once from its court-ordered September deadline. A proposed rule for Phase IV of land disposal restrictions regulating mineral processing waste was signed Dec. 15, but because of the shutdown, it was not published until Jan. 25 [Federal Register, 1996, 61 {17), 2338-75]. The 90-day comment period begins on the publication date, and Berlow predicted OSW would seek relief from the court-ordered deadline of June 30. Other major rulemakings by the office have not been significantly delayed, Berlow said. The proposed hazardous waste identification rule, which was published Dec. 21, 1995, was in its comment period during the shutdown, and there has been no extension. And proposed rules governing military munitions and dyes and pigments handling as hazardous wastes all have had comment periods extended about a month, according to Amy Salfi of EPA's solid waste hotline. But whether OSW will be able to continue work on these and lesser priority rules is a matter of funding. "We did some contingency planning for budget cuts, but we weren't prepared for the kind of cut in the continuing resolution," Berlow said. "After funding the combustion rule and [land disposal restrictions], there isn't much left for anything else."
Almost 300 Superfund projects shut down Most Superfund projects were not affected during the majority of the shutdown and continued to operate using money leftover from previous years' program funds, according to Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response officials. But 278 sites were either completely or partially shut down when 1995 fiscal year administrative funds were depleted Jan. 2, according to a Superfund official. Of the 278 that were shut down, 168 were National Priorities List (NPL) sites, fewer than 14% of all NPL sites, according to Robin Richardson, a budget official in the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. Although these sites had programmatic funding, most of which came from the Superfund trust fund, the administrative funds to pay for EPA oversight ran out, she said. Money budgeted for Superfund is not limited to use only in the fiscal year for which it is appropriated but can
be carried forward until it is depleted. Sites that were shut down did not represent an immediate threat to human health and property, which was the test for keeping a site open without EPA oversight. Many sites, however, were kept open because of responsible party activity, state activity, or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers oversight, according to Richardson. Federal facilities managed by an agency with an approved 1996 budget were kept open. In terms of downtime, the Superfund program, which relies on the trust fund supplied through special taxes on industries that pollute the most, was not affected as much as other program offices, Richardson said; however, 48 response actions did not have programmatic funds available when the budget impasse began and either had to stop or never started. When the first continuing resolution was passed in early January, sites that shut down could reopen immediately, Richardson said, because it provided some $1 billion dollars from the trust fund for 1996 project funding. Of the sites that were shut down, about 75% of the NPL sites have reopened. The actual costs of the shutdown have not yet been calculated, says Richardson. Early estimates place the cost of restarting these projects at between $4 million and $6 million. It will take several months to receive and process all of the invoices submitted by the contractors, she said.
Acid rain rule lowers NOx emissions limits
which are dry-bottom wall-fired and tangentially fired boilers, to reduce annual NOx emissions by 400,000 tons in the years 1996-1999 and then 1.5 million tons after that. The proposed rule would increase the post-1999 reductions to 1.7 million tons annually, said Peter Tsirigotis of the Acid Rain Division. Older coal-burning facilities will be hit by the rule, said Gene Peters of the National Independent Energy Producers. Modern facilities that use advanced technologies already exceed the standards that would be set by the rule, but older plants will need expensive retrofits to achieve the standards, he said. However, Title IV called for standards to be set that would be equivalent in cost to using low-NOx burner technology. Bob Beck, vice president of environmental affairs for Edison Electric Institute, said that to meet the standards in the proposed rule, power plants would need low-NO^. burners plus extra technology. Beck claimed that EPA in proposing standards at such low levels was trying to "backdoor" utilities into using more technology than the cost equivalent of low-NOx burners. To comply, plants must install one or more of a list of technologies that includes low-NOx burners, a variety of combustion controls, reburning, and scrubbers. However, companies that own more than one boiler can average emissions as long as tfie average is under the limit. An alternative lower emissions standard is available under certain circumstances, Tsirigotis said. The rule will cost $143 million, mosdy for retrofits and technology purchases, he said.
Older coal-burning electric power TRI deadline extended plants will be required to cut their nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions by The shutdown delayed completion about 35% beginning in 2000 under and distribution of revised Toxics a Jan. 18 proposed rule [Federal Reg- Release Inventory (TRI) reporting ister 1996, 6i(13), 1441-80]. Coalforms that include the chemicals fired power plants account for aladded to the list in 1994. EPA is exmost 33% of total NOx emissions, tending the reporting deadline from according to EPA. July 1 to Aug. 1 [Federal Register, 1996, 61 {12), 2722-23]. Required under Title IV of the Clean Air Act, the proposed rule tarCompanies begin reporting an gets a group of boiler types for readditional 286 chemicals added to ductions. These Group 2 boilers inthe TRI list on their 1995 reports. clude cell burners, cyclones, wetUnder new threshold reporting rebottom wall-fired boilers, and quirements issued in 1994, EPA devertically fired boilers. veloped a "short form" for a facility that releases less than 500 pounds The proposed rule would also total in reportable chemicals. EPA tighten limits for Group 1 boilers expects that many facilities will be beginning in 2000. A rule published reporting for the first time. last spring requires Group 1 boilers, VOL.30, NO. 3, 1996 /ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / N E W S " 1 0 7 A
