Federal Register: March 1, 1994 Part 2. 40 CFR Parts 261, 271, and 302. Hazardous Waste Management System; Carbamate Production Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Proposed Rule


Tuesday
March 1, 1994
 Part II


 Environmental

 Protection  Agency	

 40 CFR Parts 261, 271, and 302
 Hazardous Waste Management System;
 Carbamate Production Identification and
 Listing of Hazardous Waste; Proposed
 Rule

-------

-------
9808
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No.  40 / Tuesday, March  1,  1994 / Proposed  Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 261,271, and 302
[SWH-FRL-4834-9]
BIN 2050-AD59

Hazardous Waste Management
System; Carbamate Production
Identification and Listing of Hazardous
Waste; and CERCLA Hazardous
Substance Designation and Reportable
Quantities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
amend the regulations for hazardous
waste management under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
by listing as hazardous six wastes
generated during the production of
carbamates, to exempt one of-these
wastes from the definition of hazardous
wastes, if it is demonstrated that
hazardous air pollutants are not being
discharged or volatilized during waste
treatment, and to exempt biological
treatment sludges generated from the
treatment of one of these wastes
provided the sludges are not
characteristically hazardous. The
Agency is also proposing to add 4
generic groups and 70 specific
chemicals to the list of commercial
chemical products that are hazardous
wastes when discarded. Also, EPA is
proposing not to list as hazardous
certain wastes generated during the
manufacture of carbamates. This action
proposes to amend the basis for listing
hazardous waste by adding the six
wastes and hazardous constituents
found in the wastes on which the listing
determinations are based, and to add 78
compounds to the list of hazardous
constituents.
   This action is proposed under the
authority of under sections 3001(e)(2)
and 3001(b)(l) of the Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
 (HSWA), which direct EPA to  make a
hazardous waste listing determination
for carbamate wastes. The effect of this
proposed regulation, if promulgated, is
that these wastes will be subject to
regulation as hazardous wastes under
 subtitle C of RCRA. Additionally, this
 action proposes to designate the wastes
 proposed for listing as hazardous
 substances subject to the
 Comprehensive Environmental
 Response, Compensation, and Liability
 Act (CERCLA). EPA is not taking action
 at this time to adjust the one-pound
                       statutory reportable quantities (RQs) for
                       these substances.
                       DATES: EPA will accept public
                       comments on this proposed rule until
                       May 2,1994. Comments post-marked
                       after this date will be marked "late" and
                       may not be considered. Any person may
                       request a public hearing on this
                       proposal by filing a request with Mr.
                       David Bussard, whose address appears
                       below, by March 15,1994.
                       ADDRESSES: The official record of this
                       rule-making is identified by Docket
                       Number F-94-CPLP-FFFFF and is
                       located at the following address. The
                       public must send an original and two
                       copies of their comments to: EPA RCRA
                       Docket Clerk, room 2616 (5305), U.S.
                       Environmental Protection Agency, 401
                       M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460.
                         Copies of materials relevant to this
                       proposed rulemaking are located in the
                       docket at the address listed above. The
                       docket is open from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
                       Monday through Friday, excluding
                       Federal holidays. The public must make
                       an appointment to review docket
                       materials by calling (202) 260-9327. The
                       public may copy 100 pages from the
                       docket at no charge; additional copies
                       are $0.15 per page.
                          Requests for a hearing should be
                       addressed to Mr. David Bussard at:
                       Characterization and Assessment
                       Division, Office of Solid Waste (5304),
                       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
                       401 M Street SW., Washington, DC
                        20460.
                        FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
                       RCRA/Superfund Hotline, toll-free, at
                        (800) 424-9346 or at (703) 920-9810.
                        The TDD Hotline number is (800) 553-
                        7672 (toll-free) or (703) 486-3323 in the
                        Washington, DC metropolitan area. For
                        technical information on the RCRA
                        hazardous waste listings, contact John
                        Austin, Office of Solid Waste (5304),
                        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
                        401 M Street SW., Washington, DC,
                        20460, (202) 260-4789.
                          For technical information on the
                        CERCLA aspects of this rule, contact:
                        Ms. Gerain H. Perry, Response
                        Standards and Criteria Branch,
                        Emergency Response Division (5202G),
                        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
                        401 M Street SW., Washington, DC
                        20460, (703) 603-8760.
                        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
                        contents of the preamble to this
                        proposed rule are listed in the following
                        outline:
                        I. Legal Authority
                        II. Background
                          A. Introduction
                          B. Previous Listings
                          C. Previous Proposed Listings
  D. Description of the Industry
III. Summary of Proposed Regulation and
   Request for Comments
  A. Overview of the Proposal
  B. Description of the Wastes
  C. Basis for Listing Determination
  1. Waste Characterization and Constituents
   of Concern
  2. Human Health Criteria and Effects
  3. Environmental Damage Cases
  4. Mobility and Persistence of Constituents
   in Carbamate Wastes
  5. Risk Analysis
  6. Estimating Hazard Quotients: Dose
    Response Risk Assessment Techniques
    for Noncancer Endpoints
  7. Ecological Risk Assessment
  8. Summary of Basis for Listing for
    Additional K Listings and Other
    Considerations
  9. Summary Basis for a No-Listing Decision
    or. Waste-waters, and Certain Wastewater
    Treatment Residuals
  10. Summary of Basis for Listing for
    Additional P & U Listings
  D. Source Reduction
IV. Applicability of Land Disposal
    Restrictions Determinations
  A. Request for Comment on the Agency's
    Approach to the Development of BOAT
    Treatment Standards
  B. Request for Comment on the Agency's
    Approach to the Capacity Analyses in
    the LDR Program
V. State Authority
  A. Applicability of Rule in Authorized
    States
  B. Effect on State Authorizations
VI. CERCLA Designation and Reportable
    Quantities
VII. Compliance Dates
  A. Notification
  B. Interim Status and Permitted Facilities
VIII. Executive Order 12866
IX. Economic Analysis
  A. Compliance Costs for Proposed Listings
  1. Universe of Carbamate Production
    Facilities and Waste Volumes
  2. Method for Determining Cost and
    Economic Impacts
  3. P and U List Wastes
  4. Summary of Results
  B. Proposed Rule Impacts
X. Regulatory Flexibility Act
XI. Paperwork Reduction Act

I. Legal Authority

   These regulations are being
promulgated under the authority of
sections 2002(a) and 3001 (b) and (e)(l)
of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), and
6921[b) and  (e)(l), (commonly referred
to as RCRA), and section 102(a) of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C.
 9602(a).

 II. Background

 A. Introduction

   As part of its regulations
 implementing Section 3001(e) of the
 Resource Conservation and Recovery

-------
               Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40  / Tuesday, March 1, 1994  /  Proposed Rules
                                                                                                 9809
Act of 1976, as amended (RCRA), EPA
published a list of hazardous wastes that
includes hazardous wastes generated
from specific sources. This list has been
amended several times, and is
published in 40 CFR 261.32. In this
action, EPA is proposing to amend this
section to add six wastes generated
during the production of carbamate
chemicals. In addition, under the
authority of section 3001 of RCRA, EPA
has promulgated in 40 CPR 261.33 a list
of commercial chemical products or
manufacturing chemical intermediates
that are hazardous wastes if they are
discarded or intended to be discarded.
In this action, the Agency is proposing
to add four generic and 70 specific
materials to this list.
  All hazardous wastes listed under
RCRA and codified in 40 CFR 261.31
through 261.33, as well as any soh'd
waste that exhibits one or more of the
characteristics of a RCRA hazardous
waste (as defined in 40 CFR 261.21
through 261.24), are also hazardous
substances under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA), as amended. See CERCLA
                            section 101(14)(C). CERCLA hazardous
                            substances are listed in Table 302.4 at
                            40 CFR 302.4 along with their reportable
                            quantities (RQs). Accordingly, the
                            Agency is proposing to list the proposed
                            wastes in this action as CERCLA
                            hazardous substances in Table 302.4 of
                            40 CFR 302.4. EPA is not taking action
                            at this time to adjust the one-pound
                            statutory RQs for these substances.
                              The following discussion briefly
                            summarizes prior regulatory actions
                            affecting wastes from the carbamates
                            industry, and presents an overview of
                            the industry.

                            B. Previous Listings
                              A number of carbamate products and
                            wastes have previously been listed as
                            hazardous wastes when discarded. The
                            Agency notes that neither the scope of
                            the existing hazardous waste listings
                            (described below) nor their regulation
                            under CERCLA are affected in any way
                            by this proposal. EPA is not soliciting
                            comments concerning these listings and
                            does not intend to respond to any such
                            comments received.
                              The following carbamate wastes from
                            the production of
                            ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid (EBDC)
and its salts have already been listed as
hazardous wastes based on the presence
of the carcinogen ethylene thiourea
(ETU) in the wastes (51 FR 37725,
October 24,1985):

K123—Process Wastewater (including
  supernates, filtrates, and wash-waters) from
  the production of
  ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid and its
  salts.
K124—Reactor vent scrubher water from the
  production of ethylenebisdithiocarbamic
  acid and its salts.                     :
K125—Purification solids (including
  filtration, evaporation, and centrifugation
  solids) from the production of
  ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid and its ,
  salts.
K126—Baghouse dust and floor sweepings in
  milling and packaging operations from the
  production or formulation of
  ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid and its
  salts.

  In addition, EPA has promulgated in
40 CFR 261.33 a list of commercial
chemical products or manufacturing
chemical intermediates that are
hazardous wastes if they are discarded
or intended to be discarded which
includes the carbamate materials listed
in Table 1.           ;
                                TABLE 1 .—CARBAMATE HAZARDOUS WASTE LISTINGS
Waste No.
                                    Name(s) used in CFR
                                                                                                        CAS No.
P045	
P070	
P066.
U062
U114
U178
U238
U244
2-Butanone, 3,3-dimethyl-1- (methylthio)-, O- [(methylamino)- carbonyl] oxime	
AWtearb	
Methomyl	
Diallate Carbamothioic acid, bis(l-methylethyl)-, S-(2,3-dichloro-2- propenyl) ester	
Carbamothloic acid, 1,2-ethanediylbis- salts and esters Ethylene bisdithiocarbamate acid, salts, & esters
Carbamte acid, methylnitroso-, ethyl ester	
Carbamte acid, ethyl ester Ethyl carbamate	
Thlram	
                          391696-18-4
                             116-06-3
                           16752-77-5
                            2303-16-4
                           1111-54-6a
                             615-52-2
                              51-79-6
                             137-26-8
  i CAS number given for parent compound only.
   In addition, EPA classified certain carbamate products and wastes as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended. CERCLA hazardous substances
are listed in Table  302.4 at 40 CFR  302.4 along with their reportable quantities (RQs)  and include the carbamate
wastes in Table 2.                                                                                 '

     TABLE 2.—LIST OF CURRENTLY REGULATED CARBAMATE CERCLA HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE
                                                   QUANTITIES
Hazardous substance
Atdfcarb 	
Carbaryl 	 	
Carbofuran 	
Diallate 	
Ethyl carbamate 	
Ethylene- bfedithfocarbamto acid, salts & esters 	
Melhomyl 	
Mothiocarb 	
Moxacarbate 	
Thfofanox 	
Carbamic add, methylnitroso-, ethyl ester 	
TWram 	 	
Triethylamine 	
K123 	
K124 	 	 	
CAS No.
116-06-3
63-25-2
1563-66-2
2303-16—4
51 79-6
111-54-6
16752-77 5
2032-65-7
315-18-4
39196-18-4
615-3-2
1<>7 OR-fi
121-44-8


Final RQ
(Ibs)
1
100
10
100
100
5000
100
10
1000
100
1
10
5000
10
10

-------
9810           Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday,  March 1, 1994 /Proposed  Rules

     TABLE 2.—LIST OF CURRENTLY REGULATED CARBAMATE CERCLA HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE
                                              QUANTITIES—Continued
Hazardous substance
I/HOC 	
K126... 	 	 	 ••• 	 .-•-••• 	 .----» 	 -
CAS No.


Final RQ
(Ibs)
10
10
                                             C. Previous Proposed Listings                          •
    The  carbamates listed in Table  3 were  proposed to be  included in the list of commercial chemical products or
manufacturing chemical  intermediates that  are hazardous wastes  if they  are  discarded or intended  to  be discarded
under 40 CFR  261.33 (49 FR  49784, December 21, 1984). These carbamate listings were proposed  in response to a
petition  by  the  State of Michigan to include 109 chemicals to the lists in 40 CFR 261.33. This  rule was never finalized.
Today the" Agency is  reproposing  a  number of carbamate chemicals, that were  also pint of the Michigan  petition. EPA
is not soliciting comments concerning any other compounds contained in  the  December 21, 1984;  notice and does
not intend to respond to any such comments received.

                         TABLE 3.—1984 PROPOSED CARBAMATE HAZARDOUS WASTE LISTINGS
Proposed waste No.
PHOT
P-fOQ
1 1971
I I977
I IO7ft
I IO7Q
i loan
U336 	 	 	 	
Name(s) used in FR



Qiilfallfltp ..;..... 	 	 	 	 	 .,.' 	 	 	 •' 	



Ziram 	 	 	 • 	 • 	 •»»... 	 • 	 • 	 ••»•••» 	 .....:.....
CAS No.
1563-66-2
315-18-4
17804-35-2
95^06-7
22781-23-3
63-25-2
101-27-9
137-30-4
    Additionally, a number  of acutely  toxic .carbamate products have been  proposed under section 302(A)(2)  of the
 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization  Act of. 1986  (SARA)  as  Extremely Hazardous Substances for addition to
 Table 302.4 at 40  GFR 302.4 along with their reportable  quantities  (RQs). These carbamate  compounds  are  listed in
 Table 4. The Extremely Hazardous Substances Proposal (54 FR 3388,  January  23,  1989) has also not been  promulgated.
 The  Agency requests additional comment only for those carbamates listed in  Table 4, which were previously proposed
 only for addition to Table 302.4. The Agency does not intend to respond to comments  received on other constituents
 in the January 23, 1989, notice.                             ,

                    TABLE 4.—PROPOSED EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND PROPOSED RQs
   CAS No.
                                               Chemical name (common name)
                                                                                              Proposed
                                                                                             RQ pounds
  26419-73-8
     57-64-7

     119-38-0
    1129-41-5
     644-64-1
  23135-22-0
  17702-57-7
  23422-53-9

     64-00-6
    2631-37-0
     57-47-6
1 3-Dithiolane-2-carboxaldehyde, 2,4-dimethyl-, O-[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxime (Tirpate)	-...,;	.....-•
Benzoic acid, 2-hydroxy, compd. with (3aSn:is)- 1,2.3,3a,8,8a-hexahydrc-1,3a,8- trimothylpyrrolo[2,3-b]indol-5-yl
  methylcarbamate ester (1:1) (Physostimigine salicylate).
Carbarnic acid, dimethyl-, 3-methyl-1-(1- methylethyl)-1 H-pyrazol-5-yl ester (Isolan)	;	
Carbamic acid, methyl-, 3-methylphenyl ester (Metolcarb) .....	
Carbarnic acid, dimethyl-,1- (dimethylamino)carbonyl)-5-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3- yl ester (Dimetilan)	
Ethanimidothioic acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N- [[methylamino carbonyl] oxy]-2-oxo-, methyl ester (Oxamyl)	.....
Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N'-[2-methyl-4- [t(methylamino)carbonyl]bxy]phenyl]- (Formparanate) ..•.,.,...,..,..	
Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N'-[3- [[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]-, monohydrochloride (Formetanate hy-
  drochloride).
Phenol, 3-(1-methylethyl), methyl carbamate (UC 10854)	;	..	...»	
Phenol, 3-methyl-5-(1-methylethyl)-methyl carbamate (Promecarb)	»	
Pyrrolb[2,3-b]indol-5-ol, 1,2,3,3a,8,8a- hexahydro-1,3a,8-trimethyl-, methylcarbamate  (ester),  (3aS-cis)- (Physo-
  stigmine).	  .,-	-         	'
  D. Description of the Industry

   The U.S. carbamates manufacturing
  industry is a very diverse industry in
  both products manufactured and
  companies that make up the industry.
  The carbamates manufacturing industry
  is made up of four major classes of
  compounds with distinct functional
  characteristics. These include
                           carbamates, carbamoyl oximes,
                           thiocarbamates, and ditblocarbamates.
                            In 1990, the carbamate industry in the
                           U.S. was composed of 64 chemical
                           products produced by 20 manufacturers
                           at 24 facilities. The majority of the
                           carbamate manufacturers are located in
                           the eastern half of the United States
                           with only four facilities located west of
                           the Mississippi River. There are
                           carbamate manufacturers located in 13
states. The total domestic production of
carhamates in 1990 was approximately
112,000 metric tons (MT). In 1990,
individual carbamate products were
manufactured at a rate of between 2.5
and 14,000 metric tons per year.
Carbamates are manufactured at very
different rates depending on the type of
product. Typically, dithiocarbamates are
produced in smaller quantities than
other classes of carbamates. Based on

-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9811
the results of EPA's RCRA § 3007
survey, the typical carbamate facility
manufactures one carbamate product or
one chemical class of carbamate
products. Of the 24 carbamate
manufacturing facilities 14 produce
only dithiocarbamates. Five of these 14
only produce one dithiocarbamate
product. Of the remaining ten carbamate
manufacturers 5 produce one carbamate
product. Three of the remaining 5
manufacturers produce a single class of
carbamates (e.g., carbamate, carbamoyl
oxime, or thiocarbamate) and 2 produce
more than one class of carbamate.
Carbamate products are widely used as
active ingredients in pesticides (i.e.,
herbicides, insecticides, and
fungicides). Dithiocarbamates are also
manufactured for use in the rubber
processing industry as rubber
accelerators. Uses have also been found
for carbamates in the wood preserving
and textiles industries.
The commercial manufacture of
carbamates currently includes five
chemical reaction processes: (1)
Reaction of an isocyanate with an
alcohol to form a carbamate, (2) reaction
of an amine and a chloroformate to form
a carbamate, (3) reaction of an
isocyanate and an organic oxime to form
a carbamoyl oxime, (4) reaction of an
organic chlorothioformate and an amine
to form a thiocarbamate, and (5) the
reaction of an amine with carbon
disulfide in the presence of a metal salt
to form a dithiocarbamate. The primary
raw materials used in the production of
these products will vary depending on
the final product. The Carbamate
Background Document i (available in
the RCRA Docket at EPA
Headquarters—see ADDRESSES section)
and the sources cited therein describe
these production processes more
thoroughly.
Most carbamate, carbamoyl oxime,
and thiocarbamate facility operations
are organized along similar process h'nes
with a carbamate intermediate
preparation phase (e.g. alcohol or
oxime), the carbamolation step, and
product and reactant recovery phase.
Dithiocarbamate production facilities
are generally run as batch operations
> Tho Background Document consists of
Engineering Analysis of the Production of
Carbamates, Carbamato Waste Listing Support:
Health Effects Background Document, Assessment
of Risks from tho Management of Carbamate Wastes,
and other supporting documents. Because of the
confidential naluro of tho information in the
Engineering Analysis, it has been classified as
Confidential Business Information (CBI), and is not
available to tho public. However, a concise
summary of this document has been assembled for
tho public docket. EPA's procedures governing the
handling of information claimed as confidential.
Including procedures for challenging a CBI
determination are found at 40 CFR Part 2.
where the reactants are put into a stirred
reaction vessel and allowed to come to
reaction completion. Facilities typically
operate with a common wastewater
treatment plant for all facility
operations.

III. Summary of the Proposed
Regulation and Request for Comments

A. Overview of the Proposal
Under section 3001(e) of RCRA, EPA
must make listing determinations on
wastes generated by specific industries,
including the carbamate industry. The
carbamate industry can be divided into
three major segments that include
carbamates and carbamoyl oximes,
thiocarbamates, and dithiocarbamates.
This rule, if finalized, will satisfy the
section 3001 (e) requirement to make
hazardous waste listing determinations
for wastes from the carbamate industry.
This action proposes to list as hazardous
six wastes generated during the
production of carbamates:
K156—Organic waste (including heavy ends,
still bottoms, light ends, spent solvents,
filtrates, and decantates) from the
production of carbamates and carbamoyl
oximes.
K157—Wastewaters (including scrubber
waters, condenser waters, washwaters, and
separation waters) from the production of
carbamates and carbamoyl oximes.
K158—Bag house dust, and filter/separation
solids from the production of carbamates
and carbamoyl oximes.
K159—Oiganics from the treatment of
thiocarbamate wastes.
K160—Solids (including filter wastes,
separation solids, and spent catalysts) from
the production of thiocarbamates and
solids from the treatment of thiocarbamate
wastes.
K161—Purification solids (including
filtration, evaporation, and centrifugation
solids), baghouse dust, and floor sweepings
from the production of dithiocarbamate
acids and their salts. (This listing does not
include K125 or K126.)
Under the authority of section 3001 of
the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976, as amended
(RCRA), and EPA's regulations at 40
CFR 261.11, EPA has promulgated in 40
CFR 261.33 a list of commercial
chemical products or manufacturing
chemical intermediates that are
hazardous wastes if they are discarded
or intended to be discarded. The phrase
"commercial chemical product or
manufacturing chemical intermediate"
refers to a chemical substance which is
manufactured or formulated for
commercial or manufacturing use, and
which consists of the commercially pure
grade of the chemical, any technical
grades of the chemical that are produced
or marketed, and all formulations in
which the chemical is the sole active
ingredient. Section 261.33 also lists as
hazardous wastes off-specification
variants and the residues and debris
from the clean-up of spills of these
chemicals if discarded (§ 261.33 (b) and
(d)). Finally § 261.33 lists as hazardous
wastes the containers that have held
those chemicals listed in § 261.33(e), if
they are discarded, unless the
containers have been triple-rinsed with
a solvent capable of removing the
chemical, or have been decontaminated
in an equivalent manner.
In listing waste as hazardous at
§ 261.33, the Agency intends to
encompass those hazardous chemical
products which, for various reasons, are
sometimes disposed in pure or diluted
form. The regulation is intended to
designate chemicals themselves as
hazardous waste, if discarded.
A chemical substance is listed in 40
CFR 261.33(e), if it meets the criteria of
§ 261.11(a)(2); that is, it is acutely
hazardous because it has been found to
be fatal to humans in low doses or in the
absence of data on human toxicity, it
has been shown in animal studies to
have an oral (rat) LD50 of less than 50
milligrams per kilogram, a dermal
(rabbit) LD50 of less than 200
milligrams per kilogram, an inhalation
(rat) L.C50 of less than 2 mg/L, or is
otherwise capable of causing or
significantly contributing to serious
illness.
Chemical substances which pose toxic
threats to human health or the
environment are listed in 40 CFR
261.33(f). For the purposes of
identifying wastes to be included on
this list of toxic discarded commercial
products, off-specification species,
container residues , and spill residues
thereof, the Agency considers
principally the nature of the toxicity
(see 40 CFR 261.11(a)(3)(i)) and its
concentration (see 40 CFR
This action proposes that the 22
substances listed in Table 5 be added to
the list of acutely hazardous wastes. The
commercial chemical products
bendiocarb and ziram were previously
proposed to be listed as toxic hazardous
wastes (49 FR 49784). Today the Agency
is proposing to list these two chemicals
as acutely hazardous, based on more
current toxicity information. This action
also proposes that four generic groups
and 48 specific substances listed in
Table 6 should be added to the list of
toxic hazardous wastes because all of
these compounds meet the criteria for
listing hazardous wastes contained in 40
CFR 261.11(a)(3).
The Agency requests comments on
the proposed listing of the above wastes,
particularly those identified as K156-

-------
9812
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
K161 wastes, and on the option of not
listing these wastes. EPA requests
comments on the data used in this
proposed listing determination, the
methodology and assumptions used in
the risk assessment, and other analyses
suppoirting the proposed listings.
TABLE 5.—LIST OF PROPOSED ACUTE HAZARDOUS WASTES
Hazardous waste
No.
P185
P1R7
PHOT
P188
P189
P190
P191
P1Q9
P193
P194
pi 95
P196
P197
P198
P198
P1QQ
ppnn
pom
P9fW
P203
P204
P205

Hazardous waste
No.
U360
U361
U362
U363
II97Q
mRA
i n
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9813
TABLE 6.— LIST OF PROPOSED Toxic HAZARDOUS WASTES— Continued
Hazardous waste
No.
U388
U389
U390
U391
U392
U393
U394
U395
U396
U397
U398
U399
U400
U401
U402
U403 „
U404
U405
U406
U407
Toxic hazardous wastes— IUPAC Name (Common name in parentheses)
Carbamothioic acid, (1 ,2-dimethylpropyl) ethyl-, S- (phenylmethyl) ester (Esprocarb)
Carbamothioic acid, bis(l-methylethyl)-, S-(2,3,3-trichlorc-2- propenyl) ester (Triallate)
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-ethyl ester (Eptam)
Carbamothioic acid, butylethyl-, S-propyl ester (Pebulate)
Carbamothioic acid, bis(2-methylpropyl)-, S-ethyl ester (Butylate)
Copper, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioato- S,S')-, (Copper dimethyld'rthiocarbamate)
Ethanimidothioic acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N-hydroxy-2-oxo-, methyl ester (A221 3) :
Ethanol, 2,2'-oxybis-, dicarbamate (Reactacrease 4-DEG)
Iron, tris(dimethyl carbamodithioato- S.S')-, (Ferbam)
Lead, bis(dipentyl carbamodithioato S,S')-
Molybdenum, bis(dibutyl carbamothioato)di-.mu.-oxodioxodi-, sulfurized
Nickel, bis(dibutyl carbamodithioato- S,S')-(Nickel dibutyldithiocarbamate)
Piperidine, 1,1'- (tetrathiodicarbonothioyl)-bis-(Sulfads)
Bis(dimethyl thiocarbamoyl) sulfide (Tetramethylthiuram monosulfide)
Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide, tetrabutyl (Butyl Tuads)
Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide, tetraethyl (Disulfiram)
Ethanamine, N,N-diethyt- (Triethylamine) .
Zinc, bis[bis(phenylmethyl)carbamodithioato S,S"]- (Arazate)
Zinc bis(dibutylcafbamodithioato- S,S')-(Butyl Ziram)
Zinc, b!s(diethylcarbamodithioatc- S,S')-(Ethyl Ziram)
CAS No.
ocyoc. on_o
OQIV^— 1 7-J\
7f\Q—QA~A
1114—71 9
onnR-41— R
117 no 1
Qn^Rft-^d
-------
9814
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
grouped by like physical properties due
to their similar management, and to
facilitate the development of potential
land disposal treatment standards (see
40 CFR 268.2(f)). Wastewaters with less
than 1 percent by weight of total organic
carbon (TOG) and less than 1 percent by
weight of total suspended solids (TSS)
were grouped as aqueous. Liquids that
contained equal to or greater than 1
percent by weight of TOG were grouped
as organic, and wastes that contain
equal to or greater than 1 percent by
weight of TSS were grouped as solids.
When process and wastes
characterizations are taken into account,
ten waste groups result.
Group 1 consists of organic waste
(including heavy ends, still bottoms,
light ends, spent solvents, filtrates, and
decantates) from the production of
carbamates and carbamoyl oximes. The
Agency is proposing that these wastes
be listed as Hazardous Waste Number
K156.
Group 2 wastes include wastewaters
(including scrubber waters, condenser
waters, washwaters, separation waters)
from the production of carbamates and
carbamoyl oximes. Group 2 wastewaters
are proposed to be listed as Hazardous
Waste Number K157.
Group 3 consists of solids from the
production of carbamate and carbamoyl
oxime products. These wastes are
typically generated from the filtration of
liquid products and include such wastes
as baghouse dusts, dust collector bags,
and process precipitates, and may
contain high levels of carbamate
product. From this generic waste
grouping, wastewater treatment sludges
and spent carbon from the production of
carbamates and carbamoyl oximes are
not proposed for listing. The decision
not to list these wastes and other waste
groupings is discussed in detail in
section III.C.8. Group 3 baghouse dusts
and filter/separation solids are proposed
to be listed as Hazardous Waste Number
K158.
Group 4 wastes include organics from
the treatment of thiocarbamate wastes.
These wastes are generated from the
treatment of the brine wastewater from
the carbamolation reaction, and are
proposed to be listed as Hazardous
Waste Number K159.
Group 5 wastes are wastewaters from
the production of thiocarbamates and
treatment of wastes from thiocarbamate
production. EPA is proposing not to list
this group of wastes.
Group 6 wastes are the solids
(including filter wastes, separation
solids, and spent catalysts) from the
production of thiocarbamates and solids
from the treatment of thiocarbamate
wastes. These wastes include spent
catalysts generated from the production
of chlorothioformates, filter cakes from
the filtration of product to remove
byproduct amine chlorides, and solid
wastes resulting from the treatment of
waste brine from the carbamolation
step. The Agency is proposing to list
Group 6 wastes as Hazardous Waste
Number K160.
Group 7 wastes include process
wastewater (including supernates,
filtrates, and washwaters) and Group 8
includes reactor vent scrubber water
from the production of
dithiocarbamates. EPA is proposing not
to list group 7 or group 8 wastes.
Group 9 wastes include purification
solids, baghouse dust, and floor
sweepings from the production of
dithiocarbamates. In many cases these
wastes are the residues resulting from
the filtration of a liquid product, and
includes filtration media, filters, filter .
cloths, centrifugation solids,
evaporation solids, or dryer wastes.
Group 9 wastes are proposed for listing
as Hazardous Waste Number K161.
Group 10 wastes include organic
wastes (including spent solvents,
solvent rinses, process decantates, and
still bottoms) from the production of
dithiocarbamates. EPA is proposing not
to list this group of wastes.
Based on data collected from industry
by the 1990 RCRA section 3007 survey,
engineering site visits, and sampling
and analysis, the Agency believes that
each of the waste groups typically
contain significant concentrations of
hazardous constituents. Table 7
identifies the constituents of concern for
the carbamate waste streams. The
Agency conducted sampling and
analysis of each of these wastes to
support this proposed hazardous waste
listing determination. The following
section, III.C., presents this data and
additional health effects data, which are
the basis for the Agency's proposal to
list or not list the wastes studied in this
rulemaking.
The total reported generation rate of
these wastes in 1990 was approximately
841,000 metric tons. Tables 8 and 9
present the characteristics of, and
management method used for these
wastes by group.
TABLE 7.—WASTE STREAM CONSTITUENTS
Waste group
Constituent
1—Organic Carbamate/Car-
bamoyl Oxime Wastes.

2—Aqueous Carbamate/Car-
bamoyl Oxime Wastes.
3—Solid Carbamate/Car-
bamoyl Oxime Wastes.
4—Organic Thiocarbamate
Wastes.
5—Aqueous Thiocarbamate
Wastes.
6—Solid Thiocarbamate
Wastes.
7—Aqueous
Dithiocarbamate Process
Waters.
8—Aqueous
Dithiocarbamate Scrubber
Wastes.
9—Solid Dithiocarbamate
Wastes.
10—Organic
Dithiocarbamate Wastes.
Acetone, acetonitrile, acetophenone, aniline, benomyl, benzene, carbai-yl, carbendazim, carbofuran, carbosulfan
chlorobenzene, chloroform, odichlorobenzene, hexane, methanol, methomyl, methyl ethyl ketone, methyl
isobutyl ketone, methylene chloride, naphthalene, phenol, pyridine, toluene, triethylamme, xylene.
Acetone, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, formaldehyde, methomyl, methyl isobutyl ketone, methyl chloride,
methyl ethyl ketone, methylene chloride, ophenylenediamine, pyridine, trieShylamine.
Benomyl, carbendazim, carbofuran, carbosulfan, chloroform, hexane, methanol, methylene chloride, phenol, xy-
lene.
Benzene, butylate, eptam, molinate, pebulate, vernolate.

Benzene, butylate, eptam, molinate, pebulate, toluene, vernolate, xylene.

Butylate, eptam, cycloate, molinate, pebulate, vernolate.

Carbon disulfide, dithiocarbamate product, xylene. ;

Carbon disulfide, dithiocarbamate product, methylene chloride, n-nttrosodimethylamine.

Carbon disulfide, dithiocarbamate product, xylene.

Carbon disulfide, dithiocarbamate product, hexane, toluene, xylene.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9815
TABLE 8.—1990 WASTE MANAGEMENT BY RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE IDENTIFICATION AND GROUP
[metric tons/year] i
Waste classification
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
Group 4
Group 5
Group 6
Group 7
Group 8
Group 9
Group 10
Total
Non-haz.
46,398
140,145
9,729
43,810
46,054
3,493

289,629
As-haz.
1,912
3,735
0.4
77
7,218
195
46.8
13,185
Corr.
69780
246,595
14.8
130 664
9
49.1

447,112
Ignit.
1 980
6.8
5.5
1.1
3.1
162.9
2,159
TC
1 s
41 9
12.3
588
380,430
20
158

381,090
I&TC
O QfV>

549

65.4
2,916
I&C

2,773
TC&C

1,055
Unknown

,000

230
t>y
91
1,983
Non-Haz.: Managed as nonhazardous waste
As-Haz.: Managed as a hazardous waste
Characteristically Hazardous Wastes
Ignit: IgnitaWe (40 CFR 261.21)
Corr.: Corrosive (40 CFR 261.22)
I&C: IgnitaWe and corrosive
I&TC: IgnHable and TC
TC&C: TC and corrosive
TC: Toxteity Characteristic (40 CFR 261.24)
'Wastes may have several classifications; therefore, the total mass of each waste group may exceed the actual mass
aThere is a toxic stream in Group 8 but it was not generated in 1990.

TABLE 9.—CURRENT WASTE MANAGEMENT BY WASTE TYPE AND QUANTITY
[metric tons/year]
Group
Recycle/Reuse
Incineration
Fuel Blending
Boiler
PrOTW
WWTP
Subtitle C Landfill ....
Subtitle D Landfill ....
Deep Well Injection .
Other
Total
1
1,601
3,263

6,360
2,922
112,292

126,438
2

1.975

20,497
4,986
238,751

266,209
3
26
18

1340

6
1,390
4

549

549
5

130,664

213582

344,246
6

665

665
7
701

42,599
1 410
4670

1 517
645
51,542
8
cy
50

45,957
23

inn
13
46,200
9

•f QO

3,458
10

65
367
Total

<£,O29
C QCC

6,360
109,053
Q QA1

4,t>oy
729
841,064
POTW—Publicly Owned Treatment Works
PrOTW—Privately Owned Treatment Works
WWTP—Wastewater Treatment Plant
C. Basis for Listing Determination
1. Waste Characterization and
Constituents of Concern
The Agency has conducted significant
data gathering efforts in order to
evaluate each of the criteria for listing
hazardous wastes found at 40 CFR
261.11. In conducting its investigation
before proposing to list a specific waste
under 40 CFR 261.32, the Agency
characterized the waste based on survey
information, engineering analysis, and
sampling and analysis. The constituents
of concern in this proposal were
identified by these methods and are
proposed as the basis for listing and for
addition to appendix VII of 40 CFR part
261 (sco Table 7). The toxic constituents
of concern which are the basis of this
and possibly future hazardous waste
listing determinations are being
proposed for addition to appendix VIII
of 40 CFR part 261 pursuant to 40 CFR
This section summarizes the
information concerning waste
characterization and constituents of
concern that EPA has gathered to
support this proposed listing. Other
compounds also have been identified in
these wastes but are not presented as
constituents of concern because they are
either not sufficiently toxic, are present
at low concentrations, or do not migrate
through the environment under
reasonable conditions.
Information regarding the identity and
concentration of the compounds found
in carbamate wastes from EPA sampling
during engineering site visits is
presented in summary form in the
Appendix A of the "non-CBI"
Engineering Analysis of the Production
of Carbamates, which is available in the
Public Docket for this proposed
rulemaking. See "ADDRESSEES" section.
The constituents of concern are found
at varying levels in each of the
carbamate waste streams proposed for
listing. Despite differences in
constituents and concentrations, each of
the wastes proposed for listing exhibit
similar levels of potential hazard and
are also amenable to similar treatment
technology. The Agency therefore is
proposing to regulate wastes from each
of these processes together under the
K156 through K161 listings.
Table 10 lists the constituents found
at concentrations above the level of
concern (the Agency's rationale for
identifying a concentration level of
-------
9816 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
concern is detailed in the following
section) from wastes sampled and
analyzed by the Agency during the
course of the engineering analysis of
wastes in the carbamate industry and
effluent guideline development under
sections 405 (d) and (e) of the Clean
Water Act (CWA), or reported present
by the manufacturer in response to the
Agency's RCRA section 3007
questionnaire. This table presents a
compilation of all concentration data for
each group of waste studied. Additional
constituents were detected at
concentrations below the level of
concern. All of the collected data is
presented in the carbamates engineering
analysis. However, the risk analysis
described in section IILC.5. of this
preamble used only the results of the
carbamate industry study.
TABLE 10.—RANGE OF CONCENTRATIONS FOR CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN
Group
1

6 .

Constituent of concern
acetone
acetonitrile
acetophenone
aniline
benomyl
benzene
carbaryl ..:
carbendazim
carbofuran
carbosulfan
chlorobenzene
chloroform
o-dichlorobenzene
hexane
methanol
methomyl
methyl ethyl ketone
methyl isobutyl ketone
methylene chloride
naphthalene
phenol
pyridine
toluene
triethylamine
xylene
acetone
carbon tetrachloride
chloroform
formaldehyde
methomyl
methyl isobutyl ketone
methyl chloride
methyl ethyl ketone
methylene chloride
o-phenylenediamine .".
pyridine
triethylamine ;
benomyl
carbendazim
carbofuran
carbosulfan
chloroform
hexane
methanol
methylene chloride
phenol
xylene
butylate
eptam
molinate
pebulate
vernolate
benzene
butylate
eptam
molinate
pebulate
vernolate
benzene
toluene
butylate
eptam
molinate
No. of
streams

3
1
1
2
•)
•)
2
3
3
•)
•)
1
8
10
2
4
6
7
•)
5
6
3
2
g
19
1
5
1
5
5
5
5
15
•)
3
5

2
2
1
1
•)
2
3
2
2
•|
1
1
•)
•]
•j
2
•a
2
3
2
•)
•)
2
3
1
Max. cone.
(ppm)
onn nnn
400 000
ftQn 7
^ ft
20 000
^n
100 000
80 000
10 nnn
350 000
1 flnn
1 9
19 nnn
200 000
Qin nnn
38 7
500 000
650000
1 50 000
6 440
1 9ft 7nn
1 "v\ nnn
980 000
OQO nnn
QQR inn

n "ii
86
4R
4n nnn
°,nn
49nrt
m nnn
4 mn
77 A
13 600
7380
on nnn
on nnn
7nn nnn
1 nn nnn
9 finn
^ ftnn
RQ f\
1^ nnn
*>nnn
135 100
en nnn
en nnn
en nnn
en nnn
50 000
01=.
1 9
iyn
^Q
n 71
01ft
1 mn
9400
ft nnn
4m nnn
22.000
Mln. cone.
(ppm)

en nnn
onn 7
°. ft
oo
ocn
mn nnn
99 •*
b AQf\
9'
1 ftnn
' 1 9
i 1 9 nnn
49
Q 9^
1 nfi
Rft
i 91 nnn
1 ft
ft 44n
i n niQft
i Q9n
oon
eon

n m
1 n n94
4fi
; ,n nn-IA
' n ft
A nn7ft
1 1
nn74
' 77 A
17 ft
74

n ^
I CO
1 on nnn
9 finn
o onn
; «co
n n47
1 n ^4ft
fim
Kf\ nnn
en nnn
i en nnn
i en nnn
en nnn
I n 1*\
i n i

7 e.
1 n m^
n noi

Q 4nn
7 4nn
'i 9 nnn
99 nnn
Mean cone.
(ppm)

^14,OuZ
1 7fi ftftY

0 Q
m m 1

mn nnn
4n m 1
7 AC£7
117 4*^1

•70 7ec

1^1 94n
OQC Hfi7

ft 44n

ooo.o
9 Q

Ope n

4 ftft7
1 Qm

1U,UUU
m nnn

9 ftnn

CO 0
R nnn

en nnn

Q 4nn

99 nnn
Median
cone, (ppm)

96,000

oyu.f

obU

,oUU
1.2
1 AUUU

toO.llJU

0,000
4y,/ou

14o,290

2.9
U.ol

49.5

o.O

1 0,000

ooU.UUo

o.oUU

^,OUU

OU.UUU
OU.UUU

.10

./
^o.o
u.uy
u.uy
,100

o,l UU
oo nnn
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules 9817
TABLE 10.—RANGE OF CONCENTRATIONS FOR CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN—Continued
Group

Constituent of concern

xylene • •
No. of
streams
1
1
1
1
4
8
5
2
1
1
5
2
81
2
, 5
7
2
2
Max. cone.
(ppm)
500
620
201
94,000
5,000
10,000
5,000
0.57
104
65,000
6,960
420
1,000,000
240,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
50,000
600,000
Min. cone. .
(ppm)
500
620
201
94,000
1;000
10,000
0.028
0.490
104
65,000
42.4
15
1,000
240,000
4,000
600,000
50,000
600,000
Mean cone.
(ppm)
500
620
201
94,000
3,750
10,000
1,178
0.53
104
65,000
2,039
218
505,201
240,000
676,800
942,857
50,000
600,000
Median
cone, (ppm)
500
620
201
94,000
4,500
10,000
15
0.53
104
65,000
70.9
218
450,000
240,000
950,000
1,000,000
50,000
600,000
2. Human Health Criteria and Effects

The Agency uses health-based levels,
or HBLs, to evaluate levels of concern of
toxic constituents in various media. In '
establishing HBLs, EPA evaluates a
wido variety of health effects data and
existing standards and criteria. EPA
uses any Maximum Contaminant Level
(MCL) promulgated under the Safe
Drinking Water Act as an HBL for
contaminants in aqueous streams. MCLs
are Drinking Water Standards
promulgated under section 1412 of the
Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974
(SDWA), as amended in 1984 for both
carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic
compounds. In setting MCLs, EPA
considers a range of pertinent factors
(see 52 FR 25697-98, July 8,1987). For
other media, or if there is no MCL, EPA
uses an oral reference dose (RfD), an
inhalation reference concentration
(RfC), and/or a carcinogenic slope factor
(CSF) to derive the HBL, in conjunction
with various exposure assumptions and,
for carcinogens, a risk level of concern.
The Agency relies on standard intake
and exposure assumptions to derive
HBLs. Standard daily intake
assumptions are: 2 liters of water; 20
cubic meters of air; 200 mg of soil for
six years (children) and 100 mg of soil
for 24 years (adults). For carcinogens,
the daily intake is averaged over a 70
year lifetime; for noncarcinogens, the
daily intake is averaged over 'a daily
period of exposure. The risk level of
concern may vary, but for the purpose
of deriving HBLs in the following
discussion, the minimal or threshold
risk level of concern is taken as 10-6
(i.e., one incremental cancer risk in a
million based on lifetime exposure). A
given constituent may have an RfD, and
RfC, and/or a CSF, depending on the
variety and nature of the toxic effects.
exhibited. The RfD is an estimate (with
uncertainty spanning perhaps an order
of magnitude) of a daily exposure to the
human population, including sensitive
subgroups, that is likely not to present
appreciable risk of deleterious effects •
during a lifetime. The CSF is an .
estimate of the upper bound confidence
limit of the lifetime risk of developing
cancer, per unit dose, Which results
from the application of a low-dose
extrapolation procedure. When
available, EPA uses RfDs, RfCs, and
CSFs that have been verified by the
Agency's Reference Dose/Reference
Concentration (RfD/RfC) Work Group or
Carcinogen Risk Assessment
Verification Endeavor (CRAVE). If no
verified value exists, other estimates of
RfDs, RfCs, and CSFs are examined to
determine if they are appropriate for use
in establishing HBLs. Health-based
levels in water and soil, and the criteria
used to establish them, are shown in
Table 11 for the constituents identified
in the carbamate wastes. A more
detailed discussion of the toxicity of
these constituents is included in the
background document "Carbamate
Waste Listing Support: Health Effects
Background Document" and associated
materials for this proposal and is
available from the Public Docket at EPA
Headquarters. See ADDRESSES section.
TABLE. 11.—ORAL AND INHALATION TOXICITY INFORMATION FOR WASTE CONSTITUENTS
Constituents
Acctono (67-
64-1).
M-» •/•
Acetophanone
(98-66-2).
Aniiino (62-53-
3).
Anthracene
(120-12-7).

Antimony
(7440-36-0).
RID
(mg/kg/day)
1E-1 (1)
1E-1 (1)

N(1.7)
3E-1 (1)

4E-4
,(1.6,7)
Oral CSF
(mg/kg/day)-'
N- (1.7)
N(1.7)

5.7E-3 (1)
N(1 .7)

N (1,7)
' RfC •
(mg/ms) •
N(1,7);
N(1.7)

1E-3(1)
N(1,7)

N (1,7)
. Inhalation
. CSF ,
(mg/kg/day) ->
N (1.7)
N(1,7)

N(1,7)
N(1,7)

N (1,7)
HBL water
(mg/L)
4E+0
4E+0 '

6.25E-3
1E+1

6E-3
HBL soil
(mg/kg)
8E+3
&E+3

1.0E+2
3E+4

3E+1
MCL
(mg/L)
N(1,6)
Nd,6)

N (1,6)
N (1,6)

0.006 (6)
Toxicity
Systemic: Increased liver and kid-
. ney weights, and nephrotoxicity.
Systemic: General toxicity. .

Cancer: Spleen tumors.
Systemic: Spleen toxicity.
Systemic-: Photoloxic dermatitis,
. inflammation of the gastro-
. intestinal tract.
.Systemic; Increased mortality and
altered blood glucose and cho-
lesterol levels.
-------
9818
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE. 11 .—ORAL AND INHALATION TOXICITY INFORMATION FOR WASTE CONSTITUENTS—Continued
Constituents
Arsenic (7440-
3&-2).

Barium (7440-
39-3).

Benomyl
(17804-35-2).
Bensulide (741-
58-2).
Benz[a]-anthra-
cene (56-55-
3).
Benzene (71-
43-2).
Benzo[b]-fluc-
ranthene
(205^99-2).
Benzo[k]-fluo-
ranthene
(207-08-9).
Benzoicacid
(65-85-0).
Butylamine
(109-73-9).
Butylate (2008-
41-5). .
Cadmium
(7440-43-9).

Carbendazim
(10605-21-
70).
Carbofuran
(1563-66-2).

Carbon disulfide
(75-15-0).

Carbon tetra-
ohloride (56-
23-5).
Carbosulfan
(55285^-14-8).
Chlorobenzene
(108-90-7).
Chloroform (67-
66-3).

Chromium VI
(18540-29-9).

Chrysene (21 8^-
01-9).
Cyanide (57-
12-5).

Cycloate(1134-
23-2).
Dibutylamine
(111-92-2).
1,2-
Dichlorobenz-
ene (95-5f>-
1).
1,3-
bichlorobenz-
ene (541-73-
1).
1,4-
Dichlorobenz-
ene(106-r46-
7).
Diethylphthalate
(84-66-2).

RID
(mg/kg/day)
3E-4 (1)

7E-2 (1)

5E-2 (1)

N (1,7)

2E-1 (92) =

N(l .7)

N (1.7)

N (1,7)

4E+0(1,7)f

N(1,7)

5E-2(1)

5E-4s,
1E-3I- (1)

N(1,7)

5E-3 (1)

1E-1 (1)

7E-4 0)

1E-2 (1)

2E-2 (1)

1E-2 (1)

5E-3(1)

N (1,7)

2E-2(1)

N (1,7)
N(1,7)

9E-2(1)

N(1,7)

N(1 ,7)

8E-1 (1)

Oral CSF
mg/kg/day) -'
1.75E+00)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

2E+1 (92)

2.9E-2 (1)

7.3E-1
(TEF*)«

7.3ET-2
(TEFd)*

N (1,7)

N<1 ,7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

1.3E-1 (1)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

6E-3 (1)

N (1,7)

7.3E-2
(TEF<0«
N (1,7)

N(1,7)
N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

2.4E-2 (7)

N(1,7)

RfC
(mg/m3)
N (1,7)

5E-4(7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1.7)

NO ,7)

1E-2(7)

N (1,7)

N(1 ,7)

2E-2 (7)

N (1,7)

N{1 ,7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1 ,7)
N (1,7)

2E-1 (7)

N(1 ,7)

7E-1 (7)

N (1,7)

Inhalation
CSF
mg/kg/day) -i
1.5E+1 (1)

N(1 ,7)

N (1,7)

N(1, 7)

2.9E-2 (7)

N(1, 7)

N (1,7)

N(1 ,7)

6.3E+0 (1)

N(1 ,7)

N(1. 7)

N (1,7)

5.2E-2 (1)

N (1,7)

8.1E-2(1)

4.2E+1 (1)

N (1,7)

N(1 ,7)

N (1,7)
NO, 7)

N(1,7)

N(1 ,7)

.N (1,7)

N(1 ,7)

HBL water
(mg/L)
5E-2

2E+0

1E-4

5E-3

2E-4

1E+2

2E+0

5E-3

4E-2

4E+0

5E-3

4E-1

1E-1

5.8E-3

1E-1

2E-4

2E-1

NA
NA

6E-1

7.5E-2

3E+1

HBL soil
(mg/kg)
4E-1

6E+3

4E+3

3E-2

2E+1

9E-1-

9E+0-

3E+5

4E+3

8E+1

4E+2

8E+3

5E+0

8E+2

2E+3

1E+2

4E+2

9E-0«

2E+3

NA
NA

8E+3

3E+1

7E+4

MCL
(tng/L)
0.05 (6)

2(6)

N(1 ,6)

N (1,6)

0.0031
PMCL (6)

0.005 (6)

0.0002
PMCL (6)

N(1 ,6)

N(1, 6)

N(1 ,6)

0.005 (6)

N (1.6)

0.04 (6)

N (1,6)

0.005 (6)

N(1 .6)

0.1 0)

N(1, 6)

0.1 (6)

0.0002
PMCL (6)
0.2 (6)

N (11,6)
N (11,6)

0.6 (6)

N (1,6)

0.075 (6)

N (1,6)

Toxicity
Cancer: Respiratory system tu-
mors.
Systemic: Hyperpigmentation, ker-
atosis, and possible vascular
complications.
Systemic: Oral; Increased blood
pressure.
Inhalation: Fetotoxicity.
Systemic: Fetotoxicity (decreased
pup weanling weights).
Systemic: Neuro-muscular pathol-
ogy".
Cancer: Liver hepatoma.
Systemic: Respiratory system ef-
fects.
Cancer: Human leukemia.

Cancer: Lung adenomas and epi-
dermoid carcinomas, putative
forestomach tumors.
Cancer: Lung adenomas and epi-
dermoid carcinomas, putative
forestomach tumors.
Systemic: Practically safe to hu-
mans and animals.
No data available.

Systemic: Increased relative liver
weights.
Cancer: Human lung, tracheal,
and bronchial tumors.
Systemic: Significant proteinuria.
Systemic: Reproductive effects.

Systemic: RBC and plasma cho-
linesterase inhibition, and testic-
ular and uterine effects.
Systemic: Oral; Fetal toxic'rty and
teratogenicity.
Inhalation: Fetal toxicity.
Cancer: Liver tumors.
Systemic: Liver lesions.

Systemic: Decreased body weight.

.•Systemic: Histopathological
changes in liver.
Cancer: Kidney tumors.
Systemic: Fatty cyst formation in
liver.
Cancer: Human lung tumors.
Systemic: Kidney and liver dam-
age, and cardiovascular and
gastrointestinal effects.
Cancer: Putative forestomach tu-
mors.
Systemic: Degenerative
neurotoxicity, and thyroid ef-
fects.
Systemic: neurotoxicity skeletal
muscle myopathy. (2) >.
No data available.

Systemic: Oral; Liver pathology.
Inhalation: Decreased relative
spleen weight.

Systemic: Hemoglobin changes
and liver and kidney damage.

Cancer: Liver tumors.
Systemic: Liver damage.

Systemic: Decreased growth rate,
food consumption, and altered
organ weights.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9819
TABLE. 11.—ORAL AND INHALATION TOXICITY INFORMATION FOR WASTE CONSTITUENTS—Continued
Constituents
Dimethytomlne
(124-40-3).

DimothyWodecy-
laro!ne(112-
18-5).
Dipfopylamine
(142-84-7).
Eplam (EPTC)
(759-94--)).
Esprocart)
(85785-20-2).
Ethytoenzena
(100-41-4).
2-
Ethylhejxylam-
fcv> (104-75-
6).
Fhxxanthene
(206-44-0).

Formaldehyde
(50-00-0).

HexachtofO-
cthano (67-
72-1).
HaxanodlO-
54-3).

Hoxytamino
(111-25-2).
Isopfopanot
(67-63-0).
Lead (7439-92-
1).

Mercury (7439-
97-6).
Mctam-ScxSum
(137-42-8).
Melhand (67-
56-1).

Mothomyl
(16752-77-5).
Mdhylamine
(74-89-5).
Methyl chloride
(74-87-3).

Melhytono chto-
rkfo (75-09-
2).
Methyl ethyl ko-
tow (78-93-
3).
Methyl isobutyl
ketorto (108-
10-1).
Mothyl
isothfocyanate
(556-61-6).
Molinato (2212-
67-1).
Molybdenum
(7439-98-7).

RID
(mg/kg/day)
N(1.7)

N(1.7)

2.5E-2 (1)

N(1.7)

1E-1 (1)

N(1.7)

4E-2 (1)

2E-1 (1)

1E-3 (1)

6E-2(7)

N(1.7)

3E-4{7)

N(1.7)

5E-1 (1)

2.5E-2 (1)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

6E-2 (1)

6E-1 (1)

5E-2(7)

N(1.7)

2E-3 (1)

5E-3 (1)

OralCSF
(mg/kg/day)-'
N(1.7)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

N (1.7)

N(1,7)

N (1.7)

1.4E-2 (1)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

N (1,7)

N(1.7)

1.3E-2 (7)

7.5E-3 (1)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

RIG
(mg/ma)
N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N (1.7)

1E+0(1)

N (1.7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

2E-1 (1)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

3E-4(7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

3E+0(7)

1 £+0(1,7)

8E-2 (7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

N (1,7)

Inhalation
CSF
(mg/kg/day)-'
N(1,7)

N(1.7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

N (1.7)

4.5E-2 (1)

1.4E-2(1)

N (1.7)

N(1.7)

N (1.7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1.7)

N (1.7)

N (1,7)

6.3E-3 (7)

1.6E-3 (1)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

HBL water
(mg/L)
NA

8.8E-1

7E-1

1E+0

7E+0

3E-3

2E+0

2E-3

2E+1

9E-1

3E-3

5E-3

2E+1

2E+0

7E-2

2E-1

HBL soil
(mg/kg)
NA

2E+3

8E+3

3E+3

2E+4

5E+1

5E+3

3E+1

4E+4

2E+3

5E+1

9E+1

5E+4

4E+3

2E+2

4E+2

MCL
(mg/L)
N(1.6)

N (1,6)

N(1.6)

0.7 (6)

N (1,6)

N(1.6)

N (1.6)

N (1,6)

N (1.6)

0.002 (6)

N(1.6)

N (1.6)

N (1,6)

N (1.6)

.005 (6)
PMCL

N(1.6)

N (1,6)

N (1.6)

Toxicity
Systemic: Liver fatty degeneration
and necrosis, and tubular de-
generation of the testes. (2)j.
Systemic: Respiratory tract ef-
fects.

No data available.

Systemic: Degenerative
cardiomyopathy.
No data available.

Systemic: Liver and kidney ef-
fects.
No data available.

Systemic: Kidney effects, in-
creased liver weights,
hematological alterations.
Cancer: Nasal cavity tumors.
Systemic: Gastrointestinal
histopathology.
Cancer: Hepatocellular carcinoma.
Systemic: Atrophy and degenera-
tion of kidney tubules.
Systemic: Oral; nervous system
effects, testicular atrophy.
Inhalation: Neurotoxicity
(electrophystological alter-
ations), and epithelial lesions in
the nasal cavity.
No data available.

No data available.

Cancer: Renal tumors.
Systemic: Neurotoxic, adverse
hematopoletic, and reproductive
and developmental effects.
Systemic: Damage to brain, kid-
neys, and developing fetuses.
Systemic: Developmental effects.
(A).
Systemic: Alterations in liver en-
zyme levels, and decreased
brain weight.
Systemic: Kidney and spleen pa-
thology.
Data not available.

Cancer: Renal tumors in mice
from intermittent inhalation ex-
posure.
Systemic: Liver and kidney ef-
fects, and degeneration and at-
rophy of the seminiferous tu-
bules.
Cancer: Liver tumors.
Systemic: Adverse liver effects.

Systemic: Decreased fetal birth
weight.

Systemic: Liver and kidney tox-
icfty.

Data not available.

Systemic: Reproductive toxicity.

Systemic: Increased uric acid in
the urine, decreased blood cop-
per levels, and painful swelling
in the joint in humans.
-------
9820
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE. 11 .—ORAL AND INHALATION TOXICITY INFORMATION FOR WASTE CoNsmTUENrs—Continued
Constituents
Nabam (142-
59-6).

Naphthalene
(91-20-3).
Nickel (7440-
02-0).

Nitrobenzene
(98-95-3).

N-Nitroso-di-n-
butylamine
(924-16-3).
N-Nitroso-di-n-
methylamine
(62-75-9).
Oxamyl (23135-
22-0).

Pebulate(1114-
71-2).
Phenol (108-
95-2).
o-
Phenylenedia-
mine (95-54-
5).
Piperidine(110-
89-4).
n-
Propylbenzen-
e (103-65-1).
Prosulfocarb
(52888-80-9).
Pyrene (129-
00-00).

Pyridine (110-
86-1).
Selenium
(7782-49-2).
Styrene (100-
42-5).

Tetralin(119-
64-2).
Toluene (108-
88-3).

Triethylamine
(121-44-8).
1,2,3-
Trimethylben-
zene (526-
73-8).
1,2,4-
Trimethylben-
zene (95-63-
6).
1,3,5-
Trimethylben-
zene (108-
67-8).
Vernolate
(Vernam)
(1929-77-7).

Vinyl acetate
(108-05-4).
RfD
(mg/kg/day)
N (1,7)

4E-2 (7)

2E-2 (1)

5E-4 (1)

N (1,7)

2.5E-2

5E-2 (7)

6E-1 (1,7)

N (1,7)

N (1.7)

N (1,7)

3E-2 (1)

1E-3 (1)

5E-3 (1)

2E-1 (1)

N (1,7)

2E-1 (1)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

1E-3 (1)

1E+0(7)

OralCSF
(mg/kg/day)-'
N (1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

5.4E+0 (1)

5.1 E+1 (1)

N (1,7)

4.7E-2 (7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1.7)

N (1,7)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

RfC
(mg/m3)
N(1,7)

N(1,7)

N (1.7)

2E-3(7)

N(1,7)

N (1.7)

N (1,7)

N (1.7)

N (1,7)

N (1.7)

N(1,7)

5E-3 (53)

N (1,7)

1E+0(1)

N (1.7)

4E-1 (1)

7E-3 (1)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

2E-1 (1)

Inhalation
CSF
(mg/kg/day)-'
N(1,7)

N(1,7)

8.4E-1 (1)

N(1.7)

5.6E+0 (1)

4.9E+1 (1)

N (1.7)

N(1,7)

N (1.7)

N(1,7)

N(1 .7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

N (1.7)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N (1.7)

N(1,7)

HBL water
(mg/L)
NA

1E+0

1E-1

2E-2

6E-6

7E-7

9E-1

2E+0

2E+1

7.4E-4

1E+0

4E-2

5E-2

1E-1

1E+0

4E-2

4E+1

HBL soil
(mg/kg)
NA

3E+3

2E+3

4E+1

1E-1

1E-2

2E+3

4E+3

5E+4

1.4E+1

3E+3

8E+1

4E+2

2E+4

8E+1

8E+4

MCL
(mg/L)
N (1,13)

N(1,'S)

0.1 (0)

N(1.B)

N (1,6)

0.2 (I5)

N (1.6)

N (1,6)

N (1,,6)

0.05 (total)
(6)
0.1 (6)

N (1,,6)

1.0 (6)

N(1,6)

N(116)

N(li6)

N(1;6)
I
Toxicity
Cancer: Putative induction of thy-
roid adenomas and
adenocarcinomas, and
hepatomas (75).<<.>
Systemic: Decreased whole body
weight in rats.
Cancer: Respiratory system tu-
mors in humans.
Systemic: Pulmonary toxic'rty.
Systemic: Adrenal, renal, and he-
patic lesions and
hematopathology.
Cancer: Bladder and gastro-
intestinal tract tumors.

Cancer Liver tumors.

Systemic: Cholinesterase inhibi-
tion, liver effects, and
fetotoxicity.
No data available.

Systemic: Developmental effects
(stunted growth).
Cancer: Liver tumors.

Systemic: Developmental and re-
productive effects (5).
No data available.

No data available.

Systemic: Kidney effects (renal tu-
bular pathology, decreased kid-
ney weight).
Systemic: Increased liver weight.

Systemic: Clinical selenosis.

Systemic: Oral; Red blood cell
and liver effects.
Inhalation: Human central nervous
system effects.
Systemic: Kidney effects and cata-
racts.
Systemic: Oral; Altered kidney and
liver weights.
Inhalation: Neurological effects
and degeneration of nasal epi-
thelium.
Systemic: Nasal passage toxicity
(inflammation).
Systemic: Diminished weight gain,
central nervous system depres-
sion, and lympnopenia and
neutrophilia (2)">.
Systemic: Diminished weight gain,
central nervous system depres-
sion, and lymphopenia and
neutrophilia (2).
Systemic: Diminished weight gain,
central nervous system depres-
sion, and lymphopenia and
neutrophilia (2).
Systemic: Altered liver weight and
hematopoiesis, and Cholin-
esterase inhibition, elevated al-
kaline phosphatase levels, and
spinal cord and nerve degen-
eration (100).
Systemic: Nasal tract toxicity (le-
sions).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9821
TABLE. 11.—ORAL AND INHALATION TOXICITY INFORMATION FOR WASTE CONSTITUENTS—Continued
Constituents
Xylono (1330-
20-7).

o-Xyteno(95-
47-6).

Zinc (7440-66-
6).

Zlram (137-30-
4).

RfO
(mg/kg/day}
2E+0 (1)

2E+0(7)

3E-1 (1)

N(1.7)

OralCSF
(mg/kg/day) -i
N(1.7)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

RfC
(mg/m3)
N(1.7)

N(1.7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

Inhalation
CSF
(mg/kg/day) -i
N(1,7)

N (1,7)

N(1,7)

N(1.7)

HBL water
(mg/L)
1E+1

7E+12

1E+1

HBL soil
(mg/kg)
2E+5

E+5

3E+4

MCL
(mg/L)
10(6)

N (1,6)

N(1,6)

Toxicity
Systemic: Central nervous system
effects (hyperactivity), de-
creased body weight, and in-
creased mortality.
Systemic: Central nervous system
effects (hyperactivity) and de-
creased body weight.
Systemic: Decrease in erythrocyte
superoxide dismutase (ESpD)
in adult females.
Systemic: Alteration of liver en-
zymes and immune responses,
spleen enlargement, and devel-
opmental effects (77, 2).
H '

t
N No data found In reference.
NA Inadequate data for calculation of health based level.
a. None available.
b. At an animal oral LOAEL of 89.8 mg/kg/day.
c. Human cancer potency value.
d. Benzofajpyrene Toxicity Equivalent Factor.
a. USEPA Provisional Guidance for the Qualitative Risk Assessment of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. 1993.
f. The human per capita intake was used as the critical dose level.
g. Drinking water RID.
n. Dietary exposure RID.
I. Inhalation unit risk.
LAt an animal oral LOAEL of 55 mg/kg/day.
At animal LOAEL of 97 pom.
I. Known toxic effect of ethylene bis-dithlocarbamate (EBDC) metabolite of nabam.
m. Exposure to a mixture of (1 A3-, 1,2,4-, 1,3,5-) trimethylbenzenes.
References
(1) Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). 1993.
(2) Hazardous Substances Databank (HSDB). 1993.
(5) RTECS (Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances) July 1992.
(6) Drinking Water Regulations and Health Advisories.
(7) Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST). March 1993.
53) Health and Environmental Effects Profile for Pyridine. June 1986.
(75J Nabam Pesticide Fact Sheet. Office of Pesticide Program. April 1987.
(77) Zlram TOX ONE-LINER. EPA Office of Pesticides. February 20,1992.
(92) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Research and Development, "Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Benz(a)anthracene", June 1988.
J100) Vemolate TOX ONE-LINER. EPA Office of Pesticides, September 23,1991.
(A) Dovetopmontal and Reproductive Toxicity Peer Review of Metam-Sodium. EPA Office of Pesticides.
3. Environmental Damage Cases
The nature and severity of the human
health and environmental damage that
has occurred as a result of improper
management is a factor considered in
the decision to list wastes as hazardous
(see 40 CFR 261.11(a)(3)(ix)). The
Agency has limited records of damages
resulting directly from the
mismanagement of carbamate wastes.
Most applicable is Superfund Record of
Decision (EPA Region 4): Stauffer/Cold
Creek, AL (First Remedial Action),
September, 1989 (PB90-186388). In
studying this site, which continues to
manufacture thiocafbamate products,
the Agency found groundwater
contaminated by wastes from the
manufacture of the products butylate,
cyclcate, EPTC, molinate, pebulate, and
vornolate at levels of concern.
Groundwater contamination at this site
was attributed to past disposal of waste
solids from thiocarbamate manufacture
in an on-site unlined landfill.
The Agency has a limited number of
reports of adverse environmental effects
from carbamate waste streams proposed
for listing. However, because pesticide
products when formulated for end use
may contain from 0.01 to 100 percent
active ingredient, EPA believes that
reports of adverse environmental
impacts such as ground water
contamination, fish kills, birds kills, or
other non-target impacts are comparable
to the possible adverse environmental
impacts which could occur should
wastes which contain pesticide active
concentrations be mismanaged in the
way pesticide products have been
mismanaged. The Agency has collected
information on environmental damages
caused by improper use of carbamate
products, mismanagement of containers
previously storing carbamate products,
and an accidental spill releasing a large
volume of product to surface waters.
The EPA believes these incidents are
appropriate to consider in proposing
listing several waste streams for the
following reasons: (1) The wastes the
Agency is proposing to list typically
contain the carbamate active ingredients
found in the products; (2) the
concentrations of the active ingredients
in the waste streams are typically many
times higher than what is found in some
formulated products; and, (3) the nature
of some of the waste streams is similar
to the product (e.g., solid, granular,
fines) and would behave similarly if
released uncontrolled to the
environment.
In the case of carbamate chemicals the
Agency has recorded numerous bird kill
incidents associated with the use or
possible misuse of carbamate products,
which the Agency feels are applicable to
an open disposal mismanagement
scenario of solids. For example, between
1972 and 1991,107 incidents have been
attributed to granular carbofuran and 40
to flowable carbofuran. These incidents
resulted in loss of 9,600 and 7,500 birds,
respectively.
In general, carbamate products are
acutely toxic to aquatic organisms. A
number of fish kills have been attributed
to carbamate products. From 1980 to
1988, the California Department of Fish
and Game's Pesticide Investigations
Unit estimated 7,000 to 30,000 fish were
killed in the Colusa Basin Drain due to
molinate entering the waterway from
carbamates in rice fields. The most
' severe fish kill incident resulted from
the July 14,1991, derailment of a tank
car containing 19,500 pounds of metam-
sodium, a dithiocarbamate product. As
a result of the spill, the surrounding
-------
9822
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
environment along a 45-mile stretch of
the Sacramento River and portions of
Lake Shasta were significantly adversely
affected. More than 200,000 fish were
killed, and several hundred people were
treated for eye, skin, and respiratory
irritation.
The collected case studies document
human exposure and wildlife loss
caused by the improper management or
misuse of carbamate products. While
only a limited number of the carbamate
products have documented damage
incidents, they do illustrate the
potential ecological effects that some
carbamate active ingredients can exert if .
released uncontrolled to the
environment. These damage incident
reports document contamination in
ground water, surface water, air and soil
by carbamate products. The Agency
currently has a more limited number of
damage incidents for the carbamate
wastes under consideration for listing. A
more extensive discussion of these and
additional damage incident reports can
be found in risk assessment support
document for carbamate wastes
included in the docket. See ADDRESSEES
section.
4. Mobility and Persistence of
Constituents in Carbamate Wastes
Mobility is the ability of a constituent
to migrate from a waste to a transport
medium, such as air, groundwater, or
surface water. Persistence is a measure
of a constituent's stability or its
resistance to degradation in the
environment. To assess mobility and
persistence, the Agency has identified
environmental release and transport
pathways representing plausible worst-
case management and disposal
scenarios. By assessing, these pathways,
potential exposure can be estimated.
Thus, if a constituent is sufficiently
mobile and does not degrade as it moves
along an environmental pathway, it may
potentially reach a receptor and threaten
human health and the environment.
The Agency assesses mobility by
estimating the concentration at which a
constituent could migrate from the
waste disposal or storage unit to the
underlying aquifer, adjacent soils, or to
the air above the unit. The propensity of
each specific constituent to either leach,
runoff, or volatilize can be estimated
using well-established physical
parameters as well as historic damage
incident cases and transport theories.
To assess the potential hazard posed
by the constituents of concern in the
wastes, the Agency compared the
concentrations of constituents found in
the wastes to known 2 health-based
levels. The Agency also compared the
concentrations that may reach potential
human and environmental receptors to
the health-based levels. The Agency
took into account the possible dilution
and attenuation that may occur due to
leaching from the waste, movement of
waste constituents adsorbed to soil
particulates, and subsequent dilution or
release to the air as a result of plausible
worst-case mismanageinent of the waste.
To evaluate the dilution and
attenuation associated with leaching
from the waste, the Agency considers '
the physical state of the waste. If the
physical state of the waste is solid, the
Agency first estimates the leaching rates
for the constituents from the waste. A
dilution/attenuation factor is applied to
account for dispersion in the subsurface
from the disposal site into ground water
and subsequently to a drinking water
source. This dilution and attenuation
may occur because of various
phenomena, such as hydrolysis,
solubility, soil conditions, adsorption
onto soil particles, dilution with ground
water, and biodegradation to the extent
those processes are likely to occur in a
plausible worst-case management or
disposal scenario.
The Agency believes that liquid
wastes are mobile if improperly
disposed and that they may reach
environmental receptors through
groundwater transport or through direct
overland flow. The carbamate wastes
proposed for listing can be either solids
or liquids at ambient temperature.
Ground-water fate and transport have
been evaluated by EPA. Evaluations of
ground-water transport were conducted
in support of the Toxicity Characteristic
(TC) (55 FR 11798). In the final TC rule
promulgated on March 29,1990, EPA
determined that a dilution and
attenuation factor of 100 was
appropriate for a reasonable worst-case
management of non-specific wastes that
may be disposed of in municipal
landfills. The factor of 100 was
determined assuming no adsorption, or
degradation of a chemical.
In assessing the intrinsic risks
associated with carbamate wastes, the
Agency compared concentrations of
constituents found in the wastes to 100
times their HBLs. While many
carbamate active ingredients may
exhibit break down through rapid
hydrolysis at pH extremes or other
degradation in the environment, they
can be highly mobile in the soil column,
and have been documented to reach
ground water where these mitigating
effects of hydrolysis/degradation are
slowed. The factor of 100 times the HBL
(i.e., assuming a dilution factor of 100X)
in the case of carbamate waste
constituents is viewed as a screening
level representing a potential level of
concern that would warrant further
analysis to better quantify potential
risks.
Table 12 shows that certain of these
wastes contain sufficient levels of the
constituents of concern to warrant
further analysis. Given-the high
concentrations of the constituents of
concern in comparison to HBLs, the
Agency believes that there is the
potential for exposure to harmful
concentrations of the constituents of
concern should the wastes be
mismanaged.

TABLE 12.—SUMMARY OF STREAMS
EXCEEDING 100 x HBL CONSTITUENT

Waste
group

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 . ...
g
10
Percentage by
waste volume
containing
hazardous
constituent
above 100x
HBL
82.8
97.2
0.75
98.1
99.4
100
11.1
0.01
46.2
87.6
Percentage by
number of
streams con-
taining hazard-
ous constituent
above 100 x
HBL
47
88
30.4
64.7
70
100
51.7
0.16
80
85.7
2 The Agency acknowledges that it lacks health
assessment studies for every substance determined
to be present in the wastes sampled as indicated by
the data gaps in Table 11. Health assessment studies
are and ongoing process where by future studies
may uncover additional information not considered
in today's rulemaking.
The mobility of carbamate active
inijredieiits.in the soil column is
documented in the Agency's Federal
Reporting Database System, maintained
by the EPA Office of Groundwater and
Drinking Water. This database tracks
groundwater monitoring data reported
from both known pesticide spills and as
a result of normal applications.
Carbamate active ingredients have been
found in the groundwater of 19 states.
Concentrations above health base levels
of concern have been measured for
aldicarb, carbofuran, and oxamyl. (For
additional damage incidents cases and
details, see the Carbamate Health
Assessment Document and associated
materials available in the Public Docket
at EPA Headquarters. See ADDRESSES
section, and section Ili.C.3.) EPA's
overall approach to damage case
information and the'relationship of
carbamate active ingredient damage
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9823
cases to carbamate wastes is discussed
earlier in this preamble.
When assessing the air pathway,
constituents must be evaluated
considering the waste management and
transport scenario to determine if they
are sufficiently mobile to support an air
plume capable of threatening human
health. The key parameters used to
estimate the mobility of constituents
into the air are the vapor pressure of the
pure substance and the Henry's Law
Constanta of the compound.
The Agency has evaluated several air
release scenarios using these parameters
and has found that a number of
constituents present in carbamate
wastes, including benzene, chloroform,
formaldehyde, methyl chloride, methyl
ethyl ketone, methylene chloride,
pyridine, triethylamine, and xylene,
may present a threat to human health by
the air transport pathway. These air
transport assessments are consistent
with the assessments used by the
Agency in its air emissions rule (56 FR
335490, July 22.1991, "Hazardous
Waste Treatment Storage and Disposal
Facilities: Emission Standards of Tanks,
Surface Impoundments, and Containers:
Proposed Rule) and use the Quiescent
Surface Model for Inorganic Wastes and
the Oil Film Model for Organic Waste to
estimate releases from tanks and
materials balance calculations for
incineration. These models are
explained in detail in "Hazardous Waste
Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Facilities (TSDF) Air Emission Models,"
Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.
EPA-450/3-87-0026. The model and
documentation are included in the
docket supporting this proposed rule.
See ADDRESSES section.
Evaluation of the air transport
assessments can be found in the
document Assessment of Risk from the
Management of Carbamate Waste and
associated materials available in the
Public Docket at EPA Headquarters. See
ADDRESSES section. The risks associated
with the air pathway are further
discussed in section III.C.5.
Persistence can be evaluated by
considering the various rates of
degradation or adsorption that affect the
compound during transport. A number
of factors can potentially degrade or
attenuate a compound during transport.
Many of these processes, including
biodegradation, photolysis, and
adsorption, affect constituent
concentrations under certain situations.
Under plausible worst-case waste
management scenarios, these processes
and many others cannot be relied upon
to attenuate constituents, because of the
limited circumstances under which
these mitigating processes could exist.
Table 13 presents the relevant
hydrolysis half-lives of each compound
in water and air.

TABLE 13.—PERSISTENCE OF
CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN
'Honry's Law Constants are physical chemistry
comtnnls which oquato tho vapor pressure of a
slightly solublo gas In contact with a definite mass
of liquid at a given temperature.
Constituent
Acetone
Acetonitrile (2)
Acetophenone
Aniline
Benomyl
Benzene (1) ..
Butylate
Cadmium
Carbaryl
Carbendazim .
Carbofuran ....
Carbon disul-
fide.
Carbon tetra-
chloride (1).
Carbosulfan ...
Chloroben-
zene (1).
Chloroform (1)
Cycloate
Dibutylamine .
o-Dichloro-
benzene (1).
Dimethylamine
Eptam
Hexane
Isopropyl alco-
hol.
Lead
Methanol
Methomyl
Methylamine ..
Methyl ethyl
ketone.
Methyl
isobutyl ke-
tone.
Methyl chlo-
ride (1).
Methylene
chloride (3).
Methylisothio-
cyanate.
Molinate
Naphthalene
d).
o-Phenylene-
diamine.
Pebulate
Phenol
Pyridine
Sodium n-
methyldithi-
ocarbamate.
Tetralin
Toluene (1) ....
Vemolate
Xylene (1)
Hydrolysis
half-life in
water
20 hours
5.5 days
<1 week
1 70 hours

1 0.5 days
8.2 weeks
2 hours
1,700 hours
1 ,700 hours
1,700 hours
12.9 hours
1 ,700 hours
1 .5 days
550 hours
5.4 days
2 days
38 weeks
1 .9 days
12 days
33 hours
2.4 to 24
hours
686 years
170 hours
4 days
90 hours
550 hours
550 hours
Hydrolysis
half-life in air
22 days.
1 hour
1 7 hours.

12 hours
4 hours.
9 days.
1 ,700 hours.
170 hours.
1 ,700 hours.
4.4 hours.
550 hours.
5.9 hours.
17 hours
1 day.
17.8 days.
1.14 months.
22 hours.
2.3 days.
15 hours.
168 to 672
hours.
Several
months.
17 hours.
15 hours
32 days.
17 hours.
17 hours.
TABLE 13.—PERSISTENCE OF CON-
STITUENTS OF CONCERN—Contin-
ued
Constituent
Zinc
Ziram

Hydrolysis
half-life in
water

Hydrolysis
half-life in air

—No Data
Unless otherwise specified, all values are
from: Howard, Philip H., ed. Handbook of En-
vironmental Fate and Exposure Data for Or-
ganic Chemicals. 1991.
(1) Mackay, Donald et al. Illustrated Hand-
book of Physical-Chemical Properties and En-
vironmental Fate for Organic Chemicals. 1992.
(2) J. Jackson Ellington et al. Measurement
of Hydrolysis Rate Constants for Evaluation of
Hazardous Waste Land Disposal: Volume 2.
Data on 54 Chemicals. 1987. U.S. EPA, Office
of Research and Development. EPA/600/3-87/
019.
(3) J. Jackson Ellington et al. Chemical Spe-
cific Parameters for Toxicity Characteristic
Contaminants. 1991. U.S. EPA, Office of Re-
search and Development. EPA/600/3-91/004.

In the case of dithiocafbamates,
thermal decomposition, hydrolysis, and
oxidation can lead to the formation of
additional toxic chemicals of concern.
Dithiocarbamic acids are extremely
reactive and are commonly reacted to
form more stable salts. Decomposition
products include carbon disulfide,
hydrogen disulfide, alkylisothiocyanates
such as methylisothiocyanate, and
amines. These amines react with
nitrogen oxides from the air or other
nitrosating ingredients to form highly
toxic nitrosoamines. The carcinogenic
potential of a number of these
nitrosoamines has been studied and
found to be significant. The Agency,
therefore, believes dithiocarbamate
chemicals typically exhibit the
characteristic of reactivity and that
discarded dithiocarbamate products, off-
specification species, container
residues, and spill residues of
dithiocarbamate products should be
managed as reactive hazardous wastes.

5. Risk Analysis

In support of this proposed
rulemaking, the Agency estimated the
risks that the constituents and waste
streams pose to human health and the
environment. A more detailed
presentation is included in two
background documents entitled,
"Carbamate Waste Listing Support:
Health Effects Background Document"
and "Assessment of Risk from the
Management of Carbamate Waste,"
which are included in the docket for
this proposed rulemaking. See
ADDRESSEES section. The results of the
risk assessment are summarized in this
section.
-------
9824
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
a. Baseline Waste Management
Practices and Release Potential of
Constituents of Concern. For each
proposed waste group, waste
management scenarios were developed
based on current industry practices. In
developing these scenarios, waste -
management practices, waste
management units, treatment processes,
and the quantities of waste being
managed were identified. For each
waste group, RCRA § 3007 questionnaire
data which identify waste descriptions,
waste quantities, waste management
methods, and waste management units
were compiled. Site visit reports
provided an additional source of
information.
Based on this information and best
engineering judgment, six waste
management practices and the sequence
of management units that would be
associated with each practice were
identified as follows:
(1) Recycled Wastes—covered tank
treatment/recycled;
(2) Incinerated Wastes—open tank
storage/industrial boiler/landfill ash;
(3) Wastewater Treatment Process
Waste—open quiescent or aerated
treatment tank; *
(4) Fuel Blended Wastes—covered
treatment tank;
(5) Landfilled Wastes—open storage
tank/landfill wastes; and
(6) Other—open quiescent treatment
tank or impoundment.
Table 14 identifies baseline waste
management practices and the quantity
of the waste groups going to each
management practice.

TABLE 14.—APPORTIONMENT OF
WASTE STREAM QUANTITIES TO
BASELINE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
TABLE 14.—APPORTIONMENT OF
WASTE STREAM QUANTITIES TO
BASELINE MANAGEMENT PRAC-
TICES—Continued
Waste
codes
Waste
group
1.

Waste
group
2.
Current management
practices
Covered Trt. Tank/Re-
cycle

Open St. Tank/Boiler/
Landfill Ash
WWTP— Open Quies-
cent Trt. Tank
Open St. Tank/Boiler/
Landfill Ash

Percentage
of waste
stream
1.

91.

•» The RCRA section 3007 questionnaire data
indicated that some wastes were being deepwell
injected. However, EPA has received subsequent
information that due to the expiration of the
facility's deepwell permit these wastes will no
longer be deepwell injected but will be sent to
wastewater treatment processes once a NPDES
discharge is approved. Therefore, waste reported as
deepwell injected were assumed to be sent to
wastewater treatment.
Waste
codes

Waste
group
3.

WWT
slud-
ges.
Waste
group
4.
Waste
group
5.
Waste
group
6.
Waste
group
7.

Waste
group
8.

Waste
group
9.

Waste
group
10.

Current management
practices
WWTP— Aerated Trt.
Tank
Covered St. Tank/Re-
cycle
Open St. Tank/Boiler/
Landfill Ash
Open St. Tank/Landfill
Other — Open Quies.
Trt. Impoundment
Open St. Tank/Landfill
Open St. Tank/Boiler/
Landfill Ash
WWTP— Open Quies.
Trt. Tank
Open St. Tank/Landfill

Covered Trt. Tank/Re-
cycle
WWTP— Open Quies.
Trt. Tank
Other — Open Quies.
Trt. Tank
Covered Trt. Tank/Re-
cycle
Open St. Tank/Boiler/
Landfill Ash
WWTP— Open Quies.
Trt. Tank
Other — Open Quies.
Trt. Tank
Covered Trt. Tank/Re-
cycle
Open St. Tank/Boiler/
Landfill Ash
Open St. Tank/Landfill
Covered Trt. Tank —
Fuel Blending
Other — Open Quies.
Trt. Tank
Covered Trt. Tank/Re-
cycle
Open St. Tank/Boiler/
Landfill Ash
Covered Trt. Tank —
Fuel Blending
Other — Open Quies.
Trt. Tank
Percentage
of waste
stream
99.

1.
97.
Less than
1.
Greater
than 99.
100.
100.
100.

1.5.

97.
1.5.
Less than
1.
Less than
1.
Greater
than 99.
Less than
1.
Less than
1.
Less than
1.
53.
Less than
1.
46.
49.

27.
6.
18.
b. Exposure Pathway Analysis. For
each constituent of concern in each
waste group, physical, chemical, and
biological properties that can be used to
predict environmental persistence,
mobility, and bioaccumulation of
constituents were identified. These
properties include aqueous solubility,
octanol water partition coefficient^ soil
adsorption coefficient, vapor pressure,
Henry's Law Constant, bioconcentration
factor for fish tissue, bioaccumulation
factor for meat and dairy products, air
degradation value, and plant uptakes
and adherence values. The majority of
the collected values were obtained from
available literature. In the absence of
reported data, estimation methods &
were used to calculate input parameter
values.
For this analysis, all potential
exposure pathways were identified for
each constituent in each waste stream
using information on physical and
chemical properties of a constituent,
and physical and chemical properties
that are associated with persistence and
mobility hi a specific pathway. For
exEimple, a pathway in which a
chemical is released from a tank to the
air., is transported through the air to the
exposed individual, and is directly
inhaled by humans would be driven
primarily by vapor pressure and Henry's
Law Constant. Constituents with high
vapor pressures and Henry's Law
Constants (such as volatile organic
compounds) would be expected to be
present in this pathway, where as
constituents with low values for these
properties (such as metals) would not be
expected to show up in this pathway.
Damage incident cases and baseline
management practices also were
examined to determine which
constituents have been released to the
environment at concentrations
presenting a concern and to determine
which media and exposure pathways
are potentially significant, or are
reasonably expected to be released to
the environment. For each waste group,
Table 15 shows the number of potential
exposure pathways identified using this
screening method.
s The octanol water partition coefficient is the
ratio of a chemical's concentration in the octanol
phase to its concentration in the aqueous phase of
a two-phase octanol/water system. Values represent
the tendency of the chemical to partition itself
between an organic phase and an aqueous phase.
e The principle source of estimation methods for
input parameters was the "Handbook of Chemical
Property Estimation Methods: Environmental
Behavior of Organic Compounds" by Warren L.
Lyman, William F. Reel, and David H. Rosenblatt,
published by McGraw-Hill Book Company in 1982.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9825
TABLE 15.—NUMBER OF POTENTIAL
EXPOSURE PATHWAYS IDENTIFIED
FOR EVALUATION
Waste stream
Waste group 1
Waste group 2
Waste group 3
Waste group 4
Waste group 5 ... .
Waste group 6 ... .
Waste group 7 ... .
Waste group 8 ... .
Waste group 9 ... .
Waste group 10 . ..
WWT sludge

••
••
Number
of con-
stituents
of con-
cern
30
39
4
13
6
14
12
20
17
9
7
Number
of poten-
tial expo-
sure path-
ways
25
31
15
20
18
18
30
31
28
26
5
Based on baseline management
practices and damage incident reports,
all relevant exposure pathways
identified were evaluated for inclusion
in the risk analysis. The background
document for the risk analysis
(Assessment of Risk from the
Management of Carbamate Waste)
examines potential pathways for
specific constituents of concern. Those
pathways determined to be plausible
were identified for further assessment
and only the exposure routes associated
with these pathways were considered to
be potential exposure routes. These
routes included direct inhalation,
indirect inhalation of soil and dust,
direct soil ingestion, indirect soil
ingostion, ingestion of ground-water,
ingestion of surface water, ingestion of
crops, ingestion of animal/dairy
products, and ingestion offish and
shellfish.
c. Risk Estimates, i. Overview. In
conducting the risk analysis, EPA
calculated risk estimates for each waste
group/management unit/exposure
pathway/exposure route combination.
(An example would be direct inhalation
of a constituent from Group 1 waste that
has been emitted as a gas from a
treatment tank.) One exception to this
methodology concerned those wastes
identified with the following waste
management sequence: tank storage/
boiler/landfill ash. Preliminary analysis
of this exposure route indicated that
constituents released from the ash
portion of this waste managed in
landfills would not pose risks at or
above levels of concern for the most
exposed individuals (i.e., a risk of 1 in
a million for carcinogens or a hazard
quotient of one or greater). This level of
risk (<10-« for carcinogens or a hazard
quotient of
-------
9826
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
The high-end risk descriptor is a plausible
Estimate of the individual risk for those
bersons at the upper end of the risk
Distribution. The intent of this descriptor is
lo convey an estimate of risk in the upper
range of the distribution, but to avoid
pstimates which are beyond the true
distribution. Conceptually, high-end risk
means risk above the 90th percentile of the
population distribution, but not higher than
:he individual in the population who has the
Highest risk. High-end estimates focus on
estimates of exposure or dose in the actual
population. (EPA Risk Assessment Council,
1991)

The "high-end" risk descriptor is
(intended to estimate the risk that is
xpected to occur in a small but
•plausible high-end segment of the
•population. The individuals with high-
lend risk may be members of a special
(population segment or individuals in
•the general population who are highly
I exposed.
If only limited information on the
I exposure or dose factors is available, the
I guidance recommends an approach for
I estimating high-end exposure or risk
I that identifies the most sensitive
I parameters and then uses maximum or
I near maximum values for one or a few
I of these variables, leaving others at their
I mean values. The guidance states that
I maximizing all variables will, in
I virtually all cases, result in an estimate
I that is above the actual values seen in
I the population.
For this analysis, data on exposure
I were generally not available for
I estimating specific percentiles of the
I exposed population for any of the
pathways. Nonetheless, limited data
I were available to develop high-end
estimates following the approach
1 described above. All exposure factors
for each of the pathways of concern ?
were identified and sensitivity analyses
were conducted to identify those
parameters that are the most sensitive in
the risk estimation process. Based on
these sensitivity analyses, a matrix was
developed for each exposure pathway of
concern that included all of the
important parameters. A base case was
then established using the arithmetic
mean and median values for all of the
! parameters; this approach provided the
average estimate. Then, each parameter
was varied using a high-end value while
I keeping all other parameters at their
* High end estimates were made for only those
pathways/constituents associated with a bounding
risk estimate of 1 x 10-« or greater for carcinogens
or a bounding hazard quotient of 1 or greater for
noncarcinogens. For a chemical constituent of
concern, a hazard quotient is the ratio of chemical's
waste stream concentration to its reported toxicity
benchmark. A quotient of 1 shows that the toxicity
benchmark was not exceeded.
mean or median value. These were
considered high-end estimates of risk.
Upper-tail estimates. An upper-tail
estimate is conceptually above the 99th
percentile of the cumulative risk
distribution. It represents an extreme
case, which could occur but is not
probable. The EPA developed upper-tail
estimates by varying two parameters at
the same time using high-end values
while keeping all other parameters at
their mean or median value. Parameters
were varied in a way that did not
present inconsistencies, such as low
body weight and high intake rate. Also,
combinations of high-end values for two
parameters at a time that seemed
inconsistent or implausible were
eliminated.
Population risk. Descriptors of
population risk are intended to convey
information about the risk borne by the
population or population segment being
studied. These risk descriptors are used
to answer questions concerning the
number of cases of a particular health
effect that probabilistically could occur
within the population during a given
time period, the number of persons or
percent of the population above a
certain risk level or health benchmark
(e.g., RfD or RfC), and risk for a
particular population segment.
The calculation of population risk
based on estimates of risk for all
individuals in the population is very
data-intensive and such data are
normally not available, as is the case for
this analysis. As the 1992 EPA
Guidelines for Exposure Assessment (57
FR 22888, May 29,1992) states:
. . . although it has been common practice
to estimate the number of cases of disease,
especially cancer, for populations exposed to
chemicals, it should be understood that these
estimates are not meant to be accurate
predictions of real (or actuarial) cases of
disease. The estimate's value lies in framing
hypothetical risk in an understandable way
rather than in any interpretation of the term
cases.
The population risk estimates for each
exposure route addressed in this
analysis were based on this approach.
The exposure routes described above
have associated populations or
subpopulations that are distinct,
although not necessarily mutually
exclusive. For this analysis, population
data were collected to approximate the
potential number of individuals
exposed within a 10 mile radius of a
representative facility. Data were
collected for land surrounding eight
existing carbamate facilities. Population
distributions within the eight study
areas were then computed using 1990
census tract-level population data to
estimate the total number of persons
within each study area, as well as
subpopulations, including children.
Using these data and central tendency
individual risk estimates or hazard
quotients (i.e., the ratio of the predicted
concentration to the applicable health
based level), population risk estimates
were calculated. However, for
inhalation risk, an overlay of estimated
concentration in 160 sectors
surrounding a facility was used to more
accurately estimate population risk.
ii. Bounding Estimates for Individual
Risk, The results of the baseline
bounding assessment are provided in
the risk assessment support document,
" Assiessment of Risk from The
Management of Carbamate Waste" (RTI,
19931). In conducting the bounding
estimates all input parameters were set
at high-end values. The bounding
estimates were used to identify
management practice/constituent/
pathway combinations for each waste
group that could potentially present risk
to individuals at levels of concern. Two
general results are of particular
importance from this analysis. First, all
food chain pathways were found to
result in human health risk below levels
of concern for all constituents in all
waste groups. Second, EPA developed
bounding risk estimates for wastewaters
and organic liquids managed in surface
impoundments from the production of
carbamates, thiocarbamates and
dithiocarbamates assuming an unlined
impoundment. Risks exceeding 1x10~6
or a hazard quotient of 1 were predicted
for ground water ingestion of
constituents in waste groups 1 and 2.
However, since no case could be
documented of untreated waste from
groups 1 and 2 currently being managed
in unlined surface impoundments, this
management scenario was not included
for further evaluation in the baseline
risk analysis.
iii. Risk Estimates by Exposure Route,
Waste Group and Management Practice.
This section discusses baseline
individual and population risk
estimation for direct inhalation, direct
soil ingestion, indirect soil ingestion,
and ingestion of ground water. For each
waste management unit/exposure route
combination, the methodologies used in
calculating individual and population
risk and the resulting risk estimates are
presented. The waste/management
practice/constituent/pathway
combinations discussed in this section
include only those with bounding risk
estimates of lxlO~6 or greater for
carcinogens and a hazard quotient of 1
or greater for noncarcinogens.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules 9823
Direct Inhalation

Individual risk estimates for tanks.
The methodology used to estimate risk
from the direct inhalation of
contaminants by humans is based on the
premise that humans live in close
proximity to a facility where wastes are
managed in tanks. The potential exists
for humans to be exposed to hazardous
constituents that volatilize from the
wastes in the tanks.
For this analysis, EPA estimated the
typical and high-end ambient air
concentrations using air emission and
dispersion models. The EPA model
CHEMDAT7 \vas used for air emissions,
the EPA Industrial Source Long Term
model (version 2) (ISCLT2) was used for
emission dispersion.
For each waste group/management
practice/exposure route, Table 16
presents the high-end and central
tendency risk estimates for those
constituents identified presenting risk at
levels of concern (i.e., having a high-end
risk estimate greater than or equal to
lxlO-« for carcinogens or a hazard
quotient greater than or equal to 1 for
noncarcinogens). Table 16 also
identifies the parameters that
significantly defined the lower and
upper boundaries of the high-end range.
A detailed discussion of the
methodology used to estimate exposure
and the various air modeling
assumptions and values of tie input
parameters for high-end and central
tendency exposures is found in the risk
assessment background document. A
sensitive parameter in the air modeling
is the distance from the emissions
source to the receptor. The Agency us
distances of 250 feet and 1000 feet to
represent high-end and central tendenc
receptor distances.s respectively. The
Agency specifically requests comments |
on the appropriateness of using these
distances in the analysis. The Agency
also requests comment on the exposure I
assumptions for a receptor living in the |
vicinity of the waste streams being
considered in today's proposal.
Information requested includes length
of time an individual dwells at any one
residence in these areas and the amount!
of time (number of days a year, hours
per day) an individual spends in and
around the residence.
TABLE 16.—INDIVIDUAL RISK ESTIMATES FOR DIRECT INHALATION: TANKS
Waste No.
Waste Group 1 ..
Waste Group 1 ..
Waste Group 1 ..
Waste Group 2 ..
Waste Group 3 ..
Waste Group 4 ..
Management practice
Covered Treatment
Tank/Recycle.
Open Tank Storage/
Boiler/Landfill Ash.
WWTP— Open Quies-
cent Treatment
Tank.
WWTP— Aerated
Tank.
Open Tank Storage/
Landfill.
Open Tank Storage/
Boiler/Landfill Ash.
Constituent of con-
cern
Triethylamine
Methylene Chloride
Triethylamine
Formaldehyde
Methylene Chloride
Triethylamine
Carbon Disulfide ...
Carbon Tetra-
chloride.
Chloroform
Methyl Chloride
Methyl Ethyl Ke-
tone.
Methylene Chloride
Pyridine
Triethylamine
Chloroform
Methylene Chloride
Benzene

High-end parameters
single/double
Recept. distance/tank
& recept. distance.
Recept. dist./conc. &
recept. distance.
Recept. dist./recept.
distance & met.
data.
Quantity/tank &
recept. distance.
Conc./tank & expo-
sure duration.
Met data/tank &
recept. distance.
Quantity/quantity &
recept. distance.
Recept. distance/
recept. dist. & expo.
dur.
Quantity/quantity &
recept. distance.
Quantity/cone. &
quantity.
Recept. distance/
cone. & recept. dist.
Conc./conc. & quan-
tity.
Recept. distance/tank
&conc.
Recept. distance/
cone. & distance.
Recept. distance/
recept. dist. & expo.
dur.
Recept. distance/
recept. dist. & expo.
dur.
Recept. distance/
recept. dist. & expo.
dur.
High-end risk
estimate
NA
3E-07— 1E-06
NA
3E-06— 1E-05
1E-05— 5E-05
NA
NA
2E-06— 7E-06
1E-06— 7E-06
4E-O5— 2E-04
NA
9E-06— 5E-05
NA
NA
4E-06— 1E-05
4E-07— 1E-06
5E-05— 2E-04
High-end
hazard
quotient
4-30
NA
20-40
NA
NA
500-2000
0.4-2
NA
NA
NA
0.2-1
NA
3-20
40-200
NA
NA
NA
Central tendency
Risk es-
timate
NA
3E-08
NA
6E-07
3E-06
NA
NA
4E-07
2E-07
7E-06
NA
9E-07
NA
NA
4E-07
5E-08
6E-06
Hazard
quotient
:
NA
NA
200
0.07
NA
NA
NA
0.04
NA
0.6
NA
NA
NA
"From "Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage,
and Disposal Facilities-Organic Air Emissions
Standards for Process Vents an Equipment Leaks
Final Rule", 55 FR 25454, June 21,1990.
-------
1828
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
Population risk estimates for tanks.
fo estimate the population risk
aated with direct inhalation of
folatile constituents, the number of
idividuals that may potentially be
posed over a 70 year period was
Jstimated. Using typical case exposure
onditions, population risk was then
alculated for each waste/constituent of
oncern/waste management practice
Combination. For each combination,
Estimates were made for individuals
exposed in all directions (i.e., north,
south, east, and west) out to 10 miles.
Exposure concentrations were estimated
at 0.25,0.5,1.0 miles from the modeled
facility in each direction and at 1.0 mile
incremental distances thereafter. The
number of exposed individuals in each
sector is an average of the population
data collected at eight carbamate
production facilities. For carcinogens,
the number of cancer cases occurring
over 70 years were calculated based on
the individual risk, number of exposed
individuals, and number of 9 year
cohorts in a 70 year time period. For
noncarciiiogens, the total number of
people exposed to constituent
concentrations greater than or equal to
the RfCs were identified. For each
combination, the estimates were
summed across all directions and out to
10 miles to obtain the population risk
(Table 17).
TABLE 17.—POPULATION RISK ESTIMATES: TANKS
Waste codes
waste Group 1 ..
Waste Group 2 ..
Waste Group 3 ..
Waste Group 4 ..
Waste Group 6 ..
Current management practices

Open St Tank/Boiler/Landfill Ash
\/WVrp Open Quiescent Trt Tank .......
Open St Tank/Boiler/Landfill Ash
WWTP Aerated Trt Tank
Open St Tank/Landfill
Open St Tank/Boiler/Landfill Ash .......
Open St. Tank/Landfill
Constituent of concern
Methylene chloride
Triethylamine.
Formaldehyde
Methylene chloride
Triethylamine
Chloroform
Formaldehyde
Methylene chloride
Triethylamine . ......
Methyl chloride ...
Methylene chloride
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloroform
Formaldehyde
Methyl chloride
Methylene chloride
Triethylamins
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
Benzene
Benzene
Cancer
cases/70
years
1.5E-04
NA
2.8E-05
1.4E-04
NA
1.4E-04
4.8E-03
2.8E-02
NA
1.3E-05
2.3E-06
7.7E-04
1.2E-03
6.2E-05
3.4E-02
4.4E-03
NA
1.9E-03
2.3E-04
2.7E-02
1.4E-04
People ex-
posed over
HfC per 70
yrs
NA
73
NA
NA
73
NA
NA
NA
54,000
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
390
NA
NA
NA
NA
Individual risk estimates for boilers.
IAS discussed above for tanks, the
I methodology used to estimate baseline
I individual risk from the direct
I inhalation of contaminants by humans
I is based on the premise that humans
I live in close proximity to a facility
I where wastes are managed. The
I potential also exists for humans living
I in close proximity to a facility to be
1 exposed to hazardous constituents that
I are emitted from industrial boilers,
I furnaces or incinerators burning the
I wastes.
Results from air emission and
I dispersion modeling using ISCLT2 were
I used to develop boiler-specific scaled
I modeled air concentrations (SMACs) for
I use in calculating ambient air
concentrations. These scaled modeled
air concentrations represent the
downwind concentrations normalized
by the feed rate that would result if the
boiler emission rate is 1 gram per
second (g/s). The SMACs were
multiplied by the waste constituent
concentrations, estimations of the
fraction of the boiler feed that the waste
comprised, and a specified destruction
and removal efficiency (DRE) to
calculate ambient air concentrations.
The high-end air concentrations were
estimated based on high-end waste
constituent concentrations and the
boiler-specific coefficient associated
with the high-end boiler and
meteorological data. The methodology
used in calculating the typical case air
concentrations used typical case values
for the waste constituent concentrations
and boiler-specific coefficient. Based on
the high end estimates, the potential
risk posed by the majority of the
consitituents in the wastes going to
boilers is below levels of concern. The
only constituent shown to be of concern
(i.e.,, having a high-end risk estimate
greater than or equal to 1x10 -« for
carcinogens or a hazard quotient greater
than or equal to 1 for noncarcinogens)
is benzene in waste Group 4. The
central tendency and high end range for
this constituent are 9x10-8 and 4x10-7
to ixlO-s, respectively.
Population risk estimates for boilers.
Using typical case exposure conditions,
EPA estimated the population risk for
each waste group/constituent of concern
combination for waste managed in
boilers, using a methodology similar to
that used for air emissions from tanks
(Table .18).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No, 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules 982S
TABLE 18.—POPULATION RISK ESTIMATES: BOILERS
Waste codes
Waste Group 1 ..
Waste Group 2 ..

Waste Group 3 ..
Waste Group 4 ..

Waste Group 8 ..
Waste Group 9 ..

Waste Group 10
Current management practices
Open tank storage/boiler/landfill ash
Open tank storage/boiler/landfill ash

Open tank storage/boiler/landfill ash
Open tank storage/boiler/landfill ash

Open tank storage/boiler/landfill ash
Constituent of concern
Methylene chloride
Chloroform
Methyl chloride
Methylene chloride
Methylene chloride
Arsenic
Benzene
Chromium
n-Nitrosodibutylamine ....
n-Nrtrosodimethylamine .
Arsenic ... .
Cadmium
Chromium
Chromium
Cancer
cases/70
years
89E-01
20E-07
5.7E-06
7.5E-07
57E-08
9 6E-W
3.4E-03
43E-06
1.5E-07
1.4E-04
24E-08
20E-08
4.2E-08
8.2E-07
People ex-
posed ove
RfC per 7C
yrs
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Individual risk estimates for landfills.
The equations used to generate the
hazard quotients and risk resulting from
inhalation of volatiles were consistent
with those presented in EPA's Risk
Assessment Guidance for Superfund
(RAGS Part B, 1991). The central
tendency risk estimates were derived
from a 30 year average atmospheric
concentration and a 9 year exposure
duration. A 30 year exposure duration
was used as a high-end exposure
duration value when generating the
high-end risk estimates.
Central tendency and high-end risk
estimates were generated for those
constituents with a bounding risk
estimate greater than 10 -« and a
bounding hazard quotient estimate
greater than or equal to 1 (Table 19).
TABLE 19.—INDIVIDUAL BASELINE RISK FROM INHALATION OF VOLATILES: LANDFILLS

Wasto Group 3 .
Waste Grouo 6 .
Current man-
practices
Landfill
Landfill

Chloroform
Methylene chloride ....
Benzene
Risk
High-end
8E-05— 1E-04
1E-05— 2E-05
1E-05— 2E-05

Central
2E-05
3E-06
4E-06

Receptor distance and exposure duration
Receptor distance and exposure duration.
Receotor distance and exoosure duration.
Population risk estimates for landfills.
Population risk for the inhalation of
volatile emissions from the landfill is a
function of individual risk from
inhalation of volatile contaminants and
the number of people living in the area
where exposure will occur. The
population risks were based on centrally
tendency risk estimates for individuals.
A sensitive parameter for many of the
landfill pathways is the volume and
management of the wastes sent to a
landfill. To calculate the volatile
emissions, waste run-off, and particle
generation, EPA assumed the disposal of
on annual quantity for each waste
stream. The waste is allowed to remain
uncovered while the portion of the
landfill is active. EPA estimates that the
landfill disposal depth is 3 meters and
that the density of the waste is 150 kg/
nV, a value resembling highly organic,
muck soils. EPA requests comments on
these assumptions or any data on these
assumptions.
As discussed above regarding
population risk estimates from direct
inhalation, the number of people living
at various distances from a facility were
also evaluated for the population risk
estimates. A total of 493 people were
determined to live within 0.3 miles of
the facility. The central tendency risk
estimates used in the baseline analyses
incorporated a 30 year average air
concentration.
The population risk estimates for
constituents of concern in waste group
3 are 8x10 -2 cases over a 70-year period
for chloroform, and 1x10-2 cases over a
70-year period for methylene chloride.
The population risk for benzene, the
constituent of concern in waste group 6,
is estimated at 2x10-2 cases over a 70-
year period.
Individual risk estimates for surface
impoundments. The sludge waste group
was the only untreated waste group
currently being managed in surface
impoundments. The bounding risk
estimates for those constituents in the
sludge waste group were below levels of
concern. Therefore, further risk
evaluations were not required.
Population risks estimates for surface
impoundments. The bounding risk
estimates did not indicate any
constituents of concern. Therefore,
further risk evaluations were not
required.

Direct Soil Ingestion

Individual risk estimates for landfills.
The equations used to quantify risks
resulting from ingestion of
contaminated soil are consistent with
those soil ingestion risk equations
contained in EPA RAGS Part B. The
exposure durations of 9 years and 30
years were used to represent central
tendency and high-end. Obviously, this
exposure duration could occur during
various stages of life. For this analysis,
it was assumed that 6 years of the
exposure period was during childhood
when soil ingestion is estimated to be
highest. This is consistent with the
RAGS Part B methodology.
The risk estimates for this pathway
are sensitive to the amount of the waste
that travels from the landfill to off-site
receptors either through run-off or
deposition of wind-blown particulates.
EPA assumed that landfills do not have
run-off controls or that the local terrain,
roads, or other engineered controls do
not channel run-off from residences.
-------
19830
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
The Agency requests comment on these
assumptions and data on these
parameters.
Central tendency and high-end risk
estimates were generated for those
constituents identified at levels of
concern from the bounding risk analysis
(Table 20).
TABLE 20.—Individual Baseline Risk From Direct and Indirect Soil Ingestion
Waste codes
Waste Group 3 .
Waste Group 6 .
Waste Group 9 .
Current manage-
ment practices
Landfill
Landfill
Landfill

Constituent of concern
Methylene chloride ....
EPTC

Arsenic

Zinc
Risk or hazard
High end
1E-07— 2E-07
4-9
20-40
3E-06-^tE-06
600-1000
1-2
Central
NA
2
10
1E-06
300
0.4
High end parameters
Soil mixing depth and soil intake rate.
Constituent concentration and soil intake rate.
Soil mixing depth and soil intake rate.
Exposure duration and soil intake rate.
Constituent concentration and soil intake rate.
Constituent concentration and soil intake rate.
Population risk estimates for landfills.
Population risk estimates for soil
ingestion were not evaluated. The EPA
concluded that the general population
in the vicinity of the facilities would not
have access to the facilities. Therefore,
the direct soil ingestion route was not
considered an exposure scenario
warranting population risk estimates.

Indirect Soil Ingestion

Individual risk estimates for landfills.
The same risk estimation methodology
used to calculate risks from direct soil
ingestion was used to calculate risks
resulting from indirect soil ingestion.
This scenario considered soil that had
eroded from the site to a nearby field.
Central tendency and high-end risk
estimates were generated for those
constituents with bounding risk
estimates greater than or equal to 10 -«
or hazard quotients greater than or equal
to 1 (Table 20).
Ingestion of Ground Water
Individual risk estimates for landfills.
The equations used to calculate risk
resulting from the ingestion of
contaminated ground water were
consistent with those presented in
EPA's RAGS Part B. The ground-water
concentration used in the central
tendency and high-end risk estimates
reflects a 30 year average ground-water
concentration. The Multimedia
Exposure Assessment Model
(MULTTMED), an EPA analytical model,
was used to estimate the various
contaminants at specific receptor points
downgradient from the source for a
variety of scenarios. A full discussion of
the model and inputs used for this
analysis is contained in the report,
"Assessment of Risk from the
Management of Carbamate Waste" (RTI,
1993), which is available in the docket
for this proposed rule. See ADDRESSES
section.
Central tendency and high-end risk
estimates were generated for those
constituents with bounding risk
estimates greater than or equal to 10~6
or hazard quotients greater than or equal
to 1 (Table 21).
The groundwater modeling analysis
assumes that groundwater
contamination results from the disposal
of waste in an on-site unlined landfill.
The Agency collected data on well use
surrounding the facility in all directions
arid assumed that the nearest wells are
always downgradient of these facilities.
The analysis further assumes that
gi'oundwater downgradient of the source
may be used for drinking water, these
wells are on the centerline of the plume,
and these wells draw from only the
uppermost aquifer. Given the current
practice that most carbamate sludges
and waste solids are disposed at off-site
kindfills, the Agency requests comments
o:n the appropriateness of its
assumptions, the resulting risk
estimates, and the data used by the
Agency.
TABLE 21.—INDIVIDUAL RISK ESTIMATES FROM GROUND-WATER IMGESTION: LANDFILLS
Waste Code
Waste Group 3 .
Waste Group 6 .
Current man-
agement
practice
Landfill
I anrffill

Constituent of concern

Methylene chloride ....
EPTC
Molinate
Risk or hazard
High end
1E-07— 3E-07
3E-06— 9E-06
5E-07— 2E-06
10-50
60-70
Central
1E-08
2E-07
3E-08
0.1
0.6
High End parameters
Landfill area/leachate conc./recharge rate/infiltration
rate & distance to well.
Distance to well and exposure duration.
Landfill area/leachate cone/recharge rate/infiltration
rate and distance to well.
Landfill area/leachate cone/recharge rate/infiltration
rate and distance to well.
Distance to well and neutral hydrolysis rate.
Population risk estimates for landfills.
hi conducting this analysis, EPA
estimated the risk to the exposed
population from ingestion of ground-
water based on the estimates of the
population using water from public or
private wells and individual risk
estimates. Population risk estimates
were generated for those constituents
which were quantitatively analyzed for
the ground-water exposure route.
The number of people using well
water was estimated from the results of
a land-use survey around 8 carbamate
production facilities. For most of the
states in which the study areas are
located, little information was available
cm private well-use.
To characterize the spatial
distribution of well-water use, EPA
contacted public works officials from
the urban centers nearest the study areas
to determine which portions of the
study areas were served by their
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9831
municipal facilities. These officials were
then asked whether those areas not
served by their public water systems are
likely to be on private wells, or whether
other smaller public utilities serve those
areas.
For those areas where smaller public
utilities were in operation, those
utilities were contacted. Representatives
for those smaller utilities (usually
serving rural areas adjacent to urban
centers) were asked whether they use
well water, or pipe in water from the
larger municipalities nearby. In
addition, the smaller public utilities
were asked whether those areas not
receiving their service are on private
wells. Through this process, it was
possible to identify those areas likely to
bo on well water (both private and
public) and those areas likely to be on
non-well water.
The land-use survey was also used to
determine the location of the well
closest to each of the facilities evaluated
in the survey. The average of the well
location point closest to each facility
was approximately 3.7 miles (5,985 m).
This distance to the ground water
exposure point was used to generate the
central tendency risk estimates required
for the population risk estimates. The
survey results also indicate that there is
a total of 672 people within a 3.7 mile
radius of the site who use either public
or private wells as their drinking water
source. The ground water concentration
used to calculate the risk represents a
70-year average ground water
concentration.
The population risk estimates for the
constituents of concern in waste group
3 are 1x10-s cases over a 70-year period
for chloroform and 2x10—* cases over a
70-year period for methylene chloride.
For waste group 6, the total number of
cases per 70-year period resulting from
benzene-contaminated ground water is
estimated at 4x10 -s. The other
constituents in this waste stream which
were analyzed, eptam (EPTC), molinate,
and toluene had hazard quotients less
than 1 and were not analyzed further.
The population risk posed by the
constituent of concern in waste group 9,
arsenic, was not significant.
6. Estimating Hazard Quotients: Dose
Response Risk Assessment Techniques
for Noncancer Endpoints
Table 11 contains RfDs, RfCs, and
observed toxic effects for constituents
detected in carbamate w'astes. Because
the noncarcinogens EPTC (eptam),
triethylamine, and ziram were
significant to the Agency's risk
assessment, the Agency is seeking to
further quantify the probability of
adverse effects resulting from exposures
to these chemicals at levels above
hazard quotients. Exposure above the
hazard quotient is viewed by the
Agency to provide an indication that
adverse effects similar to those observed
in animal studies could also be observed
in the exposed human population.
However, the likelihood of particular
effects above the RfD or RfC cannot be
effectively predicted. The Agency is
considering using logistic regression on
ordered categories (i.e., categorical
regression analysis) to provide estimates
of risks at exposure levels ab.ove the RfD
or RfC, and for the probability of
adverse population effects. The
following sections present an overview
of dose-response assessment and
categorical regression. A more detailed
discussion of the categorical regression
methodology is found in a paper Using
Categorical Regression Instead of a
NOEAL to Characterize a Toxicologist's
Judgment in Noncancer Risk
Assessment by Richard C. Hertzberg,
Ph.D. and Michael L. Dourson, Ph.D. of
EPA's Environmental Criteria and
Assessment Office. This paper is
available in the docket supporting this
proposal. See "ADDRESSES" section.
Dose-Response Assessment. Dose-
response assessment follows hazard
identification in the risk assessment
process as defined by the National
Academy of Sciences (1983). Dose-
response assessment involves the
quantitative evaluation of toxicity data
to determine the like incidence of the
associated effects in humans. The
information available for dose-response
assessment ranges from well-conducted
and controlled studies on human
exposures, epidemiology studies with
large numbers of subjects and well-
characterized exposures, and supportive
studies in several animal species, to a
lack of human and animal toxicity data
with only structure-activity
relationships to guide the evaluation. In
any case, the Agency considers all
pertinent studies in this process.
However, only data of sufficient quality
are used in the dose-response
assessment of a chemical.
The Chronic Reference Dose (RfD),
and Reference Concentration (RfC).
Given at least a moderate amount of
toxicity data, one risk assessment goal is
to determine a level of daily exposure
that is likely to be without an
appreciable risk of deleterious effects
during a lifetime. The Agency's
Reference Dose (RfD) and Reference
Concentration (RfC) approaches strive to
include scientific considerations in their
determination.
The Agency defines the chronic RfD
as an estimate (with uncertainty
spanning perhaps an order of
magnitude) of a daily exposure to the
human population (including sensitive
subgroups) that is likely to be without
an appreciable risk of deleterious effects
during a lifetime. In addition, the
Agency is also using this model for
inhalation exposures and similarly
defines a Reference Concentration (RfC).
The RfD and RfC are useful as
reference points for gauging the
potential effects of other doses and for
estimating hazard quotients. Doses at
the RfD or less (consistent with hazard
quotients of 1 or less) are not likely to
be associated with any health risks, and
are, therefore, assumed likely to be of
little regulatory concern. In contrast, as
the amount and frequency of exposures
exceeding the RfD increase (or the
hazard quotient exceeds 1), the
probability that adverse effects may be
observed in a human population also
increases. However, the conclusion that
all doses below the RfD are acceptable
and that all doses in excess of the RfD
are unacceptable cannot be categorically
stated because these models cannot
effectively predict the likelihood of
particular effects above the RfD or RfC.
Another risk assessment goal is to
determine or estimate the likely human
response to various exposure levels of a
particular contaminant. For carcinogens,
a dose-response model is appropriate if
sufficient data exist. Dose response
models for noncancer endpoints are just
now starting to be used. The next
section highlights a new procedure,
categorical regression, for which the
Agency asks for comments. The Agency
is interested in receiving comments on
the categorical regression technique as
applied to estimating the probability of
effect above a benchmark level, and also
on the appropriateness of using this
technique in a hazardous waste listing
determination.
Categorical Regression. The categories
of response used in the analysis
correspond to the RfD and RfC
derivation: no-observed-effect level
(NOEL) = exposure level at which no
effects were observed; NOAEL =
exposure at which no adverse effects
were observed; AEL = exposure at
which mild to moderate adverse effects
were observed; FEL = exposure at which
severe (frank) effects were observed.
Categorical regression procedures can be
used to model the probabilities of these
four categories occurring as a function
of exposure level expressed as the
logarithm of human equivalent dose or
human equivalent concentration and
duration of exposure expressed as a
proportion of life span. For each of the
compounds studied by this technique, a
second data set is constructed by
identifying and censoring "unreliable"
-------
19832
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
INOELs or NOAELs from each data set;
I these "censored" studies would not
•include measurement of sensitive
Itoxicologic endpoints shown to be of
I interest, or were studies that tested
I clearly insensitive species.
The categorical regression model is
[described as follows: Given a categorical
•response variable where the K categories
tare ordered in some fashion, the
I outcomes can be expressed as numbers
II.... K (e.g., Y=1(NOEL), Y=2(NOAEL),
|Y=3(AEL), Y=4(FEL)). Categorical
•regression can be used to express the
•relationship between category (Y) and
Ian explanatory variable (X) and to
[estimate, at a specified value of X, the
•probability of the occurrence of a
particular response category (Y=i). The
final 3- and 4-category regression
equations can be used to estimate the
risk of a dose above the RfD or a
concentration above the RfC.
7. Ecological Risk Assessment
The degree to which the constituents
in a waste or any degradation product
of the constituents bioaccumulates in
ecosystems, and poses ecological risks
when improperly treated, stored or
disposed of, or otherwise managed are
also considered in the Agency's listing
determinations. See 40 CFR
261.11(a)(3). The measure of a
chemicals tendency to.bioconcentrate is
expressed as a bioconcentration factor

TABLE 22.—BIOCONCENTRATION FACTORS
(BGF). The BCF is calculated by
dividing the concentration of the
chemical in exposed organism's tissues
by lie concentration of the chemical in
the exposure medium. The values
calculated are normalized to a 3% lipid
content (typical to fish) for comparison.
Tho higher the BCF, the greater the
potential for bioconcentration to levels
which would have ecological effects or
pose risks to humans through
con sumption. Table 22 presents BCFs
for selected carbamate products. A
number of carbamate chemicals show
significant potential to bioaccumulate if
wastes containing these chemicals were
to be mismanaged.
CAS*
116-06-3
1646-88-1
337-71-1
2008-41-5
63-25-2
1563-66-2
101-21-3
759-94-4
2212-67-1
114-26-1
122-42-9
28249-77-6
23564-05-8
23031-17-5
Common name
Aldicarb
Aldicarb sulfone (Aldoxycarb)
Asulam
Butylate
Carbaryl
Carbofuran
Chloropropham
EPTC(Eptam)
Molinate
Propoxur
Propham
Thiobencarb
Thiophanate-methyl
Triallate
Estimated
bioconcentration
factor (BCF) 3%
lipid
303
1
1 22
730
30.5
358
241
171
88.2
702
45
179
731
970
Screening methodology. The EPA
I performed a screening analysis for
I ecological risk based on waste stream
I description, waste management
I practice, and reasonable release
I scenarios. Chemical properties of the
I waste groups were another key
[component in determining ecological
I exposure routes. For example, given the
I fact that most of the chemical
I constituents had low BCFs, an estimate
I of exposure to chemicals that
I bioaccumulate up the food chain was
I not necessary for most constituents.
I Taking into account current waste
I management practices, reasonable
I release scenarios were established only
I for those waste streams going to
landfills (Waste Groups 3, 6, 9, and
I Sludges). The remaining waste streams
I are managed in wastewater treatment
I plants (WWTP) and on-site treatment
I tanks, therefore significant releases to
I either aquatic or terrestrial ecosystems
I are not likely. Examples of relevant
I ecological exposure routes stemming
I from landfills include:
• Direct contact with contaminated
I soil and surface water that has been
contaminated by overland runoff or by
air particle deposition, or by ground-
water that was contaminated as a result
of landfill leachate;
• Direct ingestion of contaminated
soil or surface water that has been
contaminated by overland runoff, or by
air particle deposition, or by ground-
water that was contaminated as a result
of landfill leachate.
Aquatic ecosystems. A comparison of
waste stream chemical concentrations to
their respective aquatic benchmarks,
such as ambient water quality criteria
and LCSOs, was used as an initial
screening to isolate chemicals of
potential ecological concern. Those
chemicals whose waste stream
concentrations exceeded their aquatic
benchmark, were then modeled through
various pathways to estimate surface
water (river) concentrations of the
chemical. Only Ziram in waste group 9
appears at levels of concern in surface
waters through the pathways modeled.
Wastes solids from the production of the
dithiocarbamate ziram were modeled to
exceed the LC50 of trout by 11.9 fold for
possible air to overland transport of
solids to surface waters, and by 8.9 fold
for overland transport to surface waters.
The Agency concludes that solids from
the production of similar
dithiocarbamate products would present
similar hazards, because of the acute
aquatic toxicity exhibited by
dithiocarbamates as a chemical class.
Terrestrial ecosystems. A comparison
of waste group concentrations of
chemicals to their respective terrestrial
benchmarks was used as an initial
screening to isolate the chemicals of
potential concern. Those chemicals
whose waste stream concentrations
exceeded their terrestrial benchmark,
were identified as constituents of
concern. Modeling was conducted for
each of these constituents through
various pathways to estimate exposure
concentrations. Since terrestrial
organisms could be exposed through
several media, chemical concentrations
were estimated in soil, in fish, and in
river water. A comparison was made of
the estimated media concentrations of
constituents to five types of terrestrial
toxicity data: lowest observable adverse
effect level (LOAEL) pertaining mostly
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules 9833J
to rat species, oral LDso for rat, dermal
LDso for rabbit, bird LDso for a variety
of avion species, and reproductive TDi.o
(the toxic dose having the lowest effect)
for rats.
Several constituents are present in the
media at concentrations that exceed
their respective terrestrial benchmark.
Carbofuran in waste group 3 presents a
potential hazard to birds, as soil
concentrations are estimated to be above
the avian LDso. Bensulide, EPTC
(eptam), vernolate, butylate and
molinate in waste group 6 present
potential hazards to mammals, as soil
concentrations exceed both oral and
dermal LDsos and other criteria, hi waste
group 9, ziram, molybdenum,
dibutylamine, dimethylamine, antimony
and zinc are estimated to be present in
soils and food chain pathways at levels
that may present a hazard to both
mammals and birds. Table 23 presents
the results of this screening analysis for
terrestrial toxicity.
EPA was unable to thoroughly assess
exposures of particular animal species,
their behavioral habits, and the comple
relationships within their ecosystems,
in order to quantify the terrestrial risk
from carbamate waste.
-------
TABLE 23.— TERRESTRIAL TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
Waste stream
Waste Group 3 ..
Waste Group 6 ..
Pathway type
Soil
Soil to Air to
Soil.
Soil
Soil to Air to
Soil.

Chemical
Carbofuran ..
Carbofuran
Bensulide . .. .
EPIC
Vernolate ..
Butylate ... ...
Molinate .
Bensulide . . ... ...

EPTC
Vernolate . .
Butylate
Molinate .-
Dipropylamine ..

CAS
1563662
1563662
741582
759944
1929777
2008415
2212671
741582
759944
1929777
2008415
2212671
142847
Concentration in media (mg/kg)
soil— 1.41 7E+0
veg_1 .Q35E-1
fish — 1 759E-4
river — 1 256E-5 (mg/L)
soil— 1 .41 7E+0
veg— 1 .Q35E-1
fish— 8.329E-7
river— 5.949E-8 (mg/L)
soil— 1 .175E+3
veg — 1 .796E+1
fish— 4.976E-2
river — 5 529E—4 (mg/L)
soil— 4.000E+4
veg— 7.520E+2
fish— 1 .402E+0
river — 2 089E— 2 (mg/L) ..
soil— 4.81 9E+1
veg— 4 753E-1
fish— 4 48E-03
river — 2.546E-5 (mg/L)
soil— 5.054E+2
veg — 3.683E+0
fish— 7.340E-2
river 2 549E-4 (mg/L)
soil— 7.823E+3
veg — 2 289E+2 ..
fish— 1 .507E-1
river— 4.31 9E-3 (mg/L)
soil— 1 .1 75E+3
veg — 1.796E+1
fish— 7.227E-4
riwar — ft.QSP-R fmn/l ^
soil — 4.000E+4
uon_7 590PJ.O ...
fish— 2.036E-2
river — 3.034E-4 (mg/L)
soil— 4.81 9E+1
veg_4.753E-1
fish— 6.508E-5
river — 3 697E-7 (mg/L)
soil— 5.054E+2
veg — 3 683E+0 ..
fish— 1 066E-3 . ..
river— 3 702E-6 (mg/L) ....
soil— 7.823E+3 .„
veg — 2 289E+2
fish— 2 189E-3
river — 6 272E-5 (mg/L)
soil— 3.973E+3
veo— 5.823E+2
Ratio of media cone, to:
LOAEL
1.10E-01
8.00E-03
1.40E-05
1.00E-06
1.10E-01
8.00E-03
6.70E-08
4.80E-09
na
na
na
na
4.00E+03
7.50E-f01
1.40E-01
2.10E-03
9.60E+00
1.00E-01
9.00E-04
5.10E-06
2.00E+01
1.50E-01
2.90E-03
1.00E-05
1.96E+03
5.70E+01
3.80E-02
1.10E-03
na
na
na
na
4.00E+03
7.50E+01
2.00E-03
3:03E-05
9.60E+00
1.00E-01
1.30E-05
7.40E-08
2.00E+01
1.50E-01
4.30E-05
1.20E-07
1.96E+03
5.70E+01
5.50E-04
1.60E-05
na
na
Oral LD50
2.30E-01
2.10E-02
3.50E-05
2.50E-06
2.30E-01
2.10E-02
1.70E-07
1.20E-08
4.30E+00
6.60E-02
1.80E-04
2.00E-06
4.40E+01
8.20E-01
1.50E-03
2.30E-05
4.00E-02
4.00E-04
3.70E-06
2.10E-08
1.70E-01
1.20E-03
2.40E-05
8.50E-08
2.10E+01
6.20E-01
4.10E-04
1.20E-05
4.30E+00
6.60E-02
2.70E-06
3.00E-08
4.40E+01
8.20E-01
2.20E-05
3.30E-07
4.00E-02
4.00E-04
5.40E-08
3.10E-10
1.70E-01
1.20E-03
3.60E-07
1.00E-09
2.10E+01
6.20E-01
5.90E-06
1.70E-07
8.60E+00
1.30E+00
Dermal
LD50
1.30E-03
1.20E-04
2.00E-07
1.40E-08
1.30E-03
1.20E-04
9.40E-10
6.70E-11
na
na
na
na
2.70E+01
5.20E-01
9.60E-04
1.40E-05
na
na
na
na
2.50E-01
1.80E-03
3.70E-05
1.30E-07
2.20E+00
6.50E-02
4.30E-05
1.20E-06
na
na
na
na
2.70E+01
5.20E-01
1.40E-05
2.10E-07
na
na
na
na
2.50E-01
1.80E-03
5.30E-07
1.50E-09
2.20E+00
6.50E-02
6.20E-07
1.80E-08
3.20E+00
4.70E-01
Bird LD50
2.90E+00
2.60E-01
4.40E-04
3.20E-05
2.90E+00
2.60E-01
2.10E-06
1.50E-07
8.50E-01
1.30E-02
3.60E-05
4.00E-07
4.00E+02
7.50E+00
1.40E-02
2.10E-04
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
8.50E-01
1.30E-02
5.20E-07
5.80E-09
4.00E+02
7.50E+00
2.00E-04
3.00E-06
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
Reproduct.
TDLo
2.00E-02
1.50E-03
2.50E-06
1.80E-07
2.00E-02
1.50E-03
1.20E-08
8.50E-10
na
na
na
na
4.00E+02
7.50E+00
1.40E-02
2.10E-04
na
na
na
na
5.10E+01
3.70E-01
7.30E-03
2.50E-05
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
4.00E+02
7.50E+00
2.00E-04
3.00E-06
na
na
na
na
5.10E+01
3.70E-01
1.10E-04
3.70E-07
na
na
na
na
na
na
CO
g
(P
1
I
!
o^
Ol
P
?
^
o
^
(D
cn
1
s
tf
H->
»-»
CD
CO
^
~>
T3
3
"8
CO
CD
P.
I
cT
CO
-------
Waste Group 9 ..

Waste Group 9 ..

- - -
Soil „

Soil to Air to
Soil.

ZffcUTl »***•»•*•*•****.*.. .«.*. .«. » •••***•**»*.
Molybdenum „

Antimony

Zinc

Dibutylamine

Dimethylamine

Ziram

Molybdenum

Antimony

Zinc

137304
7439987

7440360

7440666

111922

124403

137304

7439987

7440360

7440666

«ish-9.506E-5
river— 3.278E-5 (mg/L) .......... .
soil— 1 .552E+5
veg— 7.536E+3 ..... .„.
fish— 1.375E-1
river— 7.766E-2 (mg/L)
soil— 8.41 OE+1
veg — 1 .75QE+0
fish— 3.881 E-4
river— 3.881 E-5 (mg/L)
soil— 3.589E+4
veg — 1 .1 98E+2
fish— 1 .84E-2
river— 1.84E-2 (mg/L) . . .
soil— 6 107E+4 .
veg— 3.159E+3
fish— 4.782E+1
river— 2.391 E-2 (mg/L)
soil — 4 971 £+2
veg— 1 .737E+1
fish— 7.066E-5
river — 3.533E-6 (mg/L)
soil— 7 179E+3
veg — 2.079E+4
fish— 8.269E-5
river 2.067E-4 (mg/L)
soil — 1 552E+5
veg — 7.536E+3
fish_1 .996E-3
river— 1.1 28E-3 (mg/L)
soil — 8 41 OE+1
veg — 1 J50E+0
fish— 5.636E-6
river— 5.636E-7 (mg/L)
soil— 3 589E+4
veg — 1 .1 98E+2
fish— 2.673E-4
river— 2.673E-4 (mg/L)
soil — 5 107E+4
veg— 3.1 59E+3
fish— 6.946E-1
river-3.473E-4 (mg/L)
-
na
na
na
na
na
na
6 01 E+02
1.30E+01
2.80E-03
2.80E-04
1 03E+05
3.42E+02
5.30E-02
5 30E-02
5 1 1 E+04
3.16E+03
4.80E+01
2.40E-02
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
6 01 E+02
1.30E+01
4.00E-05
4.00E-06
1 03E+05
3.42E+02
7.60E-04
7.60E-04
511 E+04
3.16E+03
6.90E-01
3.50E-04

2.10E-07
7.10E-08
5.81 E+02
2.80E+01
5.10E-04
2.90E-04
na
na
na
na
5.10E+00
1.70E-02
2.60E-06
2.60E-06
na
na
na
na
2 60E+00
9.20E-02
3.70E-07
1.90E-08
1 OOE+01
3.00E+01
1.20E-07
3 OOE-07
5 81 E+02
2.80E+01
7.50E-06
4.20E-06
na
na
na
na
5 10E+00
1.70E-02
3 80E-08
3.80E-08
na
na
na
na

7.60E-08
2.60E-08
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
4 90E-01
1.70E-02
7.00E-08
3.50E-09
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na

na
na
1.55E+03
7.50E+01
1.40E-03
7.70E-04
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
1 55E+03
7 50E+01
2.00E-05
1.10E-05
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na

na
na
651 E+02
3.00E+01
5.50E-04
3.10E-04
1 40E+01
250E-01
640E-05
6 40E-06
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
621 E+02
3 OOE+01
8.00E-06
4.50E-06
1 40E+01
2.90E-01
9.30E-07
9.30E-08
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na

*T|
i?
p*
(D
&
>Z)
§
°a.
yi
Si
(D
1
"~
^

01
CO
z.
o
*>
o
~~
H
p;
%
d.
<%
y
ft
1
h-i
Hi
CO
CD
>»>
--•
3
3
8
CD
fTl
$
to
09
W
U1
-------
J836 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
3. Summary of Basis for Listing For
Additional K Listings and Other
Considerations
EPA's decision to propose additional
jazardous waste listings represents a
determination by the Agency that six
bamate wastes (identified as K156
_ough K161) meet the criteria for
listing as hazardous wastes presented in
10 CFR 261.11. Consequently, EPA is
•proposing to add these 6 wastes to the
•list of hazardous wastes from specific
•sources contained in 40 CFR 261.32.
[K156 through K161 wastes typically and
•frequently contain mobile and persistent
•hazardous constituents at levels such
I that concentrations of these constituents
I at human or environmental receptors
I may exceed one or more human or
I environmental health-based levels
1 (HBLs) if the wastes are improperly
I managed. The high concentrations of
I hazardous constituents in these wastes,
I the mobility and persistence of the
I constituents of concern, and the
I estimated risks associated with those
I constituents satisfy the criteria set forth
I in 40 CFR 261.11 for listing a waste as
hazardous and provide the basis for
listing these wastes as hazardous. EPA
is proposing that these wastes from
carbamate production be listed as
I hazardous and subject to the
requirements of 40 CFR parts 124, 262-
266, 268, 270, and 271 since they are
capable of posing a threat to human
health and the environment when
improperly treated, stored, transported,
disposed of, or otherwise handled.
As described in more detail below,
these wastes frequently contain
significant concentrations of product
material and raw materials listed in
Appendix VIII of 40 CFR part 261.
These compounds may present a threat
to human health and the environment if
mismanaged due to their toxicity,
mobility, and persistence. These
constituents may be carcinogenic,
mutagenic, and/or cause other chronic
systemic effects if mismanaged. Some of
these constituents are highly persistent
and are mobile in the environment
based on their physical properties and
evidence from damage incidents studies
collected by the Agency.
EPA in its risk analysis attempted to
quantify the magnitude of the risk posed
by plausible mismanagement of each of
the waste groupings. EPA also notes that
significant toxicological data gaps exist
for all wastes, precluding a full
accounting of the total risk from
plausible waste mismanagement and
from possible additive or synergistic
interactions. The Agency was able to
calculate risks for only those
constituents of concern for which
health-based numbers were available.
All these wastes contain significant
quantities or percent levels of chemicals
which have limited toxicological data
from which health-based numbers can
not be developed.
The Agency requests comment on the
basis for listing these wastes. EPA also
requests comment on the data obtained
for use in this listing determination, the
methodology and the assumptions used
in the risk assessment, and on the
Agency's decision to list these waste
streams. Specifically, the Agency
requests comments on the assumptions
used in the risk assessment which are
highlighted in Section IH.C.5 of this
preamble. In particular, the Agency
requests comments on the assumptions
pertaining to characterization of the
wastes, the distances from where the
waste is managed to a receptor, the
operating management practices for
carbamate wastes disposed in a landfill,
and the exposure frequencies and
durations assumed at a receptor.
The Agency also requests comments
on the option of not listing these waste
streams. The Agency requests comments
on the use of carbamate active
ingredient damage information in
assessing the potential damage from the
mismanagement of carbamate waste
streams and on the relevance of the
historical record on management of
these waste streams. In addition, EPA
recognizes the volumes of some of the
carbamate waste streams are relatively
low and the Agency requests comment
on whether and how they should be
addressed in this listing. The Agency
requests comments on whether existing
or potential regulations under the Clean
Air Act (CAA) or Clean Water Act
(CWA), if promulgated, would reduce
incremental risks from the
mismanagement of carbamate wastes
significantly to warrant not listing these
wastes. Finally, the Agency also solicits
comments on the methodology and
assumptions used in the risk
assessment. The Agency's risk
assessment finds that the central
tendency risk estimates are on the order
of one in a million, with high end
individual risk estimates falling in the
range of 10 ~4 to 10- 6. EPA requests
comments on the representativeness of
these high-end scenarios and on the
merits of alternative risk management
strategies including decisions to list and
not to list these waste streams.
The following provides a summary of
the rationale for each of the proposed
listings based on EPA's consideration of
the criteria for listing set forth in 40 CFR
261.11. The supporting data and
specific results of the risk assessment
are presented elsewhere in this
preamble. Results of the Agency's risk
assessment estimating individual high-
end, and central tendency estimates and
population estimates are presented in
Section m of this preamble.
K.156 Carbamate Organic Wastes.
From the carbamate/carbamoyl oxhne
segment of the industry, the Agency is
proposing to list organic wastes
(including heavy ends, still bottoms,
light ends, spent solvents, filtrates, and
decantates) as Hazardous Waste Number
Kl!56. K156 wastes frequently contain
high concentrations of volatile solvents
such as methylene chloride, methyl
chloride, pyridine, and methyl ethyl
ketone, and highly toxic products such
as carbaryl and carbofuran. For K156
wastes, the primary pathway of concern
was found to be air emissions and
subsequent transport to nearby residents
from the plausible mismanagement in
open tanks. The high-end individual
exposures were estimated to present
cancer risks above a 10 ~6 level, as well
as non-cancer effects based on
exposures above reference
concentrations. The Agency has also
collected damage resource information
showing the toxicity to wildlife of
caibaniate active ingredients such as
those found in these wastes resulting
from their misuse or mismanagement.
K157 Carbamate Wastewaters. K157
wastes frequently contain high
concentrations of volatile solvents such
as acetone, acetonitrile, acetophenone,
aniline, benzene, chlorobenzene,
chloroform, o-dichlorobenzene, hexane,
methanol, methomyl, methyl ethyl
kedone, methyl isobutyl ketone,
methylene chloride, naphthalene,
phenol, pyridine, toluene,
triBthylamine, and, xylene as well as
tojdc products including benomyl,
carbaryl, carbendazim, carbofuran, and
carbosulfan. The risk assessment
primary pathway of concern was found
to be air emissions from management in
aerated tanks. In this scenario, the high-
end individual exposure from volatile
solvents were estimated to present
inhalation cancer risks above a 10 ~6
level and non-cancer effects based on
exposures above reference
concentrations. The Agency has
collected damage information showing
toxicity to wildlife from carbamate
active ingredients such as those found
in these wastes resulting from the
misuse or mismanagement of these
chemicals.
m the case of wastewaters proposed
for listing as K157, air emissions from
current management practices were
found to present substantive high-end
individual cancer risks, as well as non-
cancer effects. In order to control and
reduce these emissions, a number of
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9837
possible options were considered by the
Agency. The Agency believes that
industry should implement cost-
effective source reduction efforts to
reduce the volume and toxicity of the
•wastes that pose these risks through
chemical substitution, process changes,
or other measures that could result in
the greater recovery and reuse of volatile
chemicals in the original production
process to reduce the risks. Where
process changes are not cost-effective,
the Agency believes cost-effective
controls should be installed to capture
these emissions for reuse or off-site
recycling.
Air omissions from hazardous waste
treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities (TSDFs) can be addressed by
regulations under RCRA 3004(n).
Currently, standards are in place for
process vents and equipment leaks
(subparts AA and BB of 40 CFR part 264
and part 265). Regulations to control air
emissions from tanks, surface
impoundments, containers, and certain
miscellaneous units were proposed July
22,1991 (56 FR 33490). This proposal
would add part CC airemission
requirements to 40 CFR part 264 and
part 265. However, under 40 CFR
264.1(g)(6) and 265.1(c)(10), wastewater
treatment units which employ tanks and
are subject to regulation under either
section 402 or 307(b) of the Clean Water
Act are not subject to either the part 264
or 265 standards, and, as such, would
not be subject to the CC regulations
when promulgated as a final rule. As a
result, listing these wastes as hazardous
without also changing existing
exemptions from waste management
rules can not mitigate the risks found,
since the current exemptions would also
prevent application of part CC air
emission standards, when finalized, to
those units. As EPA stated when it
promulgated the limited permitting
exemption, these exemptions "were
intended to reduce the regulatory
burden on a class of facilities which
pose less of a risk to human health and
the environment than other types of
hazardous waste management facilities"
(47 FR 4708). Removal of these
exemptions as a means to control the air
emissions from this one industry group
would defeat this purpose, and
necessitate the resource-intensive
Eermitting of thousands of low risk
tciliUes. The Agency is not at this time
proposing to remove or amend 40 CFR
264.1(g)(6) and 264.1(c)(10). However,
the Agency is exploring additional
options to control air emissions from
such facilities.
As an alternative to listing this
wastewater stream as hazardous and
subjecting them to the management
control of the air emission under RCRA
3004(n) authority, the Agency also
considered the availability of other
authorities that specifically direct EPA
to control air emissions. The primary
statute providing such authority is the
Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., as
amended by the Clean Air Act of 1990,
Public Law 101-549, Nov. 15,1990).
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the
Agency has proposed a National
Emission Standard for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for producers of
hazardous organic air pollutants (57 FR
62608). The proposed NESHAP, if
promulgated as a Final Rule, would
control wastewaters from the
production of one of the carbamate
products (carbaryl), provided the total
hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
concentration is 10,000 parts per
million by weight, or a total average
concentration greater than or equal to
1,000 parts per million by weight and
the average flow rate is greater than or
equal to 10 liters per minute, but does
not impact other carbamate product
lines. With the passage of the CAA, the
Agency has embarked on a multiyear
plan for implementation through the
year 2000 (57 FR 44147, July 16,1992).
As explained in the July 16,1992 notice,
the Agency is also developing
additional NESHAPs to cover a number
of other source categories, but these
actions would not fully control the risks
associated with the particular
wastewaters of concern in the carbamate
industry segment. The Agency has also
developed draft control technique
guidlines (CTGs) under the Clean Air
Act (see document No. EPA 453/D-93-
056) which may address some air risks
at facilities in non-attainment areas. The
Agency also plans to develop alternative
control techniques (ACTs) which are not
mandatory. Because of the limited
applicability of the CTGs and ACTs,
they will not address all air risks from
carbamate facilities.
In order to provide industry with
flexibility to allow it to accomplish the
Agency's source reduction goals, the
Agency is proposing a regulatory
strategy which allows for a
concentration-based exemption from the
listing. For wastewaters from the
production of carbamate and carbamoyl
oxime chemicals (proposed as
hazardous waste code K157), a
hazardous waste listing coupled with a
concentration-based listing exemption is
appropriate to define when the K157
wastewater in tanks ceases to pose an
unacceptable risk to human health or
the environment. Using models to
calculate the atmospheric
concentrations of chemicals of concern,
the Agency found that for these
wastewaters a total concentration of 5
parts per million by weight (ppmwt)
would be protective for wastewater
containing formaldehyde, methyl
chloride, methylene chloride, and
triethylamine. For these constituents of
concern, the 5 ppmwt level, while
protective of air emission risks, would
be above the 40 CFR part 268 best
demonstrated available treatment
(BDAT) level for these constituents in
other hazardous wastewaters and
current delisting criteria. These
treatment standards assume that wastes
have been subjected to final treatment
prior to disposal. Assuming further
wastewater treatment as necessary
before discharge, under the "plausible
mismanagement" scenario of treatment
in open tanks for K157 (see Section
III.C.5), the Agency views this level as
protective. In addition, EPA notes that
the 40 CFR Part 268 land disposal
restrictions's would not apply to wastes
managed in tanks except to the extent
the wastes were also managed in land-
based units such as surface
impoundments. Therefore, the Agency
is proposing a concentration-based
exemption to the listing description of
these wastewaters.
The Agency is proposing to list as
Hazardous Waste Number K157 the
"group 2" wastewaters as follows:
K157—Wastewaters (including scrubber
waters, condenser waters, washwaters, and
separation waters) from the production of
carbamates and carbamoyl oximes.

Under § 261.3(a)(2)(iv), a new
exemption to the definition of
hazardous wastes would be created for
these wastewaters. This proposed new
exemption would read:
§261.3(a)(2)(iv)* * *
(F) One or more of the following wastes
listed in § 261.32—wastewaters from the
production of carbamates and carbamoyl
oximes (EPA Hazardous Waste No. K157)—
provided that the maximum weekly usage of
formaldehyde, methyl chloride, methylene
chloride, and triethylamine (including all
amounts that cannot be demonstrated to be
reacted in the process or is recovered, i.e.,
what is discharged or volatilized) divided by
the average weekly flow of process
wastewater prior to any dilutions into the
headworks of the facility's wastewater
treatment system does not exceed a total of
5 parts per million by weight.

Under this exemption, wastes which
are calculated to contain less than a
total concentration of 5 ppmwt for the
sum of the four constituents of concern
would not be hazardous wastes, and any
sludges generated from further
biological treatment would not be
derived from hazardous wastes,
-------
9838
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
assuming wastewaters are <5 ppmwt at
the point of generation.
The Agency does not intend to
determine compliance with this
provision by requiring that generators
actually monitor the concentration of
the constituents of concern in untreated
wastewater, but proposes to use the
same strategy used in other exemptions
for wastewaters discharged into the
headworks of a wastewater treatment
system found at 40 CFR 261.3(a)(2)(4)
(46 FR 56582, November 17,1981). A
generator must be able to demonstrate
that the total amount of all constituents
of concern that is not converted to
product or recovered (i.e., what is
discharged or volatilized) during the
week divided by the average weekly
flow of the process unit discharge to
into the headworks of the final
wastewater treatment step not exceed
the proposed standards.
This demonstration can be made
through an audit of various records
already maintained at most facilities,
including invoices showing material
purchases, lists including to whom and
how much inventory was distributed
and other, similar, operating records. A
facility can exclude that portion of the
constituents of concern not disposed to
wastewaters. No portion of the material
of concern which is volatilized may be
excluded from the calculation. The
Agency requests comment on whether
or not specific record keeping
requirements should be promulgated.
Under current regulations (40 CFR
262.11 and 268.7) generators are
required to determine whether their
wastes are hazardous. Facilities
claiming the exemption would have to
be able to demonstrate that they meet
the exemption. Such information would
be intended to verify compliance with
this concentration standard. An EPA
inspector would look to this information
to verify the assessment made by the
generator, and may employ direct
analytical testing as further verification.
Should either measurement indicate a
total concentration greater than 5
ppmwt for the sum of the
concentrations of the four chemicals of
concern, then the, wastes shall be subject
to regulation as K157 hazardous waste.
In this manner, the Agency seeks to
discourage and prevent air stripping or
other technologies which would merely
continue to volatilize these hazardous
air pollutants of concern. The Agency
requests comment on using this
regulatory strategy to achieve risk
reduction.
The Agency is also proposing to
specifically exempt biological treatment
sludges from the treatment of
wastewaters from the production of
carbamates and carbamoyl oximes from
the definition of hazardous waste.
Under § 263.3(c)(2)(ii), a new exemption
to the definition of hazardous wastes
would be created for sludges from the
biological treatment of these
wastewaters. This proposed new
exemption would read:
§ 261.3(c)(2)(ii) * * *
(D) Biological treatment sludge from the
treatment of one of the following wastes
listed in § 261.32—wastewaters from the
production of carbamates and carbamoyl
oximes (EPA Hazardous Waste No. K157).
Without exemption, a large volume of
previously disposed wastes and sludge
currently collecting within the various
treatment systems would require
management as derived from newly
identified hazardous waste. However, in
the case of the biological sludges from
the treatment of carbamate and
carbamoyl oxime wastewaters, the
Agency could only identify risks
resulting from the hazardous volatile air
pollutants present in the wastewaters
being treated. Neither these air
pollutants nor other hazardous
substances were found to be
accumulating in the biological treatment
sludges studied by the Agency. This
leads the Agency to believe these
sludges do not meet the definition of
hazardous waste. Therefore, the Agency
is proposing to exempt these sludges
derived from the proposed K157 wastes
from the definition of hazardous wastes,
provided the wastes are not otherwise
characteristically hazardous. EPA
believes that this exemption is
particularly appropriate because of the
small number of facilities in this
industry and the Agency's through
investigation of carbamate wastes, as
described elsewhere in this preamble.
K158 Carbamate Baghouse Dust and
Filter/Separation Solids. K158 wastes
frequently contain percent levels of
'such products as carbofuran,
carbosulfan, benomyl, and carbendazim
as well as such solvents as methylene
chloride, chloroform, phenol, and
xylene. These materials are known to be
mobile in soils and may pose risks
above a 10 ~6 level by direct exposure or
through groundwater transport when
landfilled. The product chemicals in
K158 wastes are acutely toxic to
humans, birds, and fish. The Agency
believes that, if mismanaged, carbofuran
wastes will present significant risks
through a soil pathway for wildlife. The
Agency recognizes that there is 549
metric tons of K158 waste generated
annually. The Agency has collected
damage information showing toxicity to
wildlife from carbamate active
ingredients such as those found in these
wastes resulting from their misuse or
mismanagement.
K158 Thiocarbamate Organic Wastes.
The Agency is proposing to list organics
from the treatment of thiocarbamate
wastes as Hazardous Waste Number
Kl 59. These wastes frequently contain
benzene, and toxic thiocarbamate
product materials, such as eptam,
molinate, and butylate, at percent levels.
EPA's risk assessment estimated high-
end individual cancer risk above a 10 -«
level for inhalation of benzene,
asisuming plausible mismanagement in
open tanks. In addition, because EPA
currently lacks inhalation reference
levels for the other constituents (eptam,
molinate, and butylate), EPA was unable
to evaluate potential risks from
volatilization of these other
constituents. The Agency has damage
case information for these wastes
involving groundwater contamination.
K160 Thiocarbamate Solids. The
Agency is proposing to list solids
(including spent carbon, filter wastes,
separation solids and spent catalysts)
from the production of thiocarbamates
and solids from the treatment of
thi.ocarbamate wastes as Hazardous
Waste Number K160. These wastes
contain significant concentrations of
benzene and percent levels of
thi.ocarbamate product materials, such
as eptam, molinate, and butylate. Also,
similar to K159 wastes, the Agency was
unable to quantify risks from
volatilization of eptam, molinate, and
butylate. Assuming plausible
mismanagement in an unlined landfill,
EPA's risk assessment showed high-end
individual cancer risks above a 10 ~6
level and non-cancer effects for the
ground water, air, and soil ingestion
pathways.
:in addition to the human health risk
assessment results, EPA has records of
mismanagement contributing to ground
water contamination. These damage
cases are discussed in Section I1I.C.4 of
thiis preamble. Furthermore, the Agency
calculated numerous significant
teirestrial ecosystem risks, which are
presented in Table 23 of this preamble.
There Ss approximately 665 metric tons
of K160 waste generated annually.
K161 Dithiocarbamate Solid Wastes.
From the dithiocarbamate segment of
the industry the Agency is proposing to
list purification solids (including
filtration, evaporation, and
centrifugation solids), and baghouse
dust and floor sweepings as Hazardous
Waste Number K161. K161 wastes
frequently contain carbon disulfide,
heavy metals such as lead, nickel,
arsenic, selenium, antimony and
cadmium, and are comprised largely of
reactive dithiocarbamate product
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9839
materials such as metam-sodium and
ziram, which are highly toxic to aquatic
organisms. Because these products
readily react in the environment to form
other gases or vapors, such as carbon
disulfide, hydrogen sulfide,
methylisothiocyanate, and amines,
which can oxidize to carcinogenic
rdtrosoamines, the EPA is proposing to
require management of these
dithiocarbamate wastes as reactive and
toxic hazardous wastes. High-end
individual cancer risks above a 10-6
level and non-cancer effects for wastes
disposed in an off-site landfill were
estimated, and significant adverse
aquatic or terrestrial ecological effects
were predicted from airborne transport.
The Agency has also collected damage
resource information showing the
toxicity to wildlife if the wastes
containing dithiocarbamate product
\vere mismanaged or the product was
misused.
9. Summary Basis for a No-Listing
Decision on Wastewaters, and Certain
Wastewater Treatment Residuals
The Agency's decision to propose a
"no list" determination for a particular
waste or waste stream represents a
weight of evidence rinding that
additional regulation is not required to
protect human health and the
environment based on currently
available information. This in no way
implies that there is no potential hazard,
or that significant environmental
damage could not occur from gross
mismanagement of the wastes. However,
based on a comprehensive survey of the
industry, EPA believes that no
significant threat exists from normal or
plausible mismanagement.
Wastowaters of groups 5, 7, and 8 are
generated throughout the carbamate
manufacturing processes. Typically, a
facility's wastewaters include reactor
and tank washwaters, scrubber waters,
condenser waters, process decantates,
mother liquors, rinsewaters, equipment
washes, and rainwater runoff. Several
facilities treat wastewaters on site before
discharge to a publicly owned treatment
works (POTW) or a privately owned
treatment works (PrOTW) or through an
on-site wastewater treatment plant and
then discharge under a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit. Some wastewaters are
incinerated and many are recycled back
to the process. The Agency has analyzed
several of these wastewaters and found
that in some cases they may also contain
constituents of concern at significant
levels.
Most wastewaters are collected and
treated in an on-site wastewater
treatment plant. As a result, the effluent
from the wastewater treatment plant is
subject to either the effluent guidelines
and pretreatment standards
promulgated for the Organic Chemicals,
Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers (OCPSF)
industries (52 FR 42522, November 5,
1987) or the Pesticide Chemicals
Manufacturing Effluent Limitations,
Guidelines, Pretreatment Standards, and
New Source Performance Standards.
These pesticide chemical manufacturing
effluent limitations, guidelines and
standards have been promulgated for a
limited number of carbamate pesticides
(58 FR 50638, September 28,1993).
In response to the effluent guidelines,
a number of facilities may install steam
stripping or other technologies to aid in
compliance with the new effluent
guidelines. The result of such action
could be a reduction in the volatile
materials currently reaching the
wastewater treatment systems, if the
stripper heads are recycled.
In addition to the wastewaters
proposed as hazardous waste number
K157, the Agency also considered the
following possible listings for
wastewaters:
Group 5—Wastewaters from the production
of thiocarbamates and treatment of wastes
from thiocarbamate production.
Group 7—Process Wastewater (including
supernates, filtrates, and washwaters) from
the production of dithiocarbamates.
Group 8—Reactor vent scrubber water from
the production of dithiocarbamates.

A large proportion of these streams
are treated on site in tanks before
discharge under the Clean Water Act
(CWA). Current risks were modeled for
air emissions from the wastewater
treatment units (i.e., tanks). Although
the gross mismanagement of these
wastewaters in unlined surface
impoundments could result in
significant environmental harm,
management in unlined surface
impoundments currently exists only for
wastewaters which have been treated to
reduce toxicity. Therefore, the Agency
determined that for these wastewaters
"plausible mismanagement" would be
continued management in the open
tanks of the existing treatment systems.
The Agency is proposing not to list
wastewaters from groups 5, 7, and 8,
which were modeled and found to not
present significant risks from current
management practices.
The Agency requests comment on its
decisions not to list these wastes, and in
particular on its selection of "plausible
mismanagement" of the wastewaters to
be the current management in tanks.
Had the Agency selected "plausible
mismanagement" to be "gross
mismanagement" such as management
in unlined surface impoundments or
discharge without treatment, then the
significant intrinsic hazard of these
wastes would have likely resulted in
significantly greater estimates of
potential risk. In this case, the Agency
surveyed the entire industry and
identified all current management
practices to be treatment in tanks,
except in the last stages of wastewater
treatment. The Agency can foresee no
reason for these facilities to abandon
their current treatment works, and
therefore, it is reasonable for the Agency
to conclude, for these wastes in this
industry, that current practices
constitute "plausible mismanagement."
The treatment of wastewaters
generates sludges from aqueous
separation, neutralization, and
biological treatment. The Agency has
found that organic/aqueous separator
sludges are concentrated organic
residuals containing significant levels of
the constituents of concern. In contrast,
most of the constituents of concern were
not detected in wastewater
neutralization and biological sludges
from the production of carbamate and
carbamoyl oxime products. Constituents
present in these wastes, when detected,
were typically present at levels below
100 times the HBI. Thus, the Agency is
proposing to not exempt biological
wastewater treatment sludges derived
from the production of carbamate and
carbamoyl oxime products from the
definition of hazardous wastes and to
provide an exemption for the source
wastewaters provided hazardous air
pollutants have been removed.
In addition, a significant volume of
spent carbons are generated from the
production of carbamate and carbamoyl
oxime products. These spent carbons
are currently regulated as D022
hazardous wastes due to the teachable
concentration of chloroform absorbed
on the spent carbon. During its data
collection effort in support of this
proposal, the Agency characterized the
spent carbons and found chloroform to
be the driving contaminant of concern.
hi the Agency's opinion, existing
hazardous waste regulations are
adequate for these spent carbons, and
therefore proposes to narrow the scope
of the waste grouping of solids from the
production of carbamates and
carbamoyl oximes to focus on bag house
dusts and filter/separation solids which
are currently not regulated.
Similarly, for organic wastes from the
production of dithiocarbamates, the
Agency found from its § 3007 Carbamate
Industry Survey that all wastes in the
grouping were already regulated as
either hazardous waste F003 or F005.
The Agency feels that these wastes are
adequately regulated by existing
-------
9840
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
regulations, and is proposing not to
separately List these wastes as hazardous
to avoid redundant regulation.

10. Summary of Basis for Listing For
Additional P & U Listings
The 23 materials listed in Table 5
meet the criteria for listing as acute
hazardous wastes presented in 40 CFR
261.11(a)(2). They are acutely hazardous
because they have been found to be fatal
to humans in low doses or in the
absence of data on human toxicity, have
been shown in animal studies to have
an oral (rat) LD50 of less than 50
milligrams per kilogram, a dermal rabbit
LD50 of less than 200 milligrams per
kilogram, an inhalation (rat) LC50 of
less than 2 mg/L, or are otherwise
capable of causing or significantly
contributing to serious illness. Table 24
presents these commercial chemical
products proposed for listing as acute
hazardous waste, the oral LD50 (rat),
inhalation LC50 (rat), and the dermal
LD50 (rabbit). As shown in this table,
each of these chemicals meets at least
one of these criteria. Consequently,
based in part on these aquatic and acute
mammalian toxicity data, EPA is
proposing to add these 23 materials to
the list of hazardous wastes in 40 CFR
261.33(e).
Chemical substances which pose toxic
threats to human health or the
environment are listed in 40 CFR
261.33(f). For the purposes of
identifying compounds to be included
on this list, the Agency considers
principally the nature of the toxicity
(see 40 CFR 261.11(a)(3)(i)) and its
concentration (see 40 CFR
261.11(a)(3)(ii)). Concentration of the
material will be high because
commercial chemicals will consist in a
large degree the toxic compound or
contain the compound as die sole active
ingredient. Table 25 presents aquatic
and acute mammalian toxicity data,
including the oral LD50 (rat), inhalation
LC50 (rat), and dermal LD50 (rabbit),
used to support the proposed hazardous
waste listing of these toxic commercial
chemical products.
hi compiling the basic lexicological
information contained in Table 25, the
Agency found that for many carbamate
products or captive intermediates, there
was little or no toxicological studies
recorded in either the available
literature, the Agency's records, or on
current Material Safety Data Sheets. To
facilitate the assessment of toxicological
properties of the chemicals of concern
in the production of carbamate
chemicals, these chemicals with limited
toxicity data were divided into
structure-toxicity groups. These groups
are:
a. esterase (cholinesterase) inhibiting,
b. other non-cancer toxicity,
c. potentially carcinogenic, and
d. toxic metal (metallocarbamates).

Structure-toxicity surrogates were
then selected for each group and their
toxicity ascribed to the group members,
for which human data are lacking and
animal data are inadequate. For most of
the constituents, some data on the
toxicity of the chemical itself or of its
metabolites were available. This
information was used to assign the
chemicals to one of the four toxicity
groups. The assignment of groups was
used to develop surrogate health
benchmarks for use in the analysis.
Although the data were adequate for
identifying the toxicity of a chemical,
there is considerable uncertainty in
assigning surrogate health benchmarks
for these chemicals. Further discussion
of this approach can be found in
"Integrative Evaluation of the Toxicity
of Data-Poor Constituents of the
Carbamate Waste Listing," available in
the docket supporting this proposed
rule. See "ADDRESSES" section. The
Agency believes that this approach is
especially valid for such structurally
similar chemicals as carbamates. The
Agency requests comment on this
approach, and any additional toxicity
information.
Table 25 also includes four generic
listings; one each for each specific
chemical group of carbamate products.
The Agency feels that these generic
descriptions are warranted to help
emergency first responders identify the
potential hazards of carbamate,
carbamoyl oxime, thiocarbamate, and
dithiocarbamate products. These
descriptions are intended to be
analogous to the current Department of
Transportation labeling requirements for
carbamate pesticides and
dithiocarbamate pesticides to speed
hazard identification in the advent of
future transportation accidents.
The Agency feels such generic
product listings are especially
appropriate for such structurally similar
chemicals as carbamate, carbamoyl
oximes, thiocarbamates and
dithiocarbamates. As a group this
chemicals exhibit significant toxicity to
a number of organisms, which has been
the basis for the registration and use of
a number of these substances as
pesticide active ingredients.
As a chemical class ditliiocarbamates
are highly reactive materials, which are
normally utilized as a more stable metal
salt. However, even these salts are
subject to decomposition to toxic
amines, alkylisothiocyanates, and
carbon disulfide, and to the oxidation of
the amines to form carcinogenic
nitrosoamines. The Agency, therefore,
believes; that the entire class of
ditliiocarbamate discarded products and
spill residues will typically exhibit the
characteristic of reactivity and is subject
to existing regulation as D003
Characteristic Hazardous Wastes.
Because no facility reported current
management of these dithiocarbamate
products waste as reactive hazardous
wastes, the Agency is proposing to
separately designate these
ditliiocarbamate wastes as hazardous
wastes.
TABLE 24.—TOXICITY DATA FOR PROPOSED ACUTELY HAZARDOUS COMMERCIAL CHEMICAL PRODUCTS
Proposed
waste code
P185

P186

P187

Acutely hazardous wastes CAS name
(common name in parentheses)
1 ,3-Dithiolane-2-carboxalctehyde, 2,4-
dimethyK O-
[(methylamino)carbonyQoxime
(Tirpate).
2-Butanone, 3,3-dimethyl-1-
(methylthio)-, O-
[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxime
(Thiofanox).
1 ,3-Benzodioxol-4-ol, 2,2-dimethyl-,
methyl carbamate (Bendiocarb).

CAS No.
26419-73-8

39196-18-4

22781-23-3

Oral LD50 (rat)
mg/kg
1

8.5

64-1 19 female
rat, 72-156
male rat.
Inh. LC50 (rat)
mg/L 4 he.

0.070

0.55 2.2/1 hr

i
Dermal
LD50 rab-
bit mg/kg
350

566 rat .....

Aquatic LC50 mg/L 4
day unless noted

0.47-1. 67 (BG), 1.2-
1.5 (Trout), 5.55
(RC).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9841
TABLE 24.—TOXICITY DATA FOR PROPOSED ACUTELY HAZARDOUS COMMERCIAL CHEMICAL PRODUCTS—Continued
Proposed
waste code
P127
P188
P189
P190
P191
P192
P193
P194
P195
P196
P197
P19S
P128
P199
P200
P201
P202
P203
P204
P205
Acutely hazardous wastes CAS name
(common name in parentheses)
7-Benzofuranol, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-di-
methyK methytearbamate
(Carbofuran).
Benzole add, 2-hydroxy, compd. with
(3as-cis)-1 ^,313a,8.8a-hexahydrc-
1 ,3a.8-trimethylpyrrolo[2.3-b]indol-5-
yl methylcarbamate ester (1:1) (Phy-
sostlgmine salicylate).
Carbamte acid,
[(dibutyIamino)triio]methyK 2,3-
tfihydro-2^-dimethyl-7-benzofuranyl
ester (Carbosulfan).
Caibamic acid, methyl-, 3-
melhylphenyl ester (Metolcarb).
Carbamic acid, dimethyl-, 1-
[(dimethylamino)carbonyQ-5-rnethyl-
1H-pyrazol-3-yl ester (Dimetilan).
Carbamlc acid, dimethyl-, 3-methyI-1-
(1-methylethyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl ester
(Isolan).
Carbamic acid, [1,2- phenylenebis
(Imino carbonothioyQlbis-, dimethyl
ester (Thiophanate-methyl).
EthanimkJothioc acid, 2-(dimethy
lamIno)-N- [[(methy lamino)carbonyl]
oxy]-2-oxo-, methyl ester (Oxamyl).
Ethanimidothiote acid, N,N'-[thiobis
[(methy liminojcarbony loxyflbis-, di-
methyl ester (Thiodicarb).
Manganese, bis(dimethyl
carbamodithioatc-S,S')-, (Man-
ganese dimethyldithio carbamate).
MethanlmJdamide, N,N-dimethyl -N'-[3-
methyl- 4-H(methyl
aminojcarbonyl] oxy]phenyl]-
(Formparanate).
Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N'-[3-
[((methylamino) carbonyl]oxy]
phenyl]-, monohydro chloride
(Formetanate hydrochloride).
Phenol, 4-{dimethylamino)-3,5-di-
methyK methylcarbamate (ester)
(Mexacarbate).
Phenol, (3,5-dimethyl-4-(methyIthio)-,
methylcarbamate (Methiocarb).
Phenol, 2-(1-methyletnoxy)-,
methylcarbamate (Propoxur).
Phenol, 3-methyl-5-(1-methylethyl)-,
methyl carbamate (Promecarb).
Phenol, 3-{1-methylethyl), methyl car-
bamate (Hercules AC-5727).
Propanal, 2-methyl-2-{methylsulfonyl)-,
O-[(methylamino)carbonyl] oxime
(Akicarb sulfone).
Pyrrok>[2,3-b]indol-5-ol, 1.2,3,3a,8,8a-
nexahydro-1 ,3a,8-trimethyl-,
methylcarbarnate (ester), (3aS-cis)-
(Physostigmine).
Zinc, Ws(dimethyl carbamodithtoato-
S.S1)-, (Ziram).
CAS No.
1563-66-2
57-64-7
55285-14-8
1129-41-5
644-64-4
119-38-0
23564-05-8
23135-22-0
59669-26-0
15339-36-3
17702-57-7
23422-53-9
315-18-4
2032-65-7
114-26-1
2631-37-0
64-00-6
f646-88-4
57-^7-6
137-30-4
Oral LD50 (rat)
mg/kg
5
2.5 (mouse)
51
268
25
10.8
6,640
2.5 female
66
32
7.2
20
14
20
70
35
16
20
3 (mouse)
267
Inn. LC50 (rat)
mg/L 4 nr.
0.017-0.047
1.53/1 hr
0.475

1.7
0.064 male
0.52

1.44/1hr

0.14
0.081
Dermal
LD50 rab-
bit mg/kg
885
>2,000

2000

>1 0,000 ....
740
6,310
10,200
>500
>2,000 350
,(rat).
800 (Rat)
>1 ,000
40
200
>2,000
Aquatic LC50 mg/L 4
day unless noted
0.165 (BG), 0.380
(RT)a, 0.872 (FM)a.

0 012/0 5 hr (DM)
0.074/2d (TC).
107 (RT)
11.4/3d(RT), 16/2d
(DM).
8 3 (FM)
1.21 (BG), 2.55 (RT).

10.4 (BG) 12 (RT)a
23.7 (FM), 15.8
(CT)a.
08 (RT) 021 (BG)
1 47 (DM) 8 2 (RT)a
25 (FM)a, 4.8
(BG)a.
28 (TD).
0.180 (RT).
1.017/2d (DL).
0.002/60d (RT), 0.1 7/
4d(FM)i.
BG: Blue Gill
OS: Daggerblade Shrimp
RT: Rainbow Trout
WM: White Mullet
b: interperitoneal
CT: Cutthroat Trout
FM: Fathead Minnow
SO: Scud
a: Active Ingredient
-------
9842
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
DP: Daphnia Pulex
DL: Daphnia Laevis
HF: Harlequinfish
TC: Tooth Carp
DM: Daphnia Magna
RC: Red Crayfish
TD: Toad
1 Recalculation involved
TABLE 25.—TOXICITY INFORMATION FOR PROPOSED Toxic COMMERCIAL CHEMICAL PRODUCTS
Proposed
waste code
U360
U361
U362
U3R3
U279
\nKA
U365
U366
U367
U368
U369
U370
U371
U280
U372
U373
U374
U271
U375
U376
U377
U378
Toxic hazardous wastes IUPAC
name (common name in paren-
theses)
Carbamates N.O.S
Carbamoyl Oximes N.O.S
Thiocarbamates N.O.S
Dithiocarbamate acids salts and/or
esters, N.O.S. (This listing includes
mixtures of one or more
dithiocarbamic acid, salt, or ester.).
1 -Naphthalene), methylcarbamate
(Carbaryl).
1 3-Benzodioxol-4-ol 2 2-dimethyl-
(Bendiocarb phenol).
1H-Azepine-1-carbothioic acid,
hexahydro-, S-ethyl ester
(Molinate).
2H-1 3 5-thiadiazine-2-thione
tetrahydro-3,5-dimethyl-(Dazomet).
7-Benzofuranol 2 3-dihydro-2 2-di-
methyl-(Carbofuran phenol).
(dipentylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-
(Antjmony
trisdipentyldithiocarbamate).
Antimony tris[bis(2-
ethylhexyl)carbamodithioato-S,S']-,
(Antimony tris(2-
ethylhexyl)dithiocarbamate).
Bismuth,
tris(dimethylcarbamodithioato-
S,S*-, (Methyl bismate).
Carbamic acid,
[(dimethylamino)iminomethyl)]
methyl, ethyl ester
monohydrochloride (Hexazinone
intermediate).
Carbamic acid, (3-chlorophenyl)-, 4-
chloro-2-butynyl ester (Barban).
Carbamic acid, 1H-benzimidazol-2-yl,
methyl ester (Carbendazim).
Carbamic acid phenyl- 1-
methylethyl ester (Propham).
Carbamic acid [[3-
[(dimethylamino)carbonyl]-2-
pyridinyf]sulfonyl]-phenyl ester
(U9069).
Carbamic acid [1 -
[(butylamino)carbonyl]-1 H-
benzimidazol-2-yl]-, methyl ester
(Benomyl).
Carbamic acid, butyl-, 3-iodo-2-
propynyl ester (Troysan Poly-
phase).
Carbamodithioic acid, dimethyl-,
tetraanhydrosulfide with
orthothioselenious acid (Selenium
dimethyldithiocarbamate).
Carbamodithioic acid methyl -
monopotassium salt (Potassium n-
methyldithiocarbamate).
Carbamodithioic acid,
(hydroxymethyl)methyl-,
monopotassium salt (Busan 40).
CAS No.

63-25-2
22961-82-6
2212-67-1
533-74-4
1563-38-8
15890-25-2
15991-76-1
21260-46-8
65086-65-3
101-27-9
10605-21-7
122-42-9
112006-94-7
17804-35-2
55406-53-6
144-34-3
137-41-7
51026-28-9
Oral LD50 (rat)
mg/kg

230
4 640
369
320

16400
16,400
>3,000
>1 1,000
527
6,400
1 000
>1 1 ,000
10,000
372
104 (mouse)
630
590
Inh. LC50 (rat)
mg/L 4 hr.

>3.4 '.
i
>0.2 •
8.4 1

27.4
>5.7
!
>2

i
!
Dermal
LC50 rabbit
mg/kg

2,000
3,536
7,000

16,000
16,000
23,000
>1 0,000 ....
>5,000
(Rat).
>1 0,000 ....
>2,000

Aquatic LC50 mg/L 4
day unless noted

3.28 (DM), 6.7 (BG),
2.1 (RT), 13.4 (FM).
10 (RT), 25/2d (DM).
0.32 (BG)a, 14.0 (RT).
0.28/2d i (HF).
16/2d (DP).

1.16/2d(HF)'.
>3.20 (BG), 0.48
(RT), 0.55/2d (DM).
38 (RT)a, 29 (BG)a,
10 (SC).
1.3(BG), 0.29 (RT),
2.05 (FM)a.
1.1 (RT).
0.01 2/2d (DM), 0.08
(RT).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9843
TABLE 25.—TOXICITY INFORMATION FOR PROPOSED Toxic COMMERCIAL CHEMICAL PRODUCTS—Continued
Proposed
waste code
U277
U379
U380
U381
U382
U383
U384
U385
U366
U387
U388
U389
U390
U391
U392
U393
U394
U395
U396
U397
U39S
U399
U400
U401
U402
U403
LM04
U405
U406
Toxic hazardous wastes IUPAC
name (common name in paren-
theses)
Carbamodithlotc acid, diethyl-, 2-
chloro-2-propenyl ester (Sulfallate).
Carbamodithioic acid, dibutyl, sodium
salt (Sodium
dibutyldithiocarbamate).
Carbamodithioic acid, dibutyl-, meth-
ylena ester (Vanlube 7723).
Carbamodithioic acid, diethyK so-
dium salt (Sodium
diethyldithlocarbamate).
Carbamodithioic acid, dimethyl-, so-
dium salt (Dibam).
Carbamodithioic acid, dimethyl, po-
tassium salt (Potassium dimethyl
dithiocarbamate) (Busan 85).
Carbamodithioic acid, methyl-, mono-
sodium salt (Metam Sodium).
Carbamothiolc acid, dipropyI-,S-
propyl ester (Vemolate).
Carbamothiolc acid, cyclohexylethyl-,
S-ethyl ester (Cycloate).
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-
(phenylmethyl) ester (Prosulfocarb).
Carbamothioic acid, (1,2-
dimethylpropyl) ethyl-, S-
(phenylmethyl) ester (Esprocarb).
Carbamothiolc acid, bis(1-
methylethyl)-, S-(2,3,3-trichloro-2-
propenyl) ester (Triallate).
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-ethyl
ester (Eptam).
Carbamothioic acid, butylethyl-, S-
propyl ester (Pebulate).
Carbamothioic acid, bis(2-
methylpropyl)-, S-ethyl ester
(Butylate).
Copper,
Ws(d!methylcarbamodithioatc-S,S')-
, (Copper dimethyldithiocarbamate).
Ethanirnidothiote acid, 2-
(d!methylamino)-N-hydroxy-2-oxo-,
methyl ester (A2213).
Ethanol, 2,2'-oxybis-, dicarbamate
(Reactacrease 4-DEG).
Iron, tris(dimethylcarbamodithioatc-
S.S1)-, (Ferbam).
Lead, bis(dipenty!carbamodithioato-
S,ST-.
Molybdenum,
bis(dibutyicarbamothioato)-di-.mu.-
oxodioxodK sulfurized.
Nickel, bis(dibutylcarbamodithioato-
S.S-)- (Nickel
dibutyldithiocarbamate).
Piperidine, 1,1'-
(tetrathiodicarbonothioyl)-bis-
(Sulfads).
Bis(dmethylthiocarbamoyl) sulfide
(Tetramethylthiuram monosulfide).
Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide.
tetrabutyl (Butyl Tuads).
Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide, tetra-
ethyl (Disulfiram).
Ethanamine, N,N-diethyl-
(Triethylamlne).
Zinc, bis[bis(phenyl meth-
yljcarbamodt thioato-S,S1-
(Arazate).
Zinc, b!s(dibutyl carbamodi thioato-
S,SO-(Butyl Ziram).
CAS No.
95-06-7
136-30-1
10254-57-6
148-18-5
128-04-1
128-03-0
137-42-8
1929-77-7
1134-23-2
52888-80-9
85785-20-2
2303-17-5
759-94-4
1114-71-2
2008-41-5
137-29-1
30558-^3-1
5952-26-1
14484-64-1
36501-84-5
68412-26-0
13927-77-0
120-54-7
97-74-5
1634-02-2
97-77-8
. 121-44-8
14726-36-^
136-23-2
Oral LD50 (rat)
mg/kg
850
670
>1 6,000
1,500
1,000

450
1 ,200
1,678
1,820
>2,000

916
921
4,000

>7,000
8,300 (mouse) ..
1,130
>10
>1 0,000
17,000
200 (mouse) b
2,350 (mouse) ..
8,600
460
>2,000
290
Inh. LC50 (rat)
mg/L 4 hr.

>4.7

4.3

>34.4

6/2hr (mouse) .

Dermal
LC50 rabbit
mg/kg
2200

>2,000
>1 000
(Rat).

800
>9,000
3000
>2,000
>2 000 (rat)

1,460
4,640 .
2000-
5,000.

>464
>1 0,000

570

Aquatic LC50 mg/L 4
day unless noted

0 91/2d (DM)
0 0064/60d (RT)
0.67/2d (DM).
0 049 (DS)
0 33/1 08d (DM)'
2.5 (BG)a, 4.3 (RT)a,
1.8(SC).
2 6 (SC)i

6 0/2d (HF)1
17 (CT)a.
625/2d (WM)'
5 5 (BG) 3 6 (RT) 1 1
(SC).
0 15 (FM)' 032
(BG)i-
5 0/2d (RT) 5 0/2d
(BG).
0029/60d (RT) 2 2
(FM), 0.9/2d (DM).

0 038/60d (RT) 2 9/
2d (DM).
>0 56/2d (DM)
0009/60d (RT) 0 12/
2d (DM).
137/60d (RT)

-------
9844
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 25.—TOXICITY INFORMATION FOR PROPOSED Toxic COMMERCIAL CHEMICAL PRODUCTS—Continued
Proposed
waste code
U407

Toxic hazardous wastes IUPAC
name (common name in paren-
theses)
Zinc, bis(diethyl carbamodi thioato-
S,S')-(Ethyl Ziram).
CAS No.
14324-55-1

Oral LD50 (rat)
mg/kg
2,910

Inh. LC50 (rat)
mg/L 4 hr.

Dermal
LC50 rabbit
mg/kg

Aquatic LC50 mg/L 4
day unless noted
0 24/2d (DM)

CT: Cutthroat Trout
DL: Daphnia Laevis
DM: Daphnia Magna
DS: Daggerblade Shrimp
FM: Fathead Minnow
HF: Harlequinfish
RC: Red Crayfish
RT: Rainbow Trout
SC: Scud
TC: Tooth Carp
TD: Toad
WM: White Mullet
a: Active ingredient
b: interperitoneal
DP: Daphnia pulex
' Recalculation involved
D. Source Reduction

In the Pollution Prevention Act of
1990 (42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq., Pub. L.
101-508, November 5,1990), Congress
declared pollution prevention the
national policy of the United States. The
Act declares that pollution should be
prevented or reduced whenever feasible;
pollution that cannot be prevented
should be recycled or reused in an
environmentally safe manner wherever
feasible; pollution that cannot be
recycled should be treated; and disposal
or release into the environment should
be chosen only as a last resort. While
the Pollution Prevention Act gives first
priority to source reduction, RCRA
promotes "waste minimization." This
section provides a brief discussion of
some pollution prevention and waste
minimization techniques that facilities
may wish to consider exploring.
Pollution prevention, recycle and
reuse practices fall into three general
groups: Actual production practices,
housekeeping practices, and practices
that employ the use of equipment that
by design promote pollution prevention.
Some of these practices/equipment
listed below conserve water, others
reduce the amount of product in the
waste stream, while others may prevent
the creation of the waste altogether. EPA
acknowledges that some of these
practices/equipment may lead to media
transfers or increased energy
consumption. This information is
presented for general information, and
is not being proposed as a regulatory
requirement.
Production practices include:
• Triple-rinsing raw material
shipping containers and returning the
rinsate directly to the reactor;
• Scheduling production to minimize
changeover cleanouts;
• Segregating equipment by
individual product or product
"families;"
• Packaging products directly out of
reactors;
• Using raw material drums for
packaging final products; and
• Dedicating equipment for hard to
clean products.
Housekeeping practices include:
• Performing preventative
maintenance on all valves, fittings, and
pumps;
• Promptly correcting leaky valves
and fittings;
• Placing drip pans under valves and
fitting to contain leaks;
• Cleaning up spills or leaks in bulk
containment areas to prevent
contamination of storm or wash wasters.
Equipment that promote pollution
prevention by reducing or eliminating
waste generation:
• Use of low volume—high pressure
hoses for cleaning;
• Drum triple rinsing stations;
• Reactor scrubber systems designed
to return captured reactants to the next
batch rather than to disposal;
• Construction of material storage
tanks with inert liners to prevent
contamination of water blankets with
contaminants which would prohibit its
use in the process;
• Enclosed automated product
handling equipment to eliminate
manual product packaging; and
• Steam stripping wastewaters to
recovery reactants or solvents for reuse.
One or more of these practices was
observed to be already implemented at
the facilities EPA visited during its
engineering site visit and sampling
effort in the carbamate industry. The
Agency took note that in some cases the
ability of a facility to implement further
pollution preventions efforts may be
inhibited, by the manner in which the
facility elected to comply with other
existing regulations. For example, the
Agency observed that facilities
dedicated to one or two product lines
often dedicated equipment and hence
air pollution control scrubbers to the
individual processes, where facilities
with larger product lines and numerous
reactors often chose to treat air
emissions in a central control system.
The result of this choice is that the
facilities with fewer products were able
to potentially recover reactants for
reuse, while the facilities with central
treatment systems generated wastes
which were not reusable in any one
process. The Agency seeks additional
information on any other factors which
might inhibit the implementation of the
pollution prevention practices
described, as well as information on
additional pollution prevention
practices.
Section 1003 of the Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, a
nation policy under the Resource
Conservation And Recovery Act
(RCRA.), was established to "minimize
the generation of hazardous waste by
encouraging process substitution,
materials recovery, properly conducted
recycling, and reuse and treatment." To
further EPA's pollution prevention
goals, the Waste Minimization Branch
(WMB) in EPA's Office of Solid Waste
(OSW) established the RCRA Waste
Minimization Action Plan to integrate
source reduction and recycling into the
National RCRA Program, and RCRA
activities into the Agency's Pollution
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday. March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9845
Prevention Strategy. As part of this
effort, EPA attempts to incorporate
pollution prevention alternatives in
hazardous waste listing determinations.
The residuals reported on EPA's
RCRA section 3007 carbamate
questionnaire were evaluated for
possible pollution prevention
opportunities. Each residual and its
generating process was examined for a
limited number of facilities. As noted in
section III.D, a number of possible
pollution prevention options were
identified for those residuals with waste
minimization potential. EPA also
performed a literature search to
determine the feasibility of the pollution
prevention technologies identified. The
residuals were then ranked considering
quantity of waste generated, impact on
the environment, and pollution
prevention potential.
A pollution prevention economic
analysis was performed for a limited
number of facilities. The economic
analysis was conducted to estimate the
monetary value the carbamate industry
forgoes by not instituting pollution
prevention programs. Two value
components were estimated:
Constituent value and avoided costs of
disposal. Many constituent values were
found in the residuals from the
sampling analysis results and/or
questionnaire responses. If these
constituents were recovered in the
production process, it would reduce the
cost of raw materials. The avoided cost
of disposing of the residuals was
estimated using the questionnaire waste
management costs. The two component
values were added to determine the
total revenues of avoided costs (i.e.,
savings to the facility by implementing
pollution prevention programs).
Pollution prevention/waste
minimization measures can be tailored
to the needs of individual industries,
processes, and firms. This approach
may make it possible to achieve greater
pollution reduction with less cost and
disruption to the firm. The Agency's
economic analysis of the carbamate
industry indicates that there may be
monetary benefits to be gained by
implementing further waste
minimization programs.
The economic analysis result was
provided to each individual facility to
review and comment. Since the 1990
base year of the questionnaire, some
facilities have initiated pollution
prevention programs while others had
not considered recovering these waste
streams until they received the
economic analysis but felt there was a
possibility for them to reclaim these
wastes. The overall theme of the
comments from these limited number of
facilities indicates that they do not want
the current or future regulations to
inhibit their ability to perform source
reduction and recycling efforts at their
facilities.
To this end, the Agency intends to
gather information on pollution
prevention potential wherever feasible
and thus is requesting comment on
particular opportunities for additional
volume and toxicity reduction through
increased recycling or other process
changes for carbamate wastes proposed
to be listed as hazardous in this rule.
The Agency invites all parties
concerned to use this open
communication approach to give inputs
that might help better promote pollution
prevention. Through cooperative efforts
such as these, the Agency can better
inform the public and make enlightened
decisions on regulatory matters. At the
same time, the information collected as
a response to this proposed rule can be
assembled, evaluated, and potentially
disseminated through the Agency's
technology transfer program, potentially
resulting in short-term positive impacts
on volume reductions.
Defined process control, waste
segregation, and good housekeeping
practices can often result in significant
volume reduction. Evaluations of
existing processes may also point out
the need for more complex engineering
approaches (e.g., waste reuse, secondary
processing of distillation bottoms, and
use of vacuum pumps instead of steam
jets) to achieve pollution prevention
objectives. Simple physical audits of
current waste generation and in-plant
management practices for the wastes
can also yield positive results. These
audits often turn up simple non-
engineering practices that can be
successfully implemented.
Pollution prevention opportunities for
the manufacturing processes generating
carbamate wastes (K156 through K161)
may potentially result in reductions in
waste generation.
The Agency is interested in comments
and data on such opportunities,
including both successful and
unsuccessful attempts to reduce waste
generation, as well as the potential for
volume or toxicity reductions. It is also
possible that, owing to previous
implementation of waste minimization
procedures, some facilities or specific
processes have very little potential for
decreases in waste generation rates or
toxicity. The Agency is particularly
interested in such specific information
as: (1) Data on the quantities of wastes
that have been or could be reduced; (2)
a means of calculating percentage
reductions that are achievable
(accounting for changes in production
rates); (3) the potential for reduction in
toxicity and mobility of the wastes; (4)
the results of waste audits that have
been performed; and (5) potential cost
savings that can be (or have been)
achieved; (6) the feasibility and cost
burden that could be faced to reuse/
recycle these wastes including an
estimated return on investment; (7) lead
time required to successfully implement
a recovery and/or recycling method; or
other methods (such as process
modification to improve efficiency) that
significantly reduce the volume and/or
toxicity of the wastes; and (8) other
barriers to implementation.
IV. Applicability of the Land Disposal
Restrictions Determinations

A. Request for Comment on the
Agency's Approach to the Development
ofBDAT Treatment Standards

RCRA requires EPA to make a land
disposal prohibition determination for
any hazardous waste that is newly
identified or listed in 40 CFR part 261
after November 8,1984, within six
months of the date of identification or
final listing (RCRA section 3004(g)(4),
42 U.S.C. 6924(g)(4)). EPA is also
required to set "* * * levels or methods
of treatment, if any, which substantially
diminish the toxicity of the waste or
substantially reduce the likelihood of
migration of hazardous constituents
from the waste so that short-term and
long-term threats to human health and
the environment are minimized" (RCRA
Section 3004(m)(l), 42 U.S.C.
6924(m)(l)). Land disposal of wastes
that meet treatment standards thus
established by EPA is not prohibited.
The wastes being proposed for listing in
this action would be subject to this
requirement once a final rule is
promulgated.
A general overview of the Agency's
approach in performing analysis of how
to develop treatment standards for
hazardous wastes can be found in
greater detail in section III.A.l of the
preamble to the final rule that set land
disposal restrictions (LDR's) for the
Third Third wastes (55 FR 22535, June
1,1990). The framework for the
development of the entire Land Disposal
Restrictions program was promulgated
November 7,1986. (51 FR 40572).
While the Agency prefers source
reduction/pollution prevention and
recycling/recovery over conventional
treatment, inevitably, some wastes (such
as residues from recycling and
inadvertent spill residues) will be
generated. Thus, standards based on
treatment using BDAT will be required
to be developed for these wastes, if a
-------
9846
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
final rule listing them as hazardous is
promulgated.
Treatment standards typically are
established based on the performance
data from the treatment of the listed
waste or wastes with similar chemical
and physical characteristics or similar
concentrations of hazardous
constituents. Treatment standards are
established for both wastewater and
nonwastewater forms on a constituent-
specific basis. The constituents selected
for regulation under the Land Disposal
Restrictions Program are not necessarily
limited to those identified as present in
the listings proposed in this action, but
include those constituents or parameters
that will ensure that the technologies
are operated properly.
Although data on waste
characteristics and current management
practices for wastes proposed in this
action have been gathered as part of the
administrative record for this rule, the
Agency has not completed its evaluation
of the usefulness of these data for
developing specific treatment standards
or assessing the capacity to treat (or
recycle) these wastes.
Available treatment performance data
show that incineration, chemical
hydrolysis, and biological treatment are
potentially applicable to carbamate
wastes. These technologies have shown
some promise, and the data are under
review for the purpose of developing
treatment standards for K156 through
K161. A collection of the available
treatment information has been placed
in the docket for this rule.
EPA intends to propose treatment
standards for K156 through K161 and
the proposed P and U wastes in a
separate rulemaking. However, EPA
specifically is soliciting comment and
data on the following as they pertain to
the proposed listing of carbamate wastes
K156 through K161 as described in this
action:
(1) Technical descriptions of treatment
systems that are or could potentially be used
for these wastes;
(2) Descriptions of alternative technologies
that might be currently available or
anticipated as applicable;
(3) Performance data for the treatment of
these or similar wastes (in particular,
constituent concentrations in both treated
and untreated wastes, as well as equipment
design and operating conditions);
(4) Information on known or perceived
difficulties in analyzing treatment residues or
specific constituents;
(5) Quality assurance/quality control
information for all data submissions;
(6) Factors affecting on-site and off-site
treatment capacity;
(7) Information on the potential costs for
set-up and operation of any current and
alternative treatment technologies for these
wastes;
(8) Information on waste minimization
approaches.

B. Request for Comment on the Agency's
Approach to the Capacity Analyses in
the LDR Program
In the land disposal restrictions
determinations, the Agency must
demonstrate that adequate commercial
capacity exists to manage the waste with
BDAT standards before it can restrict
the listed waste from further land
disposal. The Agency performs capacity
analyses to determine if sufficient
alternative treatment or recovery
capacity exists to accommodate the
volumes of waste that will be affected
by the land disposal prohibition. If
adequate capacity exists, the waste is
restricted from further land disposal. If
adequate capacity does not exist, RCRA
section 3004(h) authorizes EPA to grant
a national capacity variance for the
waste for up to two years or until
adequate alternative treatment capacity
becomes available, whichever is sooner.
To perform capacity analyses, the
Agency needs to determine the volumes
of the listed waste that will require
treatment prior to land disposal. The
volumes of waste requiring treatment
depend, in turn, on the waste
management practices employed by the
listed waste generators. Data on waste
management practices for these wastes
•were collected during the development
of this proposed rule. However, as the
regulatory process proceeds, generators
may decide to minimize or recycle their
wastes or otherwise alter their
management practices. Thus EPA will
update and monitor changes in
management practices because these
changes will affect the final volumes of
waste requiring commercial treatment
capacity. Therefore, EPA needs
information on current and future waste
management practices for these wastes,
including the volumes of waste that are
recycled, mixed with or co-managed
with other waste, discharged under
Clean Water Act provisions, and the
volumes and types of residuals that are
generated by the various management
practices applicable to newly listed and
identified wastes (e.g., treatment
residuals).
The availability of adequate
commercial treatment capacity for these
wastes determines whether or not a
waste is granted a capacity variance
under RCRA section 3004(h). EPA
continues to update and monitor
changes in available commercial
treatment capacity because the
commercial hazardous waste
management industry is extremely
dynamic. For example, national
commercial treatment capacity changes
as new facilities come on-line, as new
units and new technologies are added at
existing facilities, and as facilities
expand existing units. The available
capacity at commercial facilities also
changes as facilities change their
commercial status (e.g., changing from a
fully commercial to a limited
commercial or captive facility). To
determine the availability of capacity for
treating these wastes, the Agency needs
to consider currently available data, as
well as the timing of any future changes
in available capacity.
For previous land disposal restriction
rules, the Agency performed capacity
analyses using data from national
surveys including the 1987 National
Survey of Hazardous Waste Treatment,
Storage, Disposal, and Recycling
Facilities (the TSDR Survey) and the
1987 National Survey of Hazardous
Waste Generators (the Generator
Survey). However, these surveys cannot
be used to determine the volumes of
carbamate wastes requiring treatment,
since the wastes were not included in
the surveys. Additionally, these surveys
may not contain adequate information
on currently available capacity to treat
newly identified wastes because the
data reflect 1986 capacity and do not
include facility expansions or closures
that have occurred since then. Although
adjustments have been made to these
data to account for changes in waste
management through 1990, this was not
done on a consistent basis across all
wa;ste management practices.
Data on waste characteristics and
management practices have been
gathered for the purpose of the
carbamates hazardous waste listing
determinations in the carbamate RCRA
Section 3007 survey. The Agency has
compiled the capacity-related
information from the survey responses
and is soliciting any updated or
additional pertinent information.
To perform the necessary capacity
analyses in the land disposal
restrictions rulemaking, the Agency
needs reliable data on current waste
generation, waste management
practices, available alternative treatment
capacity, and planned treatment
capacity. The Agency will need the
annual generation volumes of waste by
each waste code including wastewater
and nonwastewater forms, and soil or
debris contaminated with these wastes
and the quantities stored, treated,
recycled, or disposed due to any change
of management practices. The Agency
also requests data from facilities capable
of treating these wastes on their current
treatment capacity and any plans they
may have in the future to expand or
reduce existing capacity. The Agency is
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9847
also requesting comments from
companies that may be considering
developing new hazardous waste
treatment capacity. Specifically, the
Agency requests information on the
determining factors involved in making
decisions to build new treatment
capacity. Waste characteristics such as
pH level, BTUs, anionic character, total
organic carbon content, constituents
concentration, and physical form may
also limit the availability of certain
treatment technologies. For these
reasons, the Agency requests data and
comments on waste characteristics that
might limit or preclude the use of any
treatment technologies.
V. State Authority
A. Applicability of Rule in Authorized
States
Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA
may authorize qualified States to
administer and enforce the RCRA
program within the State. (See 40 CFR
part 271 for the standards and
requirements for authorization.)
Following authorization, EPA retains
enforcement authority under sections
3007,3008,3013, and 7003 of RCRA,
although authorized States have primary
enforcement responsibility.
Before the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) amended
RCRA, a State with final authorization
administered its hazardous waste
program entirely in lieu of the Federal
program in that State. The Federal
requirements no longer applied in the
authorized State, and EPA could not
issue permits for any facilities located in
the State with permitting authorization.
When new, more stringent Federal
requirements were promulgated or
enacted, the State was obligated to enact
equivalent authority within specified
time-frames. New Federal requirements
did not take effect in an authorized State
until the State adopted the requirements
as State law.
By contrast, under section 3006(g) of
RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6926(g), new
requirements and prohibitions imposed
by the HSWA (including the hazardous
waste listings proposed in this notice)
take effect in authorized States at the
samo time that they take effect in non-
authorized States. EPA is directed to
implement those requirements and
prohibitions in authorized States,
including the issuance of permits, until
the State is granted authorization to do
so. While States must still adopt HSWA-
related provisions as State law to retain
final authorization, the federal HSWA
requirements apply in authorized States
in the interim.
B. Effect on State Authorizations
Because this proposal (with the
exception of the actions proposed under
CERCLA authority) will be promulgated
pursuant to the HSWA, a state
submitting a program modification is
able to apply to receive either interim or
final authorization under section
3006(g)(2) or 3006(b), respectively, on
the basis of requirements that are
substantially equivalent or equivalent to
EPA's requirements. The procedures
and schedule for State program
modifications under 3006(b) are
described in 40 CFR 27li21. It should be
noted that all HSWA interim
authorizations are currently scheduled
to expire on January 1, 2003 (see 57 FR
60129, February 18,1992).
Section 271.21(e)(2) of EPA's state
authorization regulations (40 CFR part
271) requires that states with final
authorization modify their programs to
reflect federal program changes and
submit the modifications to EPA for
approval. The deadline by which the
states must modify their programs to
adopt this proposed regulation, if it is
adopted as a final rule, will be
determined by the date of promulgation
of a final rule in accordance with
§ 271.21(e)(2). If the proposal is adopted
as a final rule, Table 1 at 40 CFR 271.1
will be amended accordingly. Once EPA
approves the modification, the State
requirements become RCRA Subtitle C
requirements.
States with authorized RCRA
programs already may have regulations
similar to those in this proposed rule.
These State regulations have not been
assessed against the federal regulations
being proposed to determine whether
they meet the tests for authorization.
Thus, a State would not be authorized
to implement these regulations as RCRA
requirements until State program
modifications are submitted to EPA and
approved, pursuant to 40 CFR 271.21.
Of course, States with existing
regulations that are more stringent than
or broader in scope than current Federal
regulations may continue to administer
and enforce their regulations as a matter
of State law.
It should be noted that authorized
States are required to modify their
programs only when EPA promulgates
Federal standards that are more
stringent or broader in scope than
existing Federal standards. Section 3009
of RCRA allows States to impose
standards more stringent than those in
the Federal program. For those Federal
program changes that are less stringent
or reduce the scope of the Federal
program, States are not required to
modify their programs. See 40 CFR
271.1(i). This proposed rule, if finalized,
is neither less stringent than nor a
reduction in the scope or the current
Federal program and, therefore, states
would be required to modify their
programs to retain authorization to
implement and enforce these
regulations.
VI. CERCLA Designation and
Reportable Quantities

All hazardous wastes listed under
RCRA and codified in 40 CFR 261.31
through 261.33, as well as any solid
waste that exhibits one or more of the
characteristics of a RCRA hazardous
waste (as defined in §§ 261.21 through
261.24), are hazardous substances under
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended. See
CERCLA Section 101(14)(C). CERCLA
hazardous substances are listed in Table
302.4 at 40 CFR 302.4 along with their
reportable quantities (RQs). RQs are the
minimum quantity of a hazardous
substance that, if released, must be
reported to the National Response
Center (NRG) pursuant to CERCLA
§ 103. In this proposal, the Agency is
proposing to h'st the proposed wastes in
this action as CERCLA hazardous
substances in Table 302.4 of 40 CFR
302.4, but is taking no action to adjust
the one-pound statutory RQs for these
substances.
Reporting Requirements. Under
section 102(b) of CERCLA, all hazardous
substances newly designated under
CERCLA will have a statutory RQ of one
pound unless and until adjusted by
regulation. Under CERCLA section
103(a), the person in charge of a vessel
or facility from which a hazardous
substance has been released in a
quantity that is equal to or exceeds its
RQ shall immediately notify the NRG of
the release as soon as that person has
knowledge thereof. The toll free number
of the NRG is 1-800-424-8802; in the
Washington, DC metropolitan area, the
number is (202) 426-2675. In addition
to this reporting requirement under
CERCLA, section 304 of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to
Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) requires
owners or operators of certain facilities
to report the release of a CERCLA
hazardous substance to State and local
authorities. EPCRA section 304
notification must be given immediately
after the release of a RQ or more to the
community emergency coordinator of
the local emergency planning committee
for each area likely to be affected by the
release, and to the State emergency
response commission of any State likely
to be affected by the release.
-------
9848
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1. 1994 / Proposed Rules
If this proposal is promulgated as a than the one-pound statutory RQ will be above, unless and until the Aeencv
final rule, releases equal to or greater subject to the requirements described adjusts the RQs for fcese^substances in
a future rulemaking.

TABLE 26.—PROPOSED ONE-POUND STATUTORY RQs FOR PROPOSED K, P, AND U WASTES
Waste
code
Constituent of concern
.,• u,' -._-—'• benomyl. benzene, carbaryl, carbendazirn, carbofuran, carbosulfan
i«»fc,n« «, r u, •J1' ^'Chlorobenzene, hexane, methanol, methomyl, methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutv
ketone, methylene chlonde, naphthalene, phenol, pyridine, toluene, triethylamine, xylerie

™ Z2ZZ^LS?*Z^ "*°!H*n. carbosulfan, chloroform, o-

K158 benomyl, carbendazirn, carbofuran, carbosulfan, methylene chloride
K159 benzene, butylate, eptc, molinate, pebulate, vemolate, thiocarbamate N.6"s
Kieo benzene, butylate, eptc, molinate, pebulate, vernolate, thiocarbamate N O S
e. antimony' cadmium, metam-sodium, xylene, ziram, dtthiocarbamate product N"6"s

B8 §52 S tt^^^^ estel 3-me*yl-5-(1-methylethyl)-, methyl carbamate (Promecarb)
P202 Phenol, 3-(1-methylethyl), methyl carbamate (Hercules AC-5727)
P2M P^S'^^'^^'lf ^''P- «methylamino)carbonylj
Pysrrolo[2,Jb].ndol-5-ol, 1 .2,3,3a.8,8a-hexahydro-1 ,3a,8- trimethyl-, methylcarbamate (ester),

P205 Zinc, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioatc-S,S')-, (T-4)- (Ziram)
U360 Carbamates N.O.S .........................
U361 Carbamoyl Oximes N.O.S ................. [[[
U362 Thiocarbamates N.O.S ...........
U363 ">»g«|*«wj^^

U364 1,3-Benzodioxol-4-ol, 2,2
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9849
TABLE 26.—PROPOSED ONE-POUND STATUTORY RQs FOR PROPOSED K, P, AND U WASTES—Continued
Wasta
code
U391
U392
U393
U394
U395
U396
U397
U398
U399
U400
U401
U402
U403
U404
U405
U406
Constituent of concern

Carbamothloic acid, butyietnyK S-propyi ester (Peculate)
Carbamothiote acid, bis(2-methylpropyl)-, S-ethyl ester (Butylate)
Copper, Dis(QlrrK3tnyK^wt}anxxHtnioaio-o,o /- loopper aimeinyiuiuiiuudiuauiai»i
Ethanlmldothloic acid, 2-(dimetnylamino)-N-nydroxy-^-oxo-, memyi esier i«^ 10;
Ethano), 2,2'-oxybis-, dicarbamate (Reactacrease 4-DEG)
Iron, tris(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S )-, (Ferbam)
Lead, bis(dip*nryteubaitwdithioato-S,S')-1.
Molybdenum, bis(dibutylcarbamothioato)di-.mu.-oxodioxodi-, sulfunzed
Nickel, bis{dtoutylcarbanioditnioato-o,«5 j- INICKBI oiuuiyiannioccirueiiimKs;
PipefkSne, 1,1'-(tetrathiodicarbonothioyl)-bis- (Sutfads)

Thtoperoxydfcarbonic diamide, tetrabutyl (Butyl Tuads)
ThloperoxydicarDonic aiamoe, leiraeinyi luisuiiudnij
Zinc, bis[bls(phenylmetnyl)carbamoartnioato-c),t) j- tArazaie;
Zinc, bis(d
-------
9850
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 27.—1990 TOTAL WASTE
QUANTITIES OF CONCERN, BY
WASTE GROUP, REPORTED BY THE
CARBAMATE PRODUCTION INDUS-
TRY—Continued
Waste category
(Quantities given in Metric tons
per year)
Category 3—Solids from the pro-
duction of carbamates an car-
bamoyl oximes
Category 4—Organic wastes from
the production of
thiocarbamates
Category 5—Wastewaters from
the production of
thiocarbamates
Category 6—Solids from the pro-
duction of thiocarbamates
Category 7—Process wastewater
from the production of
dithiocarbamates
Category 8—Reactor vent scrub-
ber water from the production
of dithiocarbamates
Category 9—Purification solids
from the production of
dithiocarbamates
Category 10—Organic wastes
from the production of
dithiocarbamates
Total
quantity
reported
1,390

500

344,000

700

51,000

46,000

3,400

400
Total: | a839,500

»Numbers may not add due to rounding.
2. Method for Determining Cost and
Economic Impacts

This section details EPA's approach
for estimating the incremental
compliance cost and the economic
impacts attributable to the listing of
carbamate production waste. Because
the carbamate production industry is
relatively small (only 20 manufacturers
at 24 facilities in 1990), EPA was able
to collect facility-specific information
and estimate incremental costs at the
waste stream level. The information
used in this analysis was collected in
1990 under the authority of a RCRA
section 3007 survey; the survey
included engineering site visits, and
sampling and analysis of waste streams.
Approach to the Cost Analysis

EPA's approach to the cost analysis
for this proposal was to compare the
cost of current management practices, as
reported in the 3007 survey of
carbamate production facilities, with the
projected cost of management to comply
with the RCRA Subtitle C hazardous
waste program as would be required by
the proposed rule. This difference in
cost, when annualized.s represents the
incremental annual compliance cost
attributable to the proposed rule.

Baseline or Current Management
Scenario
Relying on survey responses and
engineering site visits, EPA was able to
determine the current (i.e., 1990)
management practices for the handling
and disposal of carbamate production
wastes. Current management practices
varied among facilities and waste
streams, and included such practices as
off-site incineration, deep-well disposal,
on-site destruction in boilers, and off-
site landfilling. These current
management practices at each facility
represent the baseline scenario of the
analysis.
As part of the 3007 survey, EPA asked
each facility to identify current costs for
the management of carbamate
production wastes. For this analysis,
EPA has relied on and has not changed
the industry's own waste-specific
estimates concerning the cost of current
management. EPA realizes that future
events such as waste minimization
efforts or increased demand for
carbamate products may change waste
generation volumes and, thus, future
waste management costs.

Post-Regulatory Management Scenarios
In predicting how industry would
comply with the listing of carbamate
production waste as RCRA hazardous
waste, EPA developed nine post-
regulatory management scenarios,
described below, that represent
plausible management reactions on the
part of industry. EPA developed these
post-regulatory management categories
based on its knowledge of current waste
management and the physical and
chemical properties of the waste.

Management Category (MC) 1: Wastes
Currently Managed as Hazardous
Waste, Either On or Off Site
EPA assumed in this post-regulatory
scenario, that wastes would continue to
be managed as in the baseline scenario.
On-site hazardous waste management
implies that there already exists a RCRA
Subtitle C permitted (or interim status)
unit at the facility, such as a RCRA
permitted incinerator. If wastes are
managed as hazardous on site, the
incremental change due to the proposed
rule would be to modify the RCRA
permit (or interim status/permit
application) to account for the new
listing of carbamate production waste. M
If wastes are managed as hazardous off
s Costs are discounted at a rate of 7 percent over
a 20 year period.
"For this category, EPA assumed that the facility
would need a RCRA Glass H permit modification to
the facility's annual contingency plan maintenance
and biennial reporting.
site, the incremental change would be
the cost from the completion of a waste
generator manifest.

Management Category 2: Wastes
Currently Managed in Boilers Subject to
BIF Requirements «
EPA assumed that these wastes would
continue to be managed in boilers. If the
boiler is on site, costs for a Class II
incinerator permit modification and
manifest arid biennial reporting would
be incurred, similar to management
Category 1. If the waste is sent to off-site
boilers subject to BIF requirements, the
only incremental cost would be that for
completing the manifest.

Management Category 3: Wastes
Currently Managed in On Site, Subtitle
D, Non-hazardous Waste Incinerators
EPA assumed that post-regulatory
management would be off site at the
nearest commercial hazardous waste
(i.e., RCRA Subtitle C permitted)
incinerator. 12 In addition to the
commercial treatment and
transportation costs, the post-regulatory
management of these wastes would
include contingency plan maintenance,
biennial reporting, and manifesting.

Management Category 4: Wastes
Currently Discharged Under National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permits, Treated at Publicly
Owned Treatment Works (POTWs)
Under the Clean Water Act, Privately
Owned Treatment Works, or On-Site
Wastewater Treatment Systems
EPA assumed that the post-regulatory
management of these wastes as a result
of this proposal would be the same as
baseline management, because the
systems or wastes would still be, either
exempt from RCRA regulation (see 40
CFR 264.1(g)(6)), or that the systems are
already covered under a RCRA permit
by rule (see 40 CFR 265.1(c)(10)), and
would therefore not incur any
significant incremental costs.
Consequently, the only incremental cost
attributed to this proposal is for
contingency plan maintenance and
biennial reporting.

Management Categories 5 and 6: Wastes
Currently Being Recycled (Category No.
5) or Recovered (Category No. 6)
No incremental cost is attributed to
these waste volumes as recycled wastes
were assumed to be exempt from RCRA
Subtitle C regulation.13

"Boilers and Industrial Furnaces.
"EPA estimated each of facility-to-commercial
incinerator distance from road maps.
"Because of the complexities of RCRA recycling
and reu.se, it is possible that these carbamate
production wastes are recycled in a manner that is
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9851
Management Category 7: Wastes
Currently Managed Off Site in Subtitle
D, Non-Hazardous Waste Incinerators
EPA assumed that this waste will
continue to be shipped off site, but to
Iho nearest commercial hazardous waste
incinerator. In addition to treatment
costs, incremental costs would include
those for contingency plan maintenance,
manifesting, and biennial reporting.
Management Categories 8 and 9: Wastes
Currently Managed in Subtitle D
Landfills (Category No. 8 for Wastes
Managed Off Site, and Category No. 9
for Wastes Managed On Site)
In the post-regulatory scenario, wastes
in both categories would be shipped off
site to the nearest commercial Subtitle
C hazardous waste landfill. Commercial
landfilling costs, biennial reporting, and
manifesting would present incremental
costs associated with this proposal.
Management Category 10: Segregation
of Subtitle D Wastes Currently
Commingled
In the post-regulatory scenario, wastes
currently commingled with industrial or
process trash and managed in Subtitle D
landfills may incur separation costs.
The process trash will be managed in
the current fashion, while the listed
waste will be managed under Subtitle C
facilities. Carbamate producers must
devote labor and capital to separate
these materials and devote space to
storage.
Unit costs for Subtitle C treatment
(i.e., incineration) or land disposal,
waste transportation between facilities,
permit modifications, maintenance of
contingency plans, manifesting and
biannual reporting system (BRS)
reporting are contained in Table 28
below. The total volume of waste
affected by each waste management
category described above are presented
below in Table 29. EPA requests
comments on these cost estimates.
TABLE 28.—POST-REGULATORY WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT COST ESTIMATES
Cost (1992$)
Source
Commercial hazardous waste Incineration
Commercial hazardous waste landfill
Hazardous waste transportation
Class II on-site hazardous waste landfill permit modifica-
tion'.
Class II on-site hazardous waste incinerator permit modi-
fication'.
Other class II on-s'rte hazardous waste treatment permit
modification.
Segregation of industrial Subtitle D waste
Maintenance of contingency plan
Manifesting^
BRS reporting
$1,600 per metric ton
$200 per metric ton
$0.27 per metric ton per mile if under 200 miles
S0.24 per metric ton per mile if over 200 miles ..
$80,102
$40,585

$7,476 ..
$10 per metric ton
$200 per facility per year
$36 per shipment
$428 per facility per year
SAIC/ICF analysis.
SAIC/ICF analysis.
SAIC analysis.

IGF analysis.

ICF analysis.

EPA estimate.
Source a.
Sources b, c.
Sources c, d.
nw i w^/wi MI «y ••«••»»••••»••••»'••"""--•••"- ---------------------- ^ i ... ,,_ --
i Permit modification costs were assumed to be incurred no more than once for each type of treatment at each facility. These costs were

KSSd once a year for each waste shipped off site. One shipment was assumed to equal
^a "EsSrSng Costs for the Economic Benefits of RCRA Non-compliance," Draft Report prepared by DPRA for Office of Waste Pro-

equireES^ Management Facilities Under the RCRA Hazardous Waste Manifest

Employment and Earnings, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 1993.
d. "1991 Hazardous Waste Report," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
TABLE 29.—TOTAL CARBAMATE PRO-
DUCTION WASTE QUANTITIES AND
TOTAL INCREMENTAL ANNUAL COST
INCURRED BY EACH POST-REGU-
LATORY WASTE MANAGEMENT CAT-
EGORY
TABLE 29.—TOTAL CARBAMATE PRO-
DUCTION WASTE QUANTITIES AND
TOTAL INCREMENTAL ANNUAL COST
INCURRED BY EACH POST-REGU-
LATORY WASTE MANAGEMENT CAT-
EGORY—Continued
Post-regu-
latory waste
manage-
ment sce-
nario
MC1
MC 2
MC3
MC4
MC 5 and 6
MC7
Total quantity
of carbamate
production
waste affected
(in metric
tons)
234,000
6,400
1
809,900
2,700
0
Total
annualized in-
cremental cost
incurred
$25,600
8,200
700
776,700
200
20
Post-regu-
latory waste
manage-
ment sce-
nario
MC 8 and 9
MC 10
Total' ..
Total quantity
of carbamate
production
waste affected
(in metric
tons)
200
4,100
840,000
Total
annualized in-
cremental cost
incurred
58,100
41,000
910,000
1 Numbers may not add due to rounding.
not exempt from RCRA permitting and other
requirements. Without further investigation of each
process configuration it is impossible to determine
which wastes would continue to be recycled or
recovered in the post-regulatory scenario. There are
2,630 metric tons assigned to management
categories 5 and 6, if all this waste was to be
shipped off site to a Subtitle C hazardous waste
Specific Analysis of K157 Wastewaters
EPA examined two scenarios for the
post-regulatory management of K157
wastewaters. The first scenario assumed
that K157 wastewaters would continue
to be sent through NPDES-permitted
discharges or to POTWs, but that (1)
sludge would be managed as hazardous
waste, (2) surface impoundments would
be closed and converted to tanks. The
second scenario assumed that
wastewaters would be treated by steam
stripping before discharge into
centralized wastewater treatment
systems. Exemption of these sludges
from the definition of hazardous waste
was found to not impact the incremental
costs, which are dominated by
impoundment conversion costs.

landfill (at $200/metric ton), then the incremental
annualized cost reported in this analysis would
increase by at least $530,000.
-------
9852
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday. March 1. 1994 / Proposed Rules
For the first K157 wastewater
scenario, EPA reviewed the information
collected as part of the RCRA section
3007 survey. The facility-specific
information shows that only two
facilities employ operational surface
impoundments (as of 1990). EPA thus
calculated the costs associated with the
closure of the surface impoundments
and conversion to tanks. The EIA
technical background document
contains details of these cost
calculations. EPA estimated that the
costs associated with the first scenario
to be approximately $760,000 per year.
For the second K157 wastewater
scenario, EPA explored the possibility
of off-site steam stripping as well as
constructing on-site steam stripping
units. EPA identified seven facilities
with K157 wastewater streams in
significant quantities to merit
construction of on-site steam stripping
units. For these facilities, EPA
calculated rough engineering cost
estimates for the on-site systems, both
for capital costs and annual operation
and maintenance. EPA identified two
additional facilities which did not
produce significant quantities of K157
wastewaters to merit construction of on-
site steam stripping units. For volumes
generated by these facilities
(approximately 400 tons), EPA
estimated the total annualized cost of
off-site steam stripping. 14 The total
estimated annualized cost for scenario
two is $6.4 million.
Because the K157 incremental
annualized cost of scenario two is more
than seven times that of scenario one,
EPA assumed that industry would
minimize its cost by adopting the lower-
cost management.is The costs estimated
for scenario one have been used in the
total costs for K157 wastes reported
below.

3. P and U List Wastes
EPA has not estimated the amounts of
P and U wastes that are generated
annually by the carbamate producers or
wastes resulting from spills or other
one-time generation occurrences. EPA
would appreciate any comment
concerning the costs of on-going P and
U waste generation as well as costs
resulting from spills and other such
incidents. Similarly, EPA has not
explored the possible use of carbamate

"Recent vendor quotes of off-site steam-stripping
showed a cost of $0.75 per gallon (approximately
S200 per metric ton).
is EPA also considered facility specific
comparisons between scenarios one and two. It
should be noted that, under scenario one, given the
worst possible case (conversion of three surface
impoundments, one tank cover and sludge disposal)
costs were still favorable to those that would be
incurred by the same facility under scenario two.
products for the precipitation of metals
in the waste treatment of other
industries.

4. Potential Remedial Action Costs
In addition to carbamate process
wastes, the proposed carbamate
hazardous waste listing could affect the
management of soils, ground water, and
other remedial materials. The Agency's
"contained in" policy defines certain
remediation wastes "containing" a
listed hazardous waste as a RCRA
hazardous waste. It is possible that areas
of past carbamate waste management,
spills, or disposal, which met the
proposed K156-K161 listing description
at the time they were placed on the
land, may still have contaminant
concentrations which exceed
"contained in" levels. A person who
disturbs such material could become a
generator of RCRA hazardous waste.
The likelihood of this imposing a
significant additional burden is low
since at least 22 of 24 carbamate
production facilities are already
permitted TSDFs. Releases from all
solid waste management units at these
TSDFs, including those that in the
future would be found to contain a
waste meeting the carbamate listing
descriptions, are already covered by
facility-wide cleanup rules under 40
CFR 264.101. This issue would be more
likely to arise from historical offsite
management at facilities that were not
TSDs.
There are two remedial possibilities
for land containing this material. First,
it may be possible to not disturb the
contaminated area or manage the
material in place with source controls or
in situ treatment and thus avoid
generating a hazardous waste. Owners
may be unable to make full value use of
the land. In this case, the cost under this
scenario is the difference between the
cost of the land at its highest valued use
and the cost of the land at the lower
value. The Agency also recognizes that
under this alternative property owners
surrounding these locations may
experience a change in their property
values but this is difficult to evaluate.
Second, owners may excavate the
material. If the material contains a
hazardous waste owners would bear
hazardous waste treatment, disposal,
management, and potentially permitting
costs. Owners and EPA are likely to
prefer the first alternative when that
action is protective of human health and
the environment.
The Agency requests comment on the
likely costs associated with remediation
of wastes found to contain the wastes
identified for listing in today's proposal.
The Agency is interested in estimates of
potential remedial wastes that would be
defined as hazardous under RCRA
because of this proposed listing and the
potential management costs. EPA
specifically requests comments on the
number of carbamate production
facilities already subject to federal (e.g.,
RCRA Corrective Action) or state
authorities compelling owners to clean
up their entire facility, including areas
of past K165-K161 management, both
onsite and offsite.
5. Summary of Results
Table 30 presents a summary of
estimated national incremental
annualized compliance costs, by waste
groupie associated with this proposal to
list certain carbamate production wastes
as hazardous.

TABLE 30.—SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED
NATIONAL INCREMENTAL ANNUAL-
IZED COMPLIANCE COSTS (1992
DOLLARS/YEAR) 1
Waste
group
1
2
3
4
6
9

Total
RCRA
waste
code
K156
K157
K158
K159
K160
K161

Annual incremental com-
. pliance cost

3>i 4,000
//O.OOO
o/,UUQ
,200
,100

2890,000
I cnTbe,rs may-not add UP due to rounding.
2 EPA also estimated the incremental com-
pliance costs associated with waste groups 5
7, 8 arid 10, which are not recommended for
listing under today's proposal. If listed, total in-
cremental annual compliance costs for these
waste groups are estimated to be $22,000.
Table 30 presents the annual
incremental compliance costs as they
correspond to the RCRA waste codes
proposed for listing (i.e., K156 through
K160). Please note that these codes
correspond directly to the waste groups
proposed for listing under this proposal
(i.e., groups 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 9). As
indicated in Table 30 the total annual
incremental compliance cost
attributable to this proposal is $890,000.
Waste category 2 (i.e., K157—
wastewaters from the production of
carbamates and carbamoyl oximes)
constitutes 86•*? percent of national
incremental compliance cost. Waste
category 9 (i.e., Kl61—purification
solids, bag-house dust, and floor
"For a detailed description of these waste
groupings, please refer to Table 27 of this preamble.
"The bulk of this cost (99 percent) is attributable
to one facility for the conversion of three surface
impoundments to tanks. The ratio of total annual
incremental cost that would be incurred by this
facility, to annual revenues for the entire company
is less than 1 percent.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday. March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9853
sweepings from the production of
dithiocarbamates) constitutes 5 percent;
and waste category 3 (i.e., K158—solids
from the production of carbamate and
carbamoyl oxime products) constitutes 3
percent of national incremental
compliance cost. The remaining 1
percent are distributed among other
\vaste groups.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Table 31 presents the estimated
annualized incremental compliance
costs borne by the five small
businesses is in the carbamate
production industry. The annual
incremental cost of the rule for the five
facilities ranged from $628 to $772. The
greatest ratio of compliance cost to sales
is 0.01%, thus, EPA concluded that no
small businesses are significantly
affected by this rule.

TABLE 31.—RESULTS OF THE
REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS

Facility

•j
2
3 .„.
4
5

Annual
incre-
mental
cost of
rule

$772
628
664
628
736

Annual
sales
(millions)

S17.8
110
6.6
45
19
Annual
cost of
compli-
ance/an-
nual
sales
(percent)
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
X. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
of 1980 requires Federal agencies to
consider "small entities" throughout the
regulatory process. Section 603 of the
RFA requires an initial screening
analysis to be performed to determine
whether small entities will he affected
by the regulation. If affected small
entities are identified, regulatory
alternatives must be considered which
mitigate the potential impacts. Small
entities as described in the Act are only
those "businesses, organizations and
governmental jurisdictions subject to
regulation."
If, however, the head of the Agency
certifies that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities, no regulatory
flexibility analysis is required. Of the 24
entities which are directly subject to
this proposed rule, 18 entities would
incur incremental compliance costs. Of
the 18 affected facilities, 4 entities fit
the definition of a "small entity" as
defined by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act.19 The annual incremental cost
impact to these 4 entities ranges from
$600 to $800. For each of the 4 facilities
impacted, these annual costs constitute
less than 1 percent of total annual sales.
EPA believes that these costs do not
represent a significant impact. Hence,
pursuant to section 605 (b) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.
605(b), "the Administrator certifies that
this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of entities."

XI. Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain any
information collection requirements
subject to OMB review under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Peat 261

Environmental protection, Hazardous
materials, Waste treatment and disposal,
Recycling.

40 CFR Part 271

Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information,
Hazardous material transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indians—lands,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Water pollution control,
Water supply.
40 CFR Part 302
Dated: January 31,1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 40 CFR parts 261, 271, and
302 are proposed to be amended as
follows:

Part 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

1. The authority citation for Part 261
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921,
6922, and 6938.
2. Section 261.3 is amended by
adding paragraphs (a)(2)(iv)(F) and
(c)(2)(ii)(D) to read as follows.

§ 261.3 Definition of hazardous waste.
(a)* * *
(2)* * *
(iv)* * *
(F) One or more of the following
wastes listed in § 261.32—wastewaters
from the production of carbaniates and
carbamoyl oximes (EPA Hazardous
Waste No. K157)—provided that the
maximum weekly usage of
formaldehyde, methyl chloride,
methylene chloride, and triethylamine
(including all amounts that cannot be
demonstrated to be reacted in the
process or is recovered, i.e., what is
discharged or volatilized) divided by the
average weekly flow of process
wastewater prior to any dilutions into
the headworks of the facility's
wastewater treatment system does not
exceed a total of 5 parts per million by
weight.
*****
(c)* * *
(2)* * *
(ii)
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals,
Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act, Extremely
hazardous substances, Hazardous
chemicals-, Hazardous materials,
Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous substances, Hazardous
wastes, Intergovernmental relations,
Natural resources, Pesticides and pests,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Waste
treatment and disposal, Water pollution
control, Water supply.
(D) Biological treatment sludge from
the treatment of one of the following
wastes listed in § 261.32—wastewaters
from the production of carbamates and
carbamoyl oximes (EPA Hazardous
Waste No. K157).
*****
3. Section 261.32 is amended by
adding in alphanumeric order (by the
first column) the following waste
streams to the subgroup "Pesticides" to
read as follows.

§ 261.32 Hazardous wastes from specific
sources.
"A small business is defined by the Small
Business Size Regulations (13 CFR part 121) as one
with under 500 employees.
is According to "EPA Guidelines for
Implementing the Regulatory Flexibility Act"
(April 1992), any producer of pesticides and
agricultural chemicals (SIC 2879) with less than 500
employees constitutes a "small entity." None of the
entities which would incur incremental compliance
costs as a result of this proposal have less than 500
employees.
-------
9854
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
Industry and EPA hazardous waste No.
K156

K157

K158

K159
K160

K161
Hazardous waste
Organic waste (including heavy ends, still bottoms, light ends, spent solvents, filtrates,
and decantates) from the production of carbamates and carbamoyl oximes.
Wastewaters (including scrubber waters, condenser waters, washwaters, and separa-
tion waters) from the production of carbamates and carbamoyl oximes.
Bag hquse dusts and filter/separation solids from the production of carbamates and
carbamoyl oximes. . . .
Organics from the treatment of thioearbamate wastes
Solids (including filter wastes, separation solids, and silent catalysts) from the produc-
tion of thiocarbamates and'solids from the treatment of thioearbamate wastes.
Purification solids (including filtration, evaporation, and centrifugation solids),
baghouse dust and floor sweepings from the production of dithiocarbamate acids
and their salts. (This listing does hot include K125 or K126.).
Hazard
code
(T)

(T)

(T)
(T)

(RJ)
4. Sections 261.33(e) and (f) are
amended by adding in alphabetic order
(by the third column) the following
substances to read as follows:
§ 261.33 Discarded commercial chemical
products, off-specification species,
container residues, and spill residues
thereof.
(e)
Hazard-
ous
waste
No.
Chemical ab-
stracts No.
Substance
P187
P127
P188
22781-23-3 1,3-Benzodioxol-4-ol, 2,2-dimethyl-, methyl carbamate (Bendiocarb).
1563-66-2 7-Benzofuranol, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyl-, methylcarbamate (Carbofuran).
57-64-7 Benzoic acid, 2-hydroxy, compd. with (3aS-cis)- 1,2,3,3a,8,8a-hexahydro-1,3a,8- trimethylpyrrolo[2,3-b]indol-5-yl
methylcarbamate ester (1:1) (Physostigmine salicylate). :
P189
P191
P192
P190
P193
55285-14-8 Carbamic acid, [(dibutylamino)thio]methyl-, 2,3- dihydro-2,2-dimethyl-7-benzofuranyl ester (Carbosulfan).
644-64-4 Carbamic acid, dimethyl-, 1- [(dimethylamino)carbonyl]^5-methyl-1H-pyrazol:3-yl ester (Dimetilan)
119-38-0 Carbamic acid, dimethyl-, 3-methyl-1 -(1- methylethyl)-1 H-pyrazol-5-yl ester (Isolan).
1129-41-5 Carbamic acid, methyl-, 3-methylphenyl ester (Metolcarb).
23564-05-8 Carbamic acid, [1,2- phenylenebis(iminocarbonothioyl)]bis-, dimethyl ester (Thiophanate-methyl).
P185 26419-73-8 1,3-Dithiolane-2-carbbxaldehyde, 2,4-dimethyl-, O- [(methylamino)carbonyrjoxime (Tirpate).
P194
P195
23135-22-0 Ethanimidothioc acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N- [[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]-2-oxo-, methyl ester (Oxamyl)
59669-26-0 Efhanimidothioic acid, N,N'- [thiobis[(methylimino)carbonyloxy]]bis-, dimethyl ester (Thiodicarb).
15339-36-3 Manganese, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-, (Manganese dimethyldithiocarbamate).
P198

P197
23422-53-9 Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N'-[3- [[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyll-, monohydrochloride (Formetanate hvdro-
chloride). :
17702-57-7 Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N'-[2-methyl-4- [[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxyjphenyl]- (Formparanate).
P128 315-18-4 Phenol, 4-(dimethylamino)-3,5-dimethyK methylcarbamate (ester) (Mexacarbate).
P199 2032-65-7 Phenol, (3,5-dimethyl-4-(methylthio)-, methylcarbamate (Methiocarb).

* * * • . . ,;
P200 114-26-1 Phenol, 2-(1-methylethoxy)-, methylcarbamate (Propoxur).
P202 64-00-6 Phenol, 3-(1-methylethyl), methyl carbamate (Hercules AC-5727).
P201
2631-37-0 Phenol, 3-methyl-5-(1-methylethyl)-, methyl carbamate (Promecarb).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9855
Hazard-
ous
waste
No.
Chemical ab-
stracts No.
Substance
P2Q3 1646-88-4 Propanal, 2-methyl-2-(methylsulfonyl)-, O- [(methylamino)carbonyl] oxime (Aldicarb sulfone).

.
P204 57-47-6 Pyrrolo[2.3-b]indol-5-ol, 1,2,3,3a,8.8a-hexahydro- 1,3a,8-trimethyl-, methylcarbamate (ester), (3aS-cis)- (Physo-
stigmine).
P205 ...
137-30-4 Zinc, bis(dimethyicarbamodithioato-S,S')-, (Ziram).
(0* ' *

.
U369 15991-76-1 Antimony. tris[bis(2-ethylhexyl)carbamodithioato- S,S']-, (Antimony tris(2-ethylhexyl)dithiocarbamate).
U368 15890-25-2 Antimony tris(dipentylcarbamodithioatc-S,S')- (Antimony trisdipentyldithiocarbamate).
U365 ."" 2212-67-1 1H-Azepine-1-carbothioic acid, hexahydro-, S-ethyl ester (Molmate).

.
U364 22961-82-6 1,3-Benzodioxol-4-oI, 2,2-dimethyl-, (Bendiocarb phenol).
U367 1563-38-8 7-Benzofuranol, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyi- (Carbofuran phenol).

- * *
• • *
U40i 97-74-5 Bis(dimethylthiocarbamoyl) sulfide (Tetramethylthiuram monosulfide).
U370 ..... 21260-46-8 Bismuth, tris(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S'-, (Methyl bismate).
U360
U372 ....
U271 ....
U375 ....
U280 ....
U380 ....
U277 ....
U374 ....
U371 ....

10605-21-7
17804-35-2
55406-63-6
101-27-9
10254-57-6
95-06-7
112006-94-7
65086-85-3
Carbamates N.O.S.
Carbamic acid, 1 H-benzimidazol-2-yl, methyl ester (Carbendazim).
Carbamic acid, [1-[(butylamino)carbonyl]-1H- benzimidazol-2-yl]-, methyl ester (Benomyl).
Carbamic acid, butyl-, 3-iodo-2-propynyl ester (Troysan Polyphase).
Carbamic acid, (3-chlorophenyl)-, 4-chloro-2- butynyl ester (Barban).
Carbamodithioic acid, dibutyl-, methylene ester (Vanlube 7723).
Carbamodithioic acid, diethyl-, 2-chlorc-2-propenyl ester (Sulfallate).
Carbamic acid, [[3-[(dimethylamino)carbonyl]-2-pyridinyl]sulfonyl]-phenyl ester U9069).
Carbamic acid (dimethylamino)iminomethyl)] methyl, ethyl ester monohydrochlonde (Hexazinone intermediate).
U373 ..... 122-42-9 Carbamio acid, phenyl-, 1-methylethyl ester (Propham).
U379
U381
U383
U382
U376
136-30-1 Carbamodithioic acid, dibutyl, sodium salt (Sodium dibutyldithiocarbamate).
148-18-5 Carbamodithioic acid, diethyl-, sodium salt (Sodium diethyldithiocarbamate).
128-03-0 Carbamodithioic acid, dimethyl, potassium salt (Potassium dimethyl dithiocarbamate) (Busan 85).

144^3 Carbamod'ithioto acid', dimethyl-', tetraanhydrosulfide with orthothioselenious acid (Selenium dimethyldithiocarbamate).
U378 51026-28-9 Carbamodithioic acid, (hydroxymethyl)methyl-, monopotassium salt (Busan 40).
U384 137-42-8 Carbamodithioic acid, methyl-, monosodium salt (Metam Sodium).
U377 137-41-7 Carbamodithioic acid, methyl,- monopotassium salt (Potassium n-methyldithiocarbamate).
U389
U392
U391
U386
U388
U390
U385
U387
U361
2303-17-5
2008-41-5
1114-71-2
1134-23-2
85785-20-2
759-94-4
1929-77-7
52888-80-9

Carbamothioic acid, bis(l-methylethyl)-, S-(2,3,3- trichloro-2-propenyl) ester (Triallate).
Carbamothioic acid, bis(2-methylpropyl)-, S-ethyl ester (Butylate).
Carbamothioic acid, butylethyl-, S-propyl ester (Pebuiate).
Carbamothioic acid, cyclohexylethyl-, S-ethyl ester (Cycloate).
Carbamothioic acid, (1,2-dimethylpropyl) ethyl-, S- (phenylmethyl) ester (Esprocarb).
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-ethyl ester (Eptam).
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-propyl ester (Vernolate).
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-(phenylmethyl) ester (Prosulfocarb).
Carbamoyl Oximes N.O.S.
U393
137-29-1 Copper, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-, (Copper dimethyldithiocarbamate).
-------
9856
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
Hazard-
ous Chemical ab-
waste stracts No.
No.
Substance
U363
mixtures of one °r more dithiocarbamicacid,
U404

U394

U395

U396

U397

U398

U279

U399

U400
U366
U362
" *
101-44-8 Ethanamine, N,N-diethyl- (Triethylamine).

*
30558-43-1 Ethanimidothioic acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N-hydroxy- 2-oxo-, methyl ester (A2213).

* * * «
5952-26-1 Ethanol, 2,2'-oxybis-, dicarbamate (Reactacrease 4-DEG).

*
14484-64-1 Iron, tris(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-, (Ferbam).

* * * .
36501-84-5 Lead, bis(dipentylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-

:
68412-26-0 Molybdenum, bis(dibutylcarbamothioato)dt-.mu.- oxodioxodi-, sulfurized.

*
63-25-2 1-Naphthalenol, methylcarbamate (Carbaryl).

* * * *
13927-77-0 Nickel, bis(dibutylcarbamodithioato-S,S')- (Nickel dibutyldithiocarbamate).

* * ,
120-54-7 Piperidine, 1,1'-(tetrathiodicarbonothioyl)-bis (Sulfads).

* * .
533-74-4 2H-1,3,5-Thiadiazine-2-thione, tetrahydro-3,5- dimethyl- (Dazomet)
Thiocarbamates N.O.S.
[-J402 ..... 1634-02-2 Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide, tetrabutyl (Butyl Tuads)
U403 ..... 97-77-8 Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide, tetraethyl (Disulfiram).
14726-36-4 Zinc, bis[bis(phenylmethyl)carbamodithioato-S,S>]- (Arazate)
136-23-2 Zinc, bis(dibutylcarbamodithioato-S,S')- (Butyl Ziram)
14324-55-1 Zinc, bis(diethylcarbamodithioato-S.S')- (Ethyl Ziram)'
H406 .....
U407 .....
EPA
hazard-
ous
waste
No.
he following waste streams in alphanumeric order (by the

APPENDIX VII TO PART 261 —BASIS FOR LISTING HAZARDOUS WASTE

Hazardous constituents for which listed
K156
K157

K158
K159
K160
K161
Acetone, acetpnitrile acetophenone, aniline, benomyl, benzene, carbaryl, carbendazim, carbofuran, carbosulfan
- methyi ethyi ketone-
Chloride'

^^
Benzene, butylate, eptc, molinate, pebulate, vernolate, thiocarbamate N O S
Metam-sodium, xylene, ziram, dithiocarbamate product N.O.S.
chlo-
&
chloride, o-
-------
Federal. Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March l; 1994 /• Proposed Rules
9857
6. Appendix VIII of Part 261 is amended by adding the following hazardous constituents in alphabetical order
(by the mst column) to read as follows.

APPENDIX VIII TO PART 261 —HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS
Common name
Chemical abstracts name
Hazardr
Chemical ab- ous
stracts No. waste
•No.
A2213
Ethanimidothioic acid, 2-{dimethy)amino)-N-hydroxy-2-oxo-, meth-
yl ester.
Acetona

*
AWtoarb sulfone
2-Propanone
Antimony tris(2-ethylhexyl)dithiocarbamate.
Antimony trisdipentyldithio-carbamate
Propanal, 2-methyl-2-(methylsulfonyl)-
[(methylamino)carbonyl] oxime.
Antimony, tris[bis(2- ethylhexyl)cart>amodithioato-S,S']->
Antimony tris (dipentylcarbarnodithioato-S.S')-
O-
Arazate
Barban .
Zinc, bis[bis(phenylmethyl) carbamodithioato- S.S.1-
Carbamic acid, (3-chlorophenyl)-, 4-chlorc-2-butynyl ester
Bendiocarb
Bertdiocarb phenol.
Benomyl
B!s(dibutylcarbarnothioato) dioxodimolybdenum
sulfurlzed.
Busan40

Butylate...
1,3-Benzodioxol-4-ol, 2,2-dimethyl.-, methyl carbamate
1 ,3-Benzodioxol-4-6l, 2,2-dimethyl-
Carbamic acid, [1-[(butylamino)carbonyQ-1H-benzimidazol-2-yl]-,
methyl ester.
Molybdenum, bis(dibutylcarbamothioato) dioxodi-, sulfurized
Garbampdithioic acid, (hydroxymethyl)methyl-, monopotassium
salt.
Carbamothioic acid, bis(2-methylpropyl)-i S-ethyl ester ..:
Butyl Tuads
Butyl Ziram —
Cacbaryl
Carbendazlm
Carbofuran
Carbofuran phenol.
Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide, tetrabutyl
Ztnc, bis (dibutylcarbamodithioato-S,S')- .
1-Naphthalenol, methylcarbamate
Garbamic acid, 1 H-benzimidazol-2-yl, methyl ester
7-Benzofuranol, 2,3-dihydrc-L2,2-dimethyl-, methylcarbamate
7-Benzofuranol, 2.3-dihydro-2i2-dimethyl-
Carbosulfan
Carbamic acid, [(dibutylamino)thio]methyl-, 2,3-dihydrc- 2,2-di-
methyl-7-benzofuranyl ester.
Copper dimethyldithiocarbamate

• <
Cycloate

. •
Dazomet
Dibam
DlmetHan v
Copper, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioatc-S,S')-,

* . *

Carbamothioic acid, cyclohexylethyl-, S-ethyl ester

* ' ' *

2H-1,3,5-thiadiazine-2-thione, tetrahydrc-3,5-dimethyl-

* *

Carbamodithioic acid, dimethyl-, sodium salt
Carbamic acid, dimethyl-, 1-[(di.methylamino)carbonyl]-5-methyl-
1 H-pyrazol-3-yl'ester.
30558-43-1 U394

67-64-1 K156

1646-88-4 P203
15991-76-i U369
15890-25-2 U368
14726-36-4 U405
101-27-9 U280
22781-23-3 P187
22961-82-6 U364
17804-35^2 U271

68412-26-0 U389
51026-28-9 U378

2008-41-5 U392
1634-02-2 U402
136-23-2 U406
63-25-2 U279
10605-21-7 U372
1563-66-2 P127
1563-38-8 U367
55285-14-8 P189

137-29-1 U393

1134-23-2 U386

53S-74--4 'U366

128-04-1 U382

644-64-4 P191
Dtsulllram Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide, tetraethyl
97-77-8 U403
-------
9858
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX VIII TO PART 261—HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS—Continued
Common name
Chemical abstracts name
Hazard-
Chemical ab- ous
stracts No. waste
No.
EPTC (Eptam) Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-ethyl
ester
Esprocarb Carbamothioic acid, (1,2-dimethylpropyl) ethyl-, S-(phenylmethyl)
ester.
* * * *
Ethyl Ziram Zinc, bis(diethylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-

:
Ferbam Iron, tris(dimethylcarbamodithioato- S,S')-
Formetanate hydrochloride Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N'-[3-
[[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyrj-, monohydrochloride.
*
Formparanate Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N'-[2-methyl-4- i
[[(methy!amino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]-.
* * * * *
Hercules AC-5727 Phenol, 3-(1-methylethyl), methyl carbamate
Hexane n-Hexane
Hexazinone intermediate Carbamic acid, [(dimethylamino)iminomethyl)] methyl,ethyl ester
monohydrochloride.
*
lsolan Carbamic acid, dimethyl-, 3-methyl-1-(l-methylethyl)--1H-pyrazol-
5-yl ester.
Lead, bis(dipentyl carbamodithioato- S,S')- Lead, bis(dipentylcarbamodithioato-S,S')- L.
.****.
Manganese dimethyldithiocarbamate Manganese, bis(dimethyl carbamodithioato- S,S')-,
* * . .
Metam Sodium Carbamodithioic acid, methyl-, monosodium salt :..

*
Methanol Methyl alcohol '_

* . * * * .
Methiocarb Phenol, (3,5-dimethyl-4-(methylthio)-, methylcarbamate

*
Methyl bismate , Bismuth, tris(dimethylcarbam6dithioato-S,S'- j...
* • * * *
Methyl isobutyl ketone 4-Methyl-2-pentanone

!
Metolcarb Carbamic acid, methyl-, 3-methylphenyl ester i...
Mexacarbate Phenol, 4-(dimethylamino)- 3,5-dimethyl-, methylcarbamate
(ester).
Molinate 1H-Azepine-1-carbothioic acid, hexahydro-, S-ethyl ester ,

* . * * * *
Nickel dibutyldithio carbamate Nickel, bis(dibutyl carbamodi thioato-S.S')- i
759-94-4 U390

85785-20-2 U388

14324-55-1 U407

14484-64-1 U396

23422-53-9 P198

17702-57-7 P197

64-00-6 P202
110-54-3 K156
65086-85-3 U371
119-38-0 P192

36501-84-5 U397

15339-36-3 P196

137-42-8 U384

67-56-1 K156

2032-65-7 P199

21260-46-8 U370

108-10-1 K156

1129-41-5 P190

315-18-4 P128

2212-67-1 U365

13927-77-0 U399
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9859
APPENDIX VIII TO PART 261 .—HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS—Continued
Common name
Chemical abstracts name
Hazard-
Chemical ab- ous
stracts No. waste
No.
Oxamyl.
Ethanimidothioc acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N-[[(methyIamino) car-
bony!] oxy]-2-oxo-, methyl ester.
23135-22-0 P194
Pebulate Carbamothioic acid, butylethyl-, S-propyl ester.
Physostigmine

Physostigmine salicylate
Pyrrolo[2,3-b]indol-5-oi, 1,2,3,3a,8.8a-hexahydro-1,3a,8-trimethyl-
, methylcarbamate (ester), (3aS-cis)-.
Benzoic acid, 2-hydroxy, compd. with (3aS-cis)-1,2,3,3a,8,8a-
hexahydro-1,3a,8-trimethyipyrrolo[2,3-b]indol-5-yl
methylcarbamate ester (1:1).
1114-71-2 U391

57-47-6 P204

57-64-7 P188
Potassium dimethyl dithiocarbamate,
Potassium n-methyldithiocarbamate
Promecarb
Carbamodithioic acid, dimethyl, potassium salt
Carbamodithioic acid, methyl.-monopotassium salt
Phenol, 3-methyl-5-(1-methylethyl)-, methyl carbamate
Propham
Propoxur
Prosulfocarb
• *
Reactacrease 4-DEG
• «
Selenium dimethyldithiocarbamate.
Carbamic acid, phenyl-, 1-methylethyl ester
Phenol, 2-(1-methylethoxy)-, methylcarbamate
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-(phenylmethyl) ester

* *

Ethanol, 2,2'-oxybis-, dicarbamate
Carbamodithioic acid, dimethyl-, tetraanhydrosulfide with
orthothioselenious acid.
128-03-0 U383
137^1-7 U377
2631-37-0 P201
122-42-9 U373
114-26-1 P199
52888-80-9 U387
5952-26-1 U395
144-34-3 U376
Sodium dibutyldithiocarbamate
Sodium diethyWithiocarbamate
Carbamodithioic acid, dibutyl, sodium salt .
Carbamodithioic acid, diethyl-, sodium salt
Sulfads...
SuUallate
Piperidine, 1,1 '-(tetrathiodicarbonothioyl)-bis-
Carbamodithioic acid, diethyl-, 2-chloro-2-propenyl ester
136-30-1 U379
148-18-5 U381
120-54-7 U400
95-06-7 U277
Tetramethylthiuram monosulfide

* *
Tnlodicarb
Bis(dimethylthiocarbamoyl) sulfide
Ethanimidothioic acid, N,N'-[thiobis[(methylimino)
carbonyloxy]]bis-, dimethyl ester.
97-74-5 U401

59669-26-0 P195
Thlophanate-methyl
Carbamic acid, [1,2- phenylenebis (iminocarbonothioyl)] bis-, di-
methyl ester.
23564-05-8 P193
Tirpale,
1,3-Dithiolane-2-carboxaldehyde, 2,4-dimethyl-, O-[(methylamino)
carbonyl] oxime.
26419-73-8 P185
Triailate
Carbamothioic acid, bis(l-methylethyl)-, S-(2,3,3-trichloro-2-pro-
penyl) ester.
2303-17-5 U389
Trlethylamlne ,

Troysan Polyphase

•

U9069
Ethanamine, N,N-diethyl-

Carbamic acid, butyl-, 3-iodo-2-propynyl ester
Carbamic acid, [[3- [(dimethylamino)carbonyl]-2-
pyridinyl]sulfonyl]-phenyl ester.
121-44-8 U404

55406-53-6 U375

112006-94-7 U374
-------
9860
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
APPENDIX VIII TO PART 261 .—HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS—Continued
Common name
Chemical abstracts name
Hazard-
Chemical ab- ous
stracts No. waste
No.
Carbamodithioic acid, dibutyl-, methylene ester 10254-57-fi Iran
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-propyl ester ; Z 1929-77-7 U385
1,3-Dimethylbenzene
°-*y ene 1,2-Dimethylbenzene
P-xy|ene 1,4-Dimethylbenzene
Ziram ,
Zinc, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-, (T-4)-
108-38-3 K156
195-47-6 K156
106-42-3 K156
137-30-4 P204
to
PART 271-REQUIREMENTS FOR AUTHORIZATION OF STATE HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAMS
7. The authority citation for part 271 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), and 6926.

•eadastnows.'1® ^ amended ^ adding the following entry to Table 1 m chronological order by date of publication

§ 271.1 Purpose and scope.
;
(j) * * * :

TABLE 1.—REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE AMENDMENTS OF 1984
Promulgation date
Title of regulation
Federal Reg-
ister ref- Effective date
erence
[Date of publication of final rule] ....................... Listing Wastes from the Production of Carbamates ...... . ........... [Federal Reg- [Effective*
; ister page date of final
- - • - - - . _ . __ _ _ ! __ numbers]. rule].
, ^ - _

PART 302-DESIGNATION, REPORTABLE QUANTITIES, AND NOTIFICATION
9. The authority citation for part 302 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9602, 9603, and 9604; 33 U.S.C. 1321 and 1361
§302.4 Designation of hazardous
substances.
*****
TABLE 302.4.—LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES
[Note: All comments/notes are located at the end of this table]
Hazardous substance
CASRN Regulatory
Statutory
Final RQ
synonyms .,._ _ . RCRA
RQ Code* ;wa™0. Category
Antimony, tris[bis(2-ethylhexyl)carbamodithioato- 15991761
S,S']-, (Antimony tris(2-
ethylhexyl)dithiocarbamate).
*1
4 U369
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / ProposedRules
9861
TABLE 302.4.— LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES— Continued
[Note: All comments/notes are located at the end of this table]
OAORM Regulatory
Hazardous substance UASKN synonyms
Antimony, tris(dipentylcarbamodithioato-S.S')- 15890252 ....
(Antimony trisdipentyldithiocarbamate).
. • * - *
1H-Azepine-1-carbothIo!c acid, hexahydro-, S- 2212671
ethyl ester (Molinate).
. * *
1,3-BenzodtoxoM-ol, 2.2-dimethyl-, (Bendiocarb 22961826
phOnOl). 007Q10-V3
1,3-BenzodtoxoM-ol. 2,2-dimethyl-, methyl car- 22781233
hamate (Bendiocarb).
.
7-Benzofuranol, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyl- 1563388
(Carboturan phenol).
• * *
Bonzote acid, 2-hydroxy, compd. with (3aS-cis)- 57647
1 ^,3,3a.8,8a-hexahydro-1 ,3a,8-
Uimethylpyrroio[2.3-b]indol-5-yl ,
melhytearbamate ester (1:1) (Physostigmme
sallcylate).
.
Bis(d!methylthtocarbamoyl) sulfide 97/-4&
(Tetramethylthiuram monosulfide).
. *
Bismuth, trIsCdImethylcarbarnodithioato-S.SS 21260468
(Methyl Wsmate). ^ , -
» * .
Carbamks acid, butyl-. 3-iodc-2-propynyt ester 55406536
(Troysan Polyphase). 17!Wviw
Carbamte acid. [l-[(butylamino)carbonyl]-1H- 17804352
benzimidazol-2-yl. methyl ester (Benomyl). nRnc917
Carbamte acid, 1H-benzimidazol-2-yl, methyl 10605217
ester (Carbendazirn). ,_„„„,„ *m97a
Carbamte acid. (3-chlorophenyl)-, 4-chloro-2- 101279
butynyl ester (Barban). KKW
-------
9862
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 302.4.— LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES— Continued
[Note: All comments/notes are located at the end of this table]
r Hazardous substance
Carbamodithioic acid, dimethyl, potassium salt
(Potassium dimethyl dithiocarbamate).
Carbamodithioic acid, dimethyl-, sodium salt
(Dibam).
Carbamodithioic acid, dimethyl-,
tetraanhydrosulfide with orthothioselenious
acid (Selenium dimethyldithiocarbamate).
Carbamodithioic acid, (hydroxymethyl)methyl-,
monopotassium salt (Busan 40).
Carbamodithioic acid, methyl.-monopotassium
salt (Potassium n-methyldithiocarbamate).
Carbamodithioic acid, methyl-, monosodium salt
(Metam Sodium).
* * *
Carbamothioic acid, bis(2-methylpropyl)-, S-ethyl
ester (Butylate).
* * *
Carbamothioic acid, bis(l-methylethyl)-, S-(2,3,3-
trichloro-2-propenyl) ester (Triallate).
Carbamothioic acid, butylethyl-, S-propyl ester
(Pebulate).
Carbamothioic acid, cyclohexylethyl-, S-ethyl
ester (Cycloate).
Carbamothioic acid, (1 ,2-dimethylpropyl) ethyl-,
S-(phenylmethyl) ester (Esprocarb).
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-ethyl ester
(EPTC (Eptam)).
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-(phenylmethyl)
ester (Prosulfocarb).
Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-propyl ester
(Vernolate).
Carbamoyl Oximes N.O.S
* * *
Copper, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioatc-S,S')-
(Copper dimethyldithiocarbamate).
* * *
Dithiocarbamate acids, salts, and/or esters
N.O.S., (This listing includes mixtures of one
or more dithiocarbamate acid, salt, and/or
ester.).
1 ,3-Dithiolane-2-carboxaldehyde, 2,4-dimethyl-,
O-[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxime (Tirpate).
* * »
Ethanimidothioic acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N-
hydroxy-2-oxo-, methyl ester (A2213).
Ethanimidothioc acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N-
[[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]-2-oxo-, methyl
ester (Oxamyl).
* * *
Ethanimidothioic acid, N,N'-
[thiobis[(methylimino)carbonyloxy]]bis-, di-
methyl ester (Thiodicarb).
* * *
Ethanol, 2,2'-oxybis-, dicarbamate
(Reactacrease 4-DEG).
* * *
Iron, tris(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-
(Ferbam).
* * *
Lead, bis(dipentylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-(Lead
bisdipentyldithiocarbamate).
* * *
Manganese, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-
CASRN Regulatory
synonyms
128030
128041
144343
51026289
137417
137428
2008415
*
2303175
1114712
1134232
85785202
759944
52888809
1929777

137291
*
26419738
*
30558431
23135220
#
59669260
5952261
14484641
*
36501845
15339363
Statutory
RQ Code*
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
*1 4
r
*1 4
*1 4
M 4
"1 4
* !
*1 4
*1 4
*
*1 4
*1 4

RCRA - to
waste No. uateS
U383
U382
U376
U378
U377
U384
U392
U389
U391
U386
U388
U390
U387
U385
U361
*
U393
U363
P185
*
U394
P194
*
P195
U395
U396
*
U397
PI 96
Final RQ
,__, Pounds
|ory (Kg)

##
it it
##
8it
##
*
##
*
##
##

##
##

*
##

##
*
##
##
##
*
titi
*
##
##

(Manganese dimethyldithiocarbamate).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
9863
TABLE 302.4. — LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES— Continued
[Note: All comments/notes are located at the end of this table]
Hazardous substance CASRN synonym's
« * * *
[((methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]-,
monohydrochtoride (Formetanate hydro-
chloride).
MfilhinimMomWa M M-Himpthul-N'-r5>-mpthvl-4- 17702577
[t(methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]-
(Formparanate).
... *
hlAhrHHaniim hIeMIViiitul/»Eirhamnth!nfltrOrti- mil - Rft419?fiO
oxodioxodi-, sulfurized.
* * * *
dibulyldithiocarbamate).
* * * *
(Hercules AC-5727).
bamate (Promecarb).
• * * *
(Sulfads).
* * * *
l(methytamJno)carbonylj oxime (Aldicarb
sulfone).
. . * *
1.3a,8-trimethyl-, methylcarbamate (ester),
(3aS-cis)-(Physostigmine).
. « * *
methyl-(Dazomet).
. « * *
ThinruwnYvdicflrhnnio rtiamidfi tfitrahutvl (Butvl 1634022
Tuads).
(Disulfiram).
• * * *
(Zifam).
Ziram).
Ziram).
S.S'HArazate).
. . . *
bottoms, light ends, spent solvents, filtrates,
and decantates) from the production of
carbamates and carbamoyl oximes.
condenser waters, washwaters, and separa-
tion waters) from the production of
carbamates and carbamoyl oximes (This list-
ing does not include sludges derived from the
treatment of these wastewaters).
solids from the production of carbamates and
carbamoyl oximes.
thiocarbamate wastes.
Statutory Final RQ
RQ Code. J^. category P°ff
*1 4 P198 ##
*1 4 P197 ##
* * *
*1 4 U398 ##
* * *
*1 4 U399 ##
*1 4 P202 ##
*1 4 P201 ##
*1 4 U400 ##
*• * *
*1 4 R203 ##
*1 4 P204 ##
* * *
*1 4 U366 ; ##
*1 4 U362 , ##
* * *
•1 '4 U402
*1 4 U403 - ##
* « • ' *
*1 4 R205 ##
*1 4 U407 ##
*1 4 U406 ##
*1 4 U405 ##
* * *
*1 4 K156 ##
•1 4 K157 ##
*1 4 K158 ##
*1 4 K159 ##

-------
9864
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 1994 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 302.4.—LIST OF HAZARDO'US SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES—Continued
[Note: All comments/notes are located at the end of this table]
Hazardous substance
CASRN
Regulatory
synonyms
Statutory
Final RQ
RQ
Code+
RCRA
waste No.
Category
Pounds
(Kg)
K160 Solids (including filter wastes, separation
solids, and spent catalysts) from the produc-
tion of thiocarbamates and solids from the
treatment of thiocarbamate wastes.
K161 Purification solids (including filtration,
evaporation, and centrifugation solids),
baghouse dust, and floor sweepings from the
production of dithiocarbamate acids and their
salts (This listing does not include K125 or
K126.).
*1
*1
4 K160
4, K161
H—indicates the statutory source as defined by 1, 2, 3, and 4 below.
4—indicates that the statutory source for designation of this hazardous substance under CERCLA is FICRA section 3001
1 —indicates that the 1 -pound RQ is a CERCLA statutory RQ.
##—The Agency may adjust the statutory RQ for this hazardous substance in a future rulemaking; until then the statutory RQ applies.

[FR Doc. 94-4051 Filed 2-28-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
-------
-------
-------
-------
-------
-------