. EPA Comments on "Memorandum of Agreement." 1. The paragraph has been revised as requested. (See Page III-I) 2. Your comment in reference to EPA oversight has been noted. No state response required. 

# -. 3. We are confused and concerned with your reference to "enforcement sensitive information." Are you developing a new requirement similar to those of "confidential reports submitted by industry?"

# • Ms. Ernesta B. Barnes September 

### 24, 1984 Page 7

If we must respond to enforcement matters and should make our policy and methods consistent to those of EPA, how are we to do thisif we do not know what data or information is driving an EPA decision in lieu of a state action? If we are to operate a program consistent with EPA and in a manner desired by EPA, then we must have available to us the same information upon which to baseour decisions. We can understand your authority to withhold "confidential" information but would like you to cite your authority to withhold "enforcement sensitive information" from us, which may result in our program not being equivalent and consistent with RCRA. 4. The department has recognized that program revisions must be made in accordance with the provisions of 

### 40 CFR 

### 271.21. Additionally, we have made the statement that we would inform the Regional Administrator of any proposed or adopted changes which would affect our ability to implement the authorized program. Therefore, there is no need to delete the reference to the SEA as requested. 5. The requested change has been made (see document). (See page 

### 111-5)
6. The requested change has been made. Annual reporting prOV1S10n has been deleted. We were referencing the state regulatory reporting requirement in error. (See page 

### 111-7)
7. The addition of "and sound management of the program" as you have requested is not in keeping with the need to have program review based upon measurable and tangible results. We feel that the existing sentence is satisfactory. 

### 8. Appropriate changes were made to the document. (See page 

### 111-8) 9. The requested change has been made (see document). (See Page 

### 111-10) 10. Appropriate changes were made to the document. (See pages III-II & 

### 12) 11. Sentence was included in error. It has been deleted in the current document. (See page 

### 111-13) 12. The change has been made (see document). (See page 

### 111-13) 13. The no restrictions statement in the first paragraph provides adequate recognition to EPA rights of inspection. Since a maximum of 

### 10% oversight inspections does not prevent the regions

# • Ms. Ernesta B. Barnes September 24, 1984 Page 8

from conducting "at least 10%" oversight inspections this is not a matter of concern. 14. The requested change has been made (see document). (See new text on III-IS) 15. See Attachment A "Comment 

### 113."
D. EPA comment on "Dangerous Waste Regulations: Applicability of Interim Status Standards." Under 40 CFR 265.1(b), EPA requires that facilities which failed to qualify for interim status must comply with interim status management standards (presumably until a final permit is issued). WDOE does not have a similar specification in one single place of its regulations, however, WDOE would also require compliance with at least interim status standards for facilities which failed to qualify for interim status (except that, new facilities must first obtain a permit before construction may commence, and would only be allowed to operate under a final facility permit

-- see first sentence of WAC 173-303-806(2) and also 173-303-806(5)). The authority for requiring compliance with standards of at least interim status stringency resides in several places. First, the general facility standards (corresponding to Subparts A, B, C, D and E of Parts 264 and 265) are applicable to all facilities, regardless of status

.(see WAC 173-303-280(1))• Second, the unit operational standards for facilities (e.g., tank requirements, closure, postclosure, etc.) are applicable as specified in WAC 173-303-400(2)(a) (for interim status) and WAC 173-303-600(2) and (3) (for final status). These two applicability sections essentially require that: 1. All TSD facilities must comply with the interim status standards; 2. All TSD facilities must comply with the final status standards, unless the facility complies with the interim status standards and qualifies for interim status. In addition, a final status permit will include all applicable final facility standards. Thus, anyone who operates a TSD facility which did not qualify for interim status would be subject to at least interim status standards, and possibly to the more stringent final facility standards. Since a permit is needed to specify the conditions for final facility compliance, WDOE concludes that interim

# ~. status standards would be applied to existing facilities which failed to qualify for interim status, while in the meantime a final permit specifying final status standards would be prepared.

# • Ms. Ernesta B. Barnes September 24, 1984 Page 9

If you have any questions concerning the final application, as amended by this letter and attachments, please feel free to contact Dave Saunders.

1 Director DWM/DS/sr

cc: With Attachments: (1) EPA Comments Letter (2) Attorney Generals Memo (3) Program Description (4) Memorandum of Agreement (revised 9/84)
Ken Feigner, EPA Betty Wiese, EPA



# •\



## u.s. ENVIRONMENTAL ,PROTECTION AGENCY

; . REGIO'N X 1 2 0 0 S I X T H A V

### PJ:~E 

## PJ

# rr:J
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101

.. 

## °84 AUG -1 

## Al0:09

",\1'" 

## ECOLO"";'.' ;. Ut Ilj i REPLY TO AnN OF: 

### UL.Yl'lPIA, \VA. 

### MIS 533 JUt 2 7 7984 

### Donald W. Moos, Director Washington State Department of ,Ecology PV

- 11 

### Olympia, Washington 98504 

### Dear Mr. Moos: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed Washington1s application for final authorization under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, which was received on July 2, 1984. 

### EPA concludes the application is complete for the purpose of conducting the formal review and decision process. Enclosed are comments concerning the information

.presented. EPA will make a tentative determination late in September on whether to grant authorization to Washington. Anotice of this determination will be published in the Federal Register along with a notice of a public hearing to be held by EPA. Wlthin 90 

### days of the notice, EPA will make a final decision regarding authorization to Washington. The State has presented a quality application reflecting the efforts of your staff and the Attorney General I

### s offi,ce to respond to concerns previously raised by EPA. The enclosed comments reflect the concerns which remain after our review of the application. They identify the need for clarification regarding aspects of the State1s program, particularly the enforcement program. Implementation of an approved State enforcement response policy is critical. We ask that the enclosed comments be addressed, supplementing the application as necessary; please document how each of the comments has been responded to. This information needs to be submitted by August 31, 

### 1984, 

### so that it can be considered as we make our tentative determination. Akey element of EPAls review of the State1s program is the capability assessment. The mid-year review of the State1s program, conducted last spring, in conjunction with an end-of-the-year review which has been scheduled, will provide the foundation for this evaluation. The

# -- 

# • -2­ capability assessment will lead 

### to agreements between the State and EPA 

### identifying the 

### actions to 

### be 

### taken to 

### overcome problems identified. One of our primary objectives will be 

### assuring the State will have 

### an 

### effective enforcement program. We look forward to working with your staff as we proceed with 

### evaluation of the State's applfcation and program. S1

### ncere1Y•

### &LA-C~" Ernesta S. 8arnes Regional Administrator Enclosure

cc: Lynda Brothers, WOOE 

### Don Dubois, WDOE Charles Oouthwa1te t**Wa~hington** 

### AG 

### nffice Al Ewing, EPA, WOO 

# •**bcc~ve** 

### Saunders, WOOE

. Geoff Lewis, OSWER Ted Rogowski, ORC

A. I

i 

# .\ .2­ 

## 'i. .-­ "-;'; ·r, v

# • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Comments Washington Application for Final Authorization

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S (AG) STATEMENT 1. Include a statement that authorities relied upon in the application were legally adopted at the time of application and will be effective by the date of authorization. In addition, because of the phased adoption of the current dangerous waste regulations, the effective dates of these regulations needs to be specifically identified. 2. While the AG statement discusses most of the issues which have been raised during various reviews, the following aspects need further clarification:

a. Page 9, statutory authority for regulation of recycled wastes: For interim authorization, this issue was resolved through a June 16, 1983 addendum to the AG statement. Although the statutory amendments referred 1n that addendum (EHB 3674 and SHB 712) have been integrated into the statute submitted with the application, a similar statement should be made for final authorization. b. Page 9, statutory definition of "disposal": Clarification regarding statutory authority to regulate disposal of dangerous wastes is needed since the definition of disposal at RCW 70.l05.0l0(4} appears to restrict regulation to discarded and 

# r. abandoned extremely hazardous wastes.

c. Page 11, statutory authority to regulate generators: The basis of the State's authority to regulate waste generators needs to be described. d. Page 13, statutory authority to establish permit requirements: Describe the basis of authority to modify, revoke and re-issue, and terminate permits (see May 25, 1983 pre-application review comment {l #8)•


### e.**Inc1~ded** 

### in the pre-application review of statutes was a comment (comment #6) concerning authorities of the State Patrol under RCW 46.48 relative to the transport of dangerous waste, particularly the penalty provisions. The application should describe what, if any, effect this statute has on the dangerous waste program. 

# • 3. Page 17, public participation in enforcement: It appears that Superior Court Rule 24 plus State assurances not to oppose intervention satisfy this requirement. The Superior Court Rule needs to be submitted as part of the application to support this conclusion. However, unless the application clearly demonstrates that the Attorney General's Office has no role in developing the State's position with respect to potential intervention in civil court enforcement proceedings, the Attorney General or his representative must also make the appropriate assurance, through the Memorandum of Agreement with EPA, not to oppose intervention.

# • -2­ 4. If the Attorney General, 

## Mr. Eikenberry, does not sign the AG statement, the application will need to include a copy of the appropriate State law or delegation of authority that allows Assistant Attorneys to sign the Statement. 5. EPA is continuing to review the statement regarding Indian lands and will provide comments on this issue as soon as possible. The matter is a subject of litigation in the Ninth Circuit; in the absence of any decision by the Court before final administrative action for final authorization, EPA will act in accordance with its position as stated in its brief. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 1. In the dangerous waste regulations, the term "Department ll 

### is used when EPA's corresponding regulation specifies "Administrator" or "Director". WDOE must describe under what circumstances the term "Department ll 

### refers to anyone other than the Director of the WDOE. The concern is that actions taken not be open to legal challenge because of the authority level of the individual taking the action. 2. Pages 111-6 and 111-40: With respect to ignitable and reactive waste buffer zones, additional discussion needs to be provided to summarize how the State will apply its requirements and to support a conclusion that the State's provisions provide protection of human health and the environment equivalent to the Federal program. 3. Page 11-17: Discuss whether current staffing is sufficient to manage the final authorization workload. If not, what positions are lacking and what steps are being taken to fill those positions. Expertise of the hazardous waste staff should also be discussed, particularly with respect to specialized training or expertise needed and available to carry out the program--for example, hydrogeological support to compliance and permitting efforts.

. 4. The State should explain the mechanisms and processes by which the Dangerous Waste Regulatory Section coordinates and tracks the compliance monitoring, permitting and enforcement activities carried out in the Regions. 5. Discussion of the State's compliance program should be expanded to address the following:

a. Scope of inspection procedure refinements to be developed. Available documentation of procedures that now exist should be submitted. b. How evaluations of compliance with key facility requirements are accomplished--c1osure/post-c1osure plans, groundwater monitoring systems and data, financial assurance instruments. Are inspectors responsible for these evaluations or does WDOE headquarters conduct.

# ~. certain ones. What specialized expertise is needed and available to support these evaluations.

# •• 

# • -3­ 6. The State needs to further describe the enforcement program. Include discussion and documentation (where it is available) of current policies and practices, particularly as they relate to distinctions between "major" and "minor" violations, enforcement remedies used, timelines applied and decision process for penalty assessments (under what circumstances penalties are assessed and how the amount is determined). The enforcement timeframes provided on page 111-40 need to be clarified. Do they represent elapsed time before initiating the next enforcement level or amount of time to prepare the action, once a decision to proceed is made. Development of a policy which provides for timely and appropriate enforcement response is a critical need. The program description should more fully discuss development of this policy and the expected implementation date. EPA Region 10 encourages the State to adopt more aggressive enforcement response timeframes than those presented in the national program quality document since Region 10 will be applying shorter time1ines (those outlined in the April 3, 1984 position paper) as the criteria for triggering Federal enforcement. 

# • 7. The permit processing timeframe should be discussed to identify what kind of permit action (storage, land disposal) is represented and whether it depicts minimum or maximum times. The timeframe is generally consistent with EPA experience for storage permits, but it is optimistic for land disposal facilities where EPA estimates about 23 to 30 months from call-in to final determination. The time for step 12 (securing a complete application) is optimistic under most circumstances; on the other hand, 90 days to prepare an initial draft permit after the application is complete (step 13) appears unnecessarily long. 8. On page 111-42, provide estimates of the size of the regulated community. 9. EPA concludes the regulatory provisions for waste designation and delisting satisfy the earlier concerns on this issue. However, since appendices to the regulations (WAC 173-303-9901 and 9902) were not revised, the application needs to include an assurance that these appendices do not override the regulatory requirements.

. 10. With respect to waste handling codes (Part Aform, Facility annual report and WAC 173-303-380 Table 2), the Department now specifies, in some cases, contradictory codes from those EPA uses. The Department should use the same codes as EPA does; otherwise it may be difficult for the WDOE to translate its data when submitting reports and permit applications and there is the possibility State information will be misrepresented

.

# • -4- MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (MOA) The MOA will continue to be reviewed as evaluation of the Statels program proceeds; additional comments may be forthcoming. 1. Page 111-1: Under section I (General), Revise the last paragraph to read IIThis agreement will take effect••• which shall be 14 days after the date of publication in the Federal Re,ister•••11. (This is a new national policy regarding effectlve dates. 2. Page 111-2, references to EPA Region lOis oversight policy: While the goal is to conduct oversight consistent with these principles, RCRA is a new program for which there will be more oversight, including focus on individual actions and technical decisions as a means to identify consistency with national objectives. 3. Page 111-4: EPA will provide copies of inspection reports, except where enforcement sensitive information can not be shared. 4. Page 111-5, first full paragraph: Since changes in resource levels outside the framework of the SEA could affect the program, the limitation to reporting only SEA resource changes should be deleted. 5. Page 111-5, fourth full paragraph: Delete IIw 

### herever possible ll 

### in the • discussion regarding State variances. 6. Page 111-7: To the reporting items to be submitted monthly, include Facility Status Sheets and Permitting Status Report. Item 3--Annual report-- needs to be clarified. What reporting is this. 7. Page 111-7, Item 0.1: at the end of the first sentence, include lI

### and sound management of the program" as an additional parameter for State program assessment. 8. Page 111-8, Conditions for State Program Review:

-- In the second line at the top of page 111-8, delete reference to "annua111 review of State program activities.

-- At least 15 days notice will be provided for the periodic review of Regional Office files (with longer notice where possible). There may be occasions where adhoc review of specific files will be necessary and 15 days notice may not be possible. 

# • In the second paragraph of item 2, program reviews will focus not only on work plan commitments but on success in carrying out the authorized program and in meeting national program criteria. State participation in program reviews will be encouraged. However, the scope of review would not limited because of lack of agreement between EPA and the State on the format or content

.

-- Last sentence of the fourth paragraph of item 2, reduction in the amount of oversight will be based on consistent strong performance levels, not just the passage of time after authorization.

# • -5­ 9. Page 111-11, EPA review of permit actions: Suggest rewording the introduction to indicate there will be three opportunities for EPA review, rather than "three reviews by EPA will occur". (EPA intends to take advantage of the opportunity for optional reviews, but in some cases may not be able to). 10. Page 111-12: item c: At the end of the first paragraph, add "EPA will provide a copy of its comments to the applicant where a comment is made that the draft permit includes conditions inconsistent with the approved State program or lacks conditions necessary to be consistent with the approved program." In the next sentence, delete "Prior to EPA submitting any comments to the applicant". 11. Page 111-13: Item F. The intent of the first sentence is unclear and appears to be inconsistent with other MOA statements regarding the status of permitting at the time of authorization. If the State intends to enforce Federal permit conditions, the application must address the source of State authority to enforce these permit conditions. 12. Page 111-13:, Item F.1: In the first paragraph of this section, delete reference to "generally" consistent. 

# • 13. Pages 111-14 and 111-15, Item 2 (provisions for EPA compliance and enforcement): --Revise the first paragraph to indicate that the provisions outlined in this section are standard procedures to be followed, with deviations only in unusual circumstances where warranted. Also include recognition that EPA is not required to provide notice prior to inspections and that Section 3008{a){2) of RCRA does not stipulate written notice. --In first sentence of the second paragraph, substitute "maximum of" with "approximately" since national guidance requires EPA Regions to conduct at least 10% oversight inspections. --EPA agrees to provide at least 10 calendar days notice prior to conducting inspections (written in most circumstances, but oral notice may be appropriate in some instances). Where possible, EPA will provide longer notice. 14. Page 111-15: In discussion of site visits, delete reference to "written" notification to the State since the method of notification may not always be written. 15. As noted in AG Statement comment 3, an addendum to the MOA is needed for the Attorney Genera1's assurance not to oppose intervention in civil court enforcement proceedings.

# • -6- 

### DANGEROUS WASTE REGULATIONS: Applicability of Interim Status Standards. The State's application, through the program description and/or MOA and the AG statement, needs to address the following issue regarding interpretation of the State's regulations. On November 22, 1983, EPA clarified the scope of the interim status standards at 40 CFR Part 265.1 to stipulate the standards apply to facilities which failed to qualify for interim status (e.g., late notification) as well as those that met the requirements for achieving interim status. EPA's Federal Register notice is attached. By the time of authorization, the State 

## will need to assure coverage of the same facilities. It appears the State may be able to conclude its current regulations provide for this coverage. If so, the application needs to include assurance that the regulations are so interpreted; the AG statement will need to include certification that the State can make such interpretation and assurance. If the State's regulations can not be interpreted to correspond to EPA's clarification, regulatory amendments may be necessary• 

# •I " 52718 Federal Register 

### I Vol. 48. No. "226 

### I Tuesday. November 22. 1983 

### I Rules and Regulations
Response:EPAqreeswiththeabove " commenL.Howev.er.duriJlatim"oflow •.. productioD.overall**~missiolU** willbe

­ limitedto 36000Jbs./day.Thus. during periodsoflowproduction. overall emissionswill be 33% lowerthan during nonnaloperations.

Comment:ThePaDERhas stated the actual threeyearemission averagefor \
'/ theplant was0.568lb./MJ.-ffitu. Therefore. theremaybeno decreasein**S~** levelsifthe0.6Ib./MMBtulimit is adopted.

Response:EPA agrees that the production basedlimit of0.6Ib./MMDtu is essentiallyequivalent to the three yearaverage emissionrate. However. byalso imposinga daily pounds ofS02 limitation.thiswill result in a decrease in**S~** comparedtothefucility's maximumactualemissions.

Comment: Emissionreduction creditis uLJtained byburning0.5% sulfurfuel in the powerplantinsteadof2.5% sulfur fuel. Since0.5% sulfuroil is theemission standard. there shouldbenocreditfor burningsuchfuel. 2.5% sulfuroil is not permitted.

Response:The0.5% sulfurin fuel limitationcontainedin theexisting Pennsylvania**re~ulations** does notapply to thp. powerboilers.The boilers are exempt from**thi~** rule because thpv fire non-commercial fuels such as**cok~** oven • gas orbliJst furnace gas (in addition to oil) whoseheat valueexceeds 50%ofthe heat input. In thi!J case. 25 PA. Code Sl'ction**123.2~(e)(JI** eBtabiisned a lirrlltation of0.61u./MMBtu.**Hi~torically.** thepowerboilerscould burn a fuel oil of 2.5% sulfurandcomplywith the0.6lb. SOz/MMBtuemission standard. Therefore.**burnin~** 0.5% sulfuroil will result inreducingSOz emissions.

Comment:Allowing the emissionrate. toincreasewithreduced production levels without defining "permanent shutdown" which would make the bubble null andvoid appears to give bubble creditfor shutdowns.

Response:Pennsylvania defines "permanent shutdown" as a source which has been outofoperation or productionfor a period ofoneyearor more. Reactivation ofsuch a source is prohibited unleRs thecompanyreceives approval bythePaDER andis issued a permit to operate.ThisreqUIrement is**con~ained** in25 PA. Code Section 127.11. In addition. the bubblereJnjlation includes 8 sunset dateofDecember. 1985. At this time. thePaDER must reviewthe bubbleregulation to assess its effectivenessand impacton air quality. ePAACtiOD

. EPAistodayapprovingthis bubble plana8 a SIPrevisionsinceithasmet
I"
I.**~r.** t /.

;, "'
.. "

. <-. .;". ("':' ." ;
...... :..**~."',** HazardOUSWaste Management" 'I**_~.:** t &herequirementsofthe April7. 198Z EmissicmaTradinsPolicy·(47FR 15076). Inaddition.40

### crn 52.2020 ." " 

## "J1 (ldentificatK>nofPk.n)isamended &0

­**~,** 

### ' reflect the inclusionofthisbubbleplan inthe StateImplementationplanfor Pennsylvania.

The Officeof**Mana~ement** andBudget has exempted this rolefrom requirementsofSection3ofExecutive Order12291.

Under5 U.S.C. 605(b) the Administratorhas certified thutSIP approvalsdonot havea significant economicimpact on a substantial numberofsmallentities.See46FR 8709 (January27. 1961).

UnderSection307(b)(1) oftheAct. petitionsforjudicialreview ofthis actionmustbefiled in"the United Stat.es Court ofAppealsfor the appropriate circuit by (60days from today).This action maynot bechallenged**l~** terin proceeqingtoenforceitsrequirements. (See 307(b)(2).) List ofSubjectsin40CFRPart52

Airpollution control.Ozone. Sulfur oxides. Nitrogen dioxide. Lead. Particulatematter.Carbonmonoxide. Hydrocarbons. Intergovernmental reiatillns.

Authority:4: U.S.C. 7401-7642. D<lled: Noveml.H!r 15. 1983. William D. Ruckelshau8. Administrator.

Notfl.-Inc:orporation by**referenc~** ofthe SlateImplementation Planfor theStateof PennsylvRnia wasapprovedbythe Director' oftheFederalRegisteron July 1. 1982. PART52-APPROVALAND PROMULGATION'OF IMPLEMENTATJON PLANS

Title40. Part52. Subpart NNofthe Code ofFederalRegulations is amended as follows: Subpart NN-Pennsylvanla § 52.2020 (Amended)

In § 52.20Z0IdentIfication of plan. (c)(55) is added toread as follows:

(c) Theplanrevision listed below was submitted onthe date 5pecified * * •

(55) Regulations andsupporting documents implementinganSOz bubble planfor U.S. SteelCorporation'sFairless Works inFairlessHills.PA was submittcd by the Secretaryofthe Pennsyh'ania Department of EnvironmentalResources onJuly 7. 1983. IFR Doc. 83-31!38HIed**11-21~;** USliml BtWHG CODE**6~**

. ,;... ".... 

# I System: InterimStatusStandardsfor Ownersand Operatorsof Hazardous Waste,Treatment.Storageand Disposal Facilities
AGENCY:EnvironmentalProtection -­ Agency. ACTION:Finul amendment
SUMMARY:TheEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA) is today amending the regulations for hazardous waste management underthe Resource**Consr~rvation** and RecoveryAct to c1urify the scope and applicability ofthe interim status standardsto**hazardou~** waste munagement facilities. Iti5 amending theprovision that cxpluins who is subjectto the interim status regulations toclarify that these rcgulutions apply to all hazardous waste managementfacilities in existenceon Novemoer 19. 1900. includingthose fucilities which have failed to qualify fully forinterim status. EFFECTIVE DATE:December22.1903. FOR FURTHER.INFORMATION CONTACT: Trot**r:Cl~r\** lluUmeat Ii;OUJ**';2~-9:;·1[j.** ur in \,.Vusn:;lgton. D.C

.. 382-JOOO; or Dr:borah \Vulpe. Office ofSolid Waste. U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency. W<ishington. D.C. Z<HrtO,**(ZO~J** 3B2-z.:.:::. SUPPLEMENTMY INFORMATION: I. Introduction

EPAhaspromulgatedregulations implementingSubtitleC ofthe Solid \Vaste Disp05ulAct. asamended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of1976. a6 amended (ReRA).42 U.S.C. 6901 etseq.• establishing a comprehensive program for thehandling and manngemf!nt ofhazardous waste**(~O** CFRPiJrts 26(}-265. 270. 271. 124). The regulations. among otherthings. require fEicilities which treat store. ordispose of hazardous waste to ootain a permit from EPA oran authorized state I and require that hazardous wastes be designated for. delivered to. and treated. stored. or disposed oronlyin thesepermitted fucilities.

Recognizing thatEPA wouldbe able to issuepermits to all hazardous waste management (HWM) faciiities at once. Section 3005(e) ofRCRA pro\'ides that a hazardous waste managementfacility

I Section 3006 orRCRA pro,.-tdes thaI the Administrator orEPA snail authonze !lIltle hlizilrdous wlisle manl'l!Zement programs which meet minimum EPAJluidelines tooperalein lheirsllite. inlieu ofthe federal program.See40 CFR Part271. SubpartAandB.Federal Register 

### I Vol. 48. No. 226 

### I Tuesday. November 22. 1983 

### I Rules and RegUlatiOns' '52719

thatmeetscertainrequirementswillbe treated ashavingbeenissueda permit until final administrativeactionis taken onits permitapplication.This statutory authorizationto operatea HWMfacility betweentheeffectivedateofthe SubtitleCprogram (November 19. 1980) and the issuanceordenialofa final permitis knownas "interimstatus". Facilitiesoperatingunderinterim status are subjectonly to the operating standardsin 40CFRPart265. which are known as the "interim status standards".Thesestandardsdonot contain the full setoftechnical design andoperating standardscontainedin40 CFR Part264. the standards to beused when issuingpermits tosuchfacilities.

Interim statusis conferreddirectlyby Section3005(e) upona personwho:

(1) Ownsoroperatesa facility which is required to havea permitunder Section3005 andis in existenceon November 19. 1980:

(2) Hascompliedwith the requirementsofSection3010(a) of RCRA. regardingnotificationof hazardouswasteactivity: and,

(3) Hasmadeanapplicatioll:.fora permit. underSection3005 ofRCRA. Interim statuscannotbegrantedor conferredby EP!\.Therefore. ifan owneroroperatorofa facility failed to meetoneormore ofthe statutory 'requirements for interim status. EPA cannot. undera literalconstructionof Section 3005(e) considerthe facility as havingachievedinterim status.Any person treating, storingordisposingof hazardous wastewithouta permitor withouthavingachieved interim status maybe ordered by the Agencyto cease that operationandmay be subjectto civilpenaltiesand/orsubjectto fine and imprisonment.

As EPA indicatedin a Federal Registernotice on November19. 1980 (45 FR76630). such a literal constructionof Section3005(e)mayhavetheeffectof preventingownersoroperators of certainwell-managedfacilities from qualifying for interimstatus andrequire that theyceaseoperationsuntil such time astheyreceivea RCRA permit. Accordingly. theAgency has adopteda policythatallowscertainfacilities in existenceonNovember 19. 1980. that havefailed to achieveinterimstatusto continueoperationifcontinued operationisinthepublicinterest. and the facility owneroroperatorcomplies with theappropriateRCRA performance standards.See45 FR 76630-36 (November 19, 1980). Underthis policy. EPAmay,bycomplianceorderissued underSection3008ofRCRA,extendthe datebywhichtheoWlleroroperatorof anexistingJacilitymay8ubmitPartAof itspermitapplication.therebyallowing 

### , ,i thefacilitytoobtaininterimstatus,if thatis theonlyrequirementforinterim statusthat the facility fails tomeet. See 40CFR270.10(e)(3).Anexisting·facility whichhasfailed tonotifyasrequiredby Section3010(a) ofRCRA,however,can neverachieveinterimstatusbutmaybe. allowedtocontinueoperationthrough theissuanceofeithera compliance orderunderSection3008oranInterim StatusComplianceLetter(ISCL). See45 FR76630-36 (November19, 1980). Asa partofthisenforcementpolicyEPA will require facilities operatingunder complianceordersorISCL's to comply with appropriatemanagementpractices asa conditionofcontinuedoperation. It hasbeenEPA policythat existing facilities operatingwithoutinterim statusura permit should, ata minimum, complywiththePart 265interimstatus standards. 

## n. AmendmenttoandClarificationof ApplicationofInterimStatus Regulations

Section3004ofRCRArequiresEPA to promulgateperformancestandards whichapplytoownersandoperatorsof facilities thattreat, store. ordisposeof hazardouswastes.TheseSection3004 standards areindependently enforceablenational standardswhich are separablefrom theSection3005 permittingrequirements. See45FR 33158 (May 19. 1980).

EPA promulgatedboththe Patt264 generalpermitting standards and the Part265 interimstatusstandardsunder the authorityofSection3004. EPA has. byregulation. limited therequirements for facilitieswithinterimstatusto those found in40 CFRPart265. See40 CFR 270.71(b). Thelanguageof40CFR 265.1(b), whichdefinesthegeneral applicationoftheinterimstatus standardsprovidesthat "(t]he standards inthisPartapplytoownersand operatorsoffacilitieswhichtreat. store, ordisposeofhazardouswaste whohave fully compliedwiththerequirementsfor interimstatus

...".Thisregulatory languagehascreatedsomeuncertainty asto whetherthePart265 standards applyto existingfacilities whichhave failed toqualifyforinterimstatus.EPA believesthatthislanguagedoesnot precludeapplicationoftheinterim statusstandardstonon-interim status facilitiesgiventhat I 265.1(b)doesnot expresslylimittheapplicationofthe Part265 standardstoonlyinterim status facilities,Therefore,EPAhasboththe statutoryandregulatoryauthorityto applyeitherthe..Part 264general permittingstandards01'thePart265 interimstatusstandardstoexisting facilitieswhichhavefailedtoqualifyfor interimstatu•. .Asindicatedabove.EPAhas ::::.;.,,:c;-,: announceditsintenttoexercise prosecutorialdiscretionwhere appropriateto allowcontinued operationofexistingfacilities that'did notqualifyforinterimstatusifsuch facilitiescompliedwithapplicableEPA Part265 regulations.

Theinterimstatusregulations,for the mostpart.consistofgeneral administrativeandnon-technical operatingstandards.These standards weredesignedtobeself-implementing. withoutneedfor substantial interpretationby, ornegotiationwith. EPA. These sameconsiderationssuggest thatthePart265 regulations arethe most appropriate standardsto apply to allexistingunpermittedfacilities, includingthosefacilitieswhichhave failed to qualifyforinterimstatus.EPA alsobelievesthat,inordertoensure consistentapplicationofthe ReRA regulations,theAgencyshouldapply the samesetofRCRAperformance standardstoallexistingunpermitted facilities.

As statedabove,EPAbelievesthat it hasauthoritytoapplythePart265 standardsto thesefacilities thathave notfully qualifiedfor interim status. However. to avoidanypossible confusiononthispoint.EPA is today amending40CFR 265.1(b) inorderto provideclearnoticetoownersor operators ofexistingfacilities without interim statusora permitthattheymust complywiththePart265 regulations until suchtime as final administrative dispositionoftheirpermit appticatiunis made. III.Comments

TheAgencyreceivedfive comments ontheproposedamendmentwhichwas publishedintheFederalRegisteron January 19, 1983, at48FR 2514. Twoof thecommentsfavoredtheproposed amendment:twoopposedthechange andonesuggestedconditionsforthe change.

Thecommentsopposingtheproposed amendmentfocussed onthelanguagein thepreamblethatcertainexisting

. facilities notmeetingthetechnical requirementsofinterim statusbe allowedto continueoperation "if continuedoperationisinthepublic interest".Thecommentersareobjecting to thepotentialbroadapplicationofthis policy. Onecommentsuggestedlimiting thepolicy tofacilitieswhichcould demonstratecertainfindings. suchas goodcauseforfailure toprovidetimely notification.

ThesecommentsaredirectedtoEPA's

. exerciseofitaenforcementpolicy. and

notattheregulatorychanges52720 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 226 

### I.Tuesday, November 22, 1983 

### 1Rules and Regulations**..,..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~** promulgatedtoday.Today'. ;.:
... , . , amendmentssimplyexplainthatthose:-; facilities withoutinterimstatuscanbe' • suedforviolationofPart264 or265. EPA intend"s toexerciseitsenforcement policyofallowingfacilities to continue ifcontinuedoperationis in the public intf:restverycarefully.Althoughthe policy appearsto havebroad

. implications·,it willbeadministered quitenarrowly. CertainlyEPAwill cunsidersuchfactorsasgoodcausefor failure to notifyin decidingwhetherto applythepolicyto particularfacilities.

EPAproposedtheamendment promulgatedtodayto clarifythatHWM facilities failing to achieveinterim status do not therebyescapeliabilityunder Part265. TheAgencymaystill enforce againstfacilities which areoperating improperlybyorderingthemeither administrativelyorjudicially.to cease uperations. IV. RegulatoryImpacts A.ExecutiveOrder12291

UnderExecutive Order12291. EPA must judge whethera regulalion is "major" and therefore subjectto the requirementofa RegulatoryImpact Analysis (RIA). Amajorrule is one whichresults in (1) anannualeffect on

e economy of$100milliunormore: (2)

_ majorincreasein costsorpricesto ndustry, consumers.Federal.Stateor loculgovernmentagencies orgeographic regions: or (3) causessignificant adverse effects oncompetition, employment. o investment.productivity,innovation.or the abilityoftheUnitedStates-based enterprisestocompetewithforeignbasedenterprisesindomesticorexport markets.TheAgencydoesnot

. anticipatethattoday's amendmentwill haveanyoftheeffectswhich characterizea rule as "major"underthe Executive Order. Itmerelyclarifieshow the existingregulations applyto existing facilities whichhavefailed to achieve intprim status.

This amendmentwas submitted to the OfficeofManagementandBudget as requiredby ExecutiveOrder12291. Any commentsfrom OMB and anyEPA responseto those comments are available atthe Office ofSolidWaste Docket.Room5-212,

### u.s. EPA. Washington.D.C. 20460. B. PaperworkReductionAct

UnderthePaperworkReductionAct. 44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.. Federalagencies must estimatethepaperworkburden createdbyanyinformationcollection uestsin a proposedorfinal rule. • ause there wouldbenoinformation

coll.ectionactivitiescreatedbythis·.

/
. amendment.therequirementsofthe PaperworkReductionActdonot**apply.~** C.RegulatoryFlexibility

### Act'**:~~::-~.{ S;'.::"~;.**  

### :::

• .' + I ." •••. ..; _, \1. Pursuantto tlleRegulatoryFlexibility:. Act. 5U.S.C. 601 etseq.• wheneveran·· agencyisrequiredtopublishgeneral notice ofrulemakingfor anyproposedor final rule, itmustprepareandmake availableforpubliccommenta regulatoryflexibility analysiswhich·. describestheimpactoftheproposedor final ruleonsmallentities(Le.• small businesses.smallorganizations. and smallgovernmentalentities).The Administratormaycertify.however. thattherulewillnothavea significant impacton a substantialnumberofsmall entities.

Thisamendmentwillgenerallyhave noeconomicimpactonsmallentities. It merelyclarifies alreadyexisting responsibilities.Accordingly.Ihereby certifythatthis regulation wouldnot havea significanteconomicimpacton a substantialnumberofsmallentities. Thisregulation therefore doesnot require a regulatoryflexibility analysis. V. List ofSubjectsin40 CFR Part265

Hazardousmaterials,Packagingand andcontainers.Reportingand recordkeepingrequirements. Security measures.Suretybonds. Waste treatmentanddisposal. Watersupply.

Dated: November15. 1983. William D.Ruckelshaus. Administrator. PART265-(AMENDED]

Title40 oftheCodeofFederal

. Regulationsisamendedasfollows: :.

1.TheAuthorityforPart265reads as follows:

Authority:Sees. 1006. 2002(a), and3004of the SolidWasteDisposalAct. 88amendedby the Resource ConservationandRecovery Act of1976(RCRA) •asamended (42 U.S.C. 6905. 6912. and6924).

2. Section26S.1(b) isrevisedto read asfollows: §265.1 Purpose,scopeandapplicability.

(1)) Thestandardsinthis Partapply to ownersandoperatorsoffacilities which treat. store.ordisposeofhazardous wastewhohavefully compliedwiththe requirementsforinterimstatusundel' Section3005(e) ofRCRA and §270.10 of this Chapter.untilfinal administrative dispositionoftheirpermitapplicationis made, and tothoseownersand operatorsoffacilities in existenceon November 19, 1980. whohavefailed to providetimelynotification asrequired bySection3010(a} ofRCRA. and/or failed tofile PartA ofthePermit· 

# , 3·· Applicationasrequiredby40CFR··, ,:
.. 1270.10(e) and(g). These**standard~·:;·-·':··** applytoalltreatment. storage,or· .; ;,;:;,'-

.. disposalofhazardouswasteatthese .:,' facilities aftertheeffectivedateofthese regulations. exceptasspecifically providedotherwise inthis PartorPart 261 ofthisChapter. [Comment:As statedin Section3005(a) ofRCRA. after theeffectivedateofregulationsunder thatSection.i.e., Parts270 and 124 of thisChapter. the treatment. storage.or
. disposal.ofhazardouswasteis prohibitedexceptin accordancewitha permit.Section3005(e) ofRCRA providesfor the continuedoperation of anexistingfacility whichmeetscertain conditionsuntilfinal administrative dispositionofthe owner'sand operator1Jpermitapplicationis made.]

IFR Doc. 83-31352Filed 11-21-83:8:45ami BILLING CODE 6560-50-II

40 CFR Part271
rSW-3-FRL2475-2] DistrictofColumbia; Phase Iand II, ComponentsAand S, Interim Authorization ofthe State Hazardous Waste Managementprogram AGENCY:EnvironmentalProtection Agency. ACTION:Approval ofState Program.
SUMMARY:PursuanttotheResource ConservationandRecoveryActof1976 (RCRA)provisions.theDistrictof Columbia**h~s** appliedforInterim AuthorizationPhaseIandPhaseII. ComponentsA andB.The

. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency (EPA) hasreviewed theDistrict'sapplication for PhasesIandII. ComponentsA and B. InterimAuthorization. andhas determinedthattheDistrict'shazardous wasteprogramis substantially equivalentto theFederalprogram coveredbyPhasesIandII. Components A and B.

TheDistrict ofColumbia is hereby grantedInterimAuthorizationfor PhasesI and II. ComponentsA andBto operatetheDistrict'shazardouswaste

­ programinlieu oftheFederalprogram. EFFECTIVE DATE:November22. 1963.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony

### J. Donatoni. Chief, State Programs Section,WasteManagement Branch, U.S. EPA Region III. 6th and WalnutStreets.Philadelphia,PA 19106 (215)**5~~-7937.** ... f·.

'.. .•"1.­: 

# . 

# • OFFICEOFTHE ATTORNEYGENERAL

Inter-officeCorrespondence**D~~** 

### August 24, 1984
Th: 

### Charlie Roe

From: 

### Charlie

# Dou~e Subject: 

### RCRA Final Authorization--Attorney General's Statement

As ·you probably recall, a June 25, 19S4 letter to 

### Mr. Donald W. MooS from you and I was submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of this state's application for final authorization under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. EPA has determined that the application submitted is-Complete for the purpose of EPA's formal review process. EPA will determine in late September, teptatively, whether to grant authorization to the State of Washington. 

# • By letter dated July 27, 1984, the Regional Office of EPA submitted comments on Washington's application for final authorization. I am told that these comments reflect, in part, review by EPA'a Headquarters' Office. The comments include some items concerning the Attorney General's Statement. This memo is intended to list those items and to suggest a response. I do not now plan to make further formal response to EPA's comments, this is a matter which you and I should discuss. I am forwarding a copy of this memo, however, to the Department's hazardous ·waste program staff. Comment 1. Effective Dates. EPA requests that a statement be supplied to the effect that the authorities relied on in the Attorney General's Statement have been legally adopted, with the dates of adoption. All the authorities relied on in the Attorney General's Statement are presently effective. The Department of Ecology adopted amendments to its dangerous waste regulations, ch. 173-303 WAC, on two occasions this year. One batch of amendments was effective May 17, 1984, the second group of amendments was effective July 27, 1984. Comment 2a. Authority to Regulate Recyc1ers. EPA requests that a statement describing the Department's authority to regulate hazardous waste recycling be supplied. This statement is sup­ 

# • plied in the Attorney General's Statement at pages 8 and 9. The statement there refers to RCW 70.105.130, 70.105.145, and 70­ .10SA.060(4).

# '.

I .



# •

• lnter-officeCorrespondence



### Charlie Roe Page Two August 24, 1984

Comment 2b. Authority to Regulate Dangerous Waste Disposal. EPA requests clarification of the Department's authority to regulate disposal of dangerous waste. I consider this matter to be resolved on page nine of the Attorney General's Statement as submitted. I refer you to paragraph three on page.nine. Comment 2c. Authority to Regulate Generators. EPA requests a statement of the state's basis to regulate hazardous waste generators. The state's basis to regulate hazardous waste generators is included in the Attorney General's Statement at page 10. The statement at that page identifies the state's authority as being located in RCW 70.105.130, 70.105.145, and 7 0 • 1 05A. 06 0 (4) • Comment 2d. Authority to Establish Permit Requirements. EPA requests that the state's authority to establish requlations which have procedures to modify, revoke, reissue, and terminate permits be described. This authority is identified at page 13 of the Attorney General's Statement. The authority to adopt regulations identified there is in RCW 70.105.130, 70.105.145, and 70 . 10SA• 0 6 0 (4) • Comment 2e. Authority of the Washington State Patrol. EPA requests that the effect of ch. 46.48 RCW, which authorizes the Washington State Patrol to adopt regulations concerning transportation of hazardous materials, be analyzed with respect to its effect on the state's RCRA program. 'The Washington State Patrol is an independent agency vested with its authority by statutes unrelated to the Department of Ecology. I do not expect the State Patrol's program of hazardous materials transport regulation to cause any conflict with the Department of Ecology's regulations. The Department of Ecology has independent authority to enforce its regulations. See RCW 70.105.080. This authority is unrelated to the enforcement authority included in ch. 46.48 RCW. Comment 3. Public Participation in Enforcement. The Department of Ecology, for interim authorization under RCRA, agreed not to oppose a request for intervention in civil enforcement proceedings brought under the dangerous waste statutes. This assurance was required by EPA regulations. The question EPA poses here is if the Attorney General's. Office has. independent authority to enforce the dangerous waste statutes, then will the Attorney General's Office also assure EPA that it will not oppose intervention in civil enforcement proceedings? My initial response is to suggest that the assurance of the Department, as the client and agency requesting. civil enforcement be conducted by;the Attorney General'sInter-officeCorrespondence 

# • Charlie Roe Page Three August 24,1984
Office, should be sufficient to satisfy EPA's regulatory requirements. In the event that this response is not adequate, then you and I should discuss further options. Comment 4. Signature of the Attorney General. EPA has requested a citation to the authority of Assistant Attorneys General to sign the statement on behalf of the Attorney General's Office. This was resolved once for interim authorization. I would refer EPA to RCW" 43.l0.060. 

### Comment 5. Indian Lands. EPA intends to act in accordance with its previous position, unless some guidance from the Ninth Circuit of the Court of Appeals is forthcoming before final authorization is granted.
CKD:pk

cc: Lynda Brothers 

# •

•

# • Memorandum of Agreement (State/EPA MOA) Outline

for F. A. Application
I. General
II. Responsibilities of Parties A. Policy Statement
B. Provision for Transfer of Information 1. EPA Program Information Transfer 2. State Program Information Transfer 3. Emergency Situations and Information Transfer 4. Confidentiality C. Frequency and Content of Reports
1. Monthly 

# • 2. Biennial 

### 3. Other
D. Conditions for State Program Reviews
1. General 2. Approach 3. Identification of Major Hazardous Waste Handlers
E. Permit Issuance 1. EPA Permitting 2. State Permitting 3. EPA Overview of State Permit Actions
F. Provisions for Compliance Monitoring and Enforcment
1. State 2. EPA 

# •

# • 3. 

### Site Visits 

### 4.**E~ergency** 

### Situations G. State DelistingAction H. Provisions for Modification of the MOA



# •

•

# • Program Description Contents Final Authorization·Application 

### WDOE Dangerous/Hazardous Waste Program I.Background II.Scope, Coverage, Structure, and Processes .A. Scope B. Coverage of the Dangerous Waste Regulation Ch. 173-303 WAC
1. 

### Waste Designation 2. 

### Generators 

### 3. Transporters 

### 4. Transfer, treatment, storage, and disposal facilities 

### 5. Other requirements 

### 6. Revision of State Program 

# • 7. 

### Summary 

### C. Lead Agency Identification, Agency Structure, Budget, and Resource Assessment
1. 

### Agency structure and organizational responsibility 2. Sources of funding and restrictions 3.**Resour~e** 

### assessment

- program plan III.Description of Permitting and Review Procedures
A. 

### Purpose 

### ·B. Permitting existingTSD facilities C. Permitting new TSD facilities D. Permit development administrative review, approval process for existing and new facilities 

### E. Permits by rule 

### F. Emergency permits 

# • G. Judicial review of permits

1I-i

# • IV. Description of Compliance and Enforcement Program 

### A. Objective**B~** 

### Facility definition and establishing priorities C. Inspection procedures 

### b. Enforcement procedures 

### E. Information Management 

### V. Regulated Community Data

- Estimates 

### A. Number of noti£iers by activity reported 

### B. Number·of generators and amount waste C. Number of transporters 

### D. Number of 

### TSD facilities and amount of waste treated, stored, and disposed E.Forms 

# • 1 . 

### Notification 2. Permit 3. Annual report 4. 

### Manifest 

### 5. Inspection F. Statutes and Regulations
1. HeW 

### (Revised Code of Washington)

a. 70.105 b. 70.105a 

### c. 80.50 d. 34.04 

### 2. WAC (Washington Administrative Code)

a. 173-303 b.**173~305** 

### c. 463-42 

# • d • 

### G. Appendices 

### 1. .State 1982 

### Annual Report Summary 2. 

### PIG 82-5 

### 3. Lab Facilities and Capabilities II-ii

# • I. Background The Washington State Legislature designated iheDepartment of· Ecology as the state agency for implementing the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Since early 1978, the department has been designating, tracking,and regulating the disposal of extremely hazardous wastes through the Hazardous Waste Regulation, Chapter 173-302 WAC. Recent promulgation of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hazardous waste regulations has

. .resultediil a need to ·modify existing state regulations to be "consistent and equivalent." The state Legislature recognized this**n~ed i~**  1980 by giving the department increased authority in the area of permitting dangerous waste facilities. Additionally, in 1983 and 1984 the Legislature again increased WDOE authority to develop and implement a program consistent with RCRA. Prior to 1981,

.the Department of Ecology identified·dangerous wastes according to the degree of haza.rd posed by a waste to the public health and the environment. ·The.waste classification system implemented by ·the department designated wastes by their level of toxicity, their persistence in nature, their potential carcinogenic risk, and their tendency to ignite, corrode, and explode. 

# • This classification system depended in· a large part on established testing procedures, and on current scientific data regarding the toxicity, persistence, and carcinogenicity of·thousands of chemicals which could occur in a given waste. The department ·felt that a "degree of risk"approach to designating·wastes was the best method to use when the enormity of the dangerous waste universe was considered. The system for tracking dangerous wastes as they moved from the generator to the disposal site was based on the use of a manifest. This manifest was to·be .prepared by the generator, and stated the type, amount, origin, transporter, and final delivery point for a dangerous waste shipment. The manifest was signed by the operator of the disposal site and returned to the generator to signify acceptance of the waste shipment. If the generator did not receive a signed manifest copy from the disposal site within a specified time, he reported this to the Department of Ecology

..The department then initiated a search for the miSsing waste. Rules for the operation and maintenanCe of the extremely hazardous waste (EHW)rilanagement facility at Hanford (the only .facility in Washington which may dispose o·f EHW) were adopted late in 1977 under Chapter 173-302 WAC. Standards for the design and operation of other dangerous waste treatment,.storage,and disposal (TSD) facilities were developed to meet the substantial equivalence requirements under RCRA at that time. 

# • The current set of dangerous waste regulations Ch. 173-303 WAC have been amended to meet the equivalent and consistent requirements of RCRA for final authorization.

11-1

# • II. Scope, Coverage,**Structure~** and**Process~s** A. Scope
This document represents the core of the State

.of Washington application for final authorization of the "Dangerous Waste Management Program" to be operated by the Department of Ecology (WDOE)

. The regulatory prog·ram developed for dangerous waste management is comprehensive and is .equivalent and consistent withthe federal RCRA program it is .intended to operate in lieu of. All persons who generate, transport, transfer, recycle, treat, s·tore or dispose of dangerous·wastes, defined in the recently amended April 17, 1984 Dangerous Waste Regulation, Chapter 173-303 Washingtbn Administrative Code (WAC), are affected. The primary purpose of the regulation is to protect the public health and environment from improper management of dangerous waste. The state program administered by the Departmentof Ecology (WDOE) has regulatory'authority over the following general areas of dangerous wa$te management; notification, inspection, monitoring,permitting, compliance monitoring, manifest tracking, and ·enforcement. 

### B. Coverage 

# • WDOErecently ·amended its'regulations to be consistent and equivalent to RCRA. .Many of the concepts developed for the rules adopted in 1977 are essentially**thesa~e,** suth as the dangetous and extremely hazardous waste (DWjEHW) two-tier designation system. Additional methods have grown out of the work done by EPA, such as a listing approach for dangerous wastes and the standards for dangerous waste management (treat, store, dispos-e (TSD) facilities. The following descriptions provide a basic knowledge of the amended Washington State Dangerous Waste Regulation, Chapter 173-303 WAC.
1. Waste Designation. The EPA procedures for designating wastes depend primarily on two lists: the Discarded Chemical Products List; 'and, the Dangerous Waste Sources List. Both of these lists were developed by EPA and adopted by WDOE (see WAC 173-303-9903 & 9904). The criteria for listing was based on the toxic'ity, persistence, carcinogenicity, ignitability, corrosiv:i,.ty, and reactivity of the waste. For the Discarded Chemical Products List, EPA considered many common commercial and 6ff"'specification manufacturing chemicals and listed those which met the**criteria~** For the Sources List, gPA studied data on various industrial processes and their typical waste streams, then listed those sources of waste which met the criteria. 

# • WDOEaugmentsthese lists with its own c'riteria, developed for the 1977 regulations. WDOE's criteria have.beenapplied in three ways. First, WDOEassignsa DWjEHW designation



### 11-2

# • to each waste which appears on 'the lists. Second, the criteria applies to unlisted wastes about which the generator'knows the constituents of the waste and the constituent concentrations; irthis knowledge shows that the waste meets the c:riteria, then' it would be designated as dangerous or extremely hazardous waste. Third, the,criteria will be us'ed by generators of unlisted wastes who have been ordered by WDOE, or who choose voluntarily, to test their wastes against the criteria and designate their waste accordingly.



# • If a generator has a listed waste, he may**al~o** apply the state's criteria to his waste to see if it is so designated. If the generator determines that the criteria do not designate his listed'waste, he must obtainWDOE's agreement that his waste is unregulated. Before making 

### a decision, WDOE will review the ,generator's own criteria test, data, and additional factors, identical to 40CFR 261.11(a)(3) (e.g., nature of toxicity,potential to degrade,etc.), as they might' apply to the waste. If, after reviewing these factors, WDOE agrees that the waste should be undesignated, then the waste will not be subject to regulation

. If WDOE disagrees, then the waste will remain**li~ted** and subjett to the applicable regulations

. 'Unless and until WDOE notifies .thegeneratorof a listed waste that his waste is no longer designated, such waste will be subject to the regulations. In'addition, WDOE requires that any listed waste, even though it may be alternat'ively designated by the state's criteria, is,still subjett to all requirements applicable to listed wastes.
In additioll to listing and' criteria a third mechanism is provided in designating dangerous wastes. 'These are the dangerous waste characteristics. Wastes with the following physical hazards ,would be designa'ted: Ignitablewastes which are highly flammable; Corrosive

- wastes which are highly acidic or alkaline; Reactive

- wastes which are explosive, unstable, or would readily release toxic fumes; and EP Toxic

- wastes containing high con­ -centrations of various metals and pesticides.
WDOE also provides procedures for exempting and excluding wastes from regulation if a generator can petition and make a successful demonstration that his waste 'should not be designated (in the case of categorical exclusions, a group of ,generators must petition/demonstrate for all wastes of a particular class). No wastes which demonstrate any of the characteristics (ignitability, corrosivity, etc.) will ,be exempted or excluded, and no waste which is 

# • listed or exhibits any characteristics will,ever be 'included in a categorical exclus:ion. Wastes which are listed must pass the criteria and characteristic tests, and must be

11-3

# • determined, by wnOE, to meet the additional factors for delisting (these factors are identical to those of 40 

### eFR 261.11(a)(3)). Wastes which are not listed and donbt exhibit any characteristics" but are designated by the statet s criteria only may he exempted if wnOE determines that they do not otherwise pose a threat to public health or the environment. An entire class of wastes may be excluded from regulation if 'all was"tes in that class: 1) are not listed; 2) do not exhibit any characteristics; and, 3) are not designated by the state's criteria, arif designated, do not otherwise threatenpublic health or the environment.
The designation approach described above assures thAt**~ll** federal wastes ate .properlydesignated and subject to the applicable requirements. The state's approach is more stringent than the federal approach in that more considerations are taken into account for waste designation (i.e., the st'ate's criteria,and lower quant'ity exclusion .limits). WDOE has also provided mechanisms to assure that any waste regulated at the federal level will be subject to the same, or more stringent considerations before it can be exempted from regulation. The state's approach todesignation'incorporates and complements all the elements of the 

# • 'federal approach,thus assuring equivalency with (or, in many cases exceeding) the requirements of EPA

. 

### 2.

.Generators. Persons generating dangerous waste wrill need to prepare a manifes·t,before sending the waste to a TSD facility. The manifest includes information on the generator, transporter, TSD facility, the type o'f waste,.and its quantity or volume. The manifest must be signed by the generator and the transporter before the waste leaves the generator'sproperty. The manif'est travels with the transporter to the TSD facility, where the facility ownerloperato.r signs the manifest and returns a copy to the generator

. If the generator does riot receive a copy of the manifest, signed by the facility owner/operator, within 45 days of shipment, he must submit an Exception Report to WDOE. When WDOE receivesan Exception Report for wastesdesignated on the manifest for out-of-state shipment, thenWDOE will notify either EPA or the authorized state agency with jurisdiction in the state designated for**receivi~g** the waste. WDOE will then initiate a search for the waste to determine its fate. WDOE is requiring that after September 

### 20, 1984,a11 dangerous' waste shipments shall utilize the Uniform National Manifest.
Genera.tors will report annually to WDOE the quantities and 

# • types of dangerous waste which were genera.ted in the past year,as well as any treatment, storage, recycling or disposal practices incorporated.

# • 'The manifest and annual repo'rtingsystem will provide WDOE with a mean:s to track the ,generation, movement, and ultimate dispositl.onof dangerous wastes in Washington. This system will reduce 'the amount' of uncontrolled dumping and illegal disposal of dangerous waste which historically has posed a national public health and environmental hazard. Generators involved with international shipments are subjectto ,state requirements that are identical to federal standards,except that copies of exception reports sent to EPA mu.st also 'be sent to WDOE.



# • WDOE'sregulations allow certaiQ, farmer's who manage their pesticide wastes on their own land to be exempt from the generator requirel,Dents. To qualify for this exemption, the farmer must either reuse his pesticide residues and rinsewaters (e.g., in his next'batch of pesticide), or else manage these wastes according to the pesticide label instructions. The label instructions ,vary for each pes'ticide, but 'almost always call for the,farmer to spray the pesticide residues ina manner which constitutes a useful purpose. For' example, the'farmer may be instructed to spray certain·herbicides or pesticides along fence rows to control weed orinsectgrowtb, or he may be instructed to apply his was'tes to certain fallow lands, which ate specifically targeted by the state Department of Agriculture, for controlling weeds and pests while the land is fallow. In some rare cases, a label may call for'disposal or burial. If

.such disposal or burial is done on the farmer's own land, then WDOE will not regulate him as a generator. Disposal of pesticide wastes elsewhere is subject to WDOE's 'generator and other requirements. 

### 3. T.ransporters

. The regulation requires transporters to comply with U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) rules under 49 CFR for hazardous materials arid substances transportation. Transporters are also responsible for notify­ 'ingauthorities and assisting in cleanup operations in the event of a spill.or discharge of dangerous wastes during transport. WDOE is requiring that after September,20, 1984, all dangerous waste shipments shall utilize the Uniform National Manifest (UNF). This will assure that interstate shipments are in ,accordance with DOT requirements. Until the UNF goes into -effect, WDOE does not expect (and so ,far has not encountered) any problems with the interstate transport of wastes. The requirements for transpo'rters who -import wastes from outside the United 'States are identical to ,federal require­ 

# • ments. Such transporter must act as the generator of the waste and comply with 'a,11 applicable generator requirements (e.g., manifesting, packaging, etc.). Transporters who export wastes must comply with state requirements that are



### 11-5

# • identical to federal standards: indicate on manifest the date the waste left the U.S.; sign and date the manifes·t; retain manifest for three years. 

### 4. Treatment, Storage and Disposal (TSD).Facilities. wnOE has :essentially adopted.EPA standards for the siting, design, performance, operation., and maintenance of TSn facilities. In general, these standards ensure that ·a facility is properly pe·rforming whatever dangerous waste storage, treatment, or disposal activities are occurring at the facility. Tsn fac·ilities must have adequate ·security, personnel training, inspection schedules, emergency plans and equipment, records of

.operation, environmental monitoring, insurance, closure and post-closure plans, and reporting before WDOE will grant·a permit (or interim sta'tus) toa facility.

. 

# • Finally, TSD facilities must be sited and operated to comply with floodplain, fa.ult line, wetland, shoreline, explosion and fire buffer zones,andmonitoringzone requirements.

.Any facility managing regulated reactive wastes will, under state regulations,be handling·at least four hundred pounds. UFC Table 

### 77-201, 1979 Edition,**requir~s** 

### minimum distances for 

### 400-500 pounds of: 

### 320 feet from inhabited buildings; and 130 

### feet from railways and highways. Larger quantities of reactive wastes will require correspondingly larger setback distances. Facilities are also**requir~d** 

### to satisfy all applicable local, state, and federal laws. (such as local comprehensive plans, air and ·water pollution laws, endangered species,**etc.)~** 

### Other reactive and ignitable wastes must be stored in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code (UFC) or National Fire Protection ASSOCiation (NFPA) Pamphlet Number 

### 30. In many cases, UFCand NFPA require storage distances in excess of 

### 50 feet from the nearest property line. In other cases, a .distance of less than 

### 50 feet is allowed, but these reductions are frequently linked to certain conditions such as: .one or two hour iirerestrictive walls; sprinkler systems; availability of fire response teams; etc. Such conditions·assure that,even with reduced storage distances, adequate protection of public safety and property is provided. Ina11 cases WDOE believes that: the knowledge and expertise of liFC andNFPA have been established over many years; tQ.at their rules and guidance provide adequate protection for storage and handling of every day .hazardousmaterials(which far exceed by many orders of .magnitude the volumes of hazardous wastes produced) to 

# • which the public is exposed; that UFC and NFPA rules can be applied properly to the storage and handling of reactive and ignitable wastes; and that storage distances and buffer zones established in accordance with these national guidelines provide protection equivalent to, a.nd at times, more stringent than EPA's 

### 50 foot setback. 11-6

# • WDOE is adopting most of these regulations'directly from the EPA regulations. Others are modified to reflect the differences between dangerous and extremely hazardous waste management practices. The state rules achieve EPA's requirements for equivalency.
In addition, WDOE has adopted stringent operating standards fot the extremely hazardous waste disposal site at Hanford

.. The current status of Hanford is that the land has been purchased from the federal gove.rnment and is waiting for funds to be allocated from the state Legislature £or its development.

The authority for requiring compliance with standatds of at least interim status stringency resides in several places. First, the general facility standards (corresponding ·to Subparts A, B, C, D, and Eaf Parts 264 and 265) are applicable to all facilities, re.gardless of status (see WAC 173-303-280(1)). Second, the unit operational standards for facilities (e.g., tank requirements, closure, post-closure, etc.) are applicable as specified in WAC 173-303-400(2)(a) (for interim status) and WAC 173-303-600(2) and (3) (for final status). 

# • These two applicability sections essentially require that: 1. All TSD facilities must comply with the interim status standards;

11-7

# • 2. All TSD·facilities .must comply with the final status standards, unless the facility complies with the interim status standards and qualifies for interim status.



### 6. 

# •

• In addition, a final status permit will include all applicable final facility standards. Thus, anyone who operates a TSDfacility which did not qualify for interim status would be subject to a.t 1east interim status standards, and possiblyto the more stringent final facility standards. Since a permit is needed to specify the conditions for final

.facility**compliance~.** WDOE concludes that interim status

standards would be applied to existing facilities which failed to qualify for interim status, while in the meantime a final permit specifying final status standards would be prepared. Revision of State Program. If WDOE revises its program, it \ViII contact EPA to determine what modifications are necessary in the memorandum of agreement, Attorney General's statement, or other documents. WDOE will modify the documents as appropriate, and submit them to EPA for approval. At this time, WDOE does not foresee any significant program revisions, and d()es not expect to transfer any of its authorized functions to any other state agencies. IfWDOE finds that it is .necessaryto amend state laws or regulations due to EPA's promulgation of new regulations, then the state will proceed as follows:

a. Statutory changes. wilOE will work with the state legislature and appropria·te committees to develop the necessary statutory language. The Washingt()n State legislature meets every year, so changes to state law should be accomplished within one year. If the statutory changes are controversial, two years may, in some rare cases, be necessary
. WDOE believes that amendments to state laws can be provided in two.years or less in all cases. b. Regulatory changes. Amendments to state regulations will be made in accordance with Chapter 34.04 RCW, Administrative Procedure Act, and will be accomplished in ,one year or less. WDOE will prepare proposed regulatory language and confirm with EPA that it will properly address the changes at the federal level; this should require no more than two months. WDOE will then file the proposed language with the State Code Reviser for publication ihthe State Register; this will require about two weeks. The first public hearings will be held twenty days after the proposed amendments are published. The public comment period may range frbm thirty days to three months (but only this long if significant changes are made and reproposal is necessary). WDOE will then prepare final

11-8I 

# • amendatory language (less than one month) and file the ·final changes with the Code Reviser. The new regulation is effective thirty days after adop·tion. Thus, simple .amendments will take as few as three months from beginning to the actual effective date. More complicated changes may take as long as nine months until the new rules go ·into effect. 

### 7. Summary. As a summation, the amended Dangerous Waste Regulation Chapter 173-303 WAC: (1) D.esignates those solid wastes which are dangerous or extremely hazardous to public health and the environment; (2) Provides.for surveillance ·andmonitoring of dangerous wastes until they are detoxified, reclaimed, neutralized, or disposed of safely; (3) Provides a manifest system for tracking, reporting, monitoring, recordkeeping,sampling, and labeling of darigerous wastes; (4) Establishes requirements for. the .siting, design, operation, and monitoring of**dangerouswast~** management facilities; 

# • (5) Establishes design, operation, and monitoring requirements for managing the state's extremely hazardous waste disposal facility; (6) Establishes and administers a program for permitting dangerous waste management .facilities;and (7) Provides for enforcement against persons who violate the requirements of the act and the Dangerous Waste Regulations.
C. Lead Agency Identification, Agency Structure, Budget, and Resource Assessment 1. Agency Structure and Organizational Responsibility
The Department of Ecology (WDOE)is .thestate agency mandated by the Legislature to administer the federally approved RCRAprogram. As shown in Figure 1, WDOE is essentially organized along program lines**~ith** the Office of Operations and Enforcement functionally set up to act as the operating arm of the agency. Each programfunctioIis under an appointed assistant director who reports to

.the deputy director and the director ·of·the department. There are also several exceptibnal program responsibilities

.which for management reasons report .directly to the deputy

director outside of the program office's structure of the organization. For purposes of the Dangerous/Hazardous Waste Program within WDOE there are three ·organizational 

# • groups which havep.rogram responsibilities. These are the Office of ·Ha.zardous Substances and Air Quality Control, Office of Operations and Enforcement and the Industrial and Technical Affairs Division.



### 11-9, , 

# • The Office of Hazardous Substances and Air Quality Control has authority and primary responsibility for program plan­ ,ning, development, and'management,of the state dangerous/

hazardous waste program. This is done through the Waste Management Division (Figure 2) and the Dangerous Waste Regulatory Section ,(Figure '3) of this office. This group is responsible forestablishing'all program gUidance and policy including enforcement policy'as well as regulations. This group also provides technical assistance to inspectors and permit writers in the Regional Offices and Industrial Section as well as coordinating permit and compliance monitoring activities an:d ensuring statewide cons'istency in theapplication of the regulations. All public involvement aspects of the program are carried out in this office. Anyneces'" sarytrac'king andreporting£unctions, including the annual report, are also the responsibility of this group. The Office of Operations and Enforcement has the authority and responsibility for all (except' as specified for the industrial Division below) operational,aspects of the Dangerous/Hazardous Waste Program. The office is divided into four geographical regions of the state with an officer and staff located in each region. The regions cover southwest Washington, northwest Washington,central Washington, and eastern Washington (Figure 5).' Each Regional Office has a desl.gnated hazardous waste group within their Environmental QualitY,Section. This group is responsible for carrying out 'compliance inspections and permit writing. They are the primary agency contact: with all generators; transporters, and TSD facilities. They also implement the, agency enforcement policy by documenting and making recommendations for enforcement actions to their assistant'director who has signatory authority for all enforcement ac.tions within their jurisdiction. this group maintains a close working ,relationship with the Dangerous Waste Regulatory Section. They use the guidance and ,policy provided by this section and, are responsible for completing 'the work plan commitments negotiated by the Dangerous Waste Section. The third group is the Industrial and Technical Affairs Division (Figure 6). This group, for purposes ,of the Dangerous/ Hazardous Waste Program, functions like the Office of Operations and Enforcement with t,heir special area of responsibility being specific major industries in the state. The one exception that should be noted here is that for permit issuance and 'enforcement actions the assistant director of the Office of Hazard'ous SubstanceS and Air Quality Control has signatory authority for this group. For program management purposes this group functions like a fifth ,Regional 

# • Office

. 2. 

### Sources of Funding and Restrictions Estimated funding levels for hazardous waste (RCRA) activities from federal and state resources are**pre~ented** 

### in 11-10

# • •

----------------------------------- ...... "'. Figure

# 1.

GOVERNOR John Spr.llm.1n

DIRECTOR 0100 Donald W. Moos, '0001 Ginger Oath, AdmIn. Asst., '0006 NUClEAR WASTE POlICY AND REVIEW BOARD AND

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NUCLEAR WASTE ADVISORY COUNCIL Sue Gould, Chdlr D[PUTY DIRECTOR 0110 John r. Spencer

- '0013 Renee Pdcdnd, Admin. Asst., '0007

ECOlOGICAl COMMISSION Janet**Ch~lupnlck, Ch~Ir** 

FACILITY SITING OFFICE 0120 LEGAl. S(RVICES 0150 Fred O.**H~hn,** Spec. Asst., '0010 Chdrles B. Roe, Jr., Sr. Asst. A.G.

Oorls Turner, Sec 2, '0802 Bev Jolley, Legal Sec. 2, '0065

INDUSTRIAL' TECH. AFFAIRS DIVISION OHO HIGH-LEVEL NUCLEAR WASTE OFFICE 0160**Oon~ld** O. Provost, Spec. Asst., '0227 David Stevens, Spec. Asst., '1165 Barb Wood, Clerk Typist 3, '0356 Vacant, Sec. 2, '0115

PUBlIC INFORMATION OFFICE 0140 INTERGOVERNI£NTAL AFFAIRS LlAISON Ats KluchI, Pub. Aff. Mmln., '0024 Vacant, [nv. Pl. 3, 'P060 Linda Vinson, Sec. 2, '0045
" YAKIMA RIVER ADJUDICATION COLUHAJA BASIN DEVELOPH£NT PROJECT Vdcant, Adjudication Referee Chdn**B~lJ** ey, Project DIrector, '0766

OFFICE OF HAZARDOUS lOOO 3000 4000 5000 OFFICE OF 1000 OFFIC[ OF WATER OFFICE OF OFFICE or OP(RATIONS SUBSTANCES AND MANAG(H[NT AND RUDGET AND LAND RESOuncrS WATER QUAlITY AND ENFORCEH£NT AIR QUAllTY CONTROL Stephen L. Hunter**Lynd~** I.. Brothers Glen H. FIedler**Don~ld** P. Dubois Bruce A. Cameron Asst. Dlr., "086 Asst. Dlr., D0014 Asst. Dlr., '0016 Asst. DIr., '0011 Asst. DIr., '0015 V

IckI**B~ltl.er,** ..-PO 2, tJ09ll. L'ndd Aylsworth, Sec. 2, 110650**N~ncy** DeBoer, Sec. 2, '0069 Judy**l~mm,** Sec. 2, '0165 Veronica Tracy, Sec. 2, '0637

AV/£X6(A6-8)

# • • •

Figure 2

Ron Holcomb

- Public Officer

.Office of Hazardous Sl,lbstances and Air Quality Control Linda 'Aylsworth

- Secretary Lynda 

## L. Brothers, Assistant Director Linda Pettit

- Receptionist

Air Resources Management. Waste Management Contract.ed Remedial Action,Programs Henry 

### F. Droege, Div.Supv. Earl Tower, Division Supervisor Marc Horton,**Di~ision** 

### Suvv.

Section Chiefs Section Chiefs Section Chiefs· Mike Landon

- Regulatory *Tom Cook

- Dangerous .Waste Regulatory John Littler

- Hazardous Wastes Section Remedial Action Dan Johnson

- Evaluation and Avery Wells

- Solid Waste Disposal John Raymond

- I/M.Program Man.agement Investigation Section Stu .Clark

- Monitoring Vacant

- Low Level Nuclear Waste Mana'gement

# • • • Figure 3 Waste Management Division. Assistant Director Division**~Superv{sor,** 

### Tower Secretary, Singer

Solid 

### Waste Disposal Dangerous Waste .Regulatory Section 'Avery Wells (Sec.tion Chief) . Tom Cook 

### (Section Chief) Jon Pace .Dave Saunders Brad Everson Jim Knudson Pete Haskin Ross'Potter Kathy Seel Marc Crooks Jail Whitworth Mike Aarhaus Ca'rol Kraege Project/temporary
tI It 

## " " Dan Kruger Jerry Boese Marie Zuroske Guy Moellendorf Leslie Sacha Denis Erickson Develops the state solid waste management plan and administers the state solid waste management program. Develops state hazardous waste program plans and integrates this with the annual federal program grant 

### and RCRArequirements. ·Administers Ref. 26/39 solid waste grants and local solid waste management planning .Develops hazardous waste regulations, policies, procedures, and law revisions. program. Prepares, tracks, and coordinates federal and state program, and the EPA grant assistance program. Responsible for program development and technical assistance for resource conservation, recycling, resoutce recovery, and public participation. Provides technical assistance to agencies and regions. Administers extremely .hazardous waste site acquisition. .Develops

.standards, methods, and procedures for sampling, testing, ana analyzing hazardous waste. Develops regulations, guidelines and policies. Coordinates statewide manifesting of hazardous waste shipments.

# • •
• gure3 Waste Management Division Assistant Director Division Supervisor, Tower Secretary, Singer

Solid Waste Disposal Dangerous Waste Regulatory Section Avery Wells (Section Chief) Tom Cook (Section Chief) Jon Pace Brad Everson Dave Saunders Jim Knudson Pete Haskin Ross Potter Kathy Seel Marc Crooks Jan Whitworth Mike Aarhaus Carol Kraege Project/temporary 

## " " " " Dan Kruger Jerry Boese Marie Zuroske Guy Moellendorf Leslie Sacha Denis Erickson Develops the state solid waste management plan and administers the state solid waste management program. Develops state hazardous waste program plans and integrates this with the annual federal program grant and RCRA requirements. Administers Ref. 26/39 solid waste grants and local solid waste management planning Develops hazardous waste regulations, policies, procedures, and law revisions. program. Prepares, tracks, and coordinates federal and state program, and the EPA grant assistance program. Responsible for program development and technical assistance for resource conservation, recycling, resource recovery, and public participation. Provides technical assistance to agencies and regions. Administers extremely hazardous waste site acquisition. Develops standards, methods, and procedures for sampling, testing, and analyzing hazardou waste. Develops regulations, guidelines and policies. Coordinates statewide manifesting of.hazardou waste shipments.

# • •

"

# .

Figure 4 DANGEROUS WASTE SECTION

- Tom Cook, E V

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT Dan Kruger, E III Dave Saunders, E III

Program Plans Dan Budget Dan State/EPA Agreement Dan Final Authorization Dave Annual Reports Dave Fee Collection Dave Notification Dave ADP Dan Tracking/Reporting Dan Distribution Dave Record Keeping Dave H.W. Classification Ref. Personnel Dan &Dave PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT Ross Potter, E III Jerry Boese, "EP III Denis Erickson, EP II Temporary Guy Moellendorf, EP IITemporary Regulations Ross Legislation Ross Procedures &Guidelines Dan &Dave TIMs JIm Non-Notifiers Dan &Dave Waste Exchanqe
Studies Special Projects Mike Select Staff

__**~~~ ~~!Jer9_** 

__**f.a.£._N~e~s Ie.!.r~**  _ Tech. Assist. Public Participation Ross Mike Intergovern. Activ. All Staff PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION Jim Knudsen, AQE III (Vacant) GO III Mike Aarhaus, E III Jan Whitworth, EP III Permits Jan, Mike, GO III Petitions GO III, Ross, Jim Certifications Jan, GO III Tech. Assist. GO III, Jim Enforcement Assist. Jan Public Participation Mike Responsiveness Summary Mike Coord./Comun. with Regional

Offices, Ind. Sec. Jan Training Mike, Jim How Clean is Clean Proj. Jim Intergovern. Activities**JA~J** Mike

AV/W53(B24-27)

E - Environmentalist EP

- Environmental Planner AQE

- Air Quality Engineer

Sf

- Sanitary Engineer GO

- Geologist

# • • •

Figure 5 Regional Office Staff Performing RCRA ActIvities

OFFICE OF FIELD OPERATIONS Bruce Cameron Assistant Director

I

, Eldon Sanborn Chemist V 

### I I I I Larry Ashley 

### * Chemist III INorthwest Regional Officel I Bob McCormick I I Regional Manager I 

### I I I I I 

### I I Stew Messman I Supervisor I I I I I I I John Conroy 

### * I Environmentalist IV 

### I I Greg Gregory 

### * Environmentalist II I I ISouthwest Regional Officel I Cene Asselstine I I Regional Manager I 

### I I Howard Steeley I District Supervisor I 

### I I Vacant 

### * I Environmentalist III I 

### I I Erick Egbers 

### * I Environmentalist II I I I Will Abercrombe 

### * Environmentalist II I I IEastern Regional Officel I John Arnquist I I Regional Manager I 

### I I I Claude Sappington I Supervisor 

### I I I Jim MaIm 

### * I Environmentalist IV 

### I I I Doug Dunster 

### * I Environmentalist II ICentral Regional Officel I Russ Taylor I I Regional Manager I 

### I I Clar Pratt Supervisor

Dennis Bowhay 

### * Environmentalist IV 

### I I (Vacant) 

### * Environmentalist II

Julie Sellick 

### * Environmentalist II


### * Individuals involved in the dangerous waste management program. AV/W53(A24)

# • Figure 6. Industrial Section Staff Performing RCRA Activities

INDUSTRIAL 

### &TECHNICAL AFFAIRS DIVISION Donald**O~** 

### Provost Special Assistant

INDUSTRIAL SECTION Dick Burkhalter

Section Head 

# • Roger Stanley

# * Environmentalist IV

Tim Nord 

# * Environmentalist III

'i'r1nvolved in the dangerous waste management program
. 

# •

11-.16

# •• 

# • Table 1. TheFY 84 figures are actual allocations from the federal grant whereas FY 85 and FY 86 estimates are exactly that (estimates) based upon .past allocations. The Legislature passed a bill in 1983 establishing a**fe~** 

### for generators and TSD facilities. WDOE has developed an adminis'trative rule Ch. 173-305 WAC to implement that bill. The level of funding to be generated is.still under analysis and development.

.Actual collection of fees will begin in July 1984 'for the last half of 1983 and.subsequent yearly collections will occur each July for the previous calendar year. At this time WDOE's policy is to guarantee a 25 percent match of federal funds alloc'ated for RCRA implementation. RCRAactivities will continue to be prioritized according to physical· and monetary resources cOlDDll.tted through the EPA/stateagreement. Table 1 - 

### Budget**E~timates** 

### for Dangerous Waste Program Federal State Total Portion Match Year '85 $715,212 $581,409 $193,803 

# • Year '86 $800,000 $600,000 $200,000

3. Resource Assessment -Program Plan As noted.in the previous section on budget ·estimates, WDOE will be limited .in the resources
.available for RCRA program implementation. Tasks have been defined that reflect the mandated duties of WDOE (Table 2)

. 

### Under each task are listed a numbe:r 6f work elements. Each work element then describes in greater detail specific.staff responsibilities. The FTE's allocated to each task will determine what effort can be made to address' that each work element is completed. Table 2 .

### presents the current distribution of 'FTE's for each task. In general, the more resources (FTE's), the higher the priority. From the t'able, it is evident that the majority of the FTE'sare in.enforcement, complianc'e monitoring, permitting, and technical assistance (existing 

### FTEs). Implementing a complete dangerous waste management program will require highly trained staff. Certain assumptions were made in planning for program implementation for

.the first two**year~,** 

### 1985 and 1986.

11-17

# • The following lists the WDOE position titles-and number of personnel in- those positions to implement RCRA. The-adequacy of these will be addressed in the capability assessment. No. Positions inRCRA Tasks E 

### EP AQE

SE GO

A 

### CE Environmentalist 8 

### Environmental Planner 1 

### Air Quality Engineer 1 

### Sanitary Engineer 1 

### Geologist- 1 

### Attorney (Available) Chemist 1



# •



# • (a) Existing FTE'smust be maintained. (b) Permitting will be emphasized with the Regional Offices writing permits. (c) Compliance monitoring will be prioritized within

.each Regional Office**acc~rding** 

### to resources available. (d) Existing FTE's will be trained (as necessary) to perform the necessary functions to imlement RCRA in accordance with all agreements with EPA

. (e) Any expertise needed for permit review or review of specialized documents during inspections will be available within the headquarters section. The following is a listing of areas of expertise that will be available to implement RCRA. WDOE Position Current Staffing Expertise 1. 

### Chemical Engineering 2. Ground Water Quality 3. Ground Water Geology 

### 4. Geology 5. Industrial Processes 6. Data Management 7. Regulatory Development 8. Public Participation 9. 

### Financial Assurance 10. Policy/Management 11. Legal 12. Enforcement 13. Budget Analyst 14. Chemist 15. Permit Writing 16. Notification/Tracking Title AQE GO/E/SE GO GO E/SE E/EP E/EP E/EP EP E A 

### E/A/SE EjEP CE E/EP/AQE/SE E/EP Status
on staff on staff on staff 

### &training on staff on staff "On staff on staff on staff on staff 

### &training on staff legal services available on staff budgeting services available on staff on staff 

### &training on staff 17. Reporting E/EP on staff 11-18

# • Implementing 

### a complete program is a labor intensive effort. The department estimated in its interim authorization application that a total of approximately 92 "FTE's would he necessary to complete all RCRA program tasks as outlined in Table 2 . Since this level of funding and staffing is impractical during the current state and federal budget situations, the current plan as discussed previously is to maintain current staffing levels "for January 85 through January 87. The current staffing, budget, and outputs are outlined in Table 3. Table 3 indicates combined federal and state FTE's committed to RCRA tasks. The source of funding, also covered previously, will be the federal program grants and the state match generated "by the Dangerolls Waste Fee Regulation Ch. 173-305 WAC

.


# •

•

11-19TABLE 2 

# •



# -.

• Program Activity or Task

I. HAZARDOUS WASTE 

### A. Program Development and Procedures
1. Develop and receive internal revision amendments to the State Dangerous Waste regulations and to the State Law.
2. Develop an ADP system for establishing permit, notification, inspections, and annual report records.
3. Review and comment on draft federal regulations and guidelines.
B. Public Participation and Service
1. Respond to information requests from the public, industry, state and local agencies, and the media. "2. Coordinate public hearings on draft permits. 3. Prepare responsiveness summaries and notices on ac"tions taken by the hazardous waste program.
4. 

### On the annual program plan to EPA, participate in public information hearings on the draft plan. C. Compliance Monitoring
1. Perform inspections on high priority generators and transporters, and inspections on storage treatment and disposal facilities to ensure compliance with regulations.
2. Perform ground water monitoring inspections. 3. Complaint inspectins.
4. Review and evaluate exception manifest reports and conduct follow-up and appropriate enforcement actions. 

### 5. Assign I.D. numbers for generators, transporters, and treatment, storage and disposal facilities•

AV/l-,T45(B2,4)

### TABLE 2 (Continued) 

# •

--.



# • Program Activity or Task

6. Provide review and comments on draft petitions for delisting.
7. Follow-up on**non~notifiers.** 

### D. Permitting
1. Process Storage**Perm~ts**


### a. New facility application (Parts A 

### &B). b. Call for and review Part E.

c. Complete issuance.
2. 

### Process Incinerator Permits

a. New facility application (Parts 

### A & 

### B). b. Call for and review Part 

### E.

c. Complete issuance. 

### 3. Process Land Treatment Pennits

a. 

### New facility application (Parts 

### A & 

### E). b. Call for and review Part 

### B.

c. Complete -issuance. 

### 4. Process Land Disposal Permits

a. New facility application (Parts A 

### &E). b. Call for and review Part 

### B.

c. Complete issuance. 

### 5. Provide headquarters support to the Regional Offices on reviewing dangerous waste storage, treatment and disposal permit applications

.

### TABLE 2 (Continued) 

# •

.

# -.

• , Program Activity or Task 

### , E. Enforcement
1. Ensure compliance schedule with generators and TSD facilities are met to correct deficiencies under the dangerous waste regulations.
2. Issue letters of warning, notice of violation, and compliance orders to yiolators of the law and regu1ations

.. 3. Perform follow-up inspections to ensure that all requirements are met. 4. Provide expert testimony at hearings or in court. F. Hazardous Material Spills
1. Respond to hazardous material spills to the ground. 2. Provide technical assistance to the regional offices on hazardous material spills• G. Technical Assistance
1. Respond to technical requests from industry on general and complex issues.
2. Respond to technical requests from municipalities, State and Federal agencies on general and complex technical issues.
3. Respond to technical assistance requests from the public on resolving problems on dangerous waste. 4. Coordinate with local governments on. siting dangerous waste facilities.
H. Training
1. Attend internal training workshops on dangerous waste. 2. Attend tralnlng workshops put on by EPA on the Federal hazardous waste programs. 3. Attend targeted training courses put on by experts in hazardous waste transportation, toxicology, safety, and environmental monitoring.

### TABLE 2 (Continued) 

# • Program Activity or Task

I. Program Coordination 1. Coordinate program activities with EPA including inspections, enforcement actions, and spill response. 2. Coordinate program actlvlties with EPA including monthly, quarterly, ·and semiannual reporting.* 3. Interprogram coordination with the alr, water, and water resources programs on matters pertaining to dangerous wastes. 

### J. Program Administration and Support 1. Prepare annual program plan with the regional offices and the industrial section.
2. Supervision of staff. 

# '. 3. Staff meetings and tracking on program tasks and out,puts

.

. 

### K. Final Authorization 1. Modify application after reivew by EPA and hold.· public hearing on second draft of application and modify as appropriate. 2. Submit formal application to EPA for review and comment by June 1984. Modify as appropriate based on EPA review. 3. Review of draft application by the regional offices and the industrial section. 4. Carry out changes identified in Authorization Plan.**AV/~145(A23,27)** 

# • *Any additional reporting**require~ents** 

### than currently reflected in the Memorandum of Understanding will be jointly agreed upon and reflected in an addendum to the program plan.

### TABLE 2 (Continued) 

# • Program Activity or Task

L. Laboratory Support 1. Apply testing and analytical procedures for designating waste simply as dangerous or extremely hazardous wastes in accordance with state regulations. 4. Conduct preliminary assessments. 5. Prepare quarterly and final reports.



# ,--4IIt



# • AV/W4S(A23,28)

# • • 

# •

tlAlAllOOUS WASJC**~O(** n 1965 ANNUAL PIIOCflAH PLAN

Program**~ct!v!ty** or Task
I I. ItAlAflDOUS WASrE A. Program Development dnd Proceduru 1. Develop and review lllBolldme"h to tho State Dangerous**Wa~te** regulation. l. State statc wll1 devolop 11 IIN1U-ycclr pormlt strdte9), tor ReRA permU tlo\lelopmont lind !Clliuanoe. , I

I 3. Thc state wiil devclop a RCRA/Dangerous Waste I enforcement policy that addre:.:.es the catC90ri­ 1**l~tion** or violations dnd timely and appropriate 

# , enforcement actions under state lalW. 8. PublJc Participation 

# I 1. Respond to inform.:.ttlon requests (rOlll the publiC, I industry, state, and local agencies, and the media. 1 I 2. Coordin.:.tte pulllic hearings and public review on 1 draft pel'lllits dnd closure plans.
•1 I l. Prepare responsiveness slfIlllaries and notices on I actions taken by the h,uardous waste program 

# I. including pCI"lQitting. Responsible UnU(s)

til)
t1Q

ItO

HO
HO

NW Sill' fR. en Outputs Uf R05ult5 and Schedulo

Amend tho OW regulations**(W~C** 17l.l0). PuyolQP**U~f4t.fQr ~n~** **m~k,u .~**  AV4.Ialli. to**~p~** no**lo~o th~n** **~O** dd)'6**~f** 'af tho fJndl**appr~VDa** FY**8~ N~tlo"~l**  Pijfwlt**Sttdtt~~** 1s MJd8**~vdl1Jbl~ t~**  the**~lJt~.** The**~O(** Stdftlng dnd funding Prugr<!lll 

### I I 1.lldClt , flCa fund:; Source**LC~~_** I I I 

### ,25: 159;051 reder.l 

# I I I 

# I 

# III

state enforcement pol.1cy w111 be completed by Septc:anller 30, 1984. 

# I I I I I I.11

# r S1

# mr1 Federal 

# I !**Re~pond** to information requests. 1 I I I I I I I I I Coordi/l"la C pulll1c hearillgs on 11 draft storage treatment 

# I .:and disposal permlls alid closul'c plotn:;• Prepare respon:t1veness 5\fi1ln.\des. 

# I

It. ,Participate in public inforllldtion hcarings dratt dllnual**progr~** plan to EPA. on the I I ttQ I P.artlcipato in three public hCoirings t plan. on the annual

1 .

f I 

# I

.

# I

, I I I I I 

# I •

C.' S. Public hearings 00 dlIlcndments to rcgulations.
,6•. Public hearings 00 f!o.al Authorization.

. ·1 7. Prepare environmental impact statement or declaroltlons ot IIonsigll1tic.:.toco as .appropriate on drdrt reljulations. perm!ts, and petitions. Compliaoce Monitoring 1. Perrorm inspections 00 high priority generaton and transporters including follow-up inspections, to ensure compliancc with regulations. 

### I; IlQ
I l. 

# I 1i0' I f HO I I 

# I NW I sw I Ell 

# I ell INO 

# I.. I Puticip.lto in- three publ1c hcarings on the rcgulatlon 41nendlllents. P.:lrUcipate io three public hC.ld/lgs 011 final**Authod.lolt1o,,~** . Prepare (ISs or negative declarations as appropriate.

Pedorm 28 inspections on

### ,lQaJ~l' generators and tran:;porteu and 66 inspections on minor geneutors/**transporter~.**

_ ] .25 .42 I I 

# I
I

# I

1 

# I

$117,666 

# I 

# I I I I I I I I, I I 

# I
I

,

# I
I I 

# I I 

### redcrd Stottc· I

# I

I I ' 

# I
I 

# I
I 

# I I I 'I I I I AV/W62(68.10-12)



# ..

.. 

### ..I 

# •

tlAZAflOOUS WASl[ \Woe f\'**198~** ANNUAL PflOCRAM**'IL~** (Continued) 

# I IMlO( St

.."i,uJ dlld fUlldj')l) 

# • •

funds Progrdm Responsible Outpuh lit ,i05U'h and Schedule Inde" J,**Pr09r~ ~ctlvlty**  or Task Unite Ii) Source Code 

# , fJes 

# I
, , NW SW CIt ell HID tlQ I 

# , NW sw (It Cil lHO 110
UW SW ER CH IND t10
HONW SW

.ER CR SW NW SW .[R CR lID NW sw en cn

, PClr'orm 1.7 m.,jor lSf> 11lliV6ottonlt including QI'Ol.illdwiH:er nllmHul'lll1l ,",,' 1/$ mlnur aD lnltpoctlunll. Rovlew for 'l'hlflolal dOCWllillltli lind "loGuro plano illi apprupr14to.

Revlew rlnJIlClcll**a5:iU~ilncCl** documClnt:; and ovaluate qfoulldwoltet 1I10llltorlflg plan$. I (ilvesUgate cOOlpl.:alilts.

Review excepUon reports and conduct tollow-up:l.

Heview and provide rinal determination on sh requests tor petition. Review an**e~timated ~OO**  annual**report~,** conduct I'ollollrup on**nOl\re:.pundent~.** and prepare annucll**wa~te** $UlMlar)/ report.

Dratt and iS$uC**~tora9c** permits or**clo~ure** plans.

Call tor ilnd review 1 incinerator perlllit,' Process two land treatment permit applications on a schedule to be developed with EPA. Cail tor 1 Pilrt 8 land treatment pet'mit appllcatiun.

Draft and lsiiue , land dhpo5al permits or clo:.ure**plall~.** dnd call ful" 6 P.trt Uland dhpo:Soll permit**appl1cat~on~. Cunt1I.lu~**  prugressive development ot 4 lalld dupos41 perllllLs. I Z. Per'orm illspec::ttomi on high priority fSO (ilcllitic:l including rolll.lW-UP in:.pcct!on3, tu ensure compliance with reljulatlon5.

). Provide technical revlew to the regional o(UCC:i aniJ l/1du:itrhl 5cctton on 'inanclal assurance ilnd ground.olter plan5. 4. Complaint inspections.

5. Review and evaluate exception manifest reports and initiate .tpproprliltc follow-up .tetions. 6. Provide review and cooments on dratt petitions tor dellsUng.

7. Review and ev.aluiltc petition**reque~ts.**
8. Revie. generator and fSO tacUity annual including rollo.up on nonre:spondents.

D. Permitting 1. Proce:lS Storage Per-its

2.**~rocess** Incineutor Permits l. Proceu Land Trutment Permits

4.**Proces~** land Disposal**Pe~lt~.** 

# I I I 

# I 

# I,

reports;­

, I I

, , , 

# I 

# I 

# I

I , I I I I 

# I 

# I

, I

# I

I AV/W62(69,ll-1S)

# • •

HAZAnoous WASTE MJOC FY 1965 ANtlUAl. PROGRAM PLAtt (Continued) MJ()( Staffing dnd rundlng , Progfcfm Responsible Outputs or nesults and Schedule Program Activity or Task Unlt(s) 

# I JndelC " rT[s Funds Source Code 

# I

,-- I I-I S. Provide headquarters support to the regional offices tiQ Provide headquarters support on revle.lng storage, on reviewing dangerous waste storage, treatment,**tre~tmcnt,** and disposal draft permita dnd permit 

# I I I and disposal permit**applic~tions,** and draft**15su~nc6.** I I f pCrtll1ts. 

# I

1.1I 

# I $40,188 

# I Feder,,' 

# I I E. Enforcement .36 Stelte- 

# I I I j 

# I

1. Ensure compliance schedule, with generators and TSO NW Ensure eompllance schedules arc met. facilities are met to correct deficiencies under "I sw 

# I the dangerous waste regulations. [R 

# I CR INO I 

# I 

# , I
I 

# , 2. Issue letters ot warning, notice of violation, and NW Appropriate and timely enforcement actions to I compliance orders, penalties, civil and or crIminal SW correct noncompliance. I 

# , I actions as appropriate to violators or the law (R I and regulations. I CR I WO I l. Pertorll tollow-up Inspections to ensure that all NW**roll~.** up Inspections. requirements are met. 

# I SW 

# I ER CR I INO I It. Provide elCpert testimony at hearings or in court. 110 Provide**e~pert** testimony at hearings. NW 

# I 

# I
1 sw I [Il 

# I cn 

## I INO 

# , , , . .

# , s. Provide enforcement assistance to regional office. f HO Provide assistance to regions on enforcement. 

# , " 

# ,

, 'I I 

# I

r. Training 

### t 

# I .2l 

# I $8,)28 

# I Federal , 1. Attend internal trainin9 workshops on 'dangerous 

# I flO Attend two workshops. _aste. NW , , I I 

# I I

z.**~~tend** tra1nl"9**_9rk~hop~ p~~**  Qn by EPA and**th~** fedcf41**h~lardQu'** wa,to**pro9~~"** SI 

# I I ER (:n 

# I**~tte"~ thr~e**  workshppo. 110 I 

# I I 

# I

mw 

# " sw £It CH 

# I I 

# 'I 

# I , , °1 

# I I 

# I I I



# I " 

# I I 

# I I

, ,AV/W6Z(09,lii-18)

# • • •

I IIMAfIOOUS WAST[ \\oOE FY 1985 AUUUAL P/IOGRAH PLAN (Continued)
b 

# I 'tOOL StarrIng dnd fundIng 

# IProlJr.vn Progrdlll Activity or Task**Re~r.~~(~)** Ie Outputs 0." Results and Schedule

. 

## I I Indel( fTEs funds Source Code
J. Provide internal training workshops on lmplementa­ tlun elements or the dangerous waste regulations and pro.r
... ClImjlOnent., I.e., .pllll, .tc. tlO Develop dn estImated 2 workshops. ! 

# I

. ! ,I

C. Proqtdm Coordln.,tlon 1. Coordinate program activities with EPA including inspections, enforcement actions, and spill response. 

# I I I I eR INn tfQ tlW SW ER ,I At'end coordination mee'lng and dlocu..**1s5ue~** by telephone.

. " 

# I I ,.

# ..o~~ Federal 

# I

I' I I 

# I

Ii.

I. Prepare clnnual program plan with regional oftlces and the industrial section. 1. Program Administration and Support

final Authorization HQ HW SW t::R cn Prepare one program plan/agreement. progr.vn plan/agreement. Review one I 

# I .24 I 

# I I I

# ! .4S I

II $8,690 

# I I I

# I 516,292 

# I, Federal

Federal. 

# I I I 

# I ,I

# I

I

# !

l. 1.

2. Negotiate with EPA to reach agreement to correct or improve any dericiencies that may be dIscovered during assessment. Submit formal application to EPA tor review and comment by July 1984. HodHy as appropriate based on EPA review. Participate with EPA In cl state capability assessment tor tinal aulhorhdtlon. Provide necessary information tor assessment and extensIve review ot**resul~s** and tinal report. HO

HO Suhmit tormal appllcatlon and modtty subsequent to [PA review. Participate In capability assessment.

Perrorm any necessary tallow-up actIon in order to achieve tinal authorIzation. f I 

# I I I 

# I I I I 

# I I I I 

# I I I / I

# I! I I I 

# I I 

# 'I.

.

/. 

# I

J. 

## '. Conduct chemical. biological and physical tests ror design.,Ung waste as dc1r1gerOU!J 

### or extremely**hd~drdous** wastes in accorddnce with state 1.**laborator~ S~ppo~t**  lab Waste samples tested clnd designated In aCCQrddllCe with Chapter 1H,) )**W~C** and results**report~d.** I-..-...---r-.....,..,.....,nno---r-........-T-..--t---.,---t I**I-.;..:;~~_--r-~~--t----t** 

# I

regulations. Issuance or reorts 15 01160 2. ProvIde**te~hnical** assistance to stafr on tation or laboratory tests.**t~c..uded,** interpre­ 

# I L,b 

# IToebnlea! a.,h"..,e provided; 

# I 

# I I I I 

# I I . 

# I f 

# I

, 

# I 

# I

, f 

# I

" 

# I 

# I 

# I

I AV/W61(09,19.21)

# • •

ttAIARDOUS WASTE WDO£ 

### rv**196~** ANIUAl PROGRAM PLAN (Continued) 

# I '", , R bi' " 

# I M)()[ StdfHng and funding 

# I Progrdlll

, Program Activity or Task I**e~r.~~(~)** e , Outputs or Results and Schedule " f ' ,Index I I I I FTES Funds I Source Code 1

, 1,' prov,ide exp.ert t,est,'imony I,n oontested C,**cl~e,',** La,b, 

# Ih P ,6tt" te5t!tnl.lny provided. 

# I I I**In~olvlng** laboratory support. 4. Assist in updating and maintaining technIcal lab Ongoing. I te:;ting and analytical prOCedures for dangerous I I and eKttemely hazardous wastes. I 

# I 

# I I 

# I 1 TOTAL 10.S $l80,lS9..... Fedetdl I 2.6 1 State·

, n:T 

# I I I I I I 

# I I PLUSa (1) Indirect $151,177' I I I (2) Computer time for tracking, monthly reporting, $ 1,000 I I , bienniai reports. I I I I 

# I

, 0 I (3) Printing dnd mailing costs assoCiated with • $ 1,000 I I final authorization, permitting, and draft ' 

# I
' I regulations.

I (4) Cost for Public Notice In newspapers, radio S 1,000 

# , , 

# I '1 I. spots, etc. for publlc participation. I I , I ' 

# l I (5) TrdVel and Goods 

### & Services. $ 47,073 

# I I 1 

# I

! I TOTAL $561,409**1 ,I 1 

# I

I 1 : I ·NOTEa State match of**25~** or 2.6 FTE's is reflected in " , f ' I the plan.' Only ,the rTE's are shown. I I
; ··NOTEa The above federal program plan is based 

# I I

, , upon the**ass~ptiol\** that suffJ.cient funding I I

I will be prpvided. If federal funding is I' , I 'increased or decreased.the program plan 

# I 'I ' I .111 be amended accordlngly.

I ' I

, '···NOTEa Total federal funds include the $32,000 " , I " old carryover. If this $32,000 Is not 

# I ' I

, , ' , provided land dispusal call in outputs 

# I

I f under permitting .11I be reduced by 3. 

# I I I

I I I I 

# I I I I'

, "' I I' I t , I 'I 

# I
' I ,

### '~ I , I " AV/W62(89,22-24)III. PERMITTING PROCEDURES 

# • A. ,Purpose,
The purpose ,of permitting 'treatment, storage, 

### and disposal (TSD) facilities (on-site, and off-site) is to ensure 'that all facilities are built and operated in accordance with the Dangerous Waste Regulations to protec't the ,public health and the environment.
In the ,first ,several years, WDOE will be concentrating' on permitting those facilities that are considered high priority by both EPA 'and WDOE. Permitting priorities will be determ1ned using the procedures described iIi the compliance monitoring section of this document considering national permitting priorities. In general, permits will fall into, two major categories, existing TSD'facilities, and new TSD facilities. Completion of permit a'ctions in progress and dispo'sition of EPA issued permits 

# • 'after final authorization will generally be in accordance with EPA Program Implementation Guidance (PIG) 82-5. It is expected that at the time of final authorization only condi,tion 5 in PIG 82-5 will apply to Washington. Any permit actions taken prior to final authorizc;ftion will be joint actions by the state and EPA. The following elements describe in general how the mCijor categories of 'permits will be handled and a discussion of the permit development"review, and approval process as it will be implemented by WDOE. 

### B. Existing TSD' Facilities
All existing facilities granted Interim Status under Section 3005 ofRCRAare deemed to have an interim status permit (Part A) in the stat,e program. .The statet s regulation directly references qualified facilities with interim status gained under Section 3005 of**RCRA~Hence,any** facility granted interim 'status by EPA tegulations adoptedpursuaIit to Section 3005 would qualify for state interim status. WDOE also allows existing facilities which do not' currently 'handle regulated dangerous waste to qualify 'for interim status if theit wasfes'become newly designated by amendments to state regulations. To qualify, the owner/operator must submit a Part 

### Apermit application within six months of the date the new amendments are adopted (equivalent to 40CFR 270.10(e)(I)(i)). WDOE does not provide (as 'specified in 

### 40 CFR 270.10 (.e)(l)(ii)) int,erimstatus on the basis of becoming subject to the interim status standards (e.g., they begin ac.cepting dangerous waste),. The state is 'more stringent iil this area. Those facilities wishing to receive or ordered byWDOE to 

# • .receive a final status permit must submit a completed Part B application as defined in WAC 17'3-303-806 ,to WDOE within six: months of its request. Late or incomplete Part 

### B applications will be p,rocessedinaccordance with the statets enforcement policy. This is equivalent 'to 40 CFR Part 270 subpart 

### B.
11-30. 

# • C. NewTSD Facilities
New facilities must submit both Parts A and B of the permit application to WDOE six months before physical construction can begin. This is covered in WAG 

### 173-303-805 and 

### 806.
D. Permit Development Review, Approval Process for Existing and New TSD Facilities. WDOE, through its permitting process will ensure that all requirements and conditions described in WAC 

### 173-303-800 through 

### 845 are followed. During the permitting process WDOE will: Provide assistance to applicants. Receive and review applications, including financial assurance review. Conduct site evaluations. Assure analysis of air, water, and/or soil samples as necessary. Callfor Part B permit applications. Review and make completeness determinations on Part 'B permit applications. Review and approve closure/post closure plans. Review and approve financial assurance documents.
Issue draf·t permits and fact sheets (if necessary) or statement of basis of permit determination

.

. Coordinate w.ith EPA during the review process.

Open comment period, issue public'notice, hold public hearings .when necessary, and establish administrative record. 12. Take necessary enforcement actions to ensure application completeness, closure/post closure and financial requirements are met prior to permit issuance and in accordance with state enforcement policies. 

### 13. Ensure compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act. (See attachment) 

# • 14. Issue final permit actions

. 

### 15. Process changes to permits including:



### 11-31

# • a. transfers b. modifications

c. revocations d. reissuance

e. terminations 16. Ensure prope'r judicial rev:lew of permits in cases of applicant appeals.
In reviewing applications and writl.ngpermits WDOE will ensure thatall appropriate information and conditions are provided. Thiswill be done by appropriate engineering and hydrogeologic judgments and technical expertise as well -as using the checklistand gUidance provided by EPA or equivalent plus any**addi~** 

### tionalchecklists necessary to include additional state requirements. The attached flow chart (see Figure 7) describes the orderof events, lines of responsibility, and intra-and interagency relationships that will Occur in the permit process. Internal operating procedures and policies will be developed to ensure adequate review and compliance with state and federal 

# • regulations

. For purposes of 

### timing on the activities outlined in Figure 7 the following time frames represent an average based upon past experience. The state expects in some cases take longer. Activity No


## o 1, 2, 11,12 3, 4, 

### 5 13 14, 15 16 17 18 

### 6" 7, 8 19, 9, 

### 10 20 21

Permits By Rule (PBR) thatland disposal permits may
Timing 6 months 120 days 10-90 days 10-90 days 14 days 7 days 14 days 45-75 days 170 days 30 days 1 day 30 days 

# • E. WDOE allows PBR for:
1. 

### Ocean disposal barges or vessels. The PBR requirements of the state are identical to federal standards.

11-32

# • 2. Underground injection wells. The PBR requirements prohibit underground injection ·of extremely hazardous waste. They require compliance with 40 

# crn 144.14 and all applicable state waste discharge permits and conditions.
3. Publicly owned treatment works (POTW)

## .potw a·re subject to state PBR requirements that are identical to

.federal standards, except thatPOTW may not accept extremely hazardous waste for disposal.
4. Totally enclosed treatment facilities and elementary neutralization and wastewater treatment units. These facilities and units are exempted under federal .requirements. The state, instead, requires a PBR, which includes conditions for complying with: security; contingency plan and emergency procedures; the manifest system (when applicable); records; reporting;' and general performance' standards. If the facilities or units .pose a threat or fail to comply with the**~BR** conditions, WDOE may require compliance with ·al1 the facility standards and require a full permit. 

### F. Emergency Permit 

# • WDOE may'issuean ·emergency permit to allow for treating,storing, or disposing wastes at faciiities which either are not permitted (including interim status), or, if permitted, are not authorized at the time to manage the particular waste. Emergency permits will only be issued if doing so will alleviate imminent and substantial threats to public health and the environment. The requirements

.for state issued emergency permitsare identical to the'federal re·quirements. 

### G. Judicial Review of Permits
WAC 173':'303-845 states that any person who .is adversely 'affected by a decision of WDOE under WAC 173-303 may appeal the decision to the Pollution Control Hearings Board pursuant to'Chapter 43.21B RCW. The Pollution Control Hearings Board at WAC 371­ 08-255 has' stated that·in the event that the board determines that a permit issued by WIlOE under Chapter 173-303 WAC is invalid in any respect, the board shall issue an order remandingthe permit to WDOE for reconsideration and appropriate action consistent with the provisions of said o.rder and federal and state law. Any further appeals shall be appealed to the superior court of the State of Washington and shall follow p.rocedures per Chapters 43.21B and 34.04 RCW

. 

# •

11-33

# • •• 

# •

\. 

### figure 

### 7
OCPARTKHT OF' U·(l.OCY

'lAlAllOOUS tASt[ FACILITY P£RHIT PR()((SS IFIHAl P£RHHS' flOW CHARI 1-11-84**Attac~nt** 

# r":-

. ll.

# f**---.----.~-.-----.-.-.-**

# ..-.--.. 

# -L l

Reolon

# "·H

H.Q.-Ops.

# 10'H H.O.-Ops. Prepare. Appro\lu D lsIr Ibulu final

. and SIO'" SIO'N'd Per_' P

....lt ., Pflrelt , 1o All P.rlI 

# __

I lead Aoency 

## 10.,

"wes 

# II

.1 lead Agency,.,

Prepare, 

# 'II

I lead Aqenr.y

.**'--'--_.'--~** Re\lle.s**C~"lI** I on Draft [IS 

# 7.' I Public Review 1.1 and C_nt. 

## I ' on Dratt [IS

to lead Agency I

• Conlad .Ith Applle.nt •• "'Jou Oflly**AY/'~71~~·16)**

# • IV. COMPLIANCE MONITORING 

### AND ENFORCEMENT A. Objective: The objective of the compliance monitoring program is to ensure the protection of public healthandtheenvironmentthrough active enforcement of the state approved Dange.rous Waste Regulations

.

.B. Facility Definition and Establishing Priorities:

. The compliancemonit·oring strategy is based upon performing the greatest number of facility inspections with available resources. Number ofinspectiolls completed each year will be dependent upon WDOEt

..s resources. Industries will be classified

.into two categories; major or nonmajor. In general, those facilities which are the largest, and pose the great·est potential for pollution will be classified as major. The criteria for developing a numerical ranking ·of facilities is presented in Table ·4. Major facilities will have a high numerical ranking. Minor facilities will, of course, have a lower numerical assignment. The basic purpose of using criteria ·is to develop consistent permitting and compliance monitoring priorities. 

# • The criteria were derived from an EPA model ·for.ranking Superfund candidates. The criteria consider five factors in establish­ ing human and environmental risks: 1. Major Hazard of·Materials·

- gives information on the types of waste being treated, stored, or disposed of at the facility. 2. Volume of Materials

- gives data 6n the size of**poten~** 

### tial environmental problem. 3. .Routes for Pollution .- ptovides information on how the waste may enter the environment. 4. Location of .Facility indicates the.size of populationnear the facility and proximity to it. 5. Observed Releases or Violations

- gives data on history of the facilitytsoperations. The decision line or break-point for what is a major or nonmajor is variable and·may change depending on national guidance for defining major/nonmajor priorities

.. This line will be negotiated during the annual program plan. 

# • bnce the major and nonmajor facilities have been identified in the annual program plan then the number of annual compliance inspections to be completed by the state under final authorization willbe negotiated based on the list of major and nonmajor facilities. The EPA national inspection scheme, including 100 percent of major handlers inspected each year, will be addressed during 11-35

# • TABLE '4. CRITERIA**FORD~TERMINING** 

### THE PRIORITY OF MAJOR AND NON-MAJOR FACILITIES.

·BASIS OF 

### 'SITE SITE 'MAX1MUM 

### RATING FACTOR INFORMATION RATING MULTIPLIER SCORE, POSSIBLE SCORE
1 

### ,MAJOR HAZARD 

### OFMATERIALS* EHW 3 6 18 

### DW 2 5 10 

### Low Risk 1 3 3 

### Subtotal '31
2 

### VOLUME OF MATERIALS
10 

### Tons 4 3 12 

### 1 - 10 Tons 3 3 9 400 

### Ibs -' 1 

### Ton ' 3 ,6

400 

### Ibs. ' '1 3 

# I. 3 

### ROUTE(S) .FOR POLLUTION* Ground Water' 3 3 9 

### Surface Water 3 9 

### Land 3 3 9 

### Air 2 3 

### Subtot-al 33 4 

### LOCATION OF FACILITY (check only one) 100,000 3 3 9 10,000-100,000 2 2 4 1 'I 1 

### OBSERVED**~LEASESOR** 

### VIOLATIQNS* Major 10 3 30 

### Moderate 6 3 18 

### Minor 3 3 9 

### Subtotal ,57
6 

### GRAND TOTAL
142



### *May have more than one entry

. 

# •

11-36

# • the annual program plan negotiations. In addition to the requirements in the EPA national inspection .schemeeach of the state's four Regional Offices and Industrial Section will identify those facilities/handlers in their area that represent a high priority need based on environmental risk. These pr10rities will be taken into account in developing ·the final inspection commitment in the annual program plan. Through this process EPA concerns and state needs and staffing levels can be addressed. Overall development and review of priorities will be done by WDOE headquarters Dangerous/Hazardous Waste group to ensure statewide priorities are being maintained.
In addition to those planned facility inspections, response to citizen or local government complaints of hazardous waste spills and abandoned/inactive hazardous waste sites may require further field investigation and the dedication of resources. This may result in a lower than anticipated nilinber of planned facility inspections. Again, the final number of industries to be inspected will be dependent upon adequacy of resources and the manag·ement of those resources. 

## c. Inspection Procedures: Dangerous waste handler/facility inspections are conducted and docum.ented by the hazardous waste inspectors in each of the four WDOE Regional Offices and the Industrial Section. These inspectors are assigned to the dangerous/hazardous waste program to allow them to develop expertise in this area and become the primary agency ·contact with the pertinent facilities and handlers. In most instances the inspectors also have the responsibility for writing any final status permits that may be called and/or issued by the state. The inspectors are trained to be

.knowledgeable on regulatory**~equitements** and interpretation as well as inspection procedures a.nd protocol. Because

.inspections· and documentation of these activities are triticaltoa successful enforcement program it is the intent of the state to develop specific guidance for field use for hazardous**~asteinspections~** There is also review of inspection reports and compliance monitoring performed by the dangerous/hazardous waste headquarters staff at WDOE to help assure statewide consistency in documentation and enforcement. In general the following procedures are followed. WDOE conducts both announced and unannounced inspections depending on the given situation. In addition to our own knowledge of what is happening in each region we also use the eyes and ears of local citizens or groups, such as the local health department and 

# • citizen complaints to alert us of any possible environmental or health tisk. Inspections may fall into one of several categories depending on the concern. Inspectors may do a compliance inspection on general facility operations, record review, sampling inspection, or a follow-up inspection on a particular compliance issue including proper closure and/or post closure tare. 

### 11-37

# • Field inspectors' are given basic training, and when possible, followup training for facility inspec·tion, record review, and safety. In general, inspections are conducted according to the following protocol: 1. Conduct a .prior research of the file·s of that facility. If there is any unusual or important inforiIlation, they will incorporate that into their inspection. 2. Conduct personnel interviews, if necessary. ·3. Talk with owners/supervisors of the facility.

4. Conduct a .tour of the plant site, taking photos, drawing maps and any other field notes that might be pertinent. 5. If applicable,review**m~nifest** and recordkeeping to ensure regulatory compliance. 

# • 6. Ask questions about -complying wl.th the.regulations such as: Are the standards being complied with? Do you have a**clo~ure** plan, a facility plan, contingencyplan, post closure plan if' applicable, correct financial assurance,
.etc. In cases where these records have not been reviewed by WDOE or are nonexistent or inaccurate, the inspector will require a submittalto WDOEfor review and also to ensure WDOE' s files contain an up-to-date copy of the appropriate records.
7. Collect samples if necessary.
An inspection form 'will be used by our field inspectors and is included with this application. 

### D. Enforcement Authority and Procedures: WDOE has the enforcement authority for the Dangerous/Hazardous Waste Program as given in Chapter 

### 70.105 RCW specifically**cit~d** in RCW 

### 70.105.080, -090, -095, -097. What follows isadescriptionof general definitions and procedures as presented in the current WDOEEnforcement Guidelines and Procedures Manual (September 

### 1978). The current enforcement guidelines are presently ina process of revision to reflect a. stronger and more definitive**enforce~ent** policy for the dangerous**~aste** program. The new policy will 

### be implemented immediately upon adoption. It should be**~ecognized** that during this period of transition from the current policy to the new enforcement policy a shift in the state's dangerous waste enforcement posture is emerging. 

# • This shift is showing a trend toward more immediate stronger enforcement actions in the use bf serious violations and accelerated levels of enforcement in other noncompliance situations. The new policy is targeted to be developed by the end of·September, 

### 1984.
11-3'8

# • 1. General Definitions Warning Letter

- This letter is issued as soon as you



# •

• know the circumstances ofa violation or environmental abuse.· The letter does five things:

a. Establishes an official record of the situation.
b. Lets the violator know there is a problem and the problem needs to be corrected in a ptescribed manner.

c. Requires the violator to let WDOE

.know what correctl.ve action will betaken.
d. Informs the violator that failure

.to correct

.the problem voluntarily may .result in more

stringent action.

e. Establishes B basis for more**st~ingent** action if it is required. Warning letters·may be approved and signed by the dan&erous waste

.supervisor in the Regional Office and Industrial Section**~nd** the inspector

. Noticeo! Violation

- This is the next, more serious action taken after a warning letter. This notice defines the problem and specifically describes what actions are required to .correct·the problem.
A notice 'is a quasi-legal "document and must be signed and approved by an assistant director.
A notice of violation requires .a response from the violator.
Administrative Order

- This is a quasi-legal document. 1t must be signed·,by an assistant director or higher authority. It will be issued 

### 30 or more days after a Notice of Violation except in an air quality enforcement action, or a dangerous waste enforcement action.
In the case of a dangerous waste violation an administrativeorder can be issued whenever WDOE det,ermines a person has violated or is 'about to violate ,the.provi'sions of RCW 

### 70.105. These situations occur when there is a threat to public health and welfare requiring immediate action. ,No Action Order

- After a Notice of Violation is issued, an order must follow. A No Action Order is issued when the violator has solved the problem prior to iSsuance of an Administrative Order.



### 11-39

# • Civil Penalty- This can be used as an enforcement action where it is provided for by statute. It is a monetary or amount of resource damage. In the case of a. dangerous waste violation it can be in the amount up to $10,000 per day pe·r violation. It.usually Occurs where there isa well-identified, specific violation or there have .been continuing or repeated violations. The statutory ·authority for issuing a civil penalty also provides fo,r the reduction or dismissal ofa 'penalty in some'cases of extenuating or.mitigating circumstances. All civil penalty assessments must be signed and approved by an assistant director. Restraining Order

- Injunction -Under RCW 70.105.120 WDOE may,request the attorney general to bring injunction, declaratory or o'ther actions to enforce any requirement of the Hazardous Waste Disposal Act, Chapter 70.105 RCW. Prior,no'tification is not required for such action and suchaction may be taken for threatened as well as actual violations. The Attorney General's statement provided withthis document further clarifies this authority. 

# • Criminal·Proceedip.gs

- This is the most severe enforcement action available to WDOE. It maybe used'only when statutory provisions allow. Conviction ofa crime means penalties of a fine, prosecution**cost~,** 

### and/or imprisonment. General Procedures The following procedures do not necessarily in all instances occurin the sequence outlined below. This information is intended 'to represent a general process and may vary according to the severity 

### of the violation or the immediate threat to public health and the environment.

a. Someone is not in compliance with the law. b . Make a telephone call and/or. a personal vis'it to assess the situation and get the facts on the**~itua** 

### tion.(i) This will begin the foundation of 'any needed enforcement action; or (ii) It can eliminate or correct any problem with noncompliance; 

# • (iii) A memo to the files should be completed to document the situation and any discussions with the violator.

# • c. If the problem is not solved informally, the next step is to send a warning letter to -the violator-. This must be signed by the section head or district supervisor. d. If the warning is not heeded and the violation continues, the next step

- is to issue a Notice of Violation. All the information is sent to the enforcement officer. He prepares the Notice of Violation and the appropriate assistant director approves and signs it.

e.
-The violator has an opportunity to respond within

. 30 days. f. After Notice of Violation, 

# an Administrative Order is issued by the enforcement officer under the assistant director's _signature. This requires an appropriate response from the violator.
g. 

### If corrective action is being**t~ken** by the violator, the initiating program staff member can decide that no further action·is necessary. 

# • h. If corrective action is not being taken, the enforce­ ment officer and the initiating staff member should decide one of the following courses of action: (i) Send a reminder letter. This should come from the section head of the init1.3ting off1ce. (ii) Enforcement officer -recommends to the appropriateassistant director that the matter should be referred to the assistant attorney general for**~ction.** i .If option i. is chosen and the situation is not corrected,-the next step is optionii. j. The matter is referred to the assistant attorney general and the**en£orce~ent** bfficer prepares a memorandum from the assistant director to the assistant attorney -general, including the following: (i) A chronology of circumstances andconditions causing the original enforcement respons-e, description of conditions, nature of the violations, and corrective action 

# • required

. (ii) Copies of correspondence, memorandum of record, inspection reports, monitoring reports, and any other documentation relating to the situation. 11-41

# • (iii) A request that the assistant attorney general take appropriate action'to record penalties

.and/or to gain compliance with



# •

• the notice or order. (iv) Attorney general contacts violator. There is an opportunity to settle without court action. If unsettled, the case is filed in the.court of the county where the violationoccurred, or in Thurston County Court. 

### k. Waivers or variances. With the exception of one a'rea, any waivers or variances grantedby'WDOE are essentially identical. to :federal waiver/variance procedures. The areas in'which waiversfva'riancescould be' granted and the conditions or circumstances for granting them are based completely on those specified in EPA's regulations or federal statute. For example: 1) ground water .monitoring waiver based on use of double liners; 2) 

### waiver from landfill liner requirements,based onhydrbgeology, waste nature, alternate design and operations, etc.; and, 3) waste exemptions, based on conditions described in Section' II.B.l. of this program description. WDOE may, under its statutory enforcement authority, issue a.compliance order which includes a .schedule for complying with the regulations. .This would amount to a temporary variance from the state requirements. Such'a variance/compliance schedule would only be provided if requiring immediate compliance: l)could result in further violations of state regulations; 2) could pose -a threat to public health or the environment; or,3) if the violation is minor (e.g., recordkeeping error, procedural problems), could. resolve the violation in a short period of time without.having to resort to penalties.· A variancel compliance. schedule would not be issued if it would result in a threat to.public health or theen:vironment.

. WDOE does vary one requirement which EPA does not. Thisis the fifty-foot setback for containers

.storing ignitable waste at final status facilities. WDOE allows compliance with the Uniform 'Fire Code or NFPA pamp'hlet #30 in lieu of the fifty-foot setback. This is discussed in detail in SectionII.B.4. The following is a general estimate of the process time required for the various enforcement measures described in the preceding procedures

.



### 11-42

# • Activity Timing a,b 0-15 days

c 0-.15 days d 15 days f,h 30 days

j 90 days It is the intent of \tIDOE to further refine the general defin'itions and procedures stated above to pr6videguidance and ensure s.tatewideconsistency in dangerous waste enforcement situations. This refinement will iricludea definition of high priority environmental/health risk situations and lessor violations. Associated with this resolution of significance will be specific guidance on level of enforcement actions, including penalty assessment, and timing o'f those actions. Dangerous waste program compliance and enforcement are recognized as critical state as ,well as national importance. It is recognized that a strong regulatory position is critical to environmental· protection and public health. 

### E. Information Management 

# • WDOE recognizes that information and data mangementare critical to good program planning and management. Several areas have been identified as high priority. These include compliance monitoring and enforcement actions, permittracking,.notification data, annual waste generation data,

.program reporting including monthly workload statistics, and output commitments as defined in the annual program plan.
An ADP system is under development 'to satisfy the state's information management needs as well as any reporting requirements identified by EPA under final authorization

. Due to the complexity 

### 0'£ the DangerousjHazardousWaste Program, rapid information retrieval will be critical in responding to the needs of all parties. The system, at this time, is divided into three areas: notification,permitsjcompliance monitoring and enforcement tracking, and reporting data (Table 5). Notification data has already been collected by EPA on generators, transporters, and TSD facilities. This data will be incorporated into'WDOE's data**base~** Notification information can. then be .recalled to assist£ield and headquarters staff in obtaining rapid notification information,i. e. who has valid identification .numbers, what types of hazardous waste activities are conducted, e-tc. Periodic updates of the notification data·base are planned. 

# • Permit compliance monitoring and enforcement tracking will also be performed by the ADP system. The data base will contain Part A, and Part B permit information (when available), as well as all handlers/facilities subject to compliance under RCW

11-43

# • 70.105 and .WAC 173-303. The data base will include compliance dates, 'enforcement actions, 'permit expiration dates, permit target dates, and other.types of information, such as facility location, permit violations including the**stat~s** of financial assurance, closure, post closure, SEPA, etc. The ADP system will be instrumental .in highlighting facility 'status,permit violations, enforcement actions, biennial waste reports, and other actions'WDOE makes for the annual report to EPA. A process is established between the inspectors and permit wr.j.ters in the regional offices and the permit coordinator in the Dangerous Waste Section whereby all enforcement actions taken, compliance dates established and met, and permit milestones are reported and monitored by the agency ADP syst'em for compliance monitoring and permit tracking. Monthly status reports are provided to managers and supervisors and compliance tickler reports are provided to inspectors for compliance follow-up

. 

# •

•

11-44

# • v. Regulated Community Data

- Estimates A. Number of Notifiers by Activity Reported Data estimating the' numbers of regulated companies was derived from EPA's notification data base and submitted Part Apermit forms

. The following information depicts the statusof Washington State: Activity Number***Generation----------~** 

### The exact numbers are not' *Transportation------- available at ihis time for

TSD-------------·---- breakdown, due to confusion over data base definitions of RCRA, RCRA/state and state only regulated. 

### B. Amount Waste 

# • WaShington's 1982 

### Annual Report return resulted in an account­ ing of 303 active generators (those which reported stateregu­ lated quantities of waste generation during calendar year 1982). 

### The amount of waste generated during 1982 

### was 

### 515,839 tons. (See the 1982 

### Annual Report Sununary attached as Appendix A to this document)


## c. Amount of Was,te Treated, Stored, 'and Disposed The state received facility annual reports from 76. Those facilities reported TSD activities on 

### 501,434 tons of dangerous waste during calendar year 

### 1982. (See the 

### 1982 Annual Report Summary attached as Appendix A to this document). *During notification process some genera'tors and transporters marked

both activities. Actual number of total entities ,is unknown.

Note: The EPA notificati9n (RCRA) data base tape has been loaded into the state system (9/20/84). 

### The data bas'e will be analyzed and an attempt made to clarify the "regulated" status of all notifiers made

.


# •

,11-45

# e'

FUTURE CAPABILITIES

REPORTING

DATA PERMIT

DATA \mOE DATA BASE

NOTIFICATION DATA 

# •

EPA DATA BASE

H\IDMS



### * Monthly Reporting Hazardous Waste Program ADP System Figure 8 AV/W57(A2.2)**MEMoRAN1J~** 

### OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN 

## THE STATE OF WASHINGTON AND 

### THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION XFOR FINAL DANGEROUS WASTE PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION 

### I. GENERAL This Memorandum of Agreement (hereafter "Agreementtt ) 

### establishes policies,responsibilities,andprocedures pursuant to 40 CFR 271.8 for operation of the State 

### of Washington's Dangerous·Waste Mana·gement Program (hereafter tfStateProgram") authorized under Section 3006

.of the' Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (hereafter "RCRA" or "the Ac.t') of 1976 (Pub. Law 94-580, 42 U.S.C. 6901, et**~)** 

### and the

.United States Environmental Protection Agency­ (hereafter EPA) Regional Office for .Region X. This Agreement further sets forth the manner in which the ·State will coordinate with EPA in administering the State Program. This Agreement is entered into by the Director of' the Washington State·DepartmentofEcology (hereafter "Director" or "the State'), the lead agency for the' State Program (as designated by the State pursuant to 40 CFR271.6(b) and the Region.al Administrator, EPA, Region X (hereafter "Regional Administrator" or "EPAtt ). 

### Nothing in this Agreement restricts EPA's authority to fulfill its oversight and enforcement responsibilities under·RCRA. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to contravene 40 CFR Part 271. The parties will review this Agreement jointly at least once a year during preparation of. the. annual State Grant Work. Program (hereafter "State Work Program"), in conjunction with grant funding under section 3011 of RCRA. This Agreement will remain in effect until the State withdraws from authoriza.tion or until such time as State Program authorization is withdrawn by EPA, atcordl.ng to the provisions of 40 CFR271.22, or reVerts to EPA according to the provisions of 40 CFR 271.23. This Agreement will take'effect at the time the State's authorization takes effect, which shall he 14 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register of EPA's decision to grant authorization to the State. II. RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTIES 

### A. Policy Statement Ea'ch of the parties to this Agreement is responsible for ensuring that its obligations under RCRA are met. The Dir.ector and the Regional Administrator agree to maintain a

# .~

IIi-1

# • high level of cooperation and coordination between State and EPA staffs in a partnership to assure successful and effective administration of the State authorized program. The State has primary authority and responsibility for all aspects of the hazardous waste program within its boundaries. EPA's primary responsibility under this agreement is the oversight of the fully authorized state.program. The purpose of oversight is to ensure that**pro~ress** 

### on environmental objectives is being made and environmental laws are being implemented in a consistent .manner. EPA retains its responsibility to ensure full and faithful execution 'of the requirements of ReRA including direct implementation in the event the State is (mabIe to act. Under final authorization, Washington will have responsibility for coordination of the program with other authorized s.tates and with EPA instates without authorization. The State expects to have minimum resources for implementing this program and will prioritize activities and accomplish them in order of priority. EPA assumes an oversight role upon granting final authorization to the State. EPA agrees to conduct its oversight of the State Program in a manner consistent with the .following principles outlined in the official Region X 

# • Oversight Policy: Focus on Overall Performance EPA will be concerned with the overall performance and environmental results achieved by state programs
. The oversight process will focus on individual procedures or actions only as indicators of overall program performance, or where actions' involve significant national issues. Respect State Technical Judgments EPA will respect the judgments of state technical staff, unless statutory requirements call for direct EPA involvement in project decisions or the technical issue has significant policy implications. Use Specific Performance Criteria EPA will specify the criteria after consultation with the states that will be used to assess State Program performance 'and include these annually in the SEA or negotiated work plans as appropriate. The criteria will address major program outputs and legally required procedures. Useful oversight can occur only if states and EPA understand in advance·about specific standards of performance to bernet and how success in meeting them should be measured. 

# • Tailor Amount of Oversight The level and amount of oversight will be geared to the maturity and performance of the State Program. A program which has been completely delegated for more than .a year and demonstrates consistently strong

111

...2

# • performance

.levels, requires less oversight. Specifically, there shQuld be less need for real time reviews. Conversely, poor performance should result in increased oversight by EPA. A new delegation·should include a specified transition period. In general, the agency's oversight should reflect changing state needs and program priorities. Emphasis on Strong, Informal EPA/State Relationships. EPA Region 10 

### has a unique ability, because of its Ope·rations Offices, to rely on informal working relationships as an oversight mechanism. The use of formal written reports will be. kept to the minimum necessary for the timely assessment and resolution of environmental problems and progress. The states will also be encouraged to participate in the oversight of their own programs through joint audits and to evaluate EPA's performance in providing assistance and meeting commitments. EPA will Retain Responsibility. EPA is responsible under sfatute for ensuring the consistent application and enforcement of national standards. If direct EPA action is necessary to ensure that environmental laws are carried out, such action will betaken, with appropriate consultation with the State. 

# • Oversight will be'accomplished by EPA through written reporting requirements, permit overview, compliance and enforcement overview, and joint review with the State of its program. EPA will keep the State informed of the content and meaning of federal statutes, regulations, guidelines, standards, policy decisions, directives, and any other factors that affect the State Program. EPA will also provide general technical guidance to the State. EPA will share w'ith the State any national reports developed by EPA from the data 'submitted through State reporting requirements. 

### B. ,Provisions for Transfer of Information 1. EPA Program Information Transfer EPA agrees to provide copies of State notification form (ECY 030-5) 

### in lieu of EPA Form (8700-12) 

### to generators, transporters, and TSDfacilities who request assistance with obtaining an EPA/State ID number. EPA will also provide, within ten (10) working days of receipt, originals of EPA Notification Forms**(8700~12)** 

### or State Notification Forms (ECY 030-5), 

### including EPA identification number, submitted by persons located in the State after the date of this Agreement. EPA further agrees to inform each requestor, by mail, ,of 'the new ID number assigned within thirty (30) 

### days of receipt

. 

# •

111-3

# • EPA agrees to tranSfer to the Director or his designee any remaining originals of Part A and Part B hazardous waste management facility permit applications, including that information pertaining to land disposal facilities submitted to EPA under 40 CFR270.10 by facilities located in the State before the date of this Agreement, together with all pertinent file information (which includes narratives, plans,maps, etc.) draft permits, public notices, administrative notices, fact sheets, and correspondence. Permit applicat10ns and file information, not already transferred to the State, will be provided to the Director or his designee within no more than thirty (30) days of the date of final authorization. EPA will also provide, within £ive (5) working days of receipt, originals of Par.t A and Part B permit applications or revisions submitted directly to EPA after the date of final authorization. EPA will keep the department informed of all proposed or adopted federal regulations as promulgated in.the Federal Register adopted pursuant to RCRA or required 

### 0'£ another federal agency to implement the full scope of the State approved dangerous waste management program. 

# • EPA will assist**thed~partment** 

### in obtaining publications of any environmental impact or assessment statement, technical support document, gUidance document, or any other publication developed by EPA, EPA contractor, ot 

### other federal agency related to the development or opeTation of a State approved hazardous waste management program
.

.EPA agrees to make. available to the State copies of any reports and data resulting from compliance inspections within sixty (60) days of completion of the inspection. EPA agrees to provide the State, upon request, any data or information necessary for the development and maintenance of the Statet

### s automated data processing files and compliance monitoring and permit tracking system. 2. State Program·lnformation Transfer The State agrees to require newgenerators,transporters, and hazardous waste management Jacilities to obtain identification numbers consistent with the Dunn and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering (DUN) system for 

# • businesses and General Service Administration Real Property Number, or equivalent, for governmental agencies. EPA and the state will participate in a joint effort to assign DUN identification numbers to all new generators, transporters, and TSD facilities who notify



### 111-4

# • the State. The State ,will then inform ,the requestor of the new identification number. Both E,PA and the State will**wo~k** 

### as rapidly as possible to provide identification numbers to new notifiers. The State will also submit any updates or changes in previously submitted notification and Part A permit application information. This information will be provided to the Regional Administrator within twenty (20) working days of receipt. The State agrees to inform the Regional Administrator of any proposed or adopted program**chan~es** 

### which would affect the State's ability to implement the authorized program. Program changes of concern include modification of the State's legal authorities (i.e. statutes, 'regulations, and judicial or legislative actions affecting those authorities), modifications or memoranda of agreement or understanding with other agencies, and modifications of resource levels (i.e., available or budgeted personnel and funds within the framework of the SEA). The State recognizes that program revisions must be made,in accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR271.21. 

# • The State will provide compliance monitoring and enforcement 'information to the Regional Administrator ona routine basis as specified in the State Work Program and the reporting section of this Agreement

. As specified in the State Work Program and the reporting ,section of this Agreement, the State will provide the Regional Administrator with information indicating the status of the State's facility permitting activities. Where the State Program involves the,granting of variances or waivers, less stringent requirements than comparable federal requirements or Variances will not be imposed. The State agrees to provide EPA with a copy of each State RCRA variance or waiver at the time it is granted. Any request for a variance or waiver concerning a RCRA regulated waste will be sent to the Region 10 EPA office in Seattle for written comment before issuance. The department will respond in writing to any comments or concerns raised in the EPA review. All written responses shall be provided to EPA before a variance or waiver is issued. For the purposes of permit overview the State will provide EPA with the following information on the major treatment, storage, and disposal facilities as identified and agreed to in the annual**p~ogram** 

### plan

. 

# •

111-5

# • ITEM DESCRIPTION FREQUENCY OF SUBMISSION Copies of facility permit

.application. Copies of draft permits, proposed permit modificationfact sheets Copies of final permit or permit modifications Within 15 working days of receipt Within 10 working days· of completion

Within 10 working days of

.completion

.

3. Emergency Situations and Information Transfer Upon receipt of any information that the handling, storage, .t·reatment, transportation, or disposal of

.hazardous waste is endangering human health or the environment, the party in receipt of suchinformation shall immediately notify by telephone the other .party(ies) to .thisagreement of the existence of such situation. A .list of appropriate contacts will be maintained and updated as a part of the· annual .program plan. 

# • 4. Confidentiality

a.. Any information o1?tained or used in the administration of the State Program shall be available to EPA upon request without restriction. If the information has been submitted to the State under a claim of confidentiality, the State must submit that claim to EPA when providing information. Any information obtained· from a state and subject to a claim of confidentiality will be treated in accordance with the regulations in 40 CFR Part2.
b. EPA agrees to furnish to the State info·rmation in its files which is not submitted under a claim of confidentiality and which the State needs to implement its program. Subject to the conditions of 40 CFR ·Part 2, EPA will furnish the State information submitted to EPA under a claim of confidentiality which the State needs to implement its program. All confidential information EPA agrees to transfer to the State will be transferred in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 2 . 

# •

111-6

# • C. Frequency and Content of Reports The State agrees .to submit to Region X, EPA the following documents, reports, and other information. 1. Monthly (on the 15th of the month for the month previous) compliance monitoring and enforcement report andperniit statusieports.



# • 2. Biennial Biennial report summarl.Zl.ng the quantities and types of hazardous waste**generated~** 

### transported, treated, stored, c;lnd' disposed in the State as specified in the RCRA guidance,' by October 1 of each evennumbered year. 

### 3. Other Additional reports a's negotiated in the State Work Program, and updated facility status information as necessary. D. Conditions for State Program Review 1. The Regional Administrator will**~ssess** 

### the Director's administration and enforcement of the State Program on a continuing basis fot equivalence and consistency with RCRA, with**thisAgreem~nt,and** 

### with all applicable federal requirements. This program evaluation will generally be accomplished by an EPA review of the information submitted by the Director in accordance with this Agreement and the State Work Plan, permit overview, compliance and enforcementoverview, and review' of State Program activities. The Regional Administrator may also consider, as part of this regular assessment, written comments about the State's program adm1nistration and enforcement that are received from regulated persons, the public, and federal, state, and local agencies.' Copies of any such comments received by the Regional Administrator will be provided to the Director 

### 2. The following approach to state program review will ·be 

# • followed by EPA and the State. All significant concerns raised during EPA review of the information submitted by the state in accordance with this agreement and the work plan will be submitted in writing to the State Hazardous Waste.Program Assistant Director. All EPA concerns raised



### 111-7

# • as a result of permit overview, compliance and enforcement overview, and annual review of State Program activities will be submitted by EPA to the State Hazardous Waste Program Assistant Director. The review of State Program activities shall be conducted as a joint review by EPA and the State Hazardous Waste Program. Joint reviews, including any associated audits of the State regional office operations, shall be scheduled with written notice at least 30 days prior to the audit. Reviews shall be no more frequent than quarterly and shall become less frequent as the state program matures. The scheduling shall include a jointly agreed to State/EPA format and content of the review which reflects goals and commitments outlined in the annual State Program plan.
EPA will provide written notice to the State at least IS days prior to conducting any other review of State files. Under emergency situations the IS-day notice may be waived, however, prior notice is still required. 

# • To ensure effective program review, the Director agrees to allow EPA access to all RCRA files and other RCRA information requested by the Regional Administrator and deemed necessary for evaluating State Program administration and enforcement. During the first year of final authorization EPA may conduct RCRA file reviews at quarterly intervals. In the spirit of EPA's oversight policy these reviews will generally be reduced to annual or in some cases semi-annual frequency after adequate performance levels have been demonstrated. Program review meetings between the Director and the Regional Administrator or their assignees will be scheduled at reasonable intervals not less than annually to review specific operating procedures and schedules, to resolve problems, and to discuss mutual program concerns. These meetings must be scheduled at least thirty (30) days in advance of the meeting, with a final agenda prepared by EPA and submitted to the Director for comment at least one week before the meeting date, unless otherwise agreed upon. 

### 3. Identification of Major Hazardous Waste Handlers The State agrees to develop with EPA a list of hazardous waste facilities, generators, and transporters in the State designated as "major" hazardous waste handlers. This designation is intended to identify, for administrative purposes, environmentally significant hazardous waste 

# • handlers, and to be used in concentrating inspection, permitting and reporting resources on those handlers. The list shall be submitted as a part of this agreement. It shall be reviewed and updated annually and more often as

111-8

# • necessary. Changes to the list do not require a formal amendment to this agreement so long as bo·th the state and EPA agree in writing to any.changes. From the list of "major" handlers the State agrees to develop and annually review with the Regional Administrator a list of facili·ties whose permit applications and draft permits will be reviewed by EPA. This smaller list constitutes "major" facilities for purposes of EPA permit overview. To ensure effective program management this "smaller list" shall be agreed to in the annual State Work Frogram and shall be**adhe~ed** 

### to for the period covered by that State Work Program. E. Permit Issuance 1. EPA Permitting Upon approval of the State Program (final authorization), EPA will suspend issuance of federal permits for hazardous waste treatment,storage, and disposal facilities in the State. 

# • EPA intends to add permitting standards for processe not currently covered by the Part 264 standards. For example, the Part 264 standards do not currently cover treatment and storage of hazardous waste in certain types of underground tanks. When EPA does promulgate standards for additional processes, EPA will process and enforce RCRA permits ·in the State in the new areas until the State receives final authorization of equivalent and consistent State standards. Every attempt will be made to coordinate with the State in processing these permits. At the time the State Program is approved 'in the new areas, EPA will suspend issuance of federal permits in the State. EPA will also transfer any pending permit applications, completed permits or pertinent file information to the State within thirty days of the approval of the State Program in conformance with the conditions of this Agreement. Completion of permit actions in progress and disposition of EPA issued pe.rmits will generally be in accordance with EPA Program Implementation Guidance (PIG) 82-5. It is expected that at the time of final authorization only Condition 5 in PIG 82-5 will apply to Washington. Any permit actions taken up to the time of finalauthorization will be joint actions by the State and EPA. 

### 2. State Permitting 

# • The State agrees to carryoutpermitting procedures consistent and equivalent to those in 40 CFR Parts 270 and 124. 

### Upon final authorization the State will continue

111-9

# • timely permit issuance activity initiated prior to final authorization, including completion of permit issuance activity initiated jointly with EPA.
The State is responsible for expeditiously drafting, circulating for public review and comment, issuing, modifying, reissuing, and terminating ReRA permits for all hazardous waste TSD facilities in the State, and shall do so ina manner consistent with RCRA, this Memorandum of Agreement, all applicable federal requirements, and with the State's program description. Annual commitments for the call in and issuance of permits will be reflected in the approved annual 'Work plan.
The State agrees to consider all timely comments EPA makes on major TSD facilities as identified in the approved State Work Program regarding draft major TSD facility permits and major permit modifications during the required 45-day public comment·period. The State will satisfy or refute the concern in writing before issuing the permit or making the modification. 

# • The State agrees to issue, modify, and reissue permits in accordance with all applicable State permitting regulations and applicable statutes, and to include as permit conditions all applicable provisions of WAC 173-303. This agreement also applies to permits issued after final authorization but for which the processing may have begun before final authorization.
The State agrees that any compliance schedules contained in permits will require compliance with the Dangerous Waste Regulations.
3. EPA Overview of State Permit Actions
EPA's overview function for permit actions, including closure of interim status and final status facilities, will focus on those facilities identified as major TSD facilities in the approved annual work program. EPA's**ov~rview** will be in keeping with the six principles of EPA's Oversight Policy as stated in Section II.A. of this agreement. EPA shall provide, in a timely fashion, clear and consistent guidance to the State in performing their review and overview function regarding State issued RCRA permits and permit actions.
For all RCRA permit actions written and issued on major TSD facilities by the State of Washington, there will be 

# • three opportunities for EPA review

.

111-10

# • a. The first review will be of the draft**appli~ation** submitted by the major TSD facility prior to completeness determination by the State. 

### EPA will review the draft application to aid in determining if all appropriate technical information has been provided. The purpose of this .review is to avoid a situation where a permit is drafted and then cannot be issued due to a lack of information or inadequate information in an application. 

### EPA' sreview comments shall include the following: 1) a justification, based on guidance or regulation, why additional or different information is necessary, and 2)a specific description of what changes need to be made in order to determ1nethe application complete. These comments must be submitted in writing to the state in accordance with the application review schedule established by the State.


# • b. The second review will be of the initial draft of the permit prior .to the public notice process. This is an informal review, the primary purpose of which is to identify any areas where the intent of RCRA is not being met and any significant issues between the department and EPA related to· the facility and the permit which sh,ould be resolved prior to the permit going to public comment. The philosophy here is that 

### EPA and the dep'artment should resolve their differences at this point in the permit process to present a more consistent and unified approach to the regulated community. EPA shall include in their comments the following: 1) a statement of the reasons for the comment (including the section of RCRA and the State regulations·that support the comment); 2) the action that should be taken by the state in order to address the comments (including the conditions which the vermitwould include if it were.issued by 

### EPA).
EPA shall respond during this review period in accordance with the review schedule set by the State. If for some**rE~ason** EPA cannot respond in that time or does not wish to comment on this draft permit review opportunity, they will so indicate in writing to the' State that they will not be commenting or they may request an extended review time in writing. 

# • c. the third review is the formal review of the draft permit following public notice. During this review EPA may comment in writing on any draft permit action or proposed permit modification, (this review includes nonmajor facilities), whether or not EPA commented on the permit application, within 45 days of public notice. For all comments including those where EPA indicates that issuance of the permit or the permit action would be inconsistertt with the approved State

III-II

# • Program, EPA shall include in the comment; 1) a statement of the reasons for the comment (including the section of the State regulations and RCRA that support



# • the comment); and 2) the actions that should be taken by the State in order to address the comments (including the conditions which the permit would include if it were issued by EPA). EPA may provide a copy of its comments to the applicant where a comment is made that the draft permit includes conditions inconsistent with the approved state program or lacks conditions necessary to be consistent with the approved program. When EPA submits any comments to the applicant, such comments shall also be provided verbatim to the state at the same time. The State shall provide a written explanation for addressing the formal comments submitted by EPA during the public review period. Based on this response, EPA shall withdraw such comments, in writing, when satisfied that the State has met or refuted its concerns. This withdrawal statement shall also include a statement of EPA's proposed course of action, including timing, for any concerns which are not being withdrawn. A copy of this statement and any comments made by EPA which have not been resolved shall be sent to the applicant at the same time it is submitted to the State. This withdrawal statement shall be submitted within 10 days prior to the scheduled permit issuance date. The Regional Administrator and the Director shall agree to meet at the request of the State in circumstances where comments by EPA on a draft or proposed permit are not sufficiently resolved by staff to allow issuance of the permit. If the State believes that the terms imposed by EPA staff comments are not justified because of specific conditions or circumstances, the request for meeting may be initiated by the Director. The Regional Administrator shall respond to such request with recommended meeting date(s) or shall concur with the Director's suggested date within ten (10) working days of receiving the Director's request. The Regional Administrator and the Director will make maximum effort to meet within twenty (20) days of the Regional Administrator receiving the Director's request. An agenda and briefing paper covering the issues needing resolution shall be prepared by EPA and the State and both shall be provided to the Regional Administrator and Director at least five (5) working days before the scheduled meeting. Under Section 3008(a)(3) of RCRA, EPA may terminate a 

# • state-issued permit in accordance with the procedures of Part 124, Subpart E, or bring an enforcement action in accordance with the procedures of 40 CFR Part 22 in the

111-12

# • case of a violation of a State Program requirement. In exercising these authorities, EPA will observe the conditions established in 40 CFR 271.19(e). Upon a request by the State, EPA will provide technical assistance for permit actions within EPA resource and expertise constraints. This assistance could be in the form of using the "permit assistance team," Region 10 staff, or EPA contractor. 

### F. Provisions for Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring Upon final authorization, the state has primary responsibility for compliance and enforcement actions within the approved state program and under state statutory and regulatory authority. EPA retains responsibility for ensuring fair and effective enforcement of federal requirements and a credible national deterrence to noncompliance through an effective state/federal partnership and an oversight role. The state and EPA agree that the following elements are mandatory for an effective enforcement and compliance monitoring program under final authorization; 1) clear oversight criteria sp'ecified in advance for program performance evaluation, 2) clear criteria for direct federal enforcement specified in advance with written procedures for advance con­ 

# • sultation and notification, and 3) adequate state reporting to ensure effective oversight• 1. State The state agrees to carry out a timely and effective program for monitoring the compliance of generators, transporters, and facilities with applicable program requirements. As part of this program, the state will conduct compliance inspections to assess compliance with generator and transporter standards (including manifest requirements), facility standards, permit requirements (including late or deficient Part B applications) compliance schedules, and all other program requirements, including violations detected by state or federal compliance inspections. A compliance and enforcement tracking system is operated by the state to ensure timely and appropriate enforcement actions, adequate compliance follow-up, monitor compliance rates, assess categories and violations and report necessary, accurate, and timely compliance and enforcement information to EPA for the purposes of oversight and program performance evaluation. Compliance monitoring and enforcement activities, priorities and reporting requirements will be specified in the annual state work program and shall be consistent with applicable federal requirements and with the state's 

# • program description•

111-13

# • Timely and appropriate State enforcement response will be based on a department approved enforcement policy for dangerous waste program violation. This policy will be consistent with State requirements for ensuring that all major threats to the environment and public health are treated effectively.
In civil enforcement proceedings, the department agrees not to oppose intervention allowed under Civil Rule for Superior Court 24, on the grounds that the applicant's interest is adequately represented by the State. The State agrees to retain all records for at least three years unless there is an enforcement action pending. In that case all records will be retained for at least three years after such action is resolved. 2. EPA
EPA's primary role in enforcement and compliance monitoring under final authorization shall be that of oversight as described in Section II.A. and in accordance with oversight criteria and measures and oversight procedures and protocols as set forth in this agreement. EPA has the 

# • right to inspect any hazardous waste generator, transporter or TSD facility or any enforcement action in accordance with Section 3008(a)(2) of RCRA.
For the purposes of oversight of compliance inspections and enforcement EPA shall maintain a policy of "no surprises" to ensure the productive use of limited state and federal resources and an effective "partnership" in achieving compliance. This principle should be applied to all aspects of the compliance and enforcement program; covering inspections, enforcement activities, press releases, and public information, and management data summaries upon which state an? national performance are assessed.
In order to guarantee that there is ample advance notification, EPA agrees to confer with the state to establish agreement in writing and reach a clear, consistent understanding on the following matters: Advance notification of intended inspections and enforcement actions; Specific identification of who will be notified; How the notification will be done; When the notification will occur; Define the process for state/federal consultation and 

# • dispute resolution on enforcement actions and policy and regulatory interpretation

.

111-14

# '. The written agreement to be established on the above matters is incorporated by reference in this memorandum of agreement. EPA also agrees to inform the state in writing of any national or regional policy changes or program direction changes and in all cases will allow the state a minimum of 90 days to implement those changes.
At a minimum, the following will be adhered to by EPA, EPA shall attend a maximum of 10 percent of the state's compliance inspections to evaluate the state's techniques, follow-up activities, and enforcement**action~.** EPA shall notify the State in writing which inspections they plan to attend. EPA shall only conduct independent oversight inspections after giving a minimum of ten working days written notice to a WDOE representative of their intent to do so and giving WDOE an opportunity to attend. If EPA has a concern about a particular facility or compliance situation, they shall request in writing that the department perform an inspection within 15 working days. If the State performs a compliance inspection and submits a report and data relevant thereto within that time to EPA, no EPA inspections will be made, unless the Regional Administrator 

# • deems the State report and data to be inadequate. The Regional Administrator may shorten or waive notice periods in emergency situations, but in all cases will inform the State before going on-site. The Regional Administrator may take enforcement action against any person determined to be in violation of the authorized program in accordance with Section 3008(a)(2). After written prior notice to the State, EPA may take action under Section 3008 of RCRA against a holder of a state issued permit on the ground that the permittee is not complying with a condition of that permit. This Agreement will be modified to reflect approved state and national enforcement policies.
In addition, EPA may take action under Section 3008 of RCRA against a holder of a State issued permit. This action will be based on any unresolved formal comments that were made by EPA during the public review and issuance of that permit. EPA shall give advance written notice of such action to the State• 

# •

111-153.,1 7 

### Site Visits
EPA is responsible for maintaining reliable national data on hazardous waste management. This data is used to report to the President and Congress on the achievements of the hazardous waste program and to support EPAIS 

### regulatory development e,fforts. Whenever EPA determines that it needs to obtain certain information, EPA will first seek to gain this information from the State. The State agrees to reply in a reasonable time to the Regional Administrator with this information if readily available and as resources allow. If the State is unable to provide the information or if it is necessary to supplement the State information, EPA may conduct a special survey or perform information collection site visits after prior notification to the State. EPA will share with the State in a timely fashion any national or regional reports developed by EPA as a result of such information collection. 

### G. State Delisting Action Ifa state delisting action causes the authorized program to be no lon'ger equivalent to EPAIS, 

### then EPA shall provide written notification of this position to the State within 20 working days of t4e action. The State shall have 20 working days to refute Or demonstrate equivalency before EPA may begin proceedings to withdraw program approval. 

### H. Provisions for Modification of the MOA This Agreement may be modified upon the initiative of either party to ensure consistency with State Program modifications or for any other purpose mutually agreed upon. Any revisions or modifications must be in writing and must be signed by both the Director and the Regional Administratot. For the**Stat~:** 

### STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY

, By:



### Title: Date: For**th~** 

### Federal Government: u.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION X



### By:

Title: Date:

111-16