40 C.F.R. § 264.101

Corrective action for solid waste management units

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The owner or operator of a facility seeking a permit for the treatment, storage or disposal of hazardous waste must institute corrective action as necessary to protect human health and the environment for all releases of hazardous waste or constituents from any solid waste management unit at the facility, regardless of the time at which waste was placed in such unit.

(b) Corrective action will be specified in the permit in accordance with this section and subpart S of this part. The permit will contain schedules of compliance for such corrective action (where such corrective action cannot be completed prior to issuance of the permit) and assurances of financial responsibility for completing such corrective action.

(c) The owner or operator must implement corrective actions beyond the facility property boundary, where necessary to protect human health and the environment, unless the owner or operator demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Regional Administrator that, despite the owner's or operator's best efforts, the owner or operator was unable to obtain the necessary permission to undertake such actions. The owner/operator is not relieved of all responsibility to clean up a release that has migrated beyond the facility boundary where off-site access is denied. On-site measures to address such releases will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Assurances of financial responsibility for such corrective action must be provided.

(d) This section does not apply to remediation waste management sites unless they are part of a facility subject to a permit for treating, storing or disposing of hazardous wastes that are not remediation wastes.

[50 FR 28747, July 15, 1985, as amended at 52 FR 45798, Dec. 1, 1987; 58 FR 8683, Feb. 16, 1993; 63 FR 65938, Nov. 30, 1998; 71 FR 40272, July 14, 2006]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2022 · leading case: West Virginia State Univ. v. The Dow Chem. Co., 23 F.4th 288 (4th Cir. 2022).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

West Virginia State Univ. v. The Dow Chem. Co., 23 F.4th 288 (4th Cir. 2022). · cites it 2× “” 40 C.F.R. § 264.101 (c). Therefore, Plaintiff’s state claims are of the kind permitted by federal law.”

United States v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 829 F. Supp. 1023 (N.D. Ind. 1993). · cites it 2× “14 , and complies with requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 264.101 . 9. Pursuant to 40 C.”

Clean Harbors Servs., Inc. v. Ill. Int'l, 309 F. Supp. 3d 556 (E.D. Ill. 2018). “*563 Clean Harbors alleges these actions violate (i) Section 4 of Attachment I and Section V(C)(1) of the Permit; (ii) 35 Ill.”

West Virginia State Univ. v. The Dow Chem. Co. (4th Cir. 2022). · cites it 3× “§ 6924 (v); 40 C.F.R. § 264.101 (c). In cases where, as here, a permittee is unable to obtain consent for offsite corrective action—in this case a restrictive covenant—the EPA’s own regulation states that the permittee is “not relieved of all responsibility to cleanup a release…”

West Virginia State Univ. Bd. of Governors v. The Dow Chem. Co. (S.D.W. Va 2020). · cites it 2× “The RCRA CA Permit issued by the EPA in 1990 provides that, pursuant to § 3004(u) of RCRA and 40 C.F.R. § 264.101 , operators of the facility must take corrective action as necessary to protect human health and the environment for release of hazardous waste or hazardous…”

United Tech. Corp. v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency, 821 F.2d 714 (D.C. Cir. 1987). “” To implement section 3004(u) in its regulatory scheme, the EPA promulgated 40 C.F.R. § 264.101 (1986), which provides in pertinent part that “[t]he owner or operator of a facility seeking a permit for the treatment, storage or disposal of hazardous waste must institute…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.