Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Priority Lists

Soil. Composting of soils contaminated by high explosives is being carried out at the Umatilla Army Depot near Hermiston, Oregon (70). Soil from munitions washout lagoons is being treated iadoors ia compost rows of 2,000 m, and the estimated cost is less than one-third the estimated cost of iaciaeration. If this is successful, there are 30 similar sites on the National Priority List that could be treated ia a similar way. [Pg.36]

In the decade from 1985 to 1995, numerous broad-based studies showed general agreement on a limited set of best R D practices that have the greatest positive impact (92—98). Taken together, these studies provide a priority listing of the top nine R D processes and practices. [Pg.134]

The EPA Hazardous Ranking System computes a numerical score for hazardous waste. If the score exceeds a predetermined value, the waste site is placed on the National Priority List (NPL) for Superfund cleanup. Discuss the pros and cons of such a ranking system. Describe a possible situation in which an air contaminant is controlled but the control system used transfers the contaminant problem to another medium, such as water or soil. [Pg.240]

Some sites are easy to elassify due to their inehision on the National Priorities List (NPL), state superfund, or other regulatory list. In other eases, debate ean and does arise to determine if a site should be treated as hazardous. Eor example, some sites eommonly referred to as brown fields have eontamination levels that are eonsidered low. Sometimes levels of eontamination are so low that exposure levels to workers do not reaeh aetion levels or permissible exposure levels (PEL). Some firms have ehosen to treat low-level eontaminated sites as if they fell under HAZWOPER requirements. This is a somewhat eonservative approaeh whieh provides a eomfort faetor for management and potentially responsible parties (PRP) or other entities. [Pg.5]

The Superfund database containing information on all aspects of hazardous waste sites from initial discover) to listing on the National Priorities List. Magnetic tapes are available quarterly from NTIS. Summaiy data under the Freedom of Information Act is available free by calling the Superfund Automated Phone System +1 800 775-5037. [Pg.304]

The toxicological profiles are developed in response to the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 (Public law 99-499) which amended the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or Superfund). This public law directed ATSDR to prepared toxicological profiles for hazardous substances most commonly found at facilities on the CERCLA National Priorities List and that pose the most significant potential threat to human health, as determined by ATSDR and the EPA. The availability of the revised priority list of 275 hazardous substances was announced in the Federal Register on November 17, 1997 (62 FR 61332). For prior versions of the list of substances, see Federal RegisternoiiCQS dated April 29, 1996 (61 FR 18744) April 17, 1987 (52 FR 12866) October 20, 1988 (53 FR 41280) October 26, 1989 (54 FR 43619) October 17, 1990 (55 FR 42067) October 17, 1991 (56 FR 52166) October 28, 1992 (57 FR 48801) and February 28, 1994 (59 FR 9486). Section 104(i)(3) of CERCLA, as amended, directs the Administrator of ATSDR to prepare a toxicological profile for each substance on the list. [Pg.6]

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identifies the most serious hazardous waste sites in the nation. These sites make up the National Priorities List (NPL) and are the sites targeted for long-term federal cleanup activities. Methyl parathion has been found in at least 16 of the 1,585 current or former NPL sites. However, the total number of NPL sites evaluated for this substance is not known. As more sites are evaluated, the sites at which methyl parathion is found may increase. This information is important because exposure to this substance may harm you and because these sites may be sources of exposure. [Pg.21]

Populations residing near hazardous waste disposal sites may be subject to higher levels of methyl parathion in environmental media (i.e., air, groundwater, soil) than those experienced by the general population. Methyl parathion has been identified in at least 16 of the 1,585 hazardous waste sites that have been proposed for inclusion on the EPA National Priorities List (NPL). However, the number of sites evaluated for methyl parathion is not known. As more sites are evaluated, the number of sites where methyl parathion has been detected may increase. [Pg.32]

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Aet (CERCLA) [42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq ], as amended by the Superflind Amendments and Reauthorization Aet (SARA) [Pub. L. 99-499], requires that the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) develop jointly with the US. Enviromnental Protection Agency (EPA), in order of priority, a list of hazardous substances most commonly found at facilities on the CERCLA National Priorities List (NPL) prepare toxicological profiles for each substance included on the priority list of hazardous substances and assure the initiation of a research program to fill identified data needs associated with the substances. [Pg.247]

Rodenbeck SE. 1997. An evaluation of the relationship between maternal exposure to trichloroethylene in drinking water and birth weight at the Tucson International Airport area national priorities list site, Pima County, Arizona. Dissertation, Tulane University. [Pg.287]

Priority Lists, Risk Assessment process and tracking system in relation to Council Regulation (EEC) 793/93 also known as Existing Substances Regulation (ESR). [Pg.314]

Diisopropyl methylphosphonate has been identified at 2 of the 1,416 hazardous waste sites that have been proposed for inclusion on the EPA National Priorities List (NPL) (HazDat 1997). One site, identified in Figure 5-1, is the RMA located near Denver, Colorado. As diisopropyl methylphosphonate was never made commercially, the EPA neither expects nor routinely looks for this chemical at hazardous waste sites unless site history indicates it might be present. [Pg.118]


See other pages where Priority Lists is mentioned: [Pg.502]    [Pg.504]    [Pg.11]    [Pg.80]    [Pg.29]    [Pg.91]    [Pg.1150]    [Pg.124]    [Pg.262]    [Pg.349]    [Pg.5]    [Pg.316]    [Pg.307]    [Pg.415]    [Pg.142]    [Pg.298]    [Pg.100]    [Pg.41]    [Pg.174]    [Pg.367]    [Pg.174]    [Pg.415]    [Pg.469]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.44 , Pg.46 ]




SEARCH



Chemicals priority list

Industrial chemicals priority list

National Priorities List

National Priority List site

National Priority List, Superfund sites

National priority list waste sites, cleanup

Natural priorities list

Priorities

Priority List of Jobs

Priority Lists of Chemicals

Priority Pollutants List

Priority Substances List

Priority Testing List

Priority pollutants, reference lists

Super fund national priorities list

United States national priority list

© 2024 chempedia.info