Monday
May 12, 1997
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 148, et al.
v/Hand Disposal Restrictions Phase IV:
Treatment Standards for Wood Preserving
Wastes, Paperwork Reduction and
Streamlining, Exemptions From RCRA for
Certain Processed Materials; and
Miscellaneous Hazardous Waste
Provisions; Final Rule
Second Supplemental Proposal on
Treatment Standards for Metal Wastes
and Mineral Processing Wastes, Mineral
Processing and Bevill Exclusion Issues,
and the Use of Hazardous Waste as Fill;
Proposed Rule
2599
-------
25998 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 148,261,268, and 271
BIN 2050 AE05
[FRL 5816-5]
Land Disposal Restrictions—Phase IV:
Treatment Standards for Wood
Preserving Wastes, Paperwork
Reduction and Streamlining,
Exemptions From RCRA for Certain
Processed Materials; and
Miscellaneous Hazardous Waste
Provisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA, the Agency).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Agency is finalizing
treatment standards for hazardous
wastes generated from wood preserving
operations, and is making a conforming
amendment to the standard for wastes
from production of chlorinated
allphatlcs which carry the F024
hazardous waste code. These treatment
standards will minimize threats to
human health and the environment
posed by these wastes. In addition, this
final rule revises the land disposal
restrictions (LDR) program to
significantly reduce paperwork
requirements by 1.6 million hours. This
rule also finalizes both the decision to
employ polymerization as an alternative
method of treatment for certain ignitable
wastes as well as the decision not to ban
certain wastes from biological treatment
because there is no need to classify
these wastes as "nonamenable." It also
clarifies an exception from LDR
requirements for de mlnimis amounts of
characteristic wastewaters. Finally, this
rule excludes processed circuit boards
and scrap metal from RCRA regulation
which Is Intended to promote .die goal
of safe recycling.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is
effective on August 11,1997 except
§§ 148.18(b) and 268.30(b), which are
effective on May 12.1999.
ADDRESSES: The public docket for this
rulemaklng is available for public
Inspection at EPA's RCRA Docket,
located at Crystal Gateway, First Floor,
1235 Jefferson Davis Highway,
Arlington, Virginia. The regulatory
docket for this final rule contains a
number of background materials. To
obtain a list of these items, contact the
RCRA Docket at 703-603-9230 and
request the list of references in EPA
Docket JJF-97-PH4F-FFFFF.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
RCRA Hotline between 9:00 a.m.-6:00
p.m.EST, toll-free, at 800-424-9346;
(703) 412-9810 from Government
phones or if in the Washington, DC local
calling area; or 800-553-7672 for the
hearing impaired. For more detailed
information on specific aspects of the
rulemaking, contact the Waste
Treatment Branch (5302W), Office of
Solid Waste (OSW), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW-,
Washington, DC 20460; phone (703)
308-8434. For technical information on
die treatment standards for wood
preserving wastes, ask for Nick Vizzone;
for information on paperwork reduction
and clean-up of Part 268, call Rhonda
Minnick at (703) 308-8771 or Nick
Vizzone at (703) 308-8460. Contact
Kristina Meson at (703) 308-8488 for
information on the exclusions for scrap
metal and shredded circuit boards. Call
Pan Lee at (703) 308-8478 for
information on the capacity analyses.
For questions on the regulatory impact
analyses, contact Paul Borst at (703)
308-0481. For other questions, call Sue
Slotnick at (703) 308-8434.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Rule on Internet
This rule is available on the Internet.
Please follow these instructions to
access the rule electronically: From die
World Wide Web (WWW), type http://
www.epa.gov/rules and regulations. In
addition, several technical background
documents contained in die docket
supporting this rule will be available on
die Internet at http://www.epa.gov/
offices and regions/oswer.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Potentially Regulated Entities
ffl. New Land Disposal Restrictions
Treatment Standards for Wastes from
Wood Preserving (Waste Codes F032,
F034, and F035) and Revised Treatment
Standard for Chlorinated Aliphatics
Waste (F024)
A. Summary
B. Determination of BOAT
1. General
2. F032 wastewaters
3. F034 wastes
4. F035 wastes
C. Alternative Combustion Treatment
Standard for Dioxins and Furans in F032
1. Today's action
2. Background
3. Summary of Phase IV NODA for F032
4. Review of Major Comments on Phase IV
NODA and Promulgation of A Modified
Version of Suboption Three
5. Revised Treatment Standard for F024
Wastes
D. Soil and Debris Contaminated with
Wood Preserving Wastes
1. Summary of comments
2. LDR Requirements Do Apply to
Contaminated Media
3. Technology- versus Risk-based
Treatment Limits
4. UTS Limits and the Performance of
Remedial Treatment Technologies
IV. Improvements to the Land Disposal
Restrictions Program
A. Significant Reduction in LDR
Paperwork
1. Background
2. Discussion of Specific Paperwork
Changes
B. Clean-up of LDR Requirements in 40
CFR 268
1. Section 268.1
2. Section 268.4
3. Section 268.5
4. Section 268.7
5. Section 268.9
6. References to section 268.32
7. Sections 268.34-268.37
8. References to sections 268.41-268.43
9. Appendices
C. Clarifications of Point of Generation
1. General Discussion
2. Boiler Cleanout
3. Sludge From High TOC (Total Organic
Carbon) D001 Treated in Tank Based
Systems
4. Tank Rinsate
D. POLYM Method of Treatment for High-
TOC CTotal Organic Carbon) Ignitable
D001 Wastes
E. Decision to Retain Current Treatment
Standard for Multi-Source Leachate
(Waste Code F039)
V. Status of Proposed Provisions on Leaks,
Sludges, and Air Emissions from RCRA-
Equivalent Treatment of Decharacterized
Wastewaters in Clean Water Act Surface
Impoundments
VI. Decision Not to Ban Nonamenable Wastes
from Biological Treatment
VII. Capacity Determinations For Wood
Preserving Wastes
A. Introduction
B. Available Capacity
1. Thermal Treatment
2. Stabilization
3. Wastewater Treatment
C. Required Capacity and Comparison with
Available Capacity
D. Mixed Radioactive Wastes
E. Phase IV Wood Preserving Wastes
Injected Into Underground Injection
Control (UIC) Class I Wells Injected into
Class I Wells
F. Summary of Variance Determinations
VIII. Changes to Definition of Solid Waste to
Exclude Processed Scrap Metal and
Shredded Circuit Boards From RCRA
Jurisdiction
A. Processed Scrap Metal
1. Summary of Proposal
2. Modifications to the proposal
B. Shredded Circuit Boards
1. The Proposal
2. Exclusion For Shredded Circuit Boards
Conditioned On Containerized Storage
Prior To Recovery
3. Limitation on Mercury Switches,
Mercury Relays, Nickel-Cadmium
Batteries and Lithium Batteries
4. Clarification of regulatory status of
secondary materials associated with the
generation or management' of circuit
boards.
IX. State Authority
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
25999
A. Applicability of Rules In Authorized
States
B. Abbreviated Authorization Procedures
C. Effect on State Authorization
D. Less stringent requirements
X. Regulatory Requirements
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis Pursuant to
Executive Order 12866
1. Methodology Section
2. Volume Results
3. Cost Results
4. Economic Impact Results
5. Benefit Estimate Results
B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
XL Environmental Justice
A. Applicability of Executive Order 12898
B. Potential Effects
XII. Submission to Congress and General
Accounting Office
I. Background
In the 1984 Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments (HSWA) of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), Congress specified that
land disposal of hazardous waste is
prohibited unless the waste meets
treatment standards established by EPA.
HSWA requires that treatment standards
must substantially diminish the toxicity
or mobility of hazardous waste, so that
short and long term threats to human
health and the environment are
minimized. The treatment standards are
part of the Land Disposal Restrictions
Program.
Today's final rule is one part of the
collection of land disposal restrictions
(LDR) rules known as "Phase IV." They
are the latest in a series of LDR rules
that establish treatment standards for
newly listed and identified wastes, and
that resolve other hazardous waste
matters.
EPA proposed the Phase IV rule in
two proposed rules (60 FR 43654,
August 22, 1995; and 61 FR 2338,
January 25, 1996), and subsequently
issued a Notice of Data Availability on
Phase IV issues (61 FR 21418, May 10,
1996). The attached rule finalizes
portions of those earlier proposals.
Other proposed revisions are in a
• second supplemental proposed rule
elsewhere in this Federal Register.
EPA estimates that the directly
measurable benefits associated with the
land disposal restrictions treatment
standards in this rule are limited
relative to the costs that may be
incurred. Therefore, the relative priority
of addressing these risks could be
questioned. However, we do not believe,
for this specific action, that a simple
cost effectiveness measure alone
provides a sufficient basis for decision-
making. As discussed below, the
preference for permanent treatment of
hazardous wastes is part of the basic
policy structure which Congress enacted
when it amended RCRA in 1984, and
reflects concern over the technological
uncertainties regarding risks and long
term protectiveness of land disposal and
the intent to assure that waste
management practices are protective for
future generations.
The whole premise of the LDR
legislation is that risks posed by land
disposal of hazardous wastes are
inherently uncertain to evaluate and
that land-based units are incapable of
long term containment. Land disposal
units (such as landfills, surface
impoundments, and waste piles) are
engineered units that can and have
failed in the past with significant
consequences to human health and the
environment. For this reason, Congress
required that hazardous wastes be
pretreated before disposal by "treatment
[which] should be the best that has been
demonstrated to be achievable."
Congressional Record of July 25, 1984
(S9178). The technology-based approach
of the land disposal restrictions
provides a measure of insurance against
the potential for failure in these land
based units.
Given these facts, and evident
Congressional intent, EPA continues to
believe that the LDR prohibitions and
treatment standards are justified in
many instances. EPA sets treatment
standards that reduce toxicity and
mobility of hazardous constituents (or
require recycling), and EPA also
requires that the treated wastes be
placed in reasonably secure land
disposal units. However, EPA does
believe that, in some situations, the
current LDR rules may not provide the
optimum regulatory approach. In those
situations, EPA will look to other
mechanisms to address those relatively
low risk scenarios.
II. Potentially Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated by this
final rule vary according to the section
of the rule. The following table breaks
down the categories industries that may
be regulated according to each major
section. The table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
regulated by this action. This table lists
the types of entities that EPA is now
aware could potentially be regulated by
this action. Other types of entities not
listed in the table could also be
regulated.
TABLE OF ENTITIES—POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE PHASE IV FINAL RULE
Section of the rule
Category
Examples of entities potentially affected
Addition to 40 CFR §268.40—Treatment standards for
wood preserving wastes.
Modifications to 40 CFR §268.7—Waste Analysis and Rec-
ordkeeping.
Wood Preserving Hazardous Waste
Generators.
Hazardous Waste Treatment Facilities ..
Hazardous Waste Generators
Addition of §§261.4(a)(12) and 261.4(a)(13)—Exclusion
from the definition of solid waste for excluded scrap metal
and shredded circuit boards.
Hazardous Waste Treatment Facilities ..
Hazardous Waste Disposal Facilities ....
Scrap Metal and/or Circuit Board Gen-
erators.
Scrap Metal Salvage and Storage
Yards.
Any person that generates over 100kg
of F032, F034, or F035.
Facilities that treat F032, F034, or
F035.
Any person who generates over 100kg
of prohibited hazardous waste, or
over 1 kg of acute hazardous waste
in a calendar month.
Facilities permitted under 40 CFR Part
270 for incinerators, surface im-
poundments, and/or land treatment
facilities.
Facilities permitted under 40 CFR Part
270 for landfills, and/or injection
wells.
Persons who generate scrap metal, as
defined under 40 CFR §261.1(c)(6)
(e.g., Die Casters, Metal Stampers,
Machining Parts).
Facilities that store scrap metal, but do
not generate or recycle.
-------
26000 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997, I Rules and Regulations
TABLE OF ENTITIES—POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE PHASE IV FINAL RULE—Continued
Section of the rule
Category
Examples of entities potentially affected
Scrap Metal Recyclers
Point of generation; Decision not to ban nonamenable
wastes.
Circuit Board Shredders
Hazardous Waste Generators
Hazardous Waste Treatment Facilities ,
Facilities that process scrap metal as
defined in 40 CFR §261.1(c)(10).
Facilities that shred circuit boards.
Any person who generates over 100kg
of prohibited hazardous waste, or
over 1 kg of acute hazardous waste
in a calendar month.
Facilities that perform biological treat-
ment in surface impoundments.
III. New Land Disposal Restrictions
Treatment Standards for Wastes From
Wood Preserving (Waste Codes F032,
F034, and F035) and Revised Treatment
Standard for Chlorinated Aliphatics
Waste (F024)
A. Summary
EPA Is promulgating UTS limits as
the treatment standards for the
hazardous constituents In wood
preserving wastes F032, F034, and F035,
as proposed. (See 60 FR 43654, August
24,1995; 60 FR 546451, October 25.
1995; and 61 FR 21417. May 10.1996.)
In addition, EPA Is establishing a
compliance alternative for dloxin and
furan (D/F) constituents in
nonwastewater and wastewater forms of
F032, namely allowing use of a method
of treatment—combustion—for these
constituents. Thus, if this method of
treatment is utilized, combustion
residues would not have to be analyzed
for D/F constituents. The alternative is
only available for F032 residues from
units subject to the standards in Part
264 subpart O or Part 266 subpart H, or
from Interim status incinerators which
have made a specific demonstration that
they operate In a manner equivalent to
a Part 264 or Part 266 combustion unit.
EPA also Is amending the treatment
standard previously established for
F024 wastes. EPA Is adopting the
alternative compliance standard for
F032 as the standard for F024. The
practical effect of this change will be to
limit somewhat the type of facilities that
can combust F024.
B. Determination of BOAT
I, General
EPA has determined that combustion
(CMBST) represents BDAT for organlcs
in nonwastewater forms of F032 and
F034 (I.e., the treatment standards are
based on the performance of combustion
technology). For organlcs in wastewater
forms of F032 and F034, EPA has
determined that a single treatment
technology or a normal wastewater
treatment train can meet the treatment
standards promulgated today. As
explained in the Final Best
Demonstrated Available Technology
Background Document for Wood
Preserving Wastes—F032.F034, and
F035 (Wood Preserving Background
Document for this rule), EPA has
determined that wastewater treatment
technologies such as biological
treatment, steam stripping, carbon
adsorption, or combinations of these
technologies can treat organics regulated
in F032 and F034 to the concentration
levels promulgated today. These
wastewater treatment technologies are
available to, or in use at, existing wood
preserving facilities.
For metals in nonwastewater forms of
F032, F034, and F035, EPA has
determined that the promulgated
treatment standards can be based on
(slag) vitrification for arsenic and on
stabilization for chromium (total). The
treatment standard for arsenic also can
be achieved using stabilization
treatment (see the Wood Preserving
Background Document). For wastewater
forms of F032, F034, and F035, EPA has
determined that treatment levels can be
achieved by lime addition followed by
sedimentation and filtration for arsenic,
and by chemical precipitation followed
by sedimentation for chromium. (Of
course, since no method of treatment is
required to be used under the
promulgated treatment standards, any
type of treatment other than
Impermissible dilution may be used to
achieve these concentration levels.)
2. F032 Wastewaters
Some commenters felt that the limits
proposed for D/F in F032 wastewaters,
namely the existing UTS limits, were
not achievable. Commenters felt that
EPA's own wastewater characterization
data showed that the D/F concentrations
in untreated F032 wastewaters were
orders of magnitude higher than the
untreated concentrations in the
wastewater samples used in establishing
the UTS limits. They also emphasized
that biological treatment normally
removes D/F constituents in the order of
78% of influent pollutants and thus,
may yield an effluent with higher
concentrations than those proposed by
EPA.
EPA has examined the available data
on the characterization of F032,
prevailing management practices for
wastewaters as difficult to treat as F032,
and for wastewaters managed by
biological treatment systems. EPA
acknowledges that the concentrations of
D/F in F032 wastewaters, as generated,
are much higher than those treated by
the biological treatment system
supporting the existing UTS limits for
D/F. However, based on the available
data on wastewater treatment practices
at wood preserving facilities, EPA
believes that prevailing wastewater
treatment practices can be optimized or
upgraded to meet the D/F limits
promulgated for F032 wastewaters. As
explained in the BDAT Background
Document, pretreatment steps can be,
and are,, used to reduce influent
concentrations to biotreatment units to
levels comparable to those on which the
treatment standards are based, and EPA
believes the same level of performance
is achievable for wood preservers. (See
the wood preserving background
document and the BDAT response to
comments document for additional
discussion on EPA's rationale and data
review.)
Another commenter asked EPA to
withdraw its proposal for the regulation
of D/F constituents in F032
wastewaters. The commenter believes
that the regulation of PCP and
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAH) can ensure the reduction of D/F
in F032 wastewaters. The commenter
also submitted data with regard to
concentrations of D/F, PCP, and PAH
analytes in two effluent F032
wastewaters treated by activated carbon
adsorption. These data appear to
support the commenter's statement that
monitoring of PCP and PAHs may serve
as a surrogate candidate for the
reduction of D/F levels in these
particular effluent wastewaters.
However, EPA lacks data to determine
if the alternative surrogate constituents
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26001
proposed for regulation can also serve as
surrogates for monitoring the treatment
of D/F in wastewater treatment effluents
resulting fronrother treatment
technology trains that may achieve the
proposed UTS, and has therefore chosen
not to adopt .this suggestion.
3. F034 Wastes
Some commenters objected to EPA's
proposed regulation of arsenic and
chromium in F034 wastes, but their
arguments were not persuasive. One
argument was that F034 wastes typically
do not contain arsenic and chromium
and that they should only be regulated
if chromated copper arsenate (CCA) is
used at the facility generating F034 at
concentrations exceeding treatment
standards. EPA's data supporting the
listing of F034 wastes in fact show that
arsenic and chromium are frequently
present in F034. (See Background
Document Supporting the Final Listing
for Wastes from Wood Preserving
Processes, November, 1990.) Further,
EPA determined that these two metal
constituents are toxic and that their
concentrations in untreated F034 wastes
also supported the listing of these
wastes as RCRA hazardous waste F034.
(See Background Document Supporting
the Final Listing for Wood Preserving
Wastes from Wood Preserving,
November, 1990; 55 FR 50458-59,
December 6, 1990; and 53 FR 53299-
300, Table 13, December 30, 1988.)
Because treatment of organic
constituents in F034 may not reduce the
mobility of these metals, EPA is
promulgating treatment standards that
will assure that the mobility of these
metal constituents is reduced prior to
disposal, consistent with a core LDR
requirement to develop treatment
standards which "substantially reduce
the likelihood of migration of hazardous
constituents from the waste * * *".
RCRA section 3004(m)(l). Furthermore,
EPA points out that treaters of this
waste can address the monitoring of
these metal constituents in their permit
Waste Analysis Plans (WAP). See 55 FR
at 22669, June 1, 1990; Chemical Waste
Managements. EPA, 976 F.2d 2, 31
(D.C. Cir. 1992); cert, denied 113 S.Ct.
1961 (1993).
4. F035 Wastes
Other commenters were concerned
with the achievability of arsenic limits
in wastewater and nonwastewater forms
of F035. One commenter was concerned
that EPA was mandating the use of
vitrification as opposed to setting a
numerical limit. Other commenters felt
that vitrification is an inappropriate
technology for setting arsenic treatment
limits and that EPA should set, instead,
UTS limits that are based on the
performance of stabilization
technologies.
None of these commenters have
submitted treatment performance data
supporting their inability to meet the
proposed UTS limits, nor have they
documented that their waste will
behave differently when treated by
stabilization or vitrification practices.
The treatment technology supporting
numerical limits for arsenic in
nonwastewater forms of F032 is
vitrification. However, EPA believes
that arsenic limits can also be achieved
via stabilization based on treatment data
supporting the promulgation of the UTS
limit for arsenic (see Final Best
Demonstrated Available Technology
(BOAT) Background Document for
Universal Standards Volume A:
Universal Standards for Nonwastewater
Forms of Listed Hazardous Wastes). In
addition, today's promulgated treatment
levels do not preclude the use of other
treatment alternatives such as
stabilization, as long as such
alternatives do not constitute land
disposal or impermissible dilution. As a
result, EPA is promulgating treatment
limits for arsenic as proposed.
C. Alternative Combustion Treatment
Standard for Dioxins and Furans in
F032
1. Today's Action
This notice establishes combustion
(defined at 40 CFR 268.42, Table 1,
CMBST) as an alternative compliance
treatment standard option for D/F in
F032. Combustion is the basis for the D/
F numerical limits, and properly
conducted combustion should
effectively destroy D/F constituents, If
this method of treatment is used to treat
F032 in certain specified combustion
devices, there is no need to monitor
compliance with the D/F numerical
limits established for D/F constituents.
However, all other organic and metal
constituents will require monitoring
prior to disposal. This approach is
patterned after EPA's promulgation of a
similar alternative treatment standard
for D/F in F024 (wastes from production
of chlorinated aliphatics). See 55 FR
22580-81, June 1, 1990. EPA discussed
this approach in detail in a Notice of
Data Availability (NODA) that appeared
in the Federal Register on May 10, 1996
(61 FR 21418).
In general, EPA is providing a method
of treatment as an alternative to actual
D/F measurement that will be equally
protective, and will assure availability
of effective treatment for these wastes.
The alternative, namely not providing
the alternative treatment standard,
leaves open the real possibility of these
wastes being refused treatment, an
environmentally worse result. EPA also
notes that its experience with F024
waste treatment, for which there Is a
parallel treatment regime, has been
satisfactory: these wastes are effectively
treated by combustion technology, and
sufficient treatment capacity has
remained available once EPA
promulgated the alternative treatment
standard which did not require analysis
of D/F in treatment residues.
2. Background
EPA proposed numerical treatment
standards for F032 constituents on
August 22, 1995. Several members of
the regulated community expressed
concern that EPA's proposal to regulate
D/F constituents in F032 may result in
problems finding treatment facilities
willing to accept the waste. D/F are very
controversial hazardous waste
constituents that often trigger public
opposition if documented at any
concentrations regardless of the
estimated risks presented. D/F
monitoring also adds significantly to
monitoring costs. See generally, 55 FR at
22580-81. Commenters emphasized that
owners and operators of combustion
devices had informed them that their
combustion facilities will not accept
F032 if EPA requires the monitoring of
D/F in combustion residues. Further,
commenters noted that if combustion is
conducted properly, analysis of D/F is
unnecessary.
The American Wood Preservers
Institute (AWPI) and .the Penta Task
Force asked EPA to consider
establishing an alternative treatment
standard that sets a method of treatment
as an alternative to the numerical limits
for D/F in F032.
The Penta Task Force submitted data
to show that the concentrations of D/F
in F032 are substantially lower than
those EPA reported in the F032 Listing
Background Document. They stated
their belief, along with AWPI, that D/F
in F032 should be regulated like D/F in
F024.
3. Summary of Phase IV NODA for F032
EPA examined these new data and
concerns and proposed in the NODA to
codify combustion (CMBST) as an
alternative method of treatment for D/F
in F032. EPA also requested comments
on potential regulatory controls on
combustion devices to assure that D/F
destruction is conducted only in well-
designed and well-operated combustion
devices. EPA proposed three regulatory
suboptions for implementing a CMBST
standard. One suboption was to merely
apply the existing F024 alternative
-------
26002 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
combustion treatment standard to F032
with applicable regulatory controls in
Part 264,265, or 266. The second
suboptlon was to revise the alternative
D/F standard for F024, and establish for
F024 and F032. a CMBST standard
alternative, that would limit the
combustion of F032 and F024 to RCRA
permitted or Interim status combustion
devices which have demonstrated the
ability to achieve a dioxln toxlcity
equivalent (TEQ) air emission discharge
limit of 0.2 ng/dscm. The third
suboptlon was to revise the F024
standard, and to establish an alternative
standard for F024 and F032 that limits
the combustion of F024 and F032 to
RCRA permitted combustion devices.
fln all of these options, and in today's
final rule, the restriction on types of
devices applies only to facilities opting
to comply with the D/F standard
without analyzing treatment residues.)
4. Review of Major Comments on Phase
IV NODA and Promulgation of A
Modified Version of Suboptlon Three
The majority of commenters
supported the proposed compliance
alternative setting CMBST as a method
of treatment for D/F. In addition, the
majority of commenters preferred
suboptlon 1 (i.e., allow combustion In a
RCRA Interim status or permitted
device) to ensure that combustion is
conducted In well-designed and well-
operated devices. A significant number
of commenters also were concerned that
adoption of suboptlon 3 may have
excluded the use of well-designed and
well-operated interim status combustion
devices operated under the Part 266
rules applicable to boilers and industrial
furnaces.
The majority of commenters argued
that It would be premature for the
Agency to adopt suboption 2 whereby a
D/F emission limit of 0.2 ng/dscm TEQ
would be established given that the
Agency has only recently proposed such
an emission standard for hazardous
waste burning Incinerators, cement, and
lightweight aggregate kilns under the
maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) rule. See 61 FR
17358 (April 19.1996).' The Agency
believes that this concern is warranted
given that EPA has received substantial
comments on whether that standard is
appropriate for those devices and has
not made a final decision as to an
appropriate standard.
The Agency believes that suboption 3
(I.e., allow combustion of FO24 and
FO32 only In RCRA-permltted devices),
as proposed, was too restrictive. EPA
' Also available via Internet: "Imp://
\v\wv.eps gov/cpBoswcr/cmbust.htm".
agrees with the commenters that interim
status boilers and industrial furnaces
operated under Part 266 should qualify
for the proposed alternative CMBST
compliance standard as well. These
devices are subject to interim status
combustion controls which limit carbon
monoxide (CO) or total hydrocarbon
levels (THC) in combustion gases, thus
ensuring that the devices operate under
good combustion conditions. The
standards also can Include explicit
control of D/F under specified
conditions (see section 266.103 (c)(l)).
Although these controls do not provide
the explicit demonstration of
destruction of toxic organics in the
waste feed that the DRE (Destruction
and Removal Efficiency) for permitted
combustion devices standard provides,
the Agency believes that they establish
good combustion, and may, in some
cases, provide even better assurance of
operations under good combustion
conditions than the bare DRE standard.
Accordingly, the Agency believes that
it is not necessary to restrict burning to
RCRA-permitted devices because boilers
and industrial furnaces operating under
interim status are required to operate
under good combustion conditions
which should ensure destruction of
toxic organic compounds in the waste
feed.
The Agency acknowledges that
ensuring that the combustion device
operates under good combustion
conditions (i.e., either under a DRE
standard or by limiting carbon
monoxide (CO) and total hydrocarbon
levels (THC) in stack gas) may not
necessarily ensure control of D/F
emissions. This is because D/F can be
formed in the post-combustion zone of
the device—in the duct work and
paniculate matter control devices that
operate at temperatures above 350°F.
Boilers and industrial furnaces
operating under these conditions must
comply with specific D/F emission
standards. (See 40 CFR 266.103(c)(l)
and 266.104(e).) In addition, under
existing Omnibus permit authority,
permit writers have the authority, if the
permitting authority demonstrates that
it is necessary to protect human health
and the environment (RCRA section
3005(c)(3)), to impose operating ^
requirements more stringent than those •'
authorized by regulations. This
authority could be invoked (assuming
the requisite showing is made) to justify
controls on permitted hazardous waste
incinerators.
EPA currently lacks similar Omnibus
permit authorities for incinerators
regulated under Part 265, Subpart O. In
addition, unlike the standards for
interim status boilers and industrial
furnaces, the interim status standards
for hazardous waste incinerators do not
contain controls on good combustion
(i.e., CO or THC controls), a DRE
requirement, or explicit standards for D/
F. EPA is concerned, therefore, that the
combustion of F032 and F024 in Part
265 incinerators may not consistently
achieve the treatment objectives sought
by the alternative combustion
compliance treatment standard. As a
result, EPA cannot support the
promulgation of suboption 1 for
incinerators operated under Part 265.
(See also 265.352(a), forbidding
combustion of the acutely hazardous D/
F-containing wastes in interim status
hazardous waste incinerators.)
Although EPA's finding here Is that
the interim status incinerator standards .
may be inadequate for qualifying for a
CMBST treatment standard for D/F, EPA
believes that on an ad-hoc basis, a site-
specific determination can be made
pursuant to 40 CFR Part 268.42(b) to
extend the availability of a "CMBST"
treatment standard to an individual
interim status incinerator. The
availability of a CMBST treatment
.standard to a facility combusting F032
or F024 in a Part 265 incinerator will
require the accomplishment of a two-
step process. One step is for the facility
to demonstrate to a regional or state
official that the combustion of D/F in
F032 (orF024, if applicable) at the
facility uses controls to assure good
combustion and control of D/F. These
would typically be the CO/THC
standards and D/F standards found in
Part 266. The second step is that the
facility solicits from EPA's Headquarters
an equivalent treatment determination
under Part 268.42 (b). (EPA believes both
steps are necessary because normally
some type of direct interaction with the
Region or State with the facility is
needed to evaluate performance of the
combustion process, and the treatment
equivalency administrative process
remains an EPA Headquarters task.)
5. Revised Treatment Standard for F024
Wastes
The current F024 treatment standard
requires CMBST as a method of
treatment, which, under the definition
at 268.42, Table 1, allows combustion in
Part 265 Subpart O interim status
incinerator (along with other types of
combustion devices). Today's rule
makes the treatment standard for F024
identical to today's alternative
combustion standard for F032. The
existing standard allows combustion in
permitted units or interim status
incinerators (Part 265 subpart O). The
new standard would require that an
interim status incinerator receive a
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. Ql / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26003
determination of equivalent treatment
under 268.42(b), as described for the
F032 standard above. As described
above, this restricts the burning to
facilities with combustion controls that
ensure proper destruction of D/F.
D. Soil and Debris Contaminated With
Wood Preserving Wastes
1. Summary of Comments
Several commenters asked EPA to
revise its policy that media
contaminated with hazardous listed
wastes is subject to the treatment
standard for the contaminated waste,
and to set instead risk-based treatment
levels. They asked EPA to delay the
applicability of the Phase IV final rule
until the Hazardous Waste Identification
Rule for contaminated hazardous media
is promulgated in order to lessen
potential disruptions to ongoing
remediation activities. In addition, other
commenters argued that the proposed
treatment standards for organics and D/
F were unachievable by remediation
technologies.
2. LDR Requirements Do Apply to
Contaminated Media
Commenters stated that hazardous
media should be exempt from LDR
requirements until EPA finalizes HWIR
for contaminated media. This issue was
settled in the Phase II final rule (50 FR
at 47986-7, September 19, 1994) if not
before, and it is not being reopened in
this final rule.
3. Technology-versus Risk-based
Treatment Limits
The principal objection to the
proposed treatment standards was that
the values do not reflect risk, that is, the
standards are based on performance of
a treatment technology rather than on
assessment of risks to the human health
and the environment posed by the
waste. The question of technology-
versus risk-based treatment standards
has been raised throughout the
development of the land disposal
restrictions program. The Agency is not
reopening this issue in this final rule.
See, instead discussion in the Phase II
final rule (59 FR at 47986, September
19. 1994). EPA does specifically find,
however, that the treatment standards
for these contaminated media are not
established below levels at which
threats to human health and the
environment are minimized. In part,
this finding turns on the Agency's
present inability to quantify this level.
In addition, for these wastes, the
presence of extremely toxic hazardous
constituents (arsenic, D/F, PCP), plus
the widespread contamination already
caused by past land disposal of these
wastes (see, e.g. the background
documents to the Listing rules for F032,
F034, and F035) warrant treatment
which effectively destroys, removes, or
immobilizes hazardous constituents to
the promulgated levels.
4. UTS Limits and the Performance of
Remedial Treatment Technologies
The third issue raised by the
commenters is whether or not the UTS
limits promulgated for organics can be
achieved by all remediation
technologies currently being used at
wood preserving facilities. The UTS
limits promulgated for organics and D/
F regulated in nonwastewater forms of
wood preserving wastes are based on
the performance of (and are routinely
achievable by) combustion technologies.
EPA does not have to set treatment ,
standards that are achievable by all, or
even several, treatment technologies.
The treatment limits promulgated for D/
F constituents in nonwastewater forms
of F032 are based on the combustion of
solids, liquids, and soils contaminated
with D/F constituents, namely acutely
hazardous wastes F020, F022, F023,
F026, and F027 (see 51 FR 1733, January
14, 1986). EPA's existing technical
guidance documents describing
technological options for treating
contaminants found at wood preserving
facilities often recommend incineration
as a viable technology for cleaning up
"hot spots" of organics and D/F
contaminants. These guidance
documents also emphasize that
incineration is usually able to treat
below cleanup levels and LDR treatment
limits. (See Presumptive Remedies for
Soils, Sediments, and Sludges at Wood
Treater Sites, Directive 9200.5-162,
NTIS#PB-95-963410; Technology
Selection Guide for Wood Treater Sites,
EPA 540-F-93-020 or Pub.9360.0-
46FS; and Contaminants and Remedial
Options at Wood Preserving Sites, EPA/
600/R-92/182.)
Available data on the performance of
noncombustion technologies such as
thermal desorptlon and chemical
dehalogenation also do not necessarily
support the commenters' claim that
other remedial technologies will fail to
meet the treatment limits promulgated
today. Based on the available
information, EPA believes that chemical
dehalogenation (for D/F and chlorinated
organic constituents) and thermal
desorption (for organics and D/F
constituents) generally can be optimized
to meet the UTS limits promulgated
today. (See Wood Preserving
Background Document and Technical
Guidance documents cited above.)
Furthermore, it may be necessary to use
two or more treatment technologies to
achieve the limits, as EPA's Technical
Guidance documents point out. This is,
however, a site-specific determination,
and the ability of a treatment train to
meet or fail UTS or cleanup limits can
only be assessed through the findings of
a feasibility study.
IV. Improvements to the Land Disposal
Restrictions Program
A. Significant Reduction in LDR
Paperwork
Summary: The LDR regulations
heretofore required hazardous waste
handlers to include LDR notifications
with each shipment of waste sent to
treaters or disposers. Today EPA is
amending the rule to require only a one-
time notification, rather than with each
shipment of hazardous waste. The one-
time notification would apply to
shipments of all restricted hazardous
wastes, and so would include lab packs.
No new notification would be required
unless there were a change in the waste,
process, or receiving facility. This
amendment will save approximately
1,630,000 hours spent by the private
sector on paperwork. EPA is also
promulgating other paperwork
reduction actions, as proposed.
1. Background
In January 1995, EPA announced a
goal to reduce the reporting and record
keeping burden imposed by its
regulations by 25 percent by June 30,
1996. This announcement initiated
implementation of one of the
reinvention projects set forth in the
President's March 16, 1995, report,
"Reinventing Environmental
Regulations." The baseline from which
the 25 percent reduction was to be
calculated was the reporting and record
keeping burden hours as described in
the Information Collection Request (ICR)
documentation as of January 1, 1995.
2. Discussion of Specific Paperwork
Changes
The LDR program imposes a
significant reporting and rectird keeping
burden that is being decreased
significantly by changes being made in
today's rule. It is estimated that the
changes being made today result in a
reduction of over 1.6 million hours per
year of paperwork burden. Furthermore,
these changes are not likely to
compromise the protectiveness or
enforceability.of the LDR regulations.
Most commenters on this issue
supported the proposed paperwork
changes. Almost all commenters
addressing this issue agreed that the
proposed changes made sense, and that
-------
26004 Federal Register / Vol. 62. No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 -I Rules and Regulations
It would be beneficial to the regulated
community to reduce the paperwork
burden. A few commenters expressed
concern that the reductions in LDR
paperwork could be an incentive for
mismanagement of hazardous wastes.
The Agency acknowledges that although
the potential for mismanagement is real,
Inspection and enforcement efforts have
been, and will continue to be, a
disincentive to facilities to provide false
or misleading Information about the
hazardous wastes at their sites. This
disincentive Is believed to be far more
important than the frequency with
which the regulated community must
create notification and certifications.
The Agency, therefore, Is promulgating
the paperwork reductions despite this
concern.
Much of the language specifying what
must be Included on LDR notifications
has been rewritten to include reductions
In paperwork burden and to make it
easier for the regulated community to
understand the requirements to which it
must adhere. Rewriting this section has
resulted In the renumbering of the
regulatory paragraphs. The new
numbering for this section is used in
this discussion. Also, the generator
paperwork requirements are
consolidated Into a table at § 268.7(a) (4).
Under the requirements of § 268.7(a),
generators managing restricted
hazardous wastes must determine
whether their wastes meet the
applicable treatment standards at the
point of generation, or are otherwise
exempt from those standards.
Generators then must notify, in writing,
cither the treatment or disposal facility
about their waste. The Agency is
changing the notification requirement
under §268.7(a)(2) from one requiring a
notice accompany each waste shipment
to one allowing an one-time notification
that would accompany the first waste
shipment and would also be placed in
the generator's files. If a generator
repeatedly generates wastes which do
not meet the applicable treatment
standards, but the composition of these
wastes, or the process generating the
wastes, or the treatment facility
receiving the wastes does not change,
then the generator is only required to
submit a one-time notification to the
receiving treatment facility and to place
a copy In their files. If the waste,
process, or the receiving treatment
facility changes, the generator is
required to send a new notice to the
receiving facility, and place a copy of
this new notice In their files. One
commenter stated that the concept of
what constituted a change in one's
waste was vague and should be clarified
so that a new notification would be
required only when a change in the
waste affects the determination of which
treatment standards apply. The Agency
agrees that only when a change in the
waste affects the determination of which
treatment standards apply must the
generator create a new LDR notification.
The Agency proposed that the one-
time notification requirement would not
apply to lab packs. Under the LDR
program, a generator of a lab pack can
either meet the treatment standards and
paperwork requirements for all the
hazardous wastes included in the lab
pack, or meet the streamlined lab pack
requirements of § 268.42 and the
paperwork requirements of § 268.7(a) (9)
(old § 268.7 (a) (8)). Several commenters
disagreed with the proposed approach,
stating that while lab packs can be
highly variable in hazardous waste
content, there are instances where
routine and consistent lab packs are
shipped by generators on a regular basis.
It was also pointed out that if the lab
pack generator decided to meet the
treatment standards of each waste in the
lab pack rather than the § 268.42
alternative lab pack standards, it would
be allowable to produce a one-time
notification for each waste the lab pack
contained. Therefore, it did not seem
equitable to make a lab pack generator
that chose to use the alternative lab pack
standards produce a notification for
each shipment, while a lab pack
generator meeting the treatment
standards for each hazardous waste in
the lab pack could produce one-time
notifications for each waste, so long as
their waste, process or receiving facility
did not change. Therefore, EPA has
decided to change its proposed
approach, and is including generators of
lab packs in the one-time notification
provisions of this final rule.
Furthermore, the lab pack notification
requirements of § 268.7 (a) (8) are
streamlined in today's rule to include
only the requirements of §§ 268.7 (a) (2),
268.7(a)(6), and 268.7(a)(7). This is
possible because the alternative
treatment standard for lab packs
specifies a method of treatment rather
than concentration levels that would
have to be monitored after treatment.
There is, therefore, no need to know
whether the wastes in the lab packs are
wastewaters or nonwastewaters or are
hazardous debris (these are the data
items being deleted from the lab pack
notification).
In § 268.7(a)(3), the Agency is
changing the notification requirement so
that a generator whose waste meets the
appropriate treatment standards as
generated is only required to submit a
one-time notification and certification to
the receiving facility. The requirements
for this, one-time notification and
certification are much the same as diose
discussed above.
In § 268.7 (a) (5), EPA is removing the
requirement that generators treating on-
site in tanks or containers have to
submit waste analysis plans to States
and Regions. Instead, the plans must
merely be kept in their on-'site files, as
proposed.
The Agency is changing the record
retention time period in § 268.7(a) (8)
from five to three years, in order to
make LDR requirements consistent with
other RCRA record retention periods.
Under §268.7 (b) (4), the treatment
facility is only required to submit a one-
time notification and certification to the
receiving facility, rather than submit
one with each shipment of waste. A
copy of the notification and certification
must be kept in the treatment facility's
files. If the waste, treatment system, or
the receiving land disposal facility
changes, the treatment facility must
send a new notification and certification
to the land disposal facility, and place
a copy of these records in their files.
Furthermore, the treatment facility
notification requirements have been
consolidated into a table at § 268.7(b) (4).
Finally, the Agency wishes to clarify
that any records kept in connection with
the LDR program may be stored
electronically, eliminating the need to
actually maintain paper copies. EPA
wants to encourage electronic storage of
LDR notifications. However, because of
the complex issues involved in
electronic data interchange (EDI), EPA
cannot at this time include standards for
electronic storage of LDR notifications
in this final rule. The Agency may
develop those standards at a future date.
Until such general standards for
allowing electronic storage of
information are developed, EPA would
note that it has, on one occasion,
confirmed that the use of an image
scanning system developed by Safety
Kleen Corporation was sufficient to
meet hazardous waste manifest
recordkeeping requirements (see
attachment to the letter to Catherine A.
McCord in the docket). This system was
used to scan, store, and retrieve images
of original hazardous waste manifests
with handwritten signatures. Although
the letter confirmed only that Safety
Kleen's system met these requirements,
the Agency noted that similar systems
used by others might also be able to
meet RCRA requirements.
B. Clean-up of LDR Requirements in 40
CFR 268
EPA is rewriting portions of the LDR
regulations to help the regulated
community understand better what they
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
26005
are required to do to comply with
today's rule. Clean-up tasks such as
removing extraneous cross references,
eliminating unneeded language,
removing unneeded appendices, and
other similar actions have been taken to
eliminate confusion for the regulated
community. A noteworthy change is the
elimination of the California List
requirements that were promulgated in
1987, because they have been
superseded by more specific treatment
standards. In addition, a clarification
has been made at 40 CFR 268.1 (e) that
the de minimis provision applies to
characteristic wastes as well as
commercial chemical products and
intermediates.
1. Section 268.1
Section 268.1(e)(4) is clarified so that
the de minimis provision applies to
minor losses of characteristic wastes as
well as to minor releases of commercial
chemical products and intermediates.
EPA actually made this clarification
already in the Phase III final rule (see 61
PR at 15597), but inadvertently omitted
it from the Phase III withdrawal notice
(see 61 FR 15662). The withdrawal
notice should have removed paragraph
268.1(e)(4)(ii) only, because it dealt with
the special de minimis provisions for
characteristic wastes being injected into
Class I injection wells (and thus, subject
to the Land Disposal Program Flexibility
Act of 1996, the impetus for the
withdrawal notice. See 61 FR 15661). A
typographical error made it appear that
the entire paragraph (e) was being
withdrawn, which was not the intention
of the Agency. Therefore, today's
regulatory language contains the text of
268. l(e) in its entirety, and clarifies that
the de minimis provision applies to
characteristic wastes.
2. Section 268.4
Section 268.4(a) (2)(iv) is changed to
read, "Recordkeeping. The sampling,
analysis, and recordkeeping provisions
of §§264.13 and 265.13 apply."
Referencing the §§264.13 and 265.13
requirements in § 268.4 clarifies that
there are no additional recordkeeping
requirements at § 268.4; the general
facility recordkeeping requirements
apply, thus the LDR program does not
add additional burden.
3. Section 268.5
The Agency proposed to amend
§ 268.5(e) so that an applicant could
apply for and be granted additional time
(up to one year) when first applying for
a case-by-case extension of the effective
date. Commenters argued, however, that
it would be Inappropriate for EPA to '
grant what would be, in effect, a "two-
year" case-by-case capacity variance.
Some commenters stated that the
proposed change would hinder
necessary treatment capacity from being
brought on-line expeditiously, and that
requiring a renewal application for a
second-year extension allows the
Agency to evaluate whether the
applicant has made a good-faith effort to
develop or locate hazardous waste
treatment capacity. The Agency is
persuaded by the commenter's concerns
and is, therefore, not making the
proposed change to §268.5. As has
always been the case in the LDR
program, case-by-case extension
applicants must make a separate
application for a renewal of their case-
by-case extension if the initial one-year
period is not sufficient to develop
treatment capacity.
4. Section 268.7
In section 268.7(c)(2), the sentence,
"* * * test method described in
appendix I of this part or using any
methods required by generators under
§268.32 of this part* * *" is changed
to read, "* * * test method described in
Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,
EPA Publication SW-846." Specific
reference to EPA Publication SW-846
for the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching
Procedure, gives the regulated
community a more direct reference for
details of the test method.
5. Section 268.9
In § 268.9, paragraph (a) has been
clarified to better describe how wastes
should be identified for purposes of the
LDR program when they are both listed
and characteristic hazardous wastes.
In §268.9(d)(l)(ii), the language has
been edited to clarify that if all
underlying hazardous constituents
reasonably expected to be present in a
characteristic waste will be monitored,
then the generator need not list any of
them on the LDR notification. If, on the
other hand, a subset of all underlying
hazardous constituents will be
monitored, they must be included on
the LDR notification.
6. References to Section 268.32
References to § 268.32 and RCRA
3004 (d), California List wastes, are
removed, because the treatment
standards for the these wastes have been
superseded by subsequent treatment
standards. See generally 55 FR at 22675
(June 1, 1990) noting the general
principle that California list
prohibitions no longer apply once a
more specific treatment standard
applies, and noting the handful of
situations where California list
prohibitions would continue to apply.
With the advent of the requirement to
treat for underlying hazardous
constituents reasonably expected to be
present in characteristic wastes, there
no longer are any situations where
California list prohibitions could create
an exclusive treatment standard.
Consequently, there is no need to retain
any reference to California list
prohibitions in the regulations.
7. Sections 268.34-268.37
The information about the dates of
waste prohibition provided in
§§ 268.34-268.37 is removed because
the treatment standards for the wastes
are all now in effect, eliminating any
need to retain the dates.
8. References to Sections 268.41-268.43
References in Part 268 to LDR
treatment standards that have
previously been found in tables in
§§268.41, 268.42, and 268.43, are
changed to refer to the consolidated
table in 268.40.
9. Appendices
Appendix I is removed and reserved
because the TCLP test method reference
to SW-846 will be incorporated into the
text of the regulatory language.
Appendix II to Part 268 is also
removed and reserved because it
incorrectly refers to treatment standards
in §§268.41, 268.42, and 268.43 (they
are now in §268.40); furthermore, there
is no longer a need for a reference to the
solvent treatment standards.
Appendix III is removed and reserved
because the California List treatment
standards have been superseded by
Universal Treatment Standards plus the
requirement to treat underlying
hazardous constituents in characteristic
hazardous wastes. Thus, there is no
need for a listing of halogenated organic
compounds under the California List.
Appendix VI is amended to clarify
that land disposed characteristic wastes
that also contain underlying hazardous
constituents must be treated not only by
a "deactivating" technology to remove
the characteristic, but also treated to
achieve the Universal Treatment
Standard for underlying hazardous
constituents.
Appendix VII has been updated to
include all the effective dates of all
surface disposed hazardous wastes for
which there are treatment standards.
Likewise, Appendix VIII has been
updated.
Appendix X is removed and reserved
because it summarized paperwork
requirements that are clarified in tables
in today's rule at sections 268.7 (a) and
(b).
-------
26006 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
The Agency Is committed to
Identifying new ways the LDR program
can be simplified, and will continue to
seek additional opportunities for such
streamlining efforts In the future.
C. Clarifications of Point of Generation
Summary: EPA Is Identifying the
point of generation of wastes from boiler
clcanout and for certain Ignltable wastes
treated In tanks. The significance of this
action Is to define the point at which a
determination Is made as to whether or
not the LDR prohibitions attach to the
wastes generated from these activities.
In some cases, die broader question of
whether a hazardous waste is even
generated also can be presented. A
waste which is not identified or listed
as hazardous at the point LDR
prohibitions would attach, die so-called
"point of generation" is not prohibited
from land disposal. Conversely, If a
waste is hazardous (i.e. identified or
listed) at that point, LDR prohibitions
typically do attach notwithstanding that
the waste may no longer be "hazardous"
at the point it Is land disposed. EPA is
not finalizing options discussed In the
Phase in LDR rule (60 FR 11715, March
2,1995) which discussed more far-
reaching alternatives for defining the
point at which LDR prohibitions can
attach, but is Issuing interpretations
applicable to several discrete fact
situations involving questions
implicating this issue.
1. General Discussion
Since November 1986, EPA has
required determinations as to whether
LDR prohibitions attach to be made at
the point when hazardous wastes are
generated (51 FR 40620). This issue took
on critical Import in the so-called Third
Third rule when EPA addressed the
Issue of treatment standards for wastes
that exhibit a hazardous waste
characteristic, and whedier LDR
prohibitions could apply to wastes that
Initially exhibit a characteristic but no
longer do so (I.e. are "non-hazardous"
In that they are no longer identified or
listed as hazardous) at the point they are
land disposed. By adhering to the
principle that LDR prohibitions attach at
the point of waste generation, EPA
maintained that these de-characterized
wastes must still be treated to satisfy
EPA-established treatment standards,
notwithstanding that the wastes are no
longer Identified as hazardous. 55 FR at
22651-52. The D.C. Circuit sustained
this Interpretation as permissible in
Chemical Waste Management v. EPA,
976 F.2d 2, 13-14 (D.C. Clr. 1992) cert.
denied USS.Ct. 1961 (1993).
In the Phase III LDR rule. EPA
solicited comment on the Issue of
possibly redefining the point at which
LDR prohibitions attach. EPA presented
three options: (1) when there are similar
wastewater streams generated by similar
processes; (2) when there are waste
streams from a single process; and (3) at
a point of aggregation called "battery
limits." 60 FR 11715-717.
EPA considered diese options because
of the potential reach of the Chemical
Waste Management opinion on
generally successful wastewater
management operations carried out
pursuant to the Clean Water Act (i.e.
treatment of aggregated wastewaters,
some of which at one time exhibited a :
hazardous waste characteristic,
pursuant to the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System
regulations for direct dischargers and
pretreatment regulations for indirect
dischargers) and the Safe Drinking
Water Act (injection of decharacterized
wastewaters into Class I non-hazardous
Injection wells under the Underground
Injection Control program). However, on
March 26, 1996, President Clinton
signed into law the Land Disposal
Program Flexibility Act of 1996. This
Act provided, among other things, that
decharacterized wastes managed in the
types of wastewater management
systems described above are no longer
prohibited from land disposal so long as
they are not hazardous wastes at the
point they are land disposed. See
generally 61 FR 61660 (April 8, 1996).
As a result, EPA no longer believes there
is any need to fundamentally reexamine
the issue of where LDR prohibitions
attach, and is not acting on these parts
of the Phase III proposal.
However, the Agency has identified
specific issues which may be considered
"point of generation" issues, and which
were not addressed by the Land
Disposal Program Flexibility Act of
1996. In today's rule, EPA is addressing
these specific issues. In each case
discussed below, the Agency believes
that the existing regulatory language is
adequate, but clarification is necessary
to prevent inappropriate interpretations.
In making these interpretations, EPA is
in some cases clarifying not only LDR
applicability, but also generally where
the determination as to whetiier a waste
is hazardous must be made.
2. Boiler Cleanout
. Power plant boilers are generally
taken out of service and cleaned out
once every 3 years (an average of one
unit every year per facility). The
cleaning process generally consists of an
initial rinse of an acid cleaning solution
and one or two rinses of water,
generating an average of several
hundred thousand gallons of acid wash/
rinse water during each cleaning. The
initial rinsate stream frequently is
characteristically hazardous, exhibiting
the TC for lead and chromium plus the
characteristic of corrosivity.
The rinsate from this process is
combined in a tank (or potentially,
several tanks), usually temporary tanks
brought on-site for the cleaning process,
and then either discharged to surface
impoundments prior to NPDES
discharge (which commingled wastes
would normally be exempt from RCRA
Subtitle C by virtue of die Bevill
Amendment) or directly fed to die
boilers (a practice typically raising no
issues of LDR applicability since no
land disposal is involved). The issue in
question is whether waste is considered
generated after each rinse (acid and
water) or at the end of the cleaning of
the boiler when the rinsates have been
combined; in other words, whether a
determination is made for each rinse or
for combined rinses. If the latter, dien
die rinsate would be hazardous waste
(and as one consequence, potentially
prohibited from land disposal) only if
the combined rinsates exhibit a
characteristic. Note that this is not
strictly an LDR issue but presents the
issue of whether a unit is regulated, in
this case the tank that receives the
rinsate.
The Agency is today clarifying diat,
specific to power plant boiler cleanout
(and potentially, to other sporadic
cleaning activities involving multiple
rinses), generation is at the completion
of the entire cleanout process. EPA
believes that the mass loading of
hazardous constituents from the process
to the environment will not be affected
by this determination, since a given
amount of cleanout fluid and water is
needed to complete the task in every
case. Cf. 60 FR at 11716 noting that in
such situations the underlying policy of
the prohibition on dilution is not
implicated. The agency views the #
cleanout of the boilers as one process
and tiierefore does not consider the
mixing of acid rinse and water rinse as
impermissible dilution but as a single
waste rinsate resulting from the single
cleanout process. This waste is subject
to regulation if it exhibits a
characteristic, and subject to LDR
prohibitions if it exhibits a
characteristic and is going to be land
disposed.
Today's clarification of the point of
generation for boiler cleanout is limited
to the situation in which the entire
quantity of boiler cleanout rinses are
contained in a single container so that
hazardous waste and LDR
determinations can be made based upon
the commingling of all the rinses
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26007
together. If, for example, a temporary
tank is brought on-site but does not have
sufficient capacity to handle the
estimated several hundred thousand
gallons of rinsate at once, the waste will
likely have to be managed in separate
loads. In such instances, the generator
will still be required to make hazardous
waste and LDR determinations for each
separate load.
In adopting today's interpretation,
EPA emphasizes that this type of
cleaning is a batch operation occurring
at widely-spaced intervals and
involving temporary storage units (i.e.
units that are removed from the
premises after receiving the rinsate).
Thus, the interpretation does not ever
apply where a surface impoundment
receives rinsate (see, e.g., Chemical
Waste Management v. EPA, 976 F. 2d at
20 n. 4 (placement of any amount of
characteristic waste in a surface
impoundment makes the unit a
regulated unit even if diluted to non-
characteristic levels afterwards)). The
interpretation also does not apply where
there are permanent storage units
involved. EPA also notes the evident
point that if commingled rinses still
exhibit a hazardous waste characteristic,
the receiving tank is a regulated unit
Persons owning or operating such tanks
have the same obligations as other
generators to determine whether the
waste exhibits a characteristic. See
262.11.
3. Sludge From High TOC (Total
Organic Carbon) D001 Treated in Tank
Based Systems
Many generators introduce waste into
tank-based wastewater treatment
systems where the resulting effluent is
discharged to a POTW or to navigable
waters, and the resulting wastewater
treatment sludge is land disposed. At
times, the waste that is placed in the
tank-based system exhibits the ignitable
characteristic. If the organic content of
the wastewater is sufficiently high, the
liquid waste—when first released—can
meet the definition of nonwastewater
found in 40 CFR Part 268.2(d).
The fact situation of concern can
involve releases of high TOC ignitable
wastes (which have a designated
method of treatment), raising a question
of whether that treatment standard for
high TOC waste still applies to sludge
generated from the wastewater
treatment, even if the sludge is not itself
high TOC ignitable waste.
It is EPA's view that the sludge in this
situation should be viewed as a new
treatability group. Put another way, the
change of treatability group principle
applies to situations where liquid
wastes which are technically
nonwastewaters are inadvertently
placed in wastewater treatment systems
- in small quantities, for legitimate
wastewater treatment, thereupon
becoming wastewaters (as defined in
268.2(f) of the rules), and subsequently
generating a sludge. See 58 FR 29871,
May 24, 1993 ("In the Third Third final
rule, EPA stated that for characteristic
wastes, each change of treatability group
in a treatment train marked a new point
of generation for determining if a
characteristic waste was prohibited from
land disposal"). Consequently, because
the sludge generated from the tank-
based wastewater treatment system is a
different treatability group from the
wastewater from which it is generated,
it would be considered to be a newly
generated waste that should be
evaluated at its point of generation to
determine if it is hazardous, and if so,
to then determine the appropriate LDR
standard. (Also, please note that
elsewhere in today's notice the Agency
clarifies that the LDR de minlmis
exemption applies to small, inadvertent,
releases of characteristic waste into
wastewater treatment systems. As a
practical matter, the de minlmis
exemption probably makes the question
moot, because larger releases would not
typically occur since they would likely
interfere with wastewater treatment
systems operation.)
4. Tank Rinsate
An issue arises when high-TOC
ignitable wastes are stored in tanks, and
some residue from these wastes remains
in the tanks after the tanks are emptied
and rinsed. The initial high-TOC
ignitable waste is considered a
nonwastewater with the treatment
standard of CMBST (combustion) or
RORG (recovery of organics). However,
it is EPA's view that the rinsate from an
empty tank (see 47 FR 1250, January 11,
1982, for guidance on empty waste
tanks) is a newly generated wastewater
and the high-TOC ignitable waste
treatment standards do not attach. The
rinsate must be evaluated at its point of
generation, i.e., after the complete
rinsing of the empty tank, and, if it
exhibits a characteristic (or for some
reason is listed independently) it is
subject to treatment standards for that
characteristic (or listed waste), rather
than to the form of the waste from
which it originated. This determination
also applies to tanks that are used to
collect wastewaters that are listed solely
because they exhibit a characteristic
(i.e., ignitability, corrosivity, or
reactivity). EPA has stated that the
existing rule, which provides that the
dilution prohibition does not apply to
wastewaters listed solely because they
exhibit a characteristic, remains in
effect. See 61 FR 15662.
D. POLYM Method of Treatment for
High-TOC (Total Organic Carbon)
Ignitable D001 Wastes
Summary: Today's rule establishes an
alternative treatment standard of
POLYM (polymerization) for high-TOC
D001 wastes originally intended as
chemical components in the commercial
manufacture of plastics. In the
polymerization treatment process
(POLYM), the wastes are reacted to
produce a chemically stable plastic in
the same manner that commercial
plastics are formed.
Discussion: The National Marine
Manufacturer's Association contacted
EPA with concerns that the May 1993
Interim Final Rule prohibited the
practice of polymerizing excess
polyester/styrene waste left over from
the manufacture of modular shower
stalls and recreational boats, among
other things. EPA proposed to add
polymerization (POLYM) to the set of
required methods of treatment
designated as BOAT for high-TOC
ignitable (D001) wastes resulting from
commercial polymerization processes.
(60 FR 43679, August 22, 1995.) In these
manufacturing processes, polyester/
sryrene reacts with methyl ethyl ketone
(MEK) peroxide in a mold to form
fiberglass. The ignitable waste
polyester/styrene and MEK peroxide are
the wastes of concern.
Small quantities of polyester/styrene
monomers and MEK peroxide wastes
can be reacted together to create
fiberglass scraps. The scraps are inert
and do not exhibit the hazardous waste
characteristics of toxicity, ignitability,
corrosivity, or reactivity. It is this
practice that is referred to as
polymerization for the purposes of this
rule. The waste polyester/styrene
monomers and MEK peroxide are
currently regulated as high-TOC
ignitable wastes (40 CFR 268.9) for
which the current standard is treatment
by CMBST (combustion) or by RORGS
(recovery of organics) before land
disposal. Neither CMBST nor RORGS
allows for polymerization (as an
exclusive treatment method) of high-
TOC ignitable wastes. The Agency
believes that the practice of
polymerizing high-TOC ignitable waste
polymers and monomers which are
chemical components in the
manufacture of plastics to a
noncharacteristic inert mass adequately
minimizes threats posed by disposal of
the waste.
Today EPA is establishing POLYM as
an alternative to CMBST or RORGS only
for those high-TOC D001 wastes
-------
26008 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
originally Intended as chemical
components In the commercial
manufacture of plastics. POLYM
requires the addition of the same
polymerizing component or catalyst to
the deactivated hlgh-TOC D001
monomer stream intended for land
disposal, POLYM Is defined as
"formation of complex high-molecular
weight solids through polymerization of
monomers with high-TOC D001
nonwastewaters which are chemical
components in the manufacture of
plastics."
EPA acknowledges that POLYM Is not
as effective at destroying all of the
hazardous constituents of the materials
as CMBST, the specified treatment
standard for high-TOC D001
nonwastewaters. However, as defined,
POLYM is the same process that is used
In the actual manufacturing of plastic
products such as water pipe and
watcrcraft. To allow materials and a
process to be used to construct water
pipe and boat hulls, but prohibit the
same process to be used to treat excess
materials from those same processes
docs not make sense. In addition, the
treatment of these chemical components
using POLYM does convert an ignitable
waste Into a non-lgnitable solid prior to
disposal. Treatment occurs as the
organic materials react to form a hard.
Inert material. Data submitted by the
Composites Institute (see CI Memo 20
DEC 96) show that of the Appendix VIII
constituents that are present In scrap
uncured polyester resins, greater than
50% of the constituents are chemically
converted by the polymerization process
to form a part of the solid polymer. The
remaining constituents are physically
bound In the solid polymer matrix. The
Agency believes that the low quantities
of Appendix VIII constituents are
sufficiently bound In the polymer
matrix so as to minimize the threats
posed by disposal of the
noncharacterlstlc inert mass of scrap
material. Below is a table showing the
Appendix VIII constituents typically
found In scrap uncured polyester resins:
Appendix VIII constituents
Molhyl mothacrylato
Antimony trioxWe >
Dibulyl phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Molhyl ethyl ketono peroxide ,
Dfoclyl phthalata ,
Molhyl cthyf katona
P-bonzoqulnona
Malolo anhydride
phlhalic acid esters NOS
Maxi-
mum %
In
uncured
resin
10.0
3.0
1.8
1.05
1.05
1.05
0.75
0.09
0.05
(1)
0)
Appendix VIII constituents
Dhthalic anhydride
Maxi-
mum %
in
uncured
resin
m
1 Trace.
Of the constituents listed in the table
above, methyl methacrylate (a
monomer) and methyl ethyl ketone
peroxide (a catalyst), are chemically
converted by the polymerization process
and form part of the solid polymer.
EPA has decided to promulgate
POLYM as a treatment standard rather
than dealing with this issue on an
individual basis via Determination of
Equivalent Treatment (DET) petitions.
As defined, equivalency need not
remove every single molecule of
constituents as the comparison
technology to be considered equivalent.
A similar issue involving high-TOC
ignitable waste was addressed in a
Determination of Equivalent Treatment
(see DET IBM Essex Junction, VT). In
that determination, the high-TOC waste
was being treated to a slightly lower
level than combustion. EPA did so, in
part, because the treatment process was
achieving very substantial destruction of
hazardous constituents, and otherwise
assuring that the special concerns
regarding treatment of high-TOC
ignitable wastes, such as interference
with wastewater treatment systems,
were not present. Similarly, in this
Instance, POLYM will destroy most of '
the hazardous constituents present and
substantially immobilize those that
remain. In addition, there is no
possibility that this treatment method
will interfere with wastewater
treatment. Finally, EPA notes that the
POLYM process appears to be as
efficient as the other type of allowable
treatment method for high-TOC
ignitable wastes, namely RORGS
(recovery of organics). Thus, EPA
believes that the POLYM process
evaluated here, along with CMBST and
REORG, satisfies the section 3004(m)
requirement that threats be minimized
by treatment, and also could satisfy the
equivalency standard in 268.42(b).
A number of commenters have
solicited EPA to expand the definition
of POLYM to include other types of
polymerization processes. EPA
appreciates the suggestions of the
commenters. However, the Agency does
not currently have enough data to
evaluate the effects of expanding the
definition. The Agency will consider the
idea of expanding the definition of
POLYM and solicits any data that
commenters may have regarding
additional methods of polymerization.
Further, under 268.42(b), persons may
petition the Agency for a determination
of equivalent treatment for their specific
polymerization process, if it is not
included in today's rule.
Finally, in response to inquiries, EPA
notes that POLYM treatment (or for that
matter, most types of treatment) can
occur at the site of generation without
having to obtain a RCRA permit,
provided treatment occurs in tanks,
containers or containment buildings and
these units comply with the substantive
standards set out in 40 CFR 262.34
(standards for so-called 90-day generator
tanks, containers, and containment
buildings). See 51 FR at 10168 (March
24,1986). EPA notes further that these
standards for 90-day units may include
compliance with the RCRA air emission
standards set out in subparts AA, BB,
and CC of part 265 (assuming the waste
satisfies the applicability criteria set out
in these rules). See generally, 61 FR at
59934-35 (Nov. 25, 1996) and 59 FR
62896 (Dec. 6, 1994). In addition,
POLYM treatment occurring in units
requiring a permit could be subject to
the corresponding standards for air
emissions found in Part 264 subparts
AA, BB and CC.
E. Decision To Retain Current
Treatment Standard for Multi-Source
Leachate (Waste Code F039)
In the Phase IV proposed rule, EPA
suggested that with the promulgation of
the Universal Treatment Standards
(UTS), there was no longer a need for
the separate list of constituents for
multisource leachate (F039) in the
Treatment Standards for Hazardous
Wastes table at 40 CFR 268.40. EPA
proposed that F039 would be treated to
meet all the UTS for the constituents at
§ 268.48, with the exceptions of
fluoride, vanadium, and zinc, which are
not underlying hazardous constituents.
Several commenters, however,
pointed out that such an action would
be more than a simplification of existing
treatment standards. Rather, it would
add several constituents to those for
which EPA has set treatment standards
in F039, without notice and an
opportunity for comment. The Agency
has reexamined the F039 list of
constituents and agrees with
commenters that changing F039 to cross
reference the UTS constituents at
§ 268.48 would add regulated
constituents to F039. This was not the
intent of the proposed change.
Therefore, the Agency is not
promulgating any change to F039 in this
final rule. The treatment standard levels
for the hazardous constituents in F039
are identical to the UTS for those
constituents, so retaining the current
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26009
treatment standard constituent list for
F039 does not decrease environmental
protection in comparison with changing
the standard.
V. Status of Proposed Provisions on
Leaks, Sludges, and Air Emissions
From RCRA-Equivalent Treatment of
Decharacterized Wastewaters in Clean
Water Act Surface Impoundments
In the August 22, 1995 Phase IV
proposal, EPA discussed three options
for ensuring that underlying hazardous
constituents in decharacterized wastes
were not released to the environment
via leaks, sludges, and air emissions
from surface impoundments in systems
regulated by the Clean Water Act or Safe
Drinking Water Act (60 FR 43655).
(Decharacterized wastes are wastes
which initially exhibited a hazardous
characteristic of ignitability, corrosivity,
reactivity, or toxicity when generated
but are no longer characteristic). On
March 16, 1996, the President signed
the Land Disposal Program Flexibility
Act of 1996, which provides that the
wastes in question are no longer
prohibited from land disposal once
rendered nonhazardous. As a result, on
April 8, 1996, EPA withdrew its
treatment standards for these wastes (61
FR 15660). Today EPA announces that
it will not finalize, at this time, the
provisions for leaks, sludges, and air
emissions that EPA proposed on August
22, 1995 (60 FR 43655-43677).
Furthermore, the treatment standards
for TC metal wastes discussed in the
proposal accompanying today's rule do
not apply to TC metal wastes if the
characteristic is removed and the wastes
are subsequently treated in a unit whose
discharge is regulated by the Clean
Water Act or, for underground injection
wells, the Safe Drinking Water Act.
However, the Land Disposal
Flexibility Act does mandate EPA to
undertake a study to determine any
potential risks posed by cross-media
transfer of hazardous constituents from
these surface impoundments. The
findings of this study, begun by the
Agency in April, 1996, may result in
proposed regulations for these units, if
risks are in fact found that would
warrant such regulation.
VI. Decision Not To Ban Nonamenable
Wastes From Biological Treatment
EPA is not prohibiting certain
decharacterized wastes from land-based
wastewater treatment systems on the
basis of whether the constituents in
those wastes are "amenable" to
biological treatment. As is discussed in
the April 8, 1996 partial withdrawal
notice to the LDR Phase III final rule (61
FR 15660), the Land Disposal Program
Flexibility Act of 1996, signed by the
President on March 26, 1996, provides
that the wastes in question are no longer
prohibited from land disposal once
rendered nonhazardous. Because they
are decharacterized before they enter the
impoundment, these wastes are no
longer prohibited wastes under RCRA.
VII. Capacity Determinations for Wood
Preserving Wastes
A. Introduction
This section summarizes the results of
the capacity analysis for the wastes
covered by this rule. For background
information on data sources,
methodology, and details of the capacity
analysis for each group of wastes
covered in this rule, see "Background
Document for Capacity Analysis for
Land Disposal Restrictions, Phase IV—
Wood Preserving Wastes (Final Rule)."
In general, EPA's capacity analysis
focuses on the amount of waste to be
restricted from land disposal that is
currently managed in land-based units
and that will require alternative
treatment as a result of the LDRs. The
quantity of wastes that are not managed
in land-based units (e.g., wastewater
managed only in RCRA exempt tanks,
with direct discharge to a Publicly
Owned Treatment Works (POTW)) is
not included in the quantities requiring
alternative treatment as a result of the
LDRs. Also, wastes that do not require
alternative treatment (e.g., those that are
currently treated using an appropriate
treatment technology) are not included^
in these quantity estimates.
EPA's decisions on whether to grant
a national capacity variance are based
on the availability of alternative
treatment or recovery technologies.
Consequently, the methodology focuses
on deriving estimates of the quantities
of waste that will require either
commercial treatment or the
construction of new on-site treatment as
a result of the LDRs. EPA attempts to
subtract from the required capacity
estimates the quantities of waste that
will be treated adequately either on site
in existing systems or off site by
facilities owned by the same company
as the generator (i.e., captive facilities).
B. Available Capacity
Available capacity was estimated for
the three treatment technology
categories: combustion, stabilization,
and wastewater treatment that are
expected to be used for the wastes in
today's rule. (Numerous other types of
treatment also can meet the treatment
standards for much of these wastes,
although the Agency did not find it
necessary to estimate the available
capacity of these treatments. See the
Background Document for further
information.)
1. Thermal Treatment
EPA estimates that there are less than
50,000 tons per year of soil combustion
capacity, approximately 144,000 tons
per year of commercial sludge/solid
combustion capacity, and 886,000 tons
per year of commercial liquid
combustion capacity available for Phase
IV Wood Preserving Wastes. This
accounts for treatment facilities without
updated permits for the newly listed
wastes or that likely will not wish to
accept the wastes for other reasons (e.g.
dioxin/furan monitoring requirements,
low BTU, or other undesirable waste
characteristics).
2. Stabilization
EPA estimates that there are
approximately 1.1 million tons of
available stabilization capacity, with
most of it able to meet the treatment
requirements for the newly listed wood
preserving wastes.
3. Wastewater Treatment
EPA estimates that there are
approximately 37 to 47 million tons per
year of available wastewater treatment
capacity. The various treatment
technologies that form the basis of this
capacity are routinely able to meet the
treatment standards of the wood
preserving wastewaters.
C. Required Capacity and Comparison
With Available Capacity
EPA estimates that very small
quantities of wood preserving
wastewater (approximately 440 tons of
organic wastewater and 13,000 tons of
inorganic wastewater) will require
Alternative treatment capacity in order
.to comply with the LDRs. EPA estimates
that less than 10,000 tons of
nonwastewaters (8,700 tons of organic
nonwastewaters and 1,300 tons of
inorganic nonwastewaters) will require
alternative treatment as a result of the
LDRs.
EPA believes that combustion,
combustion followed by stabilization, or
stabilization will meet the treatment
standards for nonwastewaters of wood
preserving wastes. For wastes with
arsenic, although the basis of the
treatment for arsenic is vitrification,
EPA believes that the standard can also
be met by stabilization. Also, in general,
chemical precipitation will meet the
treatment standards for the inorganic
wastewater. EPA identified specific
wastewater treatment technologies that
support UTS for these wastes and
concluded that the wastewater
-------
26010 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
treatment practices at the wood
preserving facilities can be optimized to
meet the proposed limits. (Please see
BOAT Background Document for
details.) There is sufficient liquid and
sludge/solid combustion capacity for
both the organic wood preserving
wastevvaters and nonwastewaters. In
addition, EPA believes that there is
sufficient chemical precipitation'
capacity for the Inorganic wastewater.
Finally, ample stabilization capacity
exists for the inorganic nonwastewaters.
Therefore, EPA is not granting a
variance for the newly listed wood
preserving wastes.
Some commenters provided data on
soil and debris contaminated with wood
preserving wastes. The regulated
communities are quite concerned about
the availability of treatment capacity
using established technologies as well
as the potential for Innovative
technologies to provide additional
treatment capacity. EPA has examined
the available data and information
submitted by commenters and from
other sources such as Super-fund Record
of Decisions. The Agency estimated that
combustion capacity available to treat
soils and debris contaminated with
newly listed wood preserving wastes Is
less than 50,000 tons per year. In
contrast. EPA estimates that well over
100,000 tons per year of soil and debris
may require additional combustion
capacity. Furthermore, logistics issues
may severely hamper the ability of site
managers to obtain adequate alternative
treatment In the near term. Therefore,
given the lack of available capacity and
other Issues associated with soil and
debris contaminated with F032, F034,
and F035 wood preserving wastes, EPA
Is granting a two-year extension of the
effective date for these wastes.
D. Mixed Radioactive Wastes
Despite the uncertainty about
quantities of mixed radioactive wastes
that will require treatment as a result of
today's rule, any new commercial
capacity that becomes available will be
needed for mixed radioactive wastes
that were regulated in previous LDR
rulemaklngs and whose capacity
extensions have already expired. Thus,
EPA has determined that sufficient
alternative treatment capacity is not
available, and is granting a two-year
national capacity extension of the
effective date for radioactive wastes
mixed with RCRA wastes for which
standards are being promulgated today,
including soil and debris.
E. Phase IV Wood Preserving Wastes
Injected Into Underground Injection
Control (UIC) Class I Wells Injected Into
Class I Wells
EPA estimated the volume of waste
regulated in today's rule that is
currently injected into UIC wells. This
volume is a conservative estimate based
on highly complex non-segregable waste
stream mixtures, and it may be that the
actual volume injected is less. A very
small volume of newly listed wood
preserving wastes (F032, F034 and
F035) may be injected into Class I Wells.
These wastes are either injected at wells
located at the site of generation, or are
sent off-site for injection in commercial
Class I wells.
These wells have existing no-
migration determinations. However,
even if an injection well has received a
no-migration petition, it can inject a
newly prohibited waste only if the
waste is similar to wastes included in
the initial no-migration petition. The
new wastes must behave hydraulically
and chemically in a similar manner to
those already included in the initial
petition demonstration such that they
will not interfere with the containment
capability of the injection zone and the
location of the waste plume will not
significantly differ from the initial
demonstration. (See 40 CFR 148.20 (f),
and UIC Guidance No. 74.) Based on
these principles, EPA has investigated
whether the no-migration determination
for the wells injecting these wood *
preserving wastes allow continued
injection. If injection is not presently
allowed due to the need to amend a
petition, the well would not be
providing any capacity, because none of
these facilities operate treatment
processes capable of achieving the
treatment standard for these wastes.
EPA has determined that at least six
commercial injection well facilities with
no-migration petitions would be
allowed to inject wood preserving
wastewaters without needing to amend
their petitions. The rationale for this
determination is located in the RCRA
docket. EPA has further determined that.
these wells have unused injection
capacity exceeding the amount of wood
preserving waste generated annually
(EPA Regional communications in the
RCRA docket). Thus, even if all wood
preserving wastewaters presently
injected would have to find new
capacity, sufficient capacity exists. In
addition, there is commercial
wastewater treatment capacity that
could accommodate some of this
volume.
Based on this information, the Agency
has reassessed its position since the
proposed rule and decided not to grant
a two-year national capacity extension
of the effective date for wood preserving
waste being injected at Class I facilities.
As discussed above, there appears to be
sufficient protective disposal capacity
(i.e. approved no-migration disposal
capacity) which can accommodate all of
the currently-injected wood preserving
wastewaters, even if all this'wastewater
will be diverted from injection wells
currently used.
EPA notes further that commenters
did not claim that there was insufficient
capacity to manage these wastes.
However, it should be noted that RCRA
section 3004(h)(3) provides individual
facilities opportunity to demonstrate
that inadequate protective treatment or
disposal capacity is available.
Substantive standards are set out in 40
CFR §268.5 and in UIC Guidance No.
69.
F. Summary of Variance Determinations
Table 1 lists each category of RCRA
wastes for which EPA is today setting
LDR standards. For each category, this
table indicates whether EPA is granting
a national capacity extension of the
effective date for land-disposed wastes
or injected wastes managed by UIC
Class I injection wells.
TABLE 1.—NATIONAL CAPACITY EXTENSIONS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE FOR NEWLY LISTED AND IDENTIFIED WASTES
Waste description
Nowiy Listed Wood Preserving Wastes (F032, F034, F035) .
SoM and Debris Contaminated with Newly Listed Wood Preserving Wastes
Mixed Wood Preservlna and Radioactive Wastes. Includina Soil and Debris
Surface-disposed
wastes
No.
Two-year
Two-vear
Deep well-
injected
wastes
No
N/A
Two-vear
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26011
VIII. Changes to Definition of Solid
Waste to Exclude Processed Scrap
Metal and Shredded Circuit Boards
From RCRA Jurisdiction
Summary: As proposed on January 25,
1995 (FR 61 2338), EPA is today
amending the definition of solid waste
to exclude from RCRA jurisdiction two
types of materials: processed.scrap
metal and containerized shredded
circuit boards.
A. Processed Scrap Metal
1. Summary of Proposal
The Agency proposed the exclusion of
processed scrap metal and shredded
circuit boards being recycled from the
Definition of Solid Waste in the January
25, 1996 proposed Phase IV LDR
supplemental rulemaking. Currently,
scrap metal being reclaimed is a solid
waste, but completely exempt from
RCRA Subtitle C regulations. The
proposal would have amended the
definition of solid waste to exclude
processed scrap metal and containerized
shredded circuit boards that are being
recycled from RCRA jurisdiction. In the
proposal, the Agency did not propose to
make changes to the current definition
of scrap metal: "bits and pieces of metal
parts (e.g., bars, turnings, rods, sheets,
wire) or metal pieces that are combined
together with bolts and soldering (e.g.,
radiators, scrap automobiles, railroad
box cars), which when worn or
superfluous can be recycled."
The proposal defined processed scrap
metal as "scrap metal which has been
manually or mechanically altered to
either separate it into distinct materials
to enhance economic value or to
improve the handling of materials.
Processed scrap metal includes but is
not limited to scrap metal which has
been bailed, shredded, sheared, melted,
agglomerated (for fines, drosses and
related materials which are not scrap
metal prior to agglomeration) or
separated by metal type." The Agency
believes that processed scrap metal
being recycled is distinct from other
secondary materials defined as wastes
when recycled due to established
markets for the material's utilization,
Inherent positive economic value of the
material, the physical form of the
material, and absence of damage
incidents attributable to the material,
and is therefore sufficiently product-like
that maintaining RCRA regulatory
jurisdiction over this material is not
necessary. A summary of the proposed
exclusion from the definition of solid
waste for shredded circuit boards being
recycled follows the discussion of the
exclusion from the definition of solid
waste for processed scrap metal being
recycled.
2. Modifications to the Proposal
The Agency received approximately
twenty-five comments concerning the
proposed scrap metal and shredded
circuifboard exclusions. The comments
were generally supportive of the
exclusions. A background document,
the major comments received, and
Agency responses on the proposed
processed scrap metal exclusion can be
found in the docket for this rulemaking.
Comments on the shredded circuit
board exclusion can also be found in
this background document.
In response to comment on the
proposed exclusion to the definition of
solid waste for processed scrap metal
being recycled, the Agency has made
several modifications to the exclusion in
the final rule. First, the Agency has
expanded the exclusion to cover
unprocessed home and unprocessed
prompt scrap metal being recycled.
Home scrap is scrap metal generated by
steel mills, foundries, and refineries
such as turnings, cuttings, punchings,
and borings. Prompt scrap, also known
as industrial or new scrap metal, is
generated by the metal working/
fabrication industries and includes such
scrap metal as turnings, cuttings, .
punchings, and borings. These
categories of scrap metal do not fit the
definition of processed scrap metal
found in the proposal because they
often do not require a processing step
before being sent for recycling. The
Agency evaluated unprocessed home
scrap and prompt scrap metal and found
that these categories of scrap metal are
substantially similar to processed scrap
metal due to established markets for the
material's utilization, inherent positive
economic value of the material, the
physical form of the material, and
absence of damage incidents attributable
to the material'. Based on this analysis,
the Agency has expanded scope of the
exclusion to include both unprocessed
home and unprocessed prompt scrap
metal. In the final rule, the term
"excluded scrap metal" will be used to
reflect this decision. Commenters also
suggested the Agency evaluate obsolete
scrap metal (scrap which is composed of
worn out metal or a metal product that
has outlived it original use, such as
automobile hulks, railroad cars,
aluminum beverage cans, steel beams
from torn down buildings, and
household appliances) using the same
factors. The Agency has not found
sufficient data to fully evaluate
unprocessed obsolete scrap metal.
Therefore, in today's final rule the
Agency is not expanding the scope of
the exclusion from the definition of
solid waste to include obsolete scrap
metal. Providing an exclusion from the
definition of solid waste for obsolete
scrap metal at this time would be
premature and is better addressed in the
Definition of Solid Waste rulemaking,
due to be proposed in the near future.
Second, the Agency clarifies that the
exclusion for processed scrap metal
being recycled applies to scrap metal
that has undergone a processing step (as
defined in the preamble to the proposed
rule) regardless of who does the
processing. In other words, a processing
step may be performed by the generator,
an intermediate scrap handler (e.g.
broker, scrap processor), or a scrap
recycler. Once the scrap metal has
undergone a processing step, it may
qualify for today's exclusion.
Third, the Agency has added
chopping, crushing, flattening, cutting
and sorting, processes typically used in
the processing of scrap metal for
recycling, to the definition of processed
scrap metal in today's final rule. In
today's final rule, the definition of
processing reads: "manually or
physically altered to either separate it
into distinct materials to enhance
economic value or to improve the
handling of materials. Additionally, to
avoid confusion, the definition of
processed scrap metal has been
reworded to clarify the status of
agglomerated fines, drosses and other
related materials. Therefore, in today's
final rule, the category of processed
scrap metal now includes but is not
limited to scrap metal which has been
baled, shredded, sheared, chopped,
crushed, flattened, cut, melted, or
separated by metal type (i.e., sorted),
and, fines, drosses and related materials
which have been agglomerated." Note
that circuit boards that are shredded and
being sent for recycling are covered
under the exclusion from the definition
of solid waste for shredded circuit
boards being recycled (261.4(a)(13)) see
discussion following) and are not
covered under the definition of
excluded scrap metal.
B. Shredded Circuit Boards
1. The Proposal
In the proposed rule, EPA proposed to
exclude shredded circuit boards being
reclaimed from the definition of solid
waste in order to facilitate their
recovery. 61 F.R. 2339, 2361. The
proposed exclusion was conditioned on
the storage of the shredded circuit
boards in containers prior to recovery
that would be adequate to prevent a
release of the boards to the
environment. This condition was
-------
26012 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
specified as a performance standard
rather than a design standard to allow
the handler maximum flexibility in
selecting the method of containment.
Today, EPA is finalizing this exclusion
as proposed with an additional
limitation that shredded circuit boards
excluded from RCRA jurisdiction be free
of mercury switches, mercury relays,
nickel-cadmium batteries and lithium
batteries.
2. Exclusion for Shredded Circuit
Boards Conditioned on Containerized
Storage Prior to Recovery
EPA explained in the proposal that
shredded circuit boards merit exclusion
from RCRA regulation in order to
facilitate their recovery when they are
properly stored in containers to prevent
their release to the environment. As
presented In the proposal, the necessity
for the proposed exclusion for shredded
circuit boards Is that the process of
shredding the circuit boards causes the
boards to lose the scrap metal
exemption (see 40 CFR §261.6(a)(3)(ii))
that currently applies to used whole
circuit boards. This scrap metal
exemption allows used whole circuit
boards being recycled to be shipped in
commerce without being subject to
RCRA regulation including generator
manifesting and export requirements.
The process of shredding the boards
produces small fines from the whole
board which are dlspersible and do not
meet die RCRA regulatory definition of
scrap metal. The application of RCRA
regulatory provisions to shredded
boards may present serious
disincentives to their recovery. As
explained in the proposal, generator
manifesting and export requirements
may result in significant delays In
shipments of shredded boards to
recovery operations such as smelters.
Many Intermediate precious metal
reclaimers, e.g. shredders, operate on a
short cash flow and depend on prompt
payment for shipments of shredded
circuit boards in order to pay the
generators of the used circuit boards for
supplying them to the Intermediate
reclaimers.
For the following reasons, EPA
believes that shredded circuit boards
destined for reclamation when properly
containerized and free of mercury
switches, mercury relays, nickel-
cadmium batteries and lithium batteries
are an appropriate secondary material to
be excluded from RCRA regulation. As
discussed In the proposal, shredding Is
beneficial to the recovery process.
Shredding improves die recovery of the
boards by Improving handling of
shredded boards dirough Increasing the
bulk density of the boards In the
container during shipment. Shredding
also improves the assaying of the
shipment for base metal and precious
metal content by homogenizing the load
thus assuring a representative sample is
taken for the assay. Shredding also
destroys proprietary information from
generators or manufacturers of the
boards thus better assuring
confidentiality to die generator or
manufacturer when making a decision
to recycle. Some generators may be
concerned about proprietary
information contained in used whole
circuit boards being transferred to
competitors once the boards are out of
the generator's control.
Second, shredded boards have
qualities which are similar to primary
materials such as virgin mineral
concentrates that are processed and
refined for base metal and precious
metal values. These qualities satisfy the
criteria EPA considers when evaluating
whether a partially-reclaimed solid
waste is commodity-like and is not part
of the waste management problem and
tiius is appropriate to exclude from
RCRA subtitle C jurisdiction through
issuance of a variance. EPA believes that
these criteria are relevant in
determining whether a general
exclusion Is justified. See 40 CFR
261.30(c)& 261.31(c). These criteria are:
(1) The degree of processing the material
has undergone and the degree of further
processing that is required, (2) the value
of the material after it has been
reclaimed, (3) die degree to which the
reclaimed material is like an analogous
raw material, (4) the extent to which an
end market for the reclaimed material is
guaranteed, (5) the extent to which a
material is managed to minimize loss
and (6) other relevant factors (such as
die presence of cyanide or other foreign
materials).
Regarding the first criterion, shredded
circuit boards have been processed
through shredders, hammer mills-and
similar devices to decrease their size.
Value is added to the boards, as
indicated above, because the boards are
easier to handle, assay and ship without
concerns of generator confidentiality
that might exist if the boards were
shipped to the smelters as whole boards.
Further processing for the shredded
boards includes both smelting and
refining to extract base metals such as
copper and precious metals such as
gold, silver and platinum group metals.
And while a substantial amount of
furdier processing remains, EPA
believes that shredded circuit boards
can be thought of as secondary
feedstocks similar to primary ore
concentrates that have undergone
beneficiation and are destined for
primary mineral processing and
refining.
Regarding the second criterion of the
value of the material after it has been
reclaimed, shredded circuit boards
generally have positive economic value
(i.e., the smelter pays the shredder for
the assayed base and precious metal
value of the shipment). The typical
price range for shredded circuit boards
is between a negative $0.25 per Ib. and
$5 per Ib. One recycling company
reported an annual average price of
shredded circuit boards of $ 1.50 per
pound which is greater than the current
market price for refined copper metal.
. Regarding the diird criterion of how
the partially reclaimed material
compares to the analogous raw material,
recyclers have indicated that shredded
circuit boards typically have assays of
that average 10 percent copper, between
one-half and one-diird that of primary
copper concentrates. Shredded circuit
board copper assays reported in
literature evaluated in completion of
this rule ranged between 11 percent and
18 percent copper. Shredded circuit
boards also frequently contain precious
metal values such as gold, silver or
platinum dial enhance the economic
value of the material. Moreover, the
reported recycling efficiency for copper,
gold, silver and platinum exceeds 90
percent for diis type of material.
Although toxic metal content for
primary copper concentrates is variable
depending on the ore body it comes
from, reported assays for circuit boards
are comparable in lead and lower in
arsenic content than reported primary
copper concentrate assays. Although
shredded circuit boards are
comparatively dispersible in .
comparison to primary copper
concentrates, the conditional
requirement for the exclusion stipulates
diat die shredded circuit boards must be
stored in containers sufficient to prevent
a release to the environment prior to
recovery reduces any greater likelihood
of release from shredded boards in
comparison to primary copper
concentrates.
The fourth criterion EPA uses to
evaluate partially-reclaimed secondary
materials is the extent to which an end
market is guaranteed for the material.
Continuous demand from primary
smelters for base metals and precious
metals from shredded circuit boards
should result from the positive
economic value of the boards, the
relative ease of handling and assaying of
the boards and the diminishing
quantities of primary copper ore
concentrates. According to the Bureau
of Mines Mineral Commodity
Summaries 1994, reported and apparent
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26013
consumption for copper, silver and
platinum group metals has either
remained constant or increased between
1989 and 1993. Reported consumption
of gold decreased slightly between 1989
and 1993 from 115 metric tons and 100
metric tons. Secondary gold production
decreased slightly over the same period
from 158 metric tons to 130 metric tons.
The price of gold declined over the
same period from $382 per troy ounce
to $355 per troy ounce. By 1996, the
price of gold has increased to over $380
per troy ounce.
The fifth criterion EPA uses to
evaluate partially-reclaimed materials is
the extent to which the material is
managed to minimize loss. The
proposed exclusion is conditioned on
the proper storage of shredded circuit
boards in containers prior to recovery.
As mentioned in the proposal, the
shredded boards are usually stored in
super sacks (sacks that are reinforced
woven resin and designed to
accommodate bulk shipments), gaylord
containers (also known as tri-wall boxes
composed of three layers of cardboard
with two layers of corrugation) and 55
gallon drums. Open bulk shipments of
board by rail, truck or barge are not
within the scope of this exclusion. In
addition to the storage requirement, the
economic value of the boards also
provides an incentive for handlers to
prevent releases to the environment. At
an average market value of $1.50 per
pound for one recycler, the incentive to
prevent releases is substantial. The
Agency notes that containerization in
and of itself was not the only reason the
Agency concluded that shredded circuit
boards should be excluded from die
definition of solid waste. The other five
factors supported this determination as
well.
Finally, EPA considers other relevant
factors when evaluating the exclusion of
partially-reclaimed materials from
RCRA jurisdiction through the variance.
In the context of shredded circuit
boards, other relevant factors include:
(1) The presence of both materials
possibly attached to printed circuit
boards that are ordinarily outside of the
definition of scrap metal such as
mercury switches, mercury relays,
nickel-cadmium batteries and lithium
batteries, and (2) the frequency of
foreign materials mixed with but not
part of the circuit board itself. EPA's
concern about these materials is
discussed below.
3. Limitation on Mercury Switches,
Mercury Relays, Nickel-Cadmium
Batteries and Lithium Batteries
Printed circuit boards may contain or
be incorporated into electronic products
which contain mercury switches,
mercury relays, nickel-cadmium
batteries, and lithium batteries. EPA is
concerned about the potential
environmental impact of these materials
that are associated with printed circuit
board production and management after
the boards are spent. Ordinarily,
commercial printed circuit board
recyclers, botii intermediate processors
(e.g. shredders) and smelters, do not
want mercury switches, mercury relays,
nickel-cadmium batteries and lithium
batteries in shipments of shredded
boards sent from the intermediate
processor to the smelter. However,
because these items may be very small,
they may, on occasion, escape visual
inspection and become shredded along
widi printed circuit boards. When this
happens, EPA is concerned about the
potential release of mercury or cadmium
to the environment. For this reason,
EPA is limiting the scope of the
exclusion for shredded boards to
shipments that are free of mercury
switches, mercury relays, nickel-
cadmium batteries or lithium batteries.
Free of these materials means that
mercury switches, mercury relays,
nickel-cadmium batteries and lithium
batteries are not or have not been part
of the batch of circuit boards shredded
to add value. Iri addition, EPA reiterates
that in enforcement actions that it is the
respondent in the action who bears the
burden of proof in documenting that a
material for which an exclusion is
claimed from the definition of solid
• waste meets the appropriate regulatory
definition or exclusion. 40 CFR 261.2(f).
Shredded circuit boards that are not free
of mercury switches, mercury relays,
nickel-cadmium batteries, and lithium
batteries when reclaimed are solid
wastes. This is so because these used
shredded circuit boards are spent
materials. Spent materials being
reclaimed are solid wastes that, when
they exhibit a characteristic or are
listed, are also hazardous wastes. 40
CFR 261.1(b)(l), 261.2(c)(3). As stated in
the proposal, EPA established in 1992
that whole used circuit boards could be
considered scrap metal. The whole used
circuit boards are therefore exempt from
RCRA regulation. See 40 CFR
261.6 (a) (3) (ii) stating scrap metal being
recycled is exempt from RCRA
regulation. (Please note that whole used
circuit boards which contain mercury
switches, mercury relays, nickel-
cadmium batteries, or lithium batteries
also do not meet the definition of scrap
metal because mercury (being a liquid
metal) and batteries are not within the
scope of the definition of scrap metal.
See 50 F.R. 614, 624 (January 4, 1985).)
As stated in the proposal shredded
circuit boards do not meet the definition
of scrap metal because the shredded
material contains fines which are too
small to qualify as scrap metal.
Shredded circuit boards that are not free
of mercury switches, mercury relays,
nickel-cadmium batteries, and lithium
batteries would be subject to applicable
parts of RCRA regulation, 40 CFR Parts
260 through 266, Part 268, Part 270, Part
273 and Part 124. Shredded circuit
boards with economically recoverable
quantities of precious metals are still
eligible for conditional exemption from
regulation under 40 CFR Part 266
Subpart F. This provision allows
recyclable materials containing an
economically recoverable amount of
precious metals to be exempt from many
RCRA regulatory provisions. However,
these materials are still subject to
manifesting, export and speculative
accumulation requirements. 40 CFR
266.70.
4. Clarification of Regulatory Status of
Secondary Materials Associated With
the Generation or Management of
Circuit Boards
Several commenters requested
clarification in today's rule about the
current regulatory status of secondary
materials associated with the generation
or management of printed circuit
boards. These materials include: spent
solder baths (pot dumps), sweeps,
baghouse dust, and solder dross. These
commenters also requested exclusion of
these materials from RCRA jurisdiction
in today's rule.
Spent solder baths, also known as pot
dumps, are solidified pieces of tin-lead
solder baths used in the production of
printed circuit boards. Prior to 1993,
EPA had classified spent solder baths as
spent materials, which, absent the scrap
metal designation, would be fully
regulated under RCRA hazardous waste
regulation. In 1993, EPA issued a letter
to the Lead Industries Association
stating that spent solder baths meet the
definition of scrap metal and are
therefore exempt from RCRA regulation
under the regulatory exemption for
scrap metal being recycled. This
interpretation continues to be the
Agency view.
Sweeps refer alternatively to a
powdered material that is a residue of
thermal recovery of precious metal-
bearing secondary material (often ash
that is crushed into particulate form in
a ball mill or similar device) or
particulate material that is collected
from firms handling precious metals
such as jewelers and metal finishers.
Sweeps have been previously classified
-------
26014 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
by EPA as a by-product.2 As such, when
sent for reclamation, sweeps are not
solid waste and are excluded from
RCRAJurlsdlctlon regulation when
considered hazardous solely by
exhibiting a characteristic.
Characteristic by-products are not solid
wastes when reclaimed. 40 CFR
261.2(c)(3). In contrast, when sweeps
are derived from source material that
meets the description of a listed
hazardous waste, the sweeps are solid
wastes that are also hazardous wastes
and arc regulated under the appropriate
RCRA regulation provisions. 40 CFR
261.2(c)(3). For example, often
combustible material such as a rag, filter
or paper Is used to clean up a secondary
material such as a spent solvent that
may: (1) contain precious metals and (2)
meets one of the F001 through F005
listing descriptions for solvents. The
rag, filter or paper will be burned to an
ash that it homogenized in order to
assay its precious metal content. The
ash when crushed is turned into a
sweep. The sweep carries the F-listed
hazardous waste code that was
associated with the original source
material (I.e., solvent). Listed by-
products, in contrast to characteristic
by-products, are solid and hazardous
wastes when reclaimed.
EPA has classified baghouse dust
from precious metal recovery furnaces
as a sludge.3 As with the by-product
classification for sweeps, baghouse dust
is not a solid and hazardous waste when
it would be considered hazardous only
for exhibiting a characteristic such as
toxiclty. However, If the source material
to the furnace contained a listed
hazardous waste, then the baghouse
dust would be considered a solid and
hazardous waste due to its classification
as a listed sludge being reclaimed. Also
as with the sweeps, even if the baghouse
dust is a listed sludge, it may still be
conditionally exempt from RCRA
regulation under 40 CFR Part 266
Subpart F if it contains economically
recoverable levels of precious metals.
Finally, EPA currently classifies
solder dross as a characteristic by-
product when reclaimed. As such, this
material is already excluded from the
definition of solid waste and not
regulated under the RCRA regulations.
Therefore, including solder dross in
today's final rule would be duplicative.
•'August 26,1992 memorandum from Sylvia K.
Lowrancc. Director, U.S.E.P.A.. Office of Solid
Waste (0 Waste Management Division Directors
U,S.E,P,A,. Regions I-X on the Regulatory Status of
Printed Circuit Boards.
IX. State Authority
A. Applicability of Rules in Authorized
States
Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA
may authorize qualified States to
administer and enforce the RCRA
program within the State. Following
authorization, EPA retains enforcement
authority under sections 3008, 3013,
and 7003 of RCRA, although authorized
States have primary enforcement
responsibility. The standards and
requirements for authorization are
found in 40 CFR Part 271.
Prior to HSWA, a State with final
authorization administered its
hazardous waste program in lieu of EPA
administering 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 that the State was authorized
to permit. When new, more stringent
Federal requirements were promulgated
or enacted, the State was obliged 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.
In contrast, under RCRA section
3006(g) (42 U.S.C. 6926(g)), new
requirements and prohibitions imposed
by HSWA take effect in authorized
States at the same time that they take
effect in unauthorized States. EPA is
. directed to carry out these requirements
and prohibitions in authorized States,
including the issuance of permits, until
the State is granted authorization to do
so.
Today's treatment standards for wood
preserving wastes are being
promulgated pursuant to sections 3004
(d) through (k), and 3004 (m), of RCRA
(42 U.S.C. 6924 (d) through (k), and
6924(m)). Therefore, the Agency is
adding today's rule to Table 1 in 40 CFR
271.l(j), which identifies the Federal
program requirements that are
promulgated pursuant to HSWA. States
may apply for final authorization for the
HSWA provisions in Table 1, as
discussed in the following section of
this preamble. Table 2 in 40 CFR
271.1(j) is also modified to indicate that
this rule is a self-implementing
provision of HSWA.
B. Abbreviated Authorization
Procedures
In the August 22, 1995, LDR Phase IV
proposed rule, EPA proposed a set of
streamlined authorization procedures
that would apply to new rules that were -
minor or routine in nature. This
procedure was designed to expedite the
authorization process by reducing the
scope of a State's submittal, for
authorization, to a State certification
and copies of applicable regulations and
statutes. EPA would then conduct a
short review of the State's request,
primarily consisting of a completeness
check (see 60 FR 43686 for a full
description of the proposed procedures).
In the HWIR-Media proposed rule, EPA
proposed another set of abbreviated
authorization procedures for more
significant rulemakings, called Category
2 (see 61 FR 18780, April 29, 1996). In
this latter proposal, EPA designated the
procedures outlined in the Phase IV
proposal as Category 1. In that proposal,
EPA also presented an expanded
discussion on the need for and the
intent of the streamlined procedures.
EPA also proposed 'a set of modified
Category 1 procedures for the
authorization of a proposed rule for
mineral processing wastes on January
25, 1996 (see 62 FR 2338).
Although EPA is firmly committed to
streamlining the RCRA State
authorization procedures, the Agency
has decided not to finalize the proposed
Category 1 authorization procedures in
today's notice. EPA believes that public
comments from the August 22, 1995,
and January 25, 1996, proposals and
comments submitted for die recent
HWIR-contaminated media proposal
should all be considered before
finalizing new procedures for
authorization. This full consideration
will enable EPA to make the best
decision regarding how the
authorization process should work. EPA
intends to address all significant public
comments for all three notices and
finalize streamlined authorization
procedures when the HWIR-Media rule
is promulgated.
C. Effect on State Authorization
Because today's Phase IV LDR rule is
being promulgated under HSWA
authority, those sections of today's rule
that expand the coverage of the LDR
program (e.g., to newly listed wood
preserving wastes) would be
implemented by EPA on the effective
date of today's rule in authorized States
until their programs are modified to
adopt these rules and the modification
is approved by EPA. These new
treatment standards also result in a
more stringent Federal program than
before. Therefore States are required to
adopt them in accordance with die
requirements below.
Because today's rule is promulgated
pursuant to HSWA, a State submitting a
program modification may apply to
receive interim or final authorization
under RCRA section 3006(g)(2) or
3006(b), respectively, on the basis of
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26015
requirements that are substantially
equivalent or equivalent to EPA's. The
procedures and schedule for State
program modifications for final
authorization are described in 40 CFR
271.21. It should be noted that all
HSWA interim authorizations will
expire January 1, 2003. (See §271.24
and 57 FR 60132, December 18, 1992.)
Section 271.21(e)(2) requires that
States with final authorization must
modify their programs to reflect Federal
program changes and to subsequently
submit the modification to EPA for
approval. The deadline by which the
State would have to modify its program
to adopt these regulations is specified in
section 271.21(e). This deadline can be
extended in certain cases (see section
271.21(e)(3)). Once EPA approves the
modification, the State requirements
become Subtitle C RCRA requirements.
States with authorized RCRA
programs may already have
requirements similar to those in today's
rule. These State regulations have not
been assessed against the Federal
regulations being proposed today to
determine whether they meet the tests
for authorization. Thus, a State is not
authorized to implement these
requirements In lieu of EPA until the
State program modifications are
approved. Of course, states with existing
standards could continue to administer
and enforce their standards as a matter
of State law. In implementing the
Federal program, EPA will work with
States under agreements to minimize
duplication of efforts. In most cases,
EPA expects that it will be able to defer
to the States in their efforts to
implement their programs rather than
take separate actions under Federal
authority.
States that submit official applications
for final authorization less than 12
months after the effective date of these
regulations may, but are not required to
include standards equivalent to these
regulations in their application.
However, the State must modify its
program by the deadline set forth in
§ 271.21(e). States that submit official
applications for final authorization 12
months after the effective date of these
regulations must include standards
equivalent to these regulations in their
application. The requirements a State
must meet when submitting its final
authorization application are set forth in
40 CFR 271.3.
D. Less Stringent Requirements
Section 3009 of RCRA allows States to
impose standards that are more
stringent than the Federal program (see
40 CFR 270.1(1)). Thus, for those Federal
changes that are less stringent or reduce
the scope of the Federal program, States
are not required to modify their
programs. EPA views the parts of
today's rule other than the new
treatment standards for newly listed
wood preserving wastes to be less
stringent. However, since these other
parts of today's final rule make
significant improvements to the LDR
program, EPA strongly encourages
States to adopt and become authorized
for them.
X. Regulatory Requirements
A. Regulatory Impact Analysis Pursuant
to Executive Order 12866
Executive Order No. 12866 requires
agencies to determine whether a
regulatory action is "significant." The
Order defines a "significant" regulatoiy
action as one that "is likely to result in
a rule that may: (1) Have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million
or more or adversely affect, in a material
way, the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) create
serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3)
materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients; or (4) raise novel legal or
policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive
Order."
The Agency estimated the costs of
today's final rule to determine if it is a
significant regulation as defined by the
Executive Order. The analysis
considered compliance cost and
economic impacts for newly listed and
identified wastes affected by this rule.
This rule covers three wood preserving
wastes (F032, F034, and F035). EPA has
determined that this rule is significant
according to the definition in'Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has
been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Detailed discussions of the
methodology used for estimating the
costs, economic impacts and the
benefits attributable to today's final rule,
followed by a presentation of the cost,
economic impact and benefit results
may be found in the background
document, "Regulatory Impact Analysis
of the Final Phase IV Land Disposal
Restrictions Rule," which was placed in
the docket for today's final rule.
1. Methodology Section
The Agency estimated the volumes of
waste affected by today's rule to
determine the national level
incremental costs (for both the baseline
and post-regulatory scenarios),
economic impacts (defined as the
difference between the industrial
activity under post-regulatory
conditions and the industrial activity in
the absence of regulation), and benefits
(including estimation of pollutant
loadings reductions, estimation of
reductions in exceedences of health-
based levels, and qualitative description
of the potential benefits.) The procedure
for estimating the volumes of newly
listed wood preserving wastes affected
by today's final rule is detailed in the
background document "Regulatory
Impact Analysis of the Final Phase IV
Land Disposal Restrictions Rule for
Wood Preserving Wastes, F032, F034
and F035," which was placed in the
docket for today's final rule.
2. Volume Results
The Agency has estimated that 469
active facilities generate an estimated
range of 3,860 tons to 18,808 tons
annually of newly listed wood
preserving wastes including F032, F034,
and F035 nonwastewaters. The Agency
has estimated that active 469 facilities
generate an estimated range of 3,860
tons to 18,808 tons annually of newly
listed wood preserving wastes including
F032, F034, and F035 nonwastewaters.
In addition the Agency has estimated
that there are approximately 1000
inactive or abandoned wood preserving
sites that have contaminated soil and
debris that may require some type of
remediation. One Agency estimate for
the total volume of wood preserving
contaminated soil and debris requiring
either in-situ or ex-situ treatment is 37
million tons based on an extrapolation
of the average quantity of excavated
soils from wood preserving Superfund
sites. For purposes of the capacity
analysis in today's rule, the Agency is
using an alternate estimate of over
100,000 tons as the basis of setting the
national capacity variance for wood
preserving soil and debris.
3. Cost Results
EPA estimated the incremental
treatment cost attributable to Phase IV
LDRs to total between $3.1 million and
$17.7 million per year for generators of
newly listed wood preserving wastes. In
addition, EPA has estimated that
administrative requirements for
reporting and record keeping from
today's rule will result in a cost of $0.2
million per year for owners and
-------
26016 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
operators of inactive and abandoned
wood preserving sites. This estimate is
based on the costs of thermal
destruction and stabilization of F032
and F034 non-wastewaters; the costs of
stabilization of F035 non-wastewaters;
and the Incremental cost of disposing of
the residuals from the treatment of the
3,860-18.808 tons of waste.
Today's final rule provides a two year
capacity variance during which
cleanups of these sites may continue
without being affected by the Land
Disposal Restriction treatment standards
promulgated in today's rule. This
provision will reduce the costs of
managing media contaminated by these
listed wastes to the extent that facility
operators and site managers take
advantage of it. Also, many sites are
using in-sltu remedies where no soil is
excavated at the site. This type of
remediation does not trigger any of the
requirements promulgated in today's
rule.
Prospcctlvely, future rulemakings
such as the Hazardous Waste
^identification Final Rule for
contaminated media may result in
quantities of contaminated soil being
removed from RCRA jurisdiction or
subject to less rigorous cleanup levels
than the current universal treatment
standards. Inactive and abandoned
wood preserving sites may avail
themselves of exemptions from today's
promulgated treatment standards such
as a no-migration petition (40 CFR Part
268.6) or site specific treatabllity
variances (40 CFR Part 268.44 (h)).
Further reductions in treatment cost
will accrue to the extent that (1) EPA
acts to remove media contaminated with
these listed wastes from RCRA
jurisdiction and (2) facility operators
and site managers petition for, and EPA
grants, these no-migration petitions and
trcatability variances. For the foregoing
reasons, EPA does not believe that
incremental treatment costs will accrue
to contaminated media cleanups at
Inactive or abandoned wood preserving
sites. Accordingly, EPA has not
estimated incremental treatment costs
that would result from the selection of
a more expensive remedy in order to
avoid triggering LDR treatment
requirements. Although EPA believes
that this scenario is unlikely, such costs
are possible.
With respect to media contaminated
with listed wood preserving wastes,
EPA's estimate of the costs of today's
final rule includes only the
administrative costs of applying for
trcatability variances which the Agency
has the discretion to grant subsequent to
this action. EPA estimates that there are
35 million tons of such contaminated
media that incur administrative costs for
treatability variances, waste analysis
plans, and other RCRA activities. The
Agency will estimate the volume and
cost of remediating contaminated media
as affected by the HWIR Contaminated
Media final rule. This will include the
evaluation of all soils and sludges that
would otherwise have been treated in-
situ whose management and treatment
costs could change, either because of
provisions of the HWIR Contaminated
Media final rule; changes in relative
prices for alternative treatment
technologies; or increases in market
prices of treatment resulting from such
shifts in demand. EPA will use the same
baseline for estimating these costs that
the Agency uses to estimate cost
savings.
4. Economic Impact Results
The Agency has estimated the
economic impacts of today's final rule
to be small. EPA conducted an initial
screening analysis of the impacts of the
Phase IV LDR rule on small wood
preserving facilities. Results of the
initial screening analysis indicate that
the cost of compliance for the majority
of active wood preserving facilities that
use inorganic wood preservatives and
generate F035 wastes is less than one
percent of total their estimated
revenues. In contrast, active wood
preserving facilities that use creosote
and pentachlorophenol as a
preservatives and generated F032 and
F034 wastes have been estimated to
incur upper bound compliance costs
that may exceed one percent of this
subsector's revenues.
Some active wood preserving
facilities that use creosote and
pentachlorophenol as preservatives may
incur upper bound compliance costs
that will exceed one percent of their
estimated revenues. EPA believes,
however, that in looking at the affected
universe of active wood preserving
facilities, today's final rule will not
constitute a significant impact to a
substantial number of them. First, only
18 or roughly 4 percent of over 469
wood preserving facilities are expected
to incur compliance costs that exceed 2
percent of their revenues or more than
25 percent of their long run profits. Of
the remaining 49 facilities or 10 percent
with upper bound estimated compliance
costs exceeding 1 percent of their
revenue, none are expected to incur
compliance costs exceeding 2 percent of
firm revenues or 25 percent of long term
profits. Second, industry Information
suggests that there is a trend within the
wood preserving industry away from
using pentachlorophenol as a
preservative. Product substitution to
other nontoxic or toxic preservatives
resulting in less expensive treatment of
wastes may result in lower costs to these
wood preserving facilities. Finally, data
collected to estimate the upper bound
quantity of F032 generated at these
facilities included values for mixed
F032/F034/F035 wastes (meaning that
the generator reported combined
volumes for F032 and other wood
preserving wastes) such that the total
volume of F032 is probably much lower
than the data suggests.
For inactive and abandoned wood
preserving sites that require
remediation, EPA believes that there
should not be a significant economic
impact resulting from today's rule. Of
the estimated 1000 sites, based on the
frequency of wood preserving
Superfund cleanups, EPA projects that
over 200 inactive and abandoned sites
will use in-situ remedies and thus not
incur any costs under today's rule. In
addition, EPA projects that the
remaining 800 sites will incur only
administrative costs associated with
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements that average $240 in
annualized cost per site. Given that the
reported average cost of cleaning up
wood preserving Superfund sites is $9.3
million,4 EPA believes that these
administrative costs should not
significantly affect remedial activities at
inactive and abandoned wood
preserving sites.
5. Benefit Estimate Results
'EPA has not performed analysis
sufficient to estimate risks to actual
individuals or populations exposed to
these listed wastes under conditions of
Subtitle C management without LDRs.
However, EPA has completed a
qualitative benefits analysis of the types
of benefits that may result from today's
rule. This analysis is described in
greater detail in the regulatory impact
analysis for newly identified listed
wood preserving hazardous waste
placed in today's docket. Benefits for
this final rule as measured by individual
or population risk reduction require
substantially more information than the
Agency has available now. Further, site
specific information on waste
characterization, hydrogeological
parameters, meteorological conditions
and demographic patterns would be
needed for a representative number of
facilities before national estimates of
4 Shreekant Gupta, George Van Houtven, and
Maureen L. Cropper, "Do Benefits and Costs Matter
in Environmental Regulation? ", in anaylzlng
Superfund, Economics, Science and Law, ed.
Richard L. Revesz and Richard B. Stewart
(Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future, 1996),
p. 97.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26017
population risk could be calculated. The
Agency does not have sufficient
information to complete a quantitative
individual or population risk estimate.
While waste management rules to
protect ground water have been
promulgated in the past to control
otherwise unacceptable individual risks,
it is unusual to predict high 'population
risks' unless there is an unusually large
water supply well impacted by the
facility, simply because ground water
contamination generally moves slowly
and locally. It has been the agency's
experience that regulations with land
disposal restrictions have been found to
produce relatively small, quantifiable
population risk reductions to
individuals exposed to contaminated
groundwater via private wells. For
example, in the analysis of Land
Disposal Restrictions Phase II (40 CFR
Parts 148, et al.) for organic toxicity
wastes, some of the individual risk were
in the range of 10~4, the population risk
reductions were found to be only about
0.22 cases of cancer per year.
If population densities and prevalence
of private ground water wells around
wood preserving facilities are similar to
other waste management facilities, it is
the Agency's expectation that land
disposal restrictions for hazardous wood
preserving wastes would also achieve
relatively small, quantifiable population
risk reductions. For these reasons and
the data limitations cited above, the
Agency has not attempted to address the
quantification of population risk
reduction for this final rule.
Nevertheless, the Agency has
concluded that LDR rules like today's
rule may produce benefits in the area of
ecological risk reduction and reduced
natural resource damage. EPA has not
developed a quantitative assessment of
these benefits categories because of
budgetary and data limitations.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., when
an agency publishes a notice of
rulemaking, for a rule that will have a
significant effect on a substantial
number of small entities, the agency
must prepare and make available for
public comment a regulatory flexibility
analysis that considers the effect of the
rule on small entities (i.e.: small
businesses, small organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions).
In assessing the regulatory approach
for dealing with small entities in today's
proposed rule, the Agency had to
consider that due to the statutory
requirements of the RCRA LDR program,
no legal avenues exist for the Agency to
provide relief from the LDR's for small
entities. The only relief available for
small entities is the existing small
quantity generator provisions and
conditionally exempt small quantity
generator exemptions found in 40 CFR
262.11-12, and 261.5, respectively.
These exemptions basically prescribe
100 kilograms (kg) per calendar month
generation of hazardous waste as the
limit below which one is exempted from
complying with the RCRA standards.
Given this statutory constraint, the
Agency was unable to frame a series of
small entity options from which to
select the lowest cost approach; rather,
the Agency was legally bound to
regulate the land disposal of the
hazardous wastes covered in today's
rule without regard to the size of the
entity being regulated. For the reasons
stated above in the economic impact
discussion of section X.A, I hereby
certify that today's final rule will not
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities in
the wood preserving sector.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMBRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, Tribal,
and local governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with "Federal mandates" that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or to the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any one year.
When a written statement is needed for
an EPA rule, section 205 of the UMRA
generally requires EPA to identify and
consider a reasonable number of
regulatory alternatives and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective, or least
burdensome alternative that achieves
the objectives of the rule. The
provisions of section 205 do not apply
when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, section 205
allows EPA to adopt an alternative other
than the least costly, most cost-effective
or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation why that alternative
was not adopted. Before EPA establishes
any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including Tribal
governments, it must have developed
under section 203 of the UMRA a small
government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, giving them
meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising them
on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule
does not contain a Federal mandate that
may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and
Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
the private sector in any one year. EPA
has estimated that the total potential
cost to State, local, and Tribal
governments would not exceed
approximately $200,000 per year over
ten years. Thus, today's rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections
202 and 205 of the UMRA.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this rule have been
submitted for approval to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 etseq. An Information Collection
Request OCR) document has been
prepared by EPA: OSWERICR No.
1442.14 would amend the existing ICR
approved under OMB Control No. 2050-
0085. This ICR has not been approved
by OMB and the information collection'
requirements, although they are less
stringent than those previously required
by the EPA, are not enforceable until
OMB approves the ICR. EPA will
publish a document in the Federal
Register when OMB approves the
information collection requirements
showing the valid OMB control number.
Until then, persons are not required to
respond to collections of information in
this ICR.
Copies of this ICR may be obtained
from Sandy Farmer, OPPE Regulatory
Information Division; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(2136); 401 M St., S.W.; Washington,
D.C. 20460 or by calling (202) 260-2740.
Include the ICR number in any request.
The annual public reporting and
recordkeeping burden for this collection
of information is estimated to be
reduced by 8 hours per response.
Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons
to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
or provide information to or for a
Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop
acquire, install, and utilize technology
and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and
maintaining information, and comply
with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements, train
personnel to be able to respond to a
-------
26018 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
collection oflnformation; search data
sources; complete and review the
collection of information; and transmit
or otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond
to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. The OMB control numbers for
EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR
Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.
Send comments on the Agency's
burden reduction, the accuracy of the
provided burden estimates, and any
suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including through
the use of automated collection of
techniques to the Director, OPPE
Regulatory Information Division; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(2136); 401 M St.. S.W.; Washington, DC
20460; and to the Office oflnformation
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th St..
N.W.. Washington, D.C. 20503, marked
"Attention: Desk Officer for EPA."
Include the 1CR number in any
correspondence.
XI. Environmental Justice
A, Applicability of Executive Order
12898
EPA Is committed to address
environmental justice concerns and is
assuming a leadership role in
environmental justice initiatives to
enhance environmental quality for all
residents of the United States. The
Agencies goals are to ensure that no
segment of the population, regardless of
race, color, national origin, or Income
bears disproportionately high and
adverse human health and
environmental effects as a result of
EPA's policies, programs, and activities,
and all people live in clean and
sustainable communities.
B, Potential Effects
Today's rule is intended to reduce
risks of disposing hazardous wastes, and
to benefit all populations. This rule is
not expected to cause any
disproportionate impacts to minority or
low Income communities versus
affluent or non-minority communities.
XII. Submission to Congress and
General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801 (a) (1) (A) as added
by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA
submitted a report containing this rule
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the General Accounting
Office prior to publication of the rule in
today's Federal Register. This rule is
not a "major rule" as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 148
Administrative practice and
procedure, Hazardous waste, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Water
supply.
40 CFR Part 261
Environmental protection, Hazardous
waste, Recycling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 268
Environmental protection, Hazardous
waste, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
40 CFR Part 271
Administrative practice and
procedure, Hazardous materials
transportation, Hazardous waste,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: April 18, 1997.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, Title 40, chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 148—HAZARDOUS WASTE
INJECTION RESTRICTIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 148
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Section 3004, Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C.
6901, etseq.
2. Section 148.18 is amended by
revising the heading, redesignating
paragraphs (a) through (c) as (c) through
(e) respectively, and by adding
paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:
§ 148.18 Waste specific prohibitions—
newly listed and identified wastes.
(a) Effective August 11, 1997, the
wastes specified in 40 CFR part 261 as
EPA Hazardous waste numbers F032,
F034, F035 are prohibited from
underground injection.
(b) Effective May 12, 1999, the wastes
specified in 40 CFR part 261 as EPA
Hazardous waste numbers F032, F034,
F035 that are mixed with radioactive
wastes are prohibited from underground
injection.
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
Subpart A—General
3. The authority citation for part 261
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921,
6922, 6924 (y), and 6938.
4. Section 261.1 is amended by
adding paragraphs (c) (9) through (12) to
read as follows:
§261.1 Purpose and scope.
*****
(c) * * *
(9) "Excluded scrap metal" is
processed scrap metal, unprocessed
home scrap metal, and unprocessed
prompt scrap metal.
(10) "Processed scrap metal" is scrap
metal which has been manually or
physically altered to either separate it
into distinct materials to enhance
economic value or to improve the
handling of materials. Processed scrap
metal includes, but is not limited to
scrap metal which has been baled,
shredded, sheared, chopped, crushed,
flattened, cut, melted, or separated by
metal type (i.e., sorted), and, fines,
drosses and related materials which
have been agglomerated. (Note:
shredded circuit boards being sent for
recycling are not considered processed
scrap metal. They are covered under the
exclusion from the definition of solid
waste for shredded circuit boards being
recycled (§261.4(a)(13)).
(11) "Home scrap metal" is scrap
metal as generated by steel mills,
foundries, and refineries such as
turnings, cuttings, punchings, and
borings.
(12) "Prompt scrap metal" is scrap
metal as generated by the metal
working/fabrication industries and
includes such scrap metal as turnings,
cuttings, punchings, and borings.
Prompt scrap is also known as
industrial or new scrap metal.
5. Section 261.2(c) is amended by
revising table 1 to read as follows:
§ 261.2 Definition of solid waste.
*****
(c) * * *
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26019
TABLE 1
Spent Materials
Sludges (listed in 40 CFR Part 261.31 or 261.32
Sludges exhibiting a characteristic of hazardous waste
By-products (listed in 40 CFR 261.31 or 261 .32)
By-products exhibiting a characteristic of hazardous waste
Commercial chemical products listed in 40 CFR 261.33
Scrap metal other than excluded scrap metal (see 261.1(c)(9))
Use constitut-
ing disposal
(§261.2(c)(1))
(1)
(*\
n
(*)
D
n
Energy recov-
ery/fuel
(§261.2(c)(2))
(2)
i*\
\ )
t*\
/*\
v ;
n
n
(*)
Reclamation
(§261.2(c)(3))
(3)
i*\
(. )
0
Speculative
accumulation
(§261.2(C)(4))
(4)
t*\
( I
l*\
\ 1
i*\
o
Note: The terms "spent materials", "sludges", "by-products", and "scrap metal" and "processed scrap metal" are defined in 261.1
6. Section 261.4(a) is amended by
adding paragraphs (a) (13) and (14) to
read as follows:
§261.4 Exclusions.
(a) * * *
(13) Excluded scrap metal (processed
scrap metal, unprocessed home scrap
metal, and unprocessed prompt scrap
metal) being recycled.
(14) Shredded circuit boards being
recycled provided that they are:
(i) Stored in containers sufficient to
prevent a release to the environment
prior to recovery; and
(ii) Free of mercury switches, mercury
relays and nickel-cadmium batteries and
lithium batteries.
* * * * *
7. Section 261.6 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii) to read as
follows:
§ 261.6 Requirements for recyclable
materials.
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) Scrap metal that is not excluded
under §261.4(a)(13);
PART 268—LAND DISPOSAL
RESTRICTIONS
8. The authority citation for part 268
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921,
and 6924.
Subpart A—General
9. Section 268.1 is amended by
revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
§ 268.1 Purpose, scope and applicability.
*****
(e) The following hazardous wastes
are not subject to any provision of part
268:
(1) Waste generated by small quantity
generators of less than 100 kilograms of
non-acute hazardous waste or less than
1 kilogram of acute hazardous waste per
month, as defined in § 261.5 of this
chapter;
(2) Waste pesticides that a farmer
disposes of pursuant to §262.70;
(3) Wastes identified or listed as
hazardous after November 8, 1984 for
which EPA has not promulgated land
disposal prohibitions or treatment
standards;
(4) De minimis losses of characteristic
wastes to wastewaters are not
considered to be prohibited wastes and
are defined as losses from normal
material handling operations (e.g. spills
from the unloading or transfer of
materials from bins or other containers,
leaks from pipes, valves or other devices
used to transfer materials); minor leaks
of process equipment, storage tanks or
containers; leaks from well-maintained
pump packings and seals; sample
purgings; and relief device discharges;
discharges from safety showers and
rinsing and cleaning of personal safety
equipment; rinsate from empty
containers or from containers that are
rendered empty by that rinsing; and
laboratory wastes not exceeding one per
cent of the total flow of wastewater into
the facility's headworks on an annual
basis, or with a combined annualized
average concentration not exceeding one
part per million in the headworks of the
facility's wastewater treatment or
pretreatment facility.
* * * * *
10. Section 268.4 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(2)(iv), and (a) (4)
introductory text to read as follows:
§268.4 Treatment surface impoundment
exemption.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) Recordkeeping: Sampling and
testing and recordkeeping provisions of
§§264.13 and 265.13 of this chapter
apply.
* * * * *
(4) The owner or operator submits to
the Regional Administrator a written
certification that the requirements of
§ 268.4(a)(3) have been met. The
following certification is required:
*****
11. Section 268.7 is amended by
revising the section heading: revising
paragraph (a); by removing paragraph
(b) (2) and redesignating paragraphs
(b)(3) through (b)(7) as (b)(2) through
(b)(6) respectively; and by revising the
introductory text of paragraph (b), and
revising paragraphs (b)(l), newly
designated paragraphs (b)(2) through
(b) (4), (c) (1), and (c) (2) to read as
follows:
§268.7 Testing, tracking, and
recordkeeping requirements for generators,
treaters, and disposal facilities.
(a) Requirements for generators: (1)
Determine if the waste has to be treated
before being land disposed, as follows:
A generator of a hazardous waste must
determine if the waste has to be treated
before it can be land disposed. This is
done by determining if the hazardous
waste meets the treatment standards in
§ 268.40 or § 268.45. This determination
can be made in either of two ways:
testing the waste or using knowledge of
the waste. If the generator tests the
waste, testing would normally
determine the total concentration of
hazardous constituents, or the
concentration of hazardous constituents
in an extract of the waste obtained using
test method 1311 in "Test Mediods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods," EPA Publication
SW-846, as referenced in §260.11 of
this chapter, depending on whether the
treatment standard for the waste is
expressed as a total concentration or
concentration of hazardous constituent
in the waste's extract. In addition, some
hazardous wastes must be treated by
particular treatment methods before
they can be land disposed. These
treatment standards are also found in
§268.40, and are described in detail in
§ 268.42, Table 1. These wastes do not
need to be tested (however, if they are
-------
E6020 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
In a waste mixture, other wastes with
concentration level treatment standards
would have to be tested). If a generator
determines they are managing a waste
that displays a hazardous characteristic
of Jgnltablllty, corroslvlty, reactivity, or
toxlclty, they must comply with the
special requirements of §268.9 of this
part In addition to any applicable
requirements In this section.
(2) If the waste does not meet the
treatment standard: With the Initial
shipment of waste to each treatment or
storage facility, the generator must send
a one-time written notice to each
treatment or storage facility receiving
the waste, and place a copy in the file.
The notice must include the information
In column "268.7(a)(2)" of the Generator
Paperwork Requirements Table in
§268.7(a) (4). No further notification is
necessary until such time that the waste
or facility change, In which case a new
notification must'be sent and a copy
placed In the generator's file.
(3) If the waste meets the treatment
standard at the original point of
generation:
(i) With the initial shipment of waste
to each treatment, storage, or disposal
facility, the generator must send a one-
time written notice to each treatment,
storage, or disposal facility receiving the
waste, and place a copy in the file. The
notice must include the information
indicated in column "268.7(a)(3)" of the
Generator Paperwork Requirements
Table in §268.7(a)(4) and the following
certification statement, signed by an
authorized representative:
I certify under penalty of law that I
personally have examined and am familiar
with the waste through analysis and testing
or through knowledge of the waste to support
this certification that the waste complies
with the treatment standards specified in 40
CFR part 268 subpart D. I believe that the
Information I submitted is true, accurate, and
complete. I am aware that there are
significant penalties for submitting a false
certification, including the possibility of a
fine and imprisonment.
(ii) If the waste changes, the generator
must send a new notice and certification
to the receiving facility, and place a
copy in their files. Generators of
hazardous debris excluded from the
definition of hazardous waste under
§ 261.3(f) of this chapter are not subject
to these requirements.
(4) For reporting, tracking and
recordkeeping when exceptions allow
certain wastes that do not meet the
treatment standards to be land disposed:
There are certain exemptions from the
requirement that hazardous wastes meet
treatment standards before they can be
land disposed. These include, but are
not limited to case-by-case extensions
under § 268.5, disposal in a no-
migration unit under § 268.6, or a
national capacity variance or case-by-
case capacity variance under subpart C
of this part. If a generator's waste is so
exempt, then witii the initial shipment
of waste, the generator must send a one-
time written notice to each land
disposal facility receiving the waste.
The notice must include the information
indicated in column "268.7(a)(4)" of the
Generator Paperwork Requirements
Table below. If the waste changes, the
generator must send a new notice to the
receiving facility, and place a copy in
their files.
GENERATOR PAPERWORK REQUIREMENTS TABLE
Required information
1. EPA Hazardous Waste and Manifest numbers
2, Statement: this waste Is not prohibited from land disposal
3. The waste Is subject to the LDRs. The constituents of concern for F001-F005, and
F039, and underlying hazardous constituents (for wastes that are not managed in a
Clean Water Act (CWA) or CWA-equivalent facility), unless the waste will be treated
and monitored for all constituents. If all constituents will be treated and monitored,
thofd Is no need to put them all on the LDR notice
4. Tho notice must Include the applicable wastewater/ nonwastewater category (see
§§268.2(d) and (f)) and subdivisions made within a waste code based on waste-
specific criteria (such as D003 reactive cyanide)
5. Wasto analysts data (when available)
6« Dato ths waslo Is subject to the prohibition
7. For hazardous debris, when treating with the alternative treatment technologies
provided by §268.45: the contaminants subject to treatment, as described in
§26S.45(b); and an Indication that these contaminants are being treated to comply
With §268.45
8. A certification Is needed (see applicable section for exact wording)
§268.7
(a)(2)
•
•
•
•
•
§268.7
(a)(3)
•
•
•
•
•
§268.7
(a)(4)
•
•
•
•
•
§268.7
(a)(9)
•
•
(5) If a generator is managing and
treating prohibited waste in tanks,
containers, or containment buildings
regulated under 40 CFR 262.34 to meet
applicable LDR treatment standards
found at § 268.40, the generator must
develop and follow a written waste
analysis plan which describes the
procedures they will carry out to
comply with die treatment standards.
(Generators treating hazardous debris
under the alternative treatment
standards of Table 1, § 268.45, however,
arc not subject to these waste analysis
requirements.) The plan must be kept on
site In the generator's records, and the
following requirements must be met:
(i) The waste analysis plan must be
based on a detailed chemical and
physical analysis of a representative
sample of the prohibited waste (s) being
treated, and contain all information
necessary to treat the waste(s) in
accordance with the requirements of
this part, including the selected testing
frequency.
(ii) Such plan must be kept in the
facility's on-site files and made
available to inspectors.
(iii) Wastes shipped off-site pursuant
to this paragraph must comply with the
notification requirements of
§268.7(a)(3).
(6) If a generator determines that the
waste is restricted based solely on his
knowledge of the waste, all supporting
data used to make this determination
must be retained on-site in the
generator's files. If a generator
determines that the waste is restricted
based on testing tfiis waste or an extract
developed using the test method 1311 in
"Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,"
EPA Publication SW-846, as referenced
in § 260.11 of this chapter, and all waste
analysis data must be retained on-site in
the generator's files.
(7) If a generator determines that he is
managing a restricted waste tfiat is
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26021
excluded from the definition of
hazardous or solid waste or exempt
from Subtitle C regulation, under 40
CFR 261.2 through 261.6 subsequent to
the point of generation (including
deactivated characteristic hazardous
wastes managed in wastewater
treatment systems subject to the Clean
Water Act (CWA) as specified at 40 CFR
261.4 (a) (2), or are CWA-equivalent), he
must place a one-time notice stating
such generation, subsequent exclusion
from the definition of hazardous or solid
waste or exemption from RCRA Subtitle
C regulation, and the disposition of the
waste, in the facility's file.
(8) Generators must retain on-site a
copy of all notices, certifications, waste
analysis data, and other documentation
produced pursuant to this section for at
least three years from the date that the
waste that'is the subject of such
documentation was last sent to on-site
or off-site treatment, storage, or
disposal. The three year record retention
period is automatically extended during
the course of any unresolved
enforcement action regarding the
regulated activity or as requested by the
Administrator. The requirements of this
paragraph apply to solid wastes even
when the hazardous characteristic is
removed prior to disposal, or when the
waste is excluded from the definition of
hazardous or solid waste under 40 CFR
261.2 through 261.6, or exempted from
Subtitle C regulation, subsequent to the
point of generation.
(9) If a generator is managing a lab
pack containing hazardous wastes and
wishes to use the alternative treatment
standard for lab packs found at
§268.42(c):
(i) With the initial shipment of waste
to a treatment facility, the generator
must submit a notice that provides the
information in column "§ 268.7(a)(9)" in
the Generator Paperwork Requirements
Table of paragraph (a) (4) of this section,
and the following certification. The
certification, which must be signed by
an authorized representative and must
be placed in the generator's files, must
say the following:
I certify under penalty of law that I
personally have examined and am familiar
with the waste and that the lab pack contains
only wastes that have not been excluded
under appendix IV to 40 CFR part 268 and
that this lab pack will be sent to a
combustion facility in compliance with the
alternative treatment standards for lab packs
at 40 CFR 268.42(c). I am aware that there are
significant penalties for submitting a false
certification, including the possibility of fine
or imprisonment.
(ii) No further notification is
necessary until such time that the
wastes in the lab pack change, or the
receiving facility changes, in which
a new notice and certification must be
sent and a copy placed in the
generator's file.
(iii) If the lab pack contains
characteristic hazardous wastes (D001-
D043), underlying hazardous
constituents (as defined in § 268.2(1))
need not be determined.
(iv) The generator must also comply
with the requirements in paragraphs
(a) (6) and (a) (7) of this section.
(10) Small quantity generators with
tolling agreements pursuant to 40 CFR
262.20(e) must comply with the
applicable notification and certification
requirements of paragraph (a) of this *
section for the initial shipment of the
waste subject to the agreement. Such
generators must retain on-site a copy of
the notification and certification,
together with the tolling agreement, for
at least three years after termination Or
expiration of the agreement. The three-
year record retention period is
automatically extended during the
course of any unresolved enforcement
action regarding the regulated activity or
as requested by the Administrator.
(b) Treatment facilities must test their
wastes according to the frequency
specified in their waste analysis plans
as required by 40 CFR 264.13 (for
permitted TSDs) or 40 CFR 265.13 (for
interim status facilities). Such testing
must be performed as provided in
paragraphs (b)(l), (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this
section.
(1) For wastes with treatment
standards expressed as concentrations
in the waste extract (TCLP), the owner
or operator of the treatment facility must
test an extract of the treatment residues,
using test method 1311 (the Toxiclty
Characteristic Leaching Procedure,
described in "Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods," EPA Publication
SW-846 as incorporated by reference in
§ 260.11 of this chapter), to assure that
the treatment residues extract meet the
applicable treatment standards.
(2) For wastes with treatment
standards expressed as concentrations
in the waste, the owner or operator of
the treatment facility must test the
treatment residues (not an extract of
such residues) to assure that they meet
the applicable treatment standards.
(3) A one-time notice must be sent
with the initial shipment of waste to the
land disposal facility. A copy of the
notice must be placed in the treatment
facility's file.
(i) No further notification is necessary
until such time that the waste or
receiving facility change, in which case
a new notice must be sent and a copy
placed in the treatment facility's file.
(ii) The one-time notice must include
these requirements:
TREATMENT FACILITY PAPERWORK REQUIREMENTS TABLE
Required information
§268.7(b)
1. EPA Hazardous Waste and Manifest numbers
2. The waste is subject 1o the LDRs. The constituents of concern for F001-F005, and F039, and underlying hazardous constitu-
ents (for wastes that are not managed in a Clean Water Act (CWA) or CWA-equivalent facility), unless the waste will be treated
and monitored for all constituents. If all constituents will be treated and monitored, there is no need to put them all on the LDR
notice
3. The notice must include the applicable wastewater/ nonwastewater category (see §§268.2(d) and (f)) and subdivisions"made
within a waste code based on waste-specific criteria (such as D003 reactive cyanide)
4. Waste analysis data (when available) !.!""""™"""!""".!"'.!"!"!"
5. A certification statement is needed (see applicable section for exact wording) !"!!!."!!".'"!!!!!
(4) The treatment facility must submit
a one-time certification signed by an
authorized representative with the
initial shipment of waste or treatment
residue of a restricted waste to the land
disposal facility. The certification must
state:
I certify under penalty of law that I have
personally examined and am familiar with
the treatment technology and operation of the
treatment process used to support this
certification. Based on my inquiry of those
individuals immediately responsible for
obtaining this information, I believe that the
treatment process has been operated and
maintained properly so as to comply with the
treatment standards specified in 40 CFR
268.40 without impermissible dilution of the
-------
26022 Federal Register / Vol. 62. No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
prohibited waste. I am aware there are
significant penalties for submitting a false
certification, including the possibility of fine
and Imprisonment.
(I) A copy of the certification must be
placed In the treatment facility's on-slte
flics. If the waste or treatment residue
changes, or the receiving facility
changes, a new certification must be
sent to the receiving facility, and a copy
placed In the file.
(11) Debris excluded from the
definition of hazardous waste under
§261.3(e) of this chapter (i.e., debris
treated by an extraction or destruction
technology provided by Table 1,
§268.45, and debris that the Director
has determined does not contain
hazardous waste), however, Is subject to
the notification and certification
requirements of paragraph (d) of this
section rather than the certification
requirements of this paragraph.
(ill) For wastes with organic
constituents having treatment standards
expressed as concentration levels, if
compliance with the treatment
standards is based In whole or in part
on the analytical detection limit
alternative specified In §268.40(d). the
certification, signed by an authorized
representative, must state the following:
1 certify under penalty of law that I have
personally examined and am familiar with
the treatment technology and operation of the
treatment process used to support this
certification. Based on my inquiry of those
'Individuals immediately responsible for
obtaining this Information, I believe that the
nonwnstewater organic constituents have
been treated by combustion units as specified
In 268.42, Table 1.1 have been unable to
detect the nonwastewater organic
constituents, despite having used best good-
faith efforts to analyze for such constituents.
I am aware there are significant penalties for
submitting a false certification, including the
possibility of fine and Imprisonment.
*****
(c) * * *
(1) Have copies of the notice and
certifications specified In paragraph (a)
or (b) of this section.
(2) Test the waste, or.an extract of the
waste or treatment residue developed
using test method 1311 (theToxiclty
Characteristic Leaching Procedure),
described In "Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods." EPA Publication
SW-846 as Incorporated by reference In
§260.11 of this chapter), to assure that
the wastes or treatment residues are In
compliance with the applicable
treatment standards set forth in subpart
D of this part. Such testing must be
performed according to the frequency
specified in the facility's waste analysis
plan as required by § 264.13 or § 265.13
of tills chapter.
*****
12. Section 268.9 Is amended by
revising paragraph (a) and (d) (1) (ii) to
read as follows:
§268.9 Special rules regarding wastes that
exhibit a characteristic.
(a) The initial generator of a solid
waste must determine each EPA
Hazardous Waste Number (waste code)
applicable to the waste In order to
determine the applicable treatment
standards under subpart D of this part.
For purposes of part 268, the waste will
carry the waste code for any applicable
listed waste (Part 261, Subpart D): In
addition, where the waste exhibits a
characteristic, the waste will carry one
or more of the characteristic waste codes
(Part 261, Subpart C), except when the
treatment standard for the listed waste
operates in lieu of the treatment
standard for the characteristic waste, as
specified in paragraph (b) of this
section. If the generator determines that
their waste displays a hazardous
characteristic (and is not D001
nonwastewaters treated by CMBST,
RORGS. OR POLYM of § 268.42, Table
1), the generator must determine the
underlying hazardous constituents (as
defined at § 268.2(1)) in the
characteristic waste.
(d)
(D
* *
* * *
* * *
(11) A description of the waste as
initially generated, including the
applicable EPA hazardous waste
code(s), treatability group(s), and
underlying hazardous constituents (as
defined in § 268.2(i)), unless the waste
will be treated and monitored for all ,.
underlying hazardous constituents. If all
underlying hazardous constituents will
be treated and monitored, there is no
requirement to list any of the underlying
hazardous constituents on the notice.
Subpart C—Prohibitions on Land
Disposal
13. Section 268.30 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 268.30 Waste specific prohibitions-
wood preserving wastes.
(a) Effective August 11, 1997, the
following wastes are prohibited from
land disposal: the wastes specified in 40
CFR part 261 as EPA Hazardous Waste
numbers F032, F034, and F035.
(b) Effective May 12, 1999, the
following wastes are prohibited from
land disposal: soil and debris
contaminated with F032, F034, F035;
and radioactive wastes mixed with EPA
Hazardous waste numbers F032, F034,
and F035.
(c) Between May 12, 1997 and May
12, 1999, soil and debris contaminated
with F032, F034, E035; and radioactive
waste mixed with F032, F034, and F035
may be disposed in a landfill or surface
impoundment only if such unit is In
compliance with the requirements
specified in §268.5(h)(2) of this part.
(d) The requirements of paragraphs (a)
and (b) of this section do not apply if:
1 (1) The wastes meet the applicable
treatment standards specified in Subpart
D of this part;
(2) Persons have been granted an
exemption from a prohibition pursuant
to a petition under § 268.6, with respect
to those wastes and units covered by the
petition;
(3) The wastes meet the applicable
alternate treatment standards
established pursuant to a petition
granted under § 268.44; or
(4) Persons have been granted an
extension to the effective date of a
prohibition pursuant to § 268.5, with
respect to those wastes covered by the
extension.
(e) To determine whether a hazardous
waste identified in this section exceeds
the applicable treatment standards
specified in § 268.40, the initial
generator must test a sample of the
waste extract or the entire waste,
depending on whether the treatment
standards are expressed as
concentrations in the waste extract or
the waste, or the generator may use
knowledge of the waste. If the waste
contains constituents in excess of the
applicable Universal Treatment
Standard levels of §268.48 of this part,
the waste is prohibited from land
disposal, and all requirements of part
268 are applicable, except as otherwise
specified.
§§268.32,268.33, 268.34, 268.35 and 2(16.36
[Removed and Reserved]
14. Sections 268.32, 268.33, 268.34,
268.35, and 268.36 are removed and
reserved.
Subpart D—Treatment Standards
15. In § 268.40 the Table of Treatment
Standards is amended by adding, in
alpha-numerical order, entries for F032,
F034, and F035, and revising entries for
D001, F024 to read as follows:
§268.40 Applicability of treatment
standards.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26023
TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTES
[Note: NA means not applicable]
Regulated hazardous constituent
Wastewaters
Waste Waste description and treat-
code ment/regulatory subcategory1
Common ngme
CAS 2 No
CAS No-
Concentration in mg/i *;
or technology codl*
Nonwastewaters
Concentration in
.'- or tech-
nology code
D001 s ...... High TOC Ignitable Char-
acteristic Liquids Sub-
category based on 40 CFR
261.21 (a)(1)—Greater than
or equal to 10% total organic
carbon. (Note: This sub-
category consists of
nonwastewaters only.).
NA
NA NA
RORGS; CMBST;
OR POLYM
F024 Process wastes, including but
not limited to, distillation resi-
dues, heavy ends, tars, and
reactor clean-out wastes,
from the production of cer-
tain chlorinated aliphatic hy-
drocarbons by free radical
catalyzed processes. These
. chlorinated aliphatic hydro-
carbons are those having
carbon chain lengths ranging
from one to and including
five, with varying amounts
and positions of chlorine
substitution. (This listing
does not include
wastewaters, wastewater
treatment sludges, spent
catalysts, and wastes listed
in §261.31 or §261.32.).
All F024 wastes
2-Chloro-1,3-butadiene
3-Chloropropylene
1,1-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloropropane ,
NA
126-99-8
107-05-1
75-34-3
107-06-2
78-87-5
cis-1,3-Dichloropropylene 10061-01-5
trans-1,3-Dichloropropylene 10061-02-6
bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate 117-61-7
Hexachloroethane 67-72-1
Chromium (Total) 7440-47-3
Nickel 7440-02-0
CMBST"
0.057
0.036
0.059
0.21
0.85
0.036
0.036
0.28
0.055
2.77
3.98
CMBST"
0.28
30
6.0
6.0
18
18
18
28
30
0.86 mg/l TCLP
5.0 mg/l TCLP
F032 Wastewaters (except those that
have noj come into contact
with process contaminants),
process residuals, preserva-
tive drippage, and spent for-
mulations from wood pre-
serving processes generated
at plants that currently use or
have previously used
chlorophenolic formulations
(except potentially cross-con-
taminated wastes that have
had the F032 waste code
deleted in accordance with
§261.35 of this chapter or
potentially cross-contami-
nated wastes that are other-
wise currently regulated as
hazardous wastes (i.e., F034
or F035), and where the
generator does not resume
or initiate use of
chlorophenolic formulations).
This listing does not include
K001 bottom sediment
sludge from the treatment of
wastewater from wood pre-
serving processes that use
creosote and/or penta-
chlorophenol.
Acenaphthene
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene (difficult to
distinguish from benzo(k) fluo-
ranthene).
Benzo(k)fluoranthene (difficult to
distinguish from benzo(b) fluo-
ranthene).
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
2-4-Dimethyl phenol
Fluorene
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
Hexachlorodibenzofurans
Indeno (1,2,3-c,d) pyrene
Naphthalene
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
Pentachlorodibenzofurans
Pentachlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxins
Tetrachlorodibenzofurans
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Arsenic
Chromium (Total)
83-32-9 0.059 3.4
120-12-7 0.059 3.4
56-55-3 0.059 3.4
205-99-2 0.11 6.8
207-08-9 0.11 6.8
50-32-8
218-01-9
53-70-3
105-67-9
86-73-7
NA
NA
193-39-5
91-20-3
NA
NA
87-86-5
85-01-8
108-95-2
129-00-0
NA
NA
58-90-2
88-06-2
7440-38-2
7440-47-3
0.061
0.059
0.055
0.036
0.059
0.000063 or CMBST"
0.000063 or CMBST"
0.0055
0.059
0.000063 or CMBST"
0.000035 or CMBST"
0.089
0.059
0.039
0.067
0.000063 or CMBST"
0.000063 or CMBST"
0.030
0.035
1.4
2.77
3.4
3.4
8.2
14
3.4
0.001 or CMBST"
0.001 or CMBST"
3.4
5.6
0.001 or CMBST"
0.001 or CMBST"
7.4
5.6
6.2
8.2
0.001 or CMBST"
0.001 or CMBST"
7.4
7.4
5.0 mg/l TCLP
0.86 mg/ITCLP
-------
26024 Federal Register / Vol. 62. No. 91 / Monday. May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTES—Continued
[Note: NA means not applicable]
Regulated hazardous constituent
Wastewaters
Nonwastewaters
Waste Waste description and treat-
code ment/regulatory subcategory1
have not come Into contact
with process contaminants),
process residuals, preserva-
tive drippage, and spent for-
mulations from wood pre-
serving processes generated
at plants that use creosote
formulations. This listing
does not Include K001 bot-
tom sediment sludge from
the treatment of wastewater
from wood preserving proc-
esses that use creosote and/
or pentachlorophenol.
F035 Wastewaters (except those that
have not come into contact
Common name
Acenaphthene
Anthracene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene (difficult to
distinguish from
benzo(k)fiuoranthene).
Benzo(k)fluoranthene (difficult to
distinguish from
benzo(b)fluoranthene).
Benzo(a)pyrene .
Dibenz(a h)anthracene
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Pyrene
Chromium (Total)
Arsenic
Chromium (Total)
CAS2 No.
83-32-9
120-12-7
56-55-3
205-99-2
207-08-9
50-32-8
218-01-9
53-70-3
86-73-7
193-39-5
91 20-3
85-01-8
129-00-0
7440-38-2
7440-47-3
7440-38-2
7440-47-3
Concentration in mg/l3;
or technology code-*
0.059
0.059
0.059
0.11
0.11
0.061
0.059
0.055
0.059
0.0055
0.059
0.059
0.067
1.4
2.77
1.4
2.77
Concentration in
mg/kg 5 unless
noted as "mg/l
TCLP"; or tech-
nology code
3.4
3.4
3.4
6.8
6.8
3.4
3.4
8.2
3.4
3.4
5.6
5.6
8.2
5.0 mg/l TCLP
0.86 mg/l TCLP
5.0 mg/l TCLP
0.86 mg/l TCLP
with process contaminants),
process residuals, preserva-
tive drippage, and spent for-
mulations from wood pre-
serving processes processes
generated at plants that use
Inorganic preservatives con-
taining arsenic or chromium.
This listing does not include
K001 bottom sediment
sludge from the treatment of
wastewater from wood pre-
serving processes that use
creosote and/or
pentachlorophenol.
FOOTNOTES TO TREATMENT STANDARDS TABLE 268.40:
'Tho waste descriptions provided in this table do not replace waste descriptions in 40 CFR part 261. Descriptions of Treatment/Regulatory
Subcatcgories are provided, as needed, to distinguish between applicability of different standards.
aCAS means Chemical Abstract Services. When the waste code and/or regulated constituents are described as a combination of a chemical
with Its salts and/or esters, the CAS number is given for the parent compound only.
a Concentration standards for Wastewaters are expressed in mg/l and are based on analysis of composite samples.
4 All treatment standards expressed as a Technology Code or combination of Technology Codes are explained in detail in §268.42 Table 1—
Technology Codes and Descriptions of Technology-Based Standards.
8 Except for Metals (EP or TCLP) and Cyanides (Total and Amenable) the nonwastewater treatment standards expressed as a concentration
wore established, In part, based upon Incineration in units operated in accordance with the technical requirements of 40 CFR part 264, subpart
O, or part 265, subpart O, or based upon combustion in fuel substitution units operating in accordance with applicable technical requirements. A
facility may comply with these treatment standards according to provisions in §268.40(d). All concentration standards for nonwastewaters are
based on analysis of grab samples.
8Whara an alternate treatment standard or set of alternate standards has been indicated, a facility may comply with this alternate standard, but
only for tho Treatment/Regulatory Subcategory or physical form (i.e., wastewater and/or nonwastewater) specified for that alternate standard.
7Both Cyanides (Total) and Cyanides (Amenable) for nonwastewaters are to be analyzed using Method 9010 or 9012, found in 'Test Methods
for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods", EPA Publication SW-846, as incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 260.11, with a sam-
ple size of 10 grams and a distillation time of one hour and 15 minutes.
•These wastes, when rendered nonhazardous and then subsequently managed in CWA, or CWA-equivalenl systems are not subject to treat-
ment standards. (See § 268.1 (c) (3) and (4)).
"Those wastes, when rendered nonhazardous and then subsequently injected in a Class I SDWA well are not subject to treatment standards.
(Sea 40 CFR part 148.1(d)).
"Between August 26, 1996, and August 26, 1997, the treatment standard for this waste may be satisfied by either meeting the constituent
concentrations In this table or by treating the waste by the specified technologies: combustion, as defined by the technolgy code CMBST at
§268.42 Table 1 of this part, for nonwastewaters; and, biodegradation as deflnded by the technolgy code BIODQ, carbon adsorption as defined
by the technology code CARBN, chemical oxidation as defined by the technology code CHOXD, or combustion as defined as technolgy code
CMBST at § 268.42 Table 1 of this part, for wastewaters.
-------
Federal Register /Vol. 62. No. 91 / Monday. May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26025
TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTES
[Note: NA means .not applicable]
Regulated hazardous constituent
Wastewaters
Nonwastewaters
Waste
code
Waste description and treat-
ment/regulatory subcategory 1
Common name CAS* No. C™c—
Concentration in
rng/kg s unless
noted as "mg/l
TCLP"; or tech-
nology code
11 For these wastes, the definition of CMBST is limited to: (1) combustion units operating under 40 CFR 266, (2) combustion units permitted
under 40 CFR Part 264, Subpart O, or (3) combustion units operating under 40 CFR 265, Subpart O, which have obtained a determination of
equivalent treatment under 268.42(b).
§268.42 [Amended]
16. Section 268.42 is amended by
adding the entry "POLYM" into Table
1.— Technology Codes and Description
of Technology-Based Standards, in
alphabetical order, to read as follows:
*****
TABLE 1 .—TECHNOLOGY CODES AND DESCRIPTION OF TECHNOLOGY-BASED STANDARDS
Technology code
Description of technology-based standards
POLYM:
Formation of, complex high-molecular weight solids through polymerization of monomers in
high-TOC D001 non-wastewaters which are chemical components in the manufacture of
plastics.
17. Section 268,44 is amended by
revising both entries in the "see also"
column of the table in paragraph (o) to
read "§268.40" and by revising the
introductory language of paragraph (o)
and the heading of the table in
paragraph (o) to read as follows:
§ 268.44 Variance from a treatment
standard.
(o) The following facilities are
excluded from the treatment standards
under § 268.40 and are subject to the
following constituent concentrations:
Table—Wastes Excluded from the
Treatment Standards Under § 268.40.
Appendices I, II, III, and X to Part 268
[Removed and Reserved]
18. Appendices I, II, III, and X to part
268 are removed and reserved.
19. The introductory language of
appendix VI to part 268 is revised to
read as follows:
Appendix VI to Part 268—
Recommended Technologies to Achieve
Deactivation of Characteristics in
Section 268.42
The treatment standard for many
characteristic wastes is stated in the § 268.40
Table of Treatment Standards as
"Deactivation and meet UTS." EPA has
determined that many technologies, when
used alone or in combination, can achieve
the deactivation portion of the treatment
standard. Characteristic wastes that are not
managed in a facility regulated by the Clean
Water Act (CWA) or in a CWA-equivalent
facility, and that also contain underlying
hazardous constituents (see § 268.2(1)) must
be treated not only by a "deactivating"
technology to remove the characteristic, but
also to achieve the universal treatment
standards (UTS) for underlying hazardous
constituents. The following appendix
presents a partial list of technologies,
utilizing the five letter technology codes
established in 40 CFR 268.42 Table 1, that
may be useful in meeting the treatment
standard. Use of these specific technologies
is not mandatory and does not preclude
direct reuse, recovery, and/or the use of other
pretreatment technologies, provided
deactivation is achieved and underlying
hazardous constituents are treated to achieve
the UTS.
*****
20. Appendix VII to Part 268 is
revised to read as follows:
Appendix VII to Part 268—LDR
Effective Dates of Surface Disposed
Prohibited Hazardous Wastes
TABLE 1 .—EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRS<
COMPREHENSIVE LIST
Waste code
D001"
D001
D002*
D003"
D004
D004
D005
D006
D007
D008
Waste category
All (except High TOG Ignitable Liquids)
High TOC Ignitable Liquids
All
All
Nonwastewater
Wastewater
All
All
All
Lead materials before secondary smeltina
Effective date
Ann Q 1QC«
Ann ft 1QQO
Ann Q 1QCM
JulyS 1996
Mav ft 1 QQP
Aug 8 1992
Aug 8 1990
Aug 8 1 990
Aug 8 1990
Mav8.'l992.
-------
26026 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1.—EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRS£
COMPREHENSIVE LIST—Continued
Waste code
0008
0009
0009
D010
D011 ,
D012 (that exhibit the toxfcHy characteristic based
oflthoTCLP)«.
0013 (that exhibit the toxlclty characteristic based
on tho TCLP)«".
D014 (that exhibit the toxlclty characteristic based
onthoTCLP}*.
D0 15 (that exhibit the toxfcHy characteristic based
onthaTCLP)-*.
D016 (that exhibit the toxteity characteristic based
onthaTCLPJd.
D017 (that exhibit the toxlcity characteristic based
onthaTCLP)-*.
0018
0018
0019
0019 ,
0020
O020
0021
0021 ,
0022
0022
O023
O023
O024
D024
0025
0025
D026
0026
0027
0027
O028
0028
0029
0029
O030
O030
0031
0031
0032
D032
0033
D033
O034
0034
O035
0035
D036
0036
O037
O037
0038
0038
0039
0039
0040
0040
0041
O041 ,
O042
D042
0043
D043
Waste category
All others
Nonwastewater
All others
All
All
All
All
AH
All
AH
All
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes •
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
AH others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others ,
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others :
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others '.
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes ;
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others ,
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Effective date
Aug. 8, 1990.
May 8, 1992.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Dec. 14, 1994.
Dec. 14, 1994.
Dec. 14, 1994.
Dec. 14, 1994.
Dec. 14, 1994.
Dec. 14, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19. 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sept. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26027
TABLE 1.—EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRS'
COMPREHENSIVE LIST—Continued
Waste code
F001
F001
F002 (1,1,2-trichloroethane)
F002
F002
F003
F003 '...'. ;
F004 :
F004
F005 (benzene, 2-ethoxy ethanol, 2-nitropropane)
F005
F005
F006 ....: ; ;
F006 :
F006 (cyanides)
F007
F008
F009
F010
F011 (cyanides)
F011
F012 (cyanides)
F012 .,
F019
F020
F021
F025
F026 I
F027 ! '...; . .. .
F028
F032
F032
F033
F033
F034
F034
F037 ,
F037
F037 .,
F038
F038
F038
F039 '.
F039
K001 (organics) f>
K001
K002
K003
K004
K004
K005
K005
K006
K007
K007 : :
K008
K008
K009
K010
K011
K011
Waste category
Small quantity generators CERCLA response/RCRA corrective action
initial generator's solvent-water mixtures, solvent-containing sludges
and solids.
All others
Wastewater and Nonwastewater ;
Small quantity generators CERCLA response/RCRA corrective action
initial generator's solvent-water mixtures, solvent-containing sludges
and solids.
All others
Small quantity generators CERCLA response/RCRA corrective action
initial generator's solvent-water mixtures, solvent-containing sludges
and solids.
All others '
Small quantity generators CERCLA response/RCRA corrective action
initial generator's solvent-water mixtures, solvent-containing sludges
and solids.
All others ;
Wastewater and Nonwastewater
Small quantity generators, CERCLA response/RCRA corrective action
initial generator's solvent-water mixtures, solvent-containing sludges
and solids.
All others
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
Nonwastewater
All
All
All
All . . ..
Nonwastewater
All others
Nonwastewater
All others
All
All
All
All .
All
All
All
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Not generated from surface impoundment cleanouts or closures
Generated from surface impoundment cleanouts or closures
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Generated from surface impoundment cleanouts or closures
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Wastewater
Non wastewate r
All
All others
All
All
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
All
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
All
All
Wastewate r
Nonwastewater
Effective date
Nov 8 1988
Nov. 8, 1986.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Nov 8 1988
Nov 8 1986
Nov 8 1988
Nov 8 1986
Nov 8 1988
Nov 8 1986
Aug. 8, 1990.
Nov 8 1988
Nov 8 1986
Aug 8 1990
Aug 8 1988
JulyS 1989
JulyS 1989
July 8 1989
JulyS 1989
June 8 1989
Dec 8 1989
JulyS 1989
Dec 8 1989
JulyS 1989
Aug 8 1 990
Nov 8 1988
Nov 8 1988
Aug 8 1990
Nov 8 1988
Nov 8 1988
Nov 8 1988
May 12 1999
May 12 1997
May 12 1999
May 12 1997
May 12 1999
May 12 1997
June 30 1993
June 30 1994
June 30 1994
him* in 1QQ9
June 30 1994
June 30 1994
Aug 8 1990
May 8 1992
Aug 8 1988
Aug 8 1 988
Aug 8 1 990
Aug 8 1990
Aug 8 1990
Aug 8 1988
Aug 8 1990
June 8 1989
Aug 8 1990
Aug 8 1990
June 8 1989
Aug 8 1990
Aug 8 1988
June 8 1989
June 8 1989
Aug 8 1990
June 8. 1989.
-------
26028 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1.—EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRS£
COMPREHENSIVE LIST—Continued
Waste code
«013
K013
K014 >
K014
K015
K015
K016
K017
K018 ,
K019
K020 .'
K021
K021
K022 «
K022
K023 .
KQ24
K025
K025
K026
K027
K028 (metals)
K028
K029
K029
KQ30
K031
K031 .
K032
K033
K034
K035
K036
K036
K037b
K037
K038
K039
K040
K041
K042
K043
K044
K045
KQ46 (Nonreacllve)
K046
K047
K048
K048 ....
K049
K049
K050
KOSO
«051
K051
K052
K052 . .
K060
K060
K061
K061
K062
K069 (Non-Catetum Sulfate)
K069
K071
K073
K083
K084
K084
K085
K086 (oraanlcs) i>
Waste category
Wastewaler
Nonwastewater
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
All
All
All
All
All
Wastewater
Wastewater
All
All «•
Wastewater :
Nonwastewater
All
All
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
All :
Wastewaler
All
All
AH
All
Wastewater
Wastewater '.
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
Nonwastewater
All others
All
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
Wastewater ,
Nonwaslewater
Nonwastewater .'
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
Wastewater , ,
AH
Nonwastewater
All others ;.
All
All
All
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
All
All
Effective date
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 8, 1 989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 8, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
JuneS, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 8, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
JuneS, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 8, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
May 8, 1992.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 8, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1988.
JuneS, 1989.
JuneS, 1989.
JuneS, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
JuneS, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Nov. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Nov. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Nov. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Nov. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Nov. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 30, 1992.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
May 8, 1992.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26029
TABLE 1.—EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRS»
COMPREHENSIVE LIST—Continued
Waste code
K086
K087
K088
K088
K093
K094
K095
K095 ,
K096
K096
K097
K098
K099
K100
K100
K101 (organics)
K101 (metals)
K101 (organics)
K101 (metals)
K102 (organics)
K102 (metals)
K102 (organics)
K102 (metals)
K103
K104
K105
K106
K106
K107
K107
K108
K108
K109
K109
K110
K110
K111
K111
K112
K112
K113
K114
K115
K116 .,
K117
K117
K118
K118
K123
K123 :
K124 ,
K124
K125
K125
K126
K126
K131
K131
K132
K132
K136
K136
K141
K141
K142 „
K142
K143
K143
K144
K144
K145
Waste category
All others
All
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others .. .
All
All
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
All
All
A'll
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
Wastewater
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
Nonwastewater
Wastewater .
Wastewater .
Nonwastewater
Nonwastewater ,
All
All
All
Wastewater
Nonwastewater
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others . ,
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others .
Mixed with radioactive wastes >%
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
All
All
All
All
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
All others .
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
AHothers
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Effective date
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Jan. 8, 1997.
JuneS, 1989.
JuneS, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
JuneS, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 8, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
May 8, 1992.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1988.
May 8, 1992.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
May 8, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 8, 1989.
JuneS, 1989.
June 8, 1 989.
June 8, 1989.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Sep. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sep. 19, 1996..
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sep. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sep. 19, 1996.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Sea 19. 1996.
-------
26032 Federal Register / Vol. 62. No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1 —EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRS'
COMPREHENSIVE LIST—Continued
Waste code
P12fl
P185
P185
P1(j8
P1RH
P189
P189 „ , ,
P190 ,
P190
P191
pjgj
P192
P192
P194
P194
P196 .
P19S „
P197 , , ,
P197
PJ98
P198
P199
P199
P201
P201
P202 ... ...
P202 . .
P203
P203
P204
P204
P205 .
P205
UQ01 . ,. ,
U002
U003 ... .
U004 < , . •
uoos
U006
U007
U008
U010
U011
U014
U015
U017 . . .
U018
U019
U020
U021 ..
U022 . .
U023 ...
U024
U025
U026
U027
U028
U029
U030
U031
U032
U033
U034
U035 „
U037
U038 ..„..
U039
Waste category
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes '.
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others •
Mixed with radioactive wastes
AH others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others ,
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others »•
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others .'
All others
All ,
All
AH
AH
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All ,
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
AH
All
All
All
All
All
All i
All
All
All
All
All ,
All
All i
All
Effective date
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
July 8, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998,
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
July 8, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
JuneS, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26033
TABLE 1.—EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRS'
COMPREHENSIVE LIST—Continued
Waste code
U041
U042
U043
U044
U045
U046
U047
U048
U049
U050
U051
U052
U053
U055
U056
U057
U058
U059
U060
U061
U062
U063
U064
U066
U067
U068
U069
U070
U071
U072
U073
U074
U075
U076
U077
U078
U079
U080
U081
U082
U083
U084
U085
U086
U087
U088
U089
U090
U091
U092
U093
U094
U095
U096
U097
U098
U099
U101
U102
U103
U105
U106
U107
U108
U109
U110
U111
U112
U113 ..
U114
U115
Waste category
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
AH
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml „
All
All
All ,
Effective date
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 8, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 30, 1992.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
JuneS, 1989..
Junes, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990. '
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 8, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug: 8, 1990.
June 8, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aua. 8. 1990.
-------
26034 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1.—EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRS1
COMPREHENSIVE LIST—Continued
Waste code
U117
U118 ,
U119
U120
U121
U122 '
U123
U124
U125 ,
(J126 .....,..:.
U127
U128
U129
U130 -
U131
y-|34
U135
Ui3g
U136
U137
U138 ,
U140
U141
U142
U143
U144
U145
U146 ,
U147
U148
U149 ,
U15Q
U151 „ , ,
U151
U152
U153
U154
U155
U158 ;
U157
U158
U159
U160
U161
U162
U163
U164
U165
U166
U167
U168
U169
U170
U171
U172
U173 . ...
y-(74
U176
U177
U178
U179 '
U180
U181 ......
U182
U183 ,
U184
U185 . , ,
U186
Waste category
AH
All
All
All
All ,
All i
All
All
All
All
All
AH
All
All
AH
AH
All ;
All
Nonwastewater
All
All
All
All
All
All
All .-.
All
All : ...
All
All
All
All
Wastewater ;
All ;.........
All
All
All
All
All ...........
All
All .,
All
All
All
All
All
All .-.
All
All
All
All
All
All
All ,
AH ,
All .-., ,.
AH '..,...i......
All .....
All
All ;
All ; ;
AH
AH
All ....a
AH ,
AH :...
All >...
Effective date
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.^
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
May 8, 1992.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
May 8, 1992.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday. May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26035
TABLE 1 .—EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRS -
COMPREHENSIVE LIST—Continued
Waste code
U187
U188
U189 ;...
U190 .
U191
U192
U193
U194
U196
U197
U200
U201
U202
U203
U204
U205
U206
U207
U208
U209 ;
U210
U211
U213
U214
U215
U216
U217
U218
U219
U220
U221
U222
U223
U225
U226
U227
U228
U234
U235
U236
U237
U238
U239
U240
U243 ;
U244
U246
U247
U248 •„;
U249
U271
U271
U277
U277
U278
U278
U279
U279
U280
U280
U328
U328
U353
U353
U359
U359 ..„
U364
U364
U365
U365
U366
Waste category
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All ;
All
All
All
All
All
All ... .
All
All
All
All ...
All
All
All
All
All
All
All ... .
All
All
All
All ,
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All ....
All ....
All
All
All
All
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others .
Mixed with' radioactive wastes
All others ..
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others '
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Effective date
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
JuneS, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June 8, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
June"8, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
JuneS, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
JuneS, 1989.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
July 8, 1996.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1994.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Apr. 8, 1998."
July 8, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Anr. 8. 1998.
-------
26036 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1.-—EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRS>
COMPREHENSIVE LIST—Continued
Waste code
U366 4 ... ... .
1)367 .
U367 ...
U372
U372 .
U373
U373 , .
U375
U375 ,
U376 ..
U375 ,
U377 .
U377
U378 .
U37A .
U379 ,
U379
U3Q1
U381
U382
U382
U3S3 ,
U383
U384 , ...
U384
U385
U385 , M
U386
U388
U387
U387 , .
U389
U389
U390
U390 . .
U391
(J39\
U392
U392 . .
U393 .
U393
U334
U394
U39S . .
U395
U396 , , , ,
U396
U400
U400 . <
U401
U401
U402 ....
U402
U403
U403
U404
U404 .....
U407
U407
U409 ,
U409
U41Q
U410 .. .
U411 ... ,
U411
Waste category
All others •
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others I
Mixed with radioactive wastes .•
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others •
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes ,:
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes
Mixed with radioactive wastes ;
All others
Mixed with radioactive wastes
All others
Effective date
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
July 8, 1996.
Apr. 8, 199S.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JulyS, 1996.
•This laWe does not Include mixed radioactive wastes (from the First, Second, and Third Third rules) which received national capacity variance
until May 8,1992. This table also does not include contaminated soil and debris wastes.
"•The standard was revised In the Third Third Final Rule (55 FR 22520, June 1,1990).
•The standard was revised in the Third Third Emergency Rule (58 FR 29860, May 24,1993); the original effective date was August 8,1990.
•»Tho standard was revised In the Phase II Rnal Rule (59 FR 47982, Sept. 19,1994); the original effective date was August 8,1990.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 ./ Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26037
TABLE 1.—EFFECTIVE DATES OF SURFACE DISPOSED WASTES (NON-SOIL AND DEBRIS) REGULATED IN THE LDRSs
COMPREHENSIVE LIST—Continued
Waste code
Waste category
Effective date
«The standards for selected reactive wastes was revised in the Phase 111 Final Rule (61 FR 15566, Apr. 8, 1996); the original effective date
was August 8,1990.
TABLE 2.—SUMMARY OF EFFECTIVE DATES OF LAND DISPOSAL RESTRICTIONS FOR CONTAMINATED SOIL AND DEBRIS
(CSD)
Restricted hazardous waste in CSD
Effective date
1. Solvent-(F001-F005) and dioxin-(F020-F023 and F026-F028) containing soil and debris from CERCLA response or
RCRA corrective actions.
2. Soil and debris not from CERCLA response or RCRA corrective actions contaminated with less than 1% total solvents
(F001-F005) or dioxins (F020-F023 and F026-F028).
3 All soil and debris contaminated with First Third wastes for which treatment standards are based on incineration
4. All soil and debris contaminated with Second Third wastes for which treatment standards are based on incineration
5. All soil and debris contaminated with Third Third wastes or, First or Second Third "soft hammer" wastes which had treat-
ment standards promulgated in the Third Third rule, for which treatment standards are based on incineration, vitrification, or
mercury retorting, acid leaching followed by chemical precipitation, or thermal recovery of metals; as well as all inorganic
solids debris contaminated with D004-D011 wastes, and all soil and debris contaminated with mixed RCRA/radioactive
wastes.
6. Soil and debris contaminated with D012-D043, K141-K145, and K147-151 wastes
7. Debris (only) contaminated with F037, F038, K107-K112, K117, K118, K123-K126, K131, K132, K136, U328, U353, U3S9
8. Soil and debris contaminated with K156-K161, P127, P128, P188-P192, P194, P196-P199, P201-P205, U271, U277-
U280, U364-U367, U372, U373, U375-U379, U381-U387, U389-U396, U400-U404, U407, and U409-U411 wastes.
9. Soil and debris contaminated with K088 wastes
10. Soil and debris contaminated with radioactive wastes mixed with K088, K156-K161, P127, P128, P188-P192 P194
P196-P199, P201-P205, U271, U277-U280, U364-U367, U372, U373, U375-U379, U361-U387, U389-U396, U400-
U404, U407, and U409-U411 wastes.
11. Soil and debris contaminated with F032, F034, and F035
Nov. 8, 1990.
Nov. 8, 1988.
Aug. 8, 1990.
JuneS, 1991.
May 8,1992.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Dec. 19, 1994
JulyS, 1996.
Jan. 8,1997.
April 8, 1998.
May 12, 1997.
Note: Appendix VII is provided for the convenience of the reader.
21. Appendix VIII to Part 268 is
revised to read as follows:
Appendix VIII to Part 268—LDR
Effective Dates of Surface Disposed
Prohibited Hazardous Wastes
NATIONAL CAPACITY LDR VARIANCES FOR UIC WASTESa
Waste code
F001-F005
D001 (except High TOC Ignrtable Liquids Sub-
category)0.
D001 (High TOC Ignitable Characteristic Liquids
Subcategory).
D002b
0002-=
D003 (cyanides)
D003 (sulfides)
D003 (explosives, reactives)
D007
D009
D012
D013
D014
D015
D016
D017
D018
D019
D020
D021
D022
D023
D024
D025
D026
D027
D028
Waste category
F005 solvent constituents.
All
Nonwastewater
All
All
All
All
All
Ail
Nonwastewater ..
All
All
All
All
All
All
AH, including mixed with radioactive wastes
All, including mixed with radioactive wastes
All, including mixed with radioactive wastes
All, including mixed with radioactive wastes
All including mixed with radioactive wastes
All, including mixed radioactive wastes
All, including mixed radioactive wastes
All, including mixed radioactive wastes
All, including mixed radioactive wastes
All including mixed radioactive wastes
All, including mixed radioactive wastes
Effective date
Feb 101 994
Sept 19 1995
Mav ft 1 QQO
Fph in 1QQ4
Mow ft 1QQP
Mav ft 1QQP
Mnv ft 1QQP
Mow ft 1QQP
Mow ft 1QQO
^Ani 1Q 1QQC;
Opnt 1Q 1QQ*?
^pnt 1Q 1QQ*^
^Ani 1Q 1QQ£
^pnt 1Q 1QQ
-------
26038 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
NATIONAL CAPACITY LDR VARIANCES FOR UIC WASTES-—Continued
Waste code
nogs
noan
rvy*i
DO32
[VJ33 .. .
rv)34 . .
nMs
D036
D037
nn*Vi
rwi*?
Wastewater •••
All
AH
All
All
All - i
All
AH
AH
All •.
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
AH >
AH
All .-.
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All i
AH
All
All
All
All
Effective date
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
Apr. 8, 1998.
JuneS, 1991.
May 12, 1999.
May 12,1999.
May 12, 1999.
Nov. 8, 1992.
Nov. 8, 1992.
May 8, 1992.
June 8, 1991.
JuneS, 1991.
May 8, 1992.
JuneS, 1991.
May 8, 1992.
June 8, 1991.
May 8, 1992.
May 8, 1992.
JuneS, 1991.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Aug; 8, 1990.
Jan. 8, 1997.
Aug. 8, 1990.
Nov. 8, 1992.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1995.
June 30, 1995.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Nov. 9, 1992.
June 30, 1995.
June 30, 1995.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Dec. 19, 1994.
Dec. 19, 1994.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
July8, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
-------
Federal,Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 26039
NATIONAL CAPACITY LDR VARIANCES FOR UIC WASTES <•—Continued
Waste code
P185
P188
P189
P190
P191 ;
P192
P194
P196
P197
P198
P199
P201
P202
P203
P204
P205
U271
U277
U278
U279
U280
U328
U353
U359
U364
U365
U366
U367
U372
U373
U375
U376
U377
U378
U379
U381
U382
U383
U384
U385
U386
U387
U389
U390
U391
U392
U395
U396
U400
U401
U402
U403
U404
U407
U409
U410
U411
Waste category
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All ....
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
All
Effective date
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
July 8, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
July 8, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996:
JulyS, 1996.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Nov. 9, 1992.
Nov. 9, 1992.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
July 8, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
JulyS, 1996.
"Wastes that are deep well disposed on-site receive a six-month variance, with restrictions effective in November 1990.
bDeepwell injected D002 liquids with a pH less than 2 must meet the California List treatment standards on August 8,1990.
<= Managed in systems defined in 40 CFR 144.6(e) and 14.6(e) as Class V injection wells, that do not engage in CWA-equivalent treatment be-
fore injection.
NOTE: This table is provided for the convenience of the reader.
PART 271—REQUIREMENTS FOR
AUTHORIZATION OF STATE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAMS
22. The authority citation for Part 271
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9602; 33 U.S.C. 1321
and 1361.
Subpart A—Requirements for Final
Authorization
23. Section 271.l(j) is amended by
adding the following entries to Table 1
in chronological order by effective date
in the Federal Register, and by adding
-------
26040 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 91 / Monday, May 12, 199? / Rules and Regulations
the following entries to Table 2 in
chronological order by date of
publication in the Federal Register, to § 271.1 Purpose and scope.
read as follows: *****
0)* * *
TABLE 1.—REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE AMENDMENTS OF 1984
Promulgation data
Title of regulation
Federal
Register ref- Effective date
erence
May 12,1997
Land Disposal Restrictions for Wood Preserving Wastes and Paperwork Reduc-
tions.
62 FR August 11,
26040 1997.
TABLE 2.—SELF-IMPLEMENTING PROVISIONS OF THE SOLID WASTE AMENDMENTS OF 1984
Effective date
Self-implementing provision
RCRA citation
Federal Ftegister
reference
August 11,1997 Prohibition on land disposal of wood preserving 3004(g)(4)(c) and 3004 (m) May 12,1997.
wastes. 62 FR 26040
May 12,1999 Prohibition on land disposal of radioactive waste and 3004(m}.' Do.
soil and debris mixed with wood preserving wastes.
* * * * *
IFR Doc. 97-11636 Filed 5-9-97:8:45 ami
BtULMQ CODE 6560-SO-P
------- |