[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14641-14645]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6673]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL-5173-4]


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

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of policy statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'') is announcing a 
policy relating to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances 
Contingency Plan (``NCP''), 40 CFR part 300, which was promulgated 
pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (``CERCLA'') (amended by the 
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (``SARA'')) and 
Executive Order 12580 (52 FR 2023, January 29, 1987). CERCLA requires 
that the NCP include a list of national priorities among the known 
releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants or 
contaminants throughout the United States, and that the list be revised 
at least annually. The National Priorities List (``NPL''), initially 
promulgated as Appendix B of the NCP on September 8, 1983 (48 FR 
40658), constitutes this list.
    This document describes a policy for deleting sites from the NPL 
and deferring them to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
(``RCRA''), as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 
1984 (``HSWA'') corrective action program, if they meet the eligibility 
criteria for deletion set out in the NCP. EPA requested public comment 
on this policy on December 21, 1988 (53 FR 51421). The policy applies 
to sites on the NPL that are RCRA-regulated facilities engaged in 
treatment, storage or disposal of hazardous waste (``TSDs'' under the 
RCRA program).

EFFECTIVE DATE: This policy is effective on April 19, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments received and the Agency's responses to them are 
contained in the Headquarters Superfund Docket. The Headquarters 
Superfund Docket is located at the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Crystal Gateway #1, 12th Floor, 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Arlington, VA. It is available for viewing by appointment only from 
9:00 a.m. to 4:00 [[Page 14642]] p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 
Federal holidays, Telephone 703/603-8917.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Superfund Hotline, phone 800/424-
9346 (or 703/412-9810 in the Washington, DC metropolitan area).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. Policy for Deleting RCRA Sites from the NPL Based Upon RCRA 
Deferral
III. Appendix A: Summary of NPL Deletion/Deferral Policies

I. Introduction

A. Purpose of CERCLA

    In 1980, Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601, et seq. (``CERCLA'' or 
``the Act''), in response to the dangers of uncontrolled or abandoned 
hazardous waste sites. CERCLA was amended in 1986 by the Superfund 
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (``SARA''), Pub. L., No. 99-499, 100 
Stat. 1613. To implement CERCLA, the Environmental Protection Agency 
(``EPA'' or ``the Agency'') promulgated the National Oil and Hazardous 
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (``NCP''), 40 CFR part 300, on 
July 16, 1982 (47 FR 31180), pursuant to CERCLA section 105 and 
Executive Order 12316 (46 FR 42237, August 20, 1981). The NCP, further 
revised most recently by EPA on March 8, 1990 (55 FR 8664), sets forth 
guidelines and procedures for responding under CERCLA to releases and 
threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or 
contaminants.
    The National Priorities List (``NPL''), initially promulgated as 
Appendix B of the NCP on September 8, 1983 (48 FR 40658), constitutes 
this list.
    EPA requested public comment on this policy on December 21, 1988 
(53 FR 51421).

B. Purpose of the NPL

    Section 105(a)(8)(A) of CERCLA requires that the NCP include 
criteria for ``determining priorities among releases or threatened 
releases throughout the United States for the purpose of taking 
remedial action and, to the extent practicable taking into account the 
potential urgency of such action.'' Section 105(a)(8)(B) of CERCLA 
requires that those criteria be used to prepare a list of national 
priorities among the known releases or threatened releases of hazardous 
substances, pollutants, or contaminants throughout the United States. 
The list, which is Appendix B of the NCP, is the National Priorities 
List (``NPL''). A site may undergo Fund-financed remedial action only 
after it is placed on the NPL. See 40 CFR 300.425(b)(1).
    The Hazard Ranking System (``HRS''), which EPA promulgated as 
Appendix A of the NCP (47 FR 31219, July 16, 1982), and amended (55 FR 
51532, December 14, 1990), is the principal tool upon which the Agency 
relies to determine the priority sites for possible remedial actions 
under CERCLA. 40 CFR 300.425(c)(1). In addition to the HRS scoring 
method, a site also may be listed if designated as a state's highest 
priority, or if the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 
(``ATSDR'') has issued a health advisory for the site, and EPA 
determines that the site poses a significant threat to public health 
and that it will be more cost effective to use the Agency's remedial 
authority than to use removal authority to respond to a release. Id. at 
40 CFR 300.425(c) (2) and (3).

II. Policy for Deleting Sites from the NPL Based Upon RCRA Deferral

A. Purpose of Today's Notice

    This notice announces the Agency's policy of deleting RCRA 
facilities from the NPL before a cleanup is complete, if the site is 
being, or will be, adequately addressed by the RCRA corrective action 
program under an existing permit or order. EPA must also be satisfied, 
based either on an evaluation of a petition from a person outside the 
Agency or via a unilateral Agency determination, that the site, as 
defined by the CERCLA program, falls within the criteria for deferral.
    The terms ``deferral'' and ``deletion'' as used in the context of 
the NPL refer to the following: Deferral refers to the decision not to 
list a site on the NPL, or not retain a site on the NPL, to allow 
another authority (RCRA corrective action in this case) to handle the 
remediation of the site in lieu of CERCLA. Deletion is the act of 
taking a site off the NPL, which may occur because cleanup at a site is 
complete or because another authority (such as RCRA corrective action) 
can be used to bring about remediation at the site and further CERCLA 
action is not needed. Please see Appendix A for a summary of the 
development of deferral policies.

B. Rationale for Deleting Sites Based Upon RCRA Deferral Under NCP 
Deletion Criteria

    EPA believes it is appropriate to delete sites from the NPL based 
upon deferral to RCRA under certain circumstances. Deletion of sites 
from the NPL to defer them to RCRA Subtitle C corrective action 
authorities would free CERCLA's oversight resources for use in 
situations where another authority is not available, as well as avoid 
possible duplication of effort and the need for an owner/operator to 
follow more than one set of regulatory procedures. Eliminating 
regulation under two separate authorities also will eliminate public 
and owner/operator confusion over which authority has primacy. 
Moreover, since the CERCLA and RCRA programs have comparable cleanup 
goals, RCRA Subtitle C facilities requiring remediation appropriately 
may be deferred to RCRA corrective action authorities unless deletion 
would interfere with the remediation of the site.
    However, today's RCRA deletion policy does not pertain to Federal 
facility sites. Federal facility sites will not be deleted from the NPL 
based upon deferral to RCRA, even if such facilities are also subject 
to the corrective action authorities of Subtitle C of RCRA. One of the 
primary goals of deferral--maximizing the use of limited Fund monies--
does not apply to Federal facility sites since Federal facilities 
typically are not eligible for Fund-financed remedial action. 
Furthermore, the goal of avoiding duplication of efforts can be 
resolved through the use of comprehensive Inter-Agency Agreements (54 
FR 10522, March 13, 1989).

C. Proposed Criteria for Deleting Sites from the NPL Based on Deferral 
to RCRA

    The following are the criteria proposed in the December 21, 1988 
Federal Register notice for determining whether a site may be deleted 
from the NPL based upon deferral to another authority such as RCRA:
    i. A site on the NPL is currently being addressed by another 
regulatory authority under an enforceable order or permit requiring 
corrective action or the PRPs have entered into a CERCLA consent order 
to perform the RD/RA;
    ii. Response is progressing adequately;
    iii. Deletion would not otherwise disrupt an ongoing CERCLA 
response action; and
    iv. All criteria for deferral to that authority have been met 
(i.e., the requesting party must meet all conditions for deferral to 
that authority in addition to the three specific criteria set out above 
for deletion based upon deferral).

D. Final Criteria for Deleting Sites

    EPA believes that it is appropriate to apply different and more 
stringent [[Page 14643]] criteria to actions to delete based on 
deferral to RCRA for sites that are on the NPL than to sites that are 
candidates for deferral prior to NPL listing. For NPL sites, EPA has 
completed its listing process, identified the site as a potential 
problem requiring further attention, and often has commenced CERCLA 
response actions. In addition, the listing itself has created public 
anticipation of a response under CERCLA. Thus, EPA and the public will 
generally have an interest in seeing that these sites are addressed by 
the Superfund program, particularly in cases where significant 
Superfund resources already have been expended at a site. Thus, it is 
in the best interest of the public to apply different and more 
stringent criteria.
    In today's notice, EPA is finalizing the criteria enumerated below 
for use in identifying sites eligible for deletion based upon deferral 
to RCRA corrective action authorities. A site should satisfy all of 
these criteria to be eligible for deletion. Where there is uncertainty 
as to whether the criteria have been met, deletion generally will be 
inappropriate. The criteria are the following:
    1. If evaluated under EPA's current RCRA/NPL deferral policy,1 
the site would be eligible for deferral from listing on the NPL.

    \1\ The term ``current RCRA/NPL deferral policy'' refers to the 
policy in effect at the time the deletion decision is made. As past 
Federal Register notices demonstrate, the RCRA/NPL deferral policy 
has changed, and may continue to change based upon the Agency's 
continued evaluation of how best to implement the statutory 
authorities of RCRA and CERCLA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The CERCLA site is currently being addressed by RCRA corrective 
action authorities under an existing enforceable order or permit 
containing corrective action provisions.
    3. Response under RCRA is progressing adequately.
    4. Deletion would not disrupt an ongoing CERCLA response action.

E. Discussion of Each Criterion

    The first criterion states that sites generally will not be 
eligible for deletion from the NPL based upon deferral to RCRA 
corrective action if similarly situated sites would not be deferred 
from listing on the NPL.
    Two types of sites may be eligible for deletion: 1) sites that 
would be eligible for deferral under current deferral criteria, but 
were not deferred because the deferral policy at the time of listing 
was different; and 2) sites that were not eligible for deferral when 
listed, but now may be eligible because of changed conditions at the 
site (e.g., they no longer are in bankruptcy, or they now are in 
compliance with a corrective action order). For RCRA facilities within 
the second category, the Agency will review the original listing 
rationale (e.g., unwillingness, bankruptcy) together with current 
information to ascertain whether conditions at the site have changed 
sufficiently to warrant deletion from the NPL. Where there is 
uncertainty about whether the criteria have been met, deletion 
generally will be inappropriate. Persons who submit petitions for 
deletion will have to bear the burden of demonstrating that they meet 
the current criteria for deletion based upon deferral, and that the 
conditions that justified the listing no longer exist and are not 
likely to recur.
    The second criterion states that the site is being addressed by 
RCRA corrective action authorities under an existing order or permit. 
The criterion specifies that the requirement applies to sites as 
defined by CERCLA, and that the authority addressing the site is RCRA 
Subtitle C corrective action.
    Under the second criterion, corrective action orders or permits 
issued by EPA or an authorized state program that address corrective 
action at the facility must generally be in place as a condition of 
deletion. This criterion serves as an objective indicator that 
contamination at a site is addressable under RCRA corrective action 
authorities. The term ``addressable'' in this context means that a 
CERCLA site is fully remediable by a permit or order with a schedule of 
compliance, whether or not actual cleanup has begun.
    Corrective action permits or orders should require the cleanup of 
all releases at the CERCLA site (e.g., if contamination stemming from 
the CERCLA ``release'' extends beyond the boundaries of a particular 
RCRA facility, such releases must be addressed under RCRA sections 
3004(v) and 3008(h) or other enforcement authority under RCRA);2 
otherwise, the CERCLA site would not be a candidate for deletion. There 
may be circumstances where modification of corrective action orders or 
permits may be necessary before a facility can be considered for 
deletion from the NPL. For example, a facility owner/operator who has 
been doing remedial work under CERCLA and intends to pursue deletion 
from the NPL, generally must obtain modification of RCRA permits or 
orders if existing permits and orders do not contain corrective action 
requirements for all operable units. Likewise, the implementing agency 
intending to unilaterally pursue deletion would need to modify orders 
or permits if necessary. This should enable the facility to meet the 
second criterion by ensuring that the entire CERCLA-defined facility is 
subject to RCRA corrective action.

    \2\ Under CERCLA, the term ``facility'' is meant to be 
synonymous with ``site'' or ``release'' and is not meant to suggest 
that the listing is geographically defined (56 FR 5600, February 11, 
1991). The size or extent of a facility listed on the NPL may extend 
to those areas where the contamination has ``come to be located.'' 
(See CERCLA section 101(9)). On the other hand, a ``facility'' as 
defined under RCRA is ``all contiguous property under the control of 
the owner or operator seeking a Subtitle C permit'' (58 FR 8664, 
February 16, 1993). Thus, a RCRA site relates more to property 
boundaries, and a CERCLA site/facility/release includes 
contamination irrespective of RCRA facility boundaries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the third criterion, EPA evaluates whether response under 
RCRA is progressing adequately. The RCRA/NPL deferral policy currently 
looks to compliance with corrective action orders or permits as the 
primary indicator of whether an owner/operator is willing to undertake 
corrective action. Under this criterion, noncompliance with corrective 
action orders and permits generally would be regarded as an indicator 
that response under RCRA is not progressing adequately. The Agency's 
evaluation may not end there, however. Even if an owner/operator is in 
compliance with a corrective action order or permit, EPA may determine 
that response is not progressing adequately based upon other factors. 
For example, the Agency may consider whether there has been a history 
of protracted negotiations due primarily to an uncooperative owner or 
operator.
    Under the fourth criterion, EPA evaluates on a site-by-site basis 
whether deletion would disrupt an ongoing CERCLA response action. 
Consistent with the deletion criterion set forth in the NCP, the fourth 
criterion in today's notice is satisfied only where one of the 
following two circumstances exist: 1) no CERCLA response has been 
undertaken; or 2) CERCLA response has been discontinued (e.g., where 
CERCLA response action has reached a logical point of transfer to the 
RCRA program and has been discontinued). Response actions being 
undertaken under CERCLA generally will not be discontinued solely to 
allow for deletion.
    In cases where EPA determines that a CERCLA response, or a CERCLA 
response combined with a RCRA response, is the most effective approach 
for addressing contamination at a site, the site will be retained on 
the NPL. In addition, a site generally will not be eligible for 
deletion based upon deferral to RCRA if such deletion would cause a 
significant delay in the response resulting in a threat to human health 
or the environment. [[Page 14644]] 

F. Process for Deleting Sites From the NPL

    In order for a site to be deleted from the NPL based upon deferral 
to RCRA, that site will be evaluated by EPA, as well as the relevant 
state authority. Deferral will be accomplished only after a coordinated 
review has occurred and concurrence has been achieved. As with any 
deletion, a decision to delete a site based upon deferral to RCRA would 
be made only after EPA publishes a Notice of Intent to Delete in the 
Federal Register and comment is taken. In addition, EPA's regulations 
allow a site to be deleted only if ``the state in which the release was 
located has concurred on the proposed deletion'' (40 CFR 
300.425(e)(2)).
    The process of deletion may begin either by a petition by a party 
outside the Agency, such as a facility owner/operator, or via a 
unilateral action from EPA. Petitions and inquiries about them should 
be directed to the appropriate Regional Administrator. The petitioner 
must demonstrate that the site has met the four criteria to the 
satisfaction of EPA, as well as the state in which the release has 
occurred. If necessary, the Agency may request additional information 
from the petitioner before making a decision.
    Finally, if, after deletion, EPA later determines that a site is 
not being addressed adequately under RCRA, and that CERCLA remedial 
action is necessary at the site, the site would remain eligible for 
CERCLA Fund-financed remedial action. (40 CFR 300.425(e)(3)). Under 
such circumstances, and in accordance with the NCP, the site also may 
be eligible for relisting on the NPL.

III. Appendix A: Summary of NPL Deletion/Deferral Policies

1. NCP Criteria for Deleting Sites From the NPL
    Section 300.425(e)(1) (i)-(iii) of the NCP addresses deletion of 
sites from the NPL. Pursuant to that section, releases may be deleted 
from the NPL where EPA determines that no further response is 
appropriate. In making that determination, EPA must consider, in 
consultation with the state, whether any of the following criteria have 
been met:
    (i) Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all 
appropriate response actions required;
    (ii) All appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been 
implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is 
appropriate; or
    (iii) The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses 
no significant threat to public health or the environment and 
therefore, taking remedial measures is not appropriate.

2. Current Deferral Policies

    When the initial NPL was promulgated (48 FR 40658, September 8, 
1983), the Agency announced certain listing policies relating to sites 
that might qualify for the NPL, but instead could be ``deferred'' to 
another authority for cleanup. These deferral policies included sites 
that can be addressed by the corrective action authorities of RCRA 
Subtitle C, or that are subject to regulation by the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission.\3\ (Id. at 40661-62).

    \3\In 1988, the Agency proposed to defer to a number of other 
authorities, namely Subtitles D and I of RCRA, the Surface Mine 
Control and Reclamation Act (``SMCRA''), the Federal Insecticide, 
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (``FIFRA''), and States, and to allow 
responsible parties voluntarily to clean up sites under CERCLA 
without listing (53 FR 51415, December 21, 1988). Final decisions 
have not been made on those proposals, and they are not addressed in 
this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. RCRA Deferral Policy

    In the preamble to the final rule promulgating the initial NPL (48 
FR 40662, September 8, 1983), EPA announced the RCRA/NPL deferral 
policy, which provided that ``where a site consists of regulated units 
of a RCRA facility operating pursuant to a permit or interim status, it 
will not be included on the NPL but will instead be addressed under the 
authorities of RCRA.'' Since that time, EPA has amended the RCRA/NPL 
deferral policy on a number of occasions. (For a more detailed 
discussion of the components of the RCRA/NPL deferral policy, see the 
Federal Register notice referenced below.\4\)

    \4\On March 13, 1989 (54 FR 10520), EPA announced the policy of 
including on the NPL Federal facility sites that may be eligible for 
listing (e.g., they have an HRS score of 28.5 or higher) even if 
such facilities are also subject to the corrective action 
authorities of Subtitle C of RCRA. The elements of the RCRA/NPL 
deferral policy are not revised in today's notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Prior to enactment of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 
1984 (HSWA) only releases to ground water from regulated units, i.e. 
surface impoundments, waste piles, land treatment areas, and landfills 
were subject to corrective action requirements under RCRA. The 
enactment of HSWA greatly expanded RCRA Subtitle C corrective action 
authorities. For example, under RCRA section 3004(u), hazardous waste 
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities seeking RCRA permits must 
address all releases of hazardous constituents to any medium from solid 
waste management units, whether active or inactive. HSWA also provided 
new authority in RCRA section 3004(v) to address releases that have 
migrated beyond the facility boundary. In addition, section 3008(h) 
authorizes EPA to compel corrective action or any response necessary to 
protect human health or the environment when there is or has been a 
release of hazardous waste at a RCRA interim status facility.
    In light of the new authorities, the Agency proposed in the 
preamble to the April 10, 1985 proposed rule (50 FR 14118), a revised 
policy for listing of RCRA-related sites on the NPL. Under the proposed 
policy, listing on the NPL of RCRA-related sites would be deferred 
until the Agency determined that RCRA corrective action measures were 
not likely to succeed due to factors outlined in the following 
paragraph.
    On June 10, 1986 (51 FR 21057), EPA announced several new 
components of the RCRA/NPL deferral policy for placing RCRA-regulated 
facilities on the NPL. Certain RCRA facilities at which Subtitle C 
corrective action authorities are available would generally be listed 
if they had an HRS score of 28.50 or greater and fell within at least 
one of the following categories: (1) Facilities owned by persons who 
have demonstrated an inability to finance a cleanup as evidenced by 
their invocation of the bankruptcy laws; (2) facilities that have lost 
authorization to operate, or for which there are additional indications 
that the owner or operator will be unwilling to undertake corrective 
action; or (3) facilities, analyzed on a case-by-case basis, whose 
owners or operators have a clear history of unwillingness to undertake 
corrective action.
    The Agency also recognized that facilities clearly not subject to 
RCRA Subtitle C corrective action authorities would be eligible for 
listing on the NPL, including those that ceased treating, storing or 
disposing of hazardous wastes prior to November 19, 1980 (the effective 
date of the RCRA hazardous waste regulations), and sites at which only 
material exempted from the statutory or regulatory definition of solid 
waste or hazardous waste are managed. Id. In addition, RCRA hazardous 
waste handlers to which Subtitle C corrective action authorities do not 
apply, such as hazardous waste generators or transporters not required 
to have interim status or a final RCRA permit, also are eligible for 
listing. Id.
    On June 24, 1988 (53 FR 23980) and October 4, 1989 (54 FR 41004), 
EPA revised the NPL/RCRA deferral policy by identifying four new 
categories of RCRA sites eligible for listing on the NPL: (1) Non- or 
late filers; (2) pre-HSWA permittees; (3) protective filers; 
[[Page 14645]] and (4) converters.\5\ In the June 24, 1988, revision, 
EPA also recognized that sites where RCRA corrective action may not 
apply to all contamination are eligible for listing (53 FR 23982).

    \5\Non- or late filers are facilities that were treating, 
storing or disposing of hazardous waste after November 19, 1980, but 
did not file a Part A permit by that date and have little or no 
history of compliance with RCRA. Pre-HSWA permittees are facilities 
that have permits in place that pre-date the 1984 corrective action 
requirements of HSWA. The protective filer category includes 
facilities which have filed Part A permit applications for 
treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes as a 
precautionary measure only, and were never actually engaged in 
hazardous waste management activities subject to RCRA Subtitle C 
corrective action. Converters are facilities that at one time were 
treating or storing RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste but have since 
converted to generator-only status, or are engaged in no other 
hazardous waste activity for which interim status is required (53 FR 
22992, June 24, 1988).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 9, 1988 (53 FR 30002), EPA proposed additional revisions 
to the policy concerning criteria to determine if an owner or operator 
is unable to pay for corrective action. No final Agency action has been 
taken on those proposed revisions.
    On August 9, 1988 (53 FR 30005), in a separate Federal Register 
notice, EPA also further revised a portion of the NPL/RCRA deferral 
policy relating to the determination of unwillingness. The Agency 
specified that circumstances under which RCRA sites may be listed on 
the NPL if an owner/operator's unwillingness to undertake corrective 
action is established through noncompliance with one or more of the 
following: (1) A Federal or substantially equivalent state unilateral 
administrative order requiring corrective action, after the facility 
owner/operator has exhausted administrative due process rights; (2) a 
Federal or substantially equivalent State unilateral administrative 
order requiring corrective action, if the facility owner/operator did 
not pursue administrative due process rights within the specified time; 
(3) an initial Federal or State preliminary injunction or other 
judicial order requiring corrective action; (4) a Federal or State RCRA 
permit condition requiring corrective action after the facility owner/
operator has exhausted administrative due process rights; or (5) a 
final Federal or State consent decree or administrative order on 
consent requiring corrective action after the exhaustion of dispute 
resolution procedures.
    EPA also may depart from the above criteria on a case-by-case basis 
where CERCLA authorities are determined to be more appropriate than 
RCRA authorities for cleaning up a site. (See, e.g., 56 FR 5602, 
February 11, 1991).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, 
Hazardous materials, Intergovernmental relations, Natural resources, 
Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, 
Waste treatment and disposal, Water pollution control, Water supply.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9605; 42 U.S.C. 9620; 33 U.S.C. 1321(C)(2); 
E.O. 11735, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp., p. 793; E.O. 12580, 3 CFR, 1987 
Comp., p. 193.

    Dated: March 8, 1995.
Elliott P. Laws,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
[FR Doc. 95-6673 Filed 3-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P