Monday
December 8, 1997
Part II
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 264, et al.
Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and
Disposal Facilities and Hazardous Waste
Generators; Organic Air Emission
Standards for Tanks, Surface
Impoundments, and Containers; Final
Rule
-------
64636 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 264,265, and 270
DL-64-2-5807; FRL-5931-7]
RIN 2060-AG44
Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage,
and Disposal Facilities and Hazardous
Waste Generators; Organic Air
Emission Standards for Tanks, Surface
Impoundments, and Containers
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; clarification and
technical amendment.
SUMMARY: Under the authority of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). as amended, the EPA has
promulgated standards (59 FR 62896,
December 6.1994) to reduce organic air
emissions from certain hazardous waste
management activities to levels that are
protective of human health and the
environment. (The standards are known
colloquially as the "subpart CC"
standards due to their inclusion in
subpart CC of parts 264 and 265 of the
RCRA subtitle C regulations). These air
standards control organic emissions
from certain tanks, containers, and
surface impoundments (including tanks
and containers at generators' facilities)
used to manage hazardous waste
capable of releasing organic waste
constituents at levels which can harm
human liealth and the environment.
Since publication of the final
standards on December 6, 1994, the EPA
has given public notice and taken
comment on several proposed revisions
to the final rule, and has made
corresponding amendments. In response
to public comments and inquiries,
today's action makes clarifying
amendments to certain regulatory text,
and provides clarification of certain
preamble language that'was contained
in previous documents for this
rulemaking.
DATES: These amendments are effective
December 8, 1997.
ADDRESSES: This document is available
on the EPA's Clean-up Information
Bulletin Board (CLU-IN). To access
CLU-IN with a modem of up to 28,800
baud, dial (301) 589-8366. First time
users will be asked to input some initial
registration information. Next, select
"D" (download) from the main menu.
Input the file name "RCRA-FIN.ZIP" to
download this document. Follow the
on-line instructions to complete the
download. More information about the
download procedure is located in
Bulletin 104; to read this type "B 104"
from the main menu. For additional
help with these instructions, telephone
the CLU-IN help line at (301) 589-8368.
Docket The supporting information
used for the subpart CC rulemaking is
available for public inspection and
copying in the RCRA docket. The RCRA
docket numbers pertaining to this
rulemaking are F-91-CESP-FFFFF, F-
92-CESA-FFFFF, F-94-CESF-FFFFF,
F-94-CE2A-FFFFF, F-95-CE3A-
FFFFF, F-96-CE3F-FFFFF, and F-96-
CE4A-FFFFF. The RCRA docket is
located at Crystal Gateway, 1235
Jefferson Davis Highway, First Floor,
Arlington, Virginia. Review of docket
materials is conducted at the Virginia
address; the public must have an
appointment to review docket materials.
Appointments can be scheduled by
calling the Docket Office at (703) 603-
9230. The mailing address for the RCRA
docket office is RCRA Information
Center (5305W), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW,
Washington, DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general information about the RCRA Air
Rules, or specific rule requirements of
RCRA rules, please contact the RCRA
Hotline, toll-free at (800) 424-9346.
' Contacts for specific information are
listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this preamble.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :
Regulated Entities: The entities
potentially affected by this action
include:
Category
Industry
Federal Government
Examples of regulated entities
Businesses that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste and are subject to RCRA subtitle C permitting
requirements, or that accumulate hazardous waste on-site in RCRA permit-exempt tanks or containers
pursuant to 40 CFR 262.34(a).
Federal agencies that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste and are subject to RCRA subtitle C permit-
ting requirements, or that accumulate hazardous waste on-site in RCRA permit-exempt tanks or containers
pursuant to 40 CFR 262.34(a).
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
interested in the amendments to the
regulation affected by this action. To
determine whether your facility is
regulated by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability
criteria in §264.1030 and §265.1030 of
the RCRA subpart AA rules, §264.1050
and §265.1050 of the RCRA subpart BB
rules, and §264.1080 and §265.1080 of
the RCRA subpart CC air rules.
Informational Contacts
If you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a
particular situation, or questions about
compliance approaches, permitting,
enforcement and rule determinations.
please contact the appropriate regional
representative below:
Region I
Stephen Yee, (617) 565-3550; Jim
Gaffey, 565-3437; U.S. EPA. Region I,
JFK Federal Building, Boston, MA
02203-0001
Region II
Abdooljabar, (212) 637-4131; John
Brogard, 637-4162; Jim Sullivan, 637-
4138; U.S. EPA, Region II, 290
Broadway, New York, NY 10007-1866
Region in
Linda Matyskiela, (215) 566-3420;
Andrew Clibanoff, 566-3391; U.S.
EPA, Region III, 841 Chestnut
Building, Philadelphia, PA 19107
Region IV
Denise Housley, (404) 562-8495; Rick
Gillam, 562-8498; Jan Martin, 562-
8593; Anita Shipley, 562-8466;
Donna Wilkinson, 562-8490; Judy
Sophianolpoulos, 562-8604; David
Langston, 562-8588; U.S. EPA, Region
IV, 61 Forsyth Street, Atlanta, GA
30303
Region V
Jae Lee, (312) 886-3781; Uylaine
McMahan, 886-4454; Mike Mikulka,
886-6760; Ivonne Vicente, 886-4449;
Wen Huang, 886-6191; U.S. EPA,
Region V, 77 West Jackson Street,
Chicago, IL 60604
Region VI
Michelle Peace, (214) 665-7430; Teena
Wooten, 665-2279; U.S. EPA, Region
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64637
VI, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200,
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Region VII
Ed Buckner, (913) 551-7621; Ken
Herstowski, 551-7631; U.S. EPA,
Region VII, 726 Minnesota Avenue,
Kansas City, KS 66101
Region VHI
MindyMohr, (303) 312-6525; Janice
Pearson, 312-6354; U.S. EPA, Region
Vffl, 999 18th Street, Suite 500,
Denver, CO 80202-2466-
Region IX
Stacy Braye, (415) 774-2056; Jean
Daniel, 774-2128; U.S. EPA, Region
IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San .
Francisco, CA 94105
Region X
Linda Liu, (206) 553-1447; David
Bartus, 553-2804; U.S. EPA, Region
X, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA
98101
For questions about testing or
analytical methods mentioned in this
document, please contact Ms. Rima
Dishakjian, Emission Measurement
Center (MD-19), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone
number (919) 541-0443. For
information concerning the analyses
performed in developing this rule,
contact Ms. Michele Aston, Emission
Standards Division (MD-13), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711, telephone number (919) 541-
2363, electronic mail address,
"aston.michele@epamail.epa.gov."
Background
Section 3004 (n) of RCRA requires,
EPA to develop standards to control air
emissions from hazardous waste
treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities (TSDF) as may be necessary to
protect human health and the
environment. This requirement echoes
the general requirement in RCRA
section 3004 (a) and section 3002(a)(3) to
develop standards to control hazardous
waste management activities as may be
necessary to pfotect human health and
the environment. The Agency has
issued a series of regulations to
implement the section 3004 (n) mandate;
these regulations control air emissions
from certain process vents and
equipment leaks (part 264 and part 265,
subparts AA and BB), and emissions
from certain tanks, containers, and
surface impoundments (the subpart CC
standards, which are the primary
subject of today's action).
The EPA today is making technical
amendments to the final subpart AA,
BB, and CC standards, and providing
interpretations for certain provisions of
those rules. Since the publication of the
final subpart CC rule (59 FR 69826,
December 4, 1994), the EPA has
published four Federal Register
documents that delayed the effective
date of that rule. The first (60 FR 26828,
May 19, 1995) revised the effective date
of the standards to be December 6, 1995.
The second (60 FR 56952, November 13,
1995) revised the'effective date of the
standards to be June 6, 1996. The third
(61 FR 28508, June 5, 1996) further
postponed the effective date for the rule
requirements until October 6, 1996, and
the fourth (61 FR 59931, November 25,
1996) established the ultimate effective
date of December 6, 1996. The EPA has
also issued an indefinite stay of the
standards specific to units managing
wastes produced by certain organic
peroxide manufacturing processes (60
FR 50426, September 29, 1995).
On August 14, 1995, the EPA
published a Federal Register document
entitled, "Proposed rule; data
availability" (60 FR 41870) and opened
RCRA docket F-95-CE3A-FFFFF to
accept comments on revisions that the
EPA was considering for the final
subpart CC standards. The EPA
accepted public comments on the
appropriateness of these revisions
through October 13, 1995. Throughout
1996 and into the present year, the EPA
also engaged in repeated discussions , ,
with representatives of the groups filing
petitions for review challenging the
subpart CC standards.
To further inform the affected public
of the major clarifications, compliance
options, and technical amendments
being considered, the EPA conducted a
series of seminars during August and
-September of 1995. At that time, a total
of six seminars were held nationally. An
updated series of six seminars was held
in September through December 1996
and two additional seminars were held
March and April of 1997 in conjunction
with an industry trade association.
(Refer to EPA RCRA Docket No. F-95-
CE3A-FFFFF.) During these seminars,
additional comments were received on
the RCRA air rules for tanks, surface
impoundments, and containers. These
comments were also considered by the
EPA in developing this final action.
On February 9, 1996, the EPA
published a Federal Register document
(61 FR 4903), "Final rule; technical
amendment," which made clarifying
amendments in the regulatory text of the
final standards, corrected typographical
and grammatical errors, and clarified
certain language in the preamble to the
final rule to better convey the EPA's
original intent.
On November 25, 1996, the EPA
published a Federal Register document
(61 FR 59932), "Final rule" that
amended provisions of the final
subparts AA, BB, CC rules to better
convey the EPA's original intent, to
. provide additional flexibility to owners
and operators who must comply with
the rules, and to change the effective
date of the requirements contained in
the subpart CC rules to be December 6,
1996.
Today's action makes technical
amendments to the final subparts AA,
BB, CC rules in order to clarify the
regulatory text of the final standards;
interpret those standards; correct
typographical, printing, and
grammatical errors; and clarify certain
language published in the preambles of
previous Federal Register documents, to
better convey the EPA's original intent.'
Today's amendments include one
change to 40 CFR Part 270, to correct a
typographical error made in the
December 6, 1994 final rule. The text
listing the sections of regulatory
requirements that must be included in
the general inspection schedule
incorrectly listed "245.193(i)" where
section 264.193(i) was intended. This
was obviously a typographical error, as
all of the sections listed in that
provision are from 40 CFR part 264; the
sections are listed in numeric order, and
"245.193(1)" was very obviously out of
place. Further, no section 245.193(i)
exists; in fact, no 40 CFR 245 exists.
Today's amendment corrects this
typographical error.
Outline
The information presented in this
preamble is organized as follows:
I. Subpart B—General Facility Standards
n. Subpart E—Manifest System,
Recordkeeping, and Reporting
in. Subpart AA—Air Emission Standards for
Process Vents
A. Applicability
B. Definitions -'
C. Standards: Closed-Vent Systems and
Control Devices
D. Recordkeeping Requirements
IV. Subpart BB—Air Emission Standards for
Equipment Leaks
A. Applicability
B. Standards: Closed-Vent Systems and
Control Devices
C. Alternative Standards for Valves
D. Recordkeeping Requirements
E. Open-ended Valves and Lines
V. Subpart CC—Air Emission Standards for
Tanks, Surface Impoundments, and
Containers
A. Applicability and Definitions
B. Schedule for Implementation of Air
Emission Standards
C. Standards: General
-------
64638 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
D. Waste Determination Procedures
E. Standards: Tanks
F. Standards: Surface Impoundments
G. Standards: Containers
H. Standards: Closed-Vent Systems and
Control Devices
• I. Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements
J. Appendix VI to Part 265
VI. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Executive Order 12866
D. Regulatory Flexibility
E. Unfunded Mandates Act
F. Immediate Effective Date
VII. Legal Authority
I. Subpart B—General Facility
Standards
Today's action removes
§§264.1091(b) and 265.1091(b) from the
list of sections in §§264.15 and 265.15,
respectively. Sections 264.15 and 265.15
contain a list of provisions from which
inspection items and frequencies are
required to be included in the general •
facility inspection schedule. The
inspection requirements for floating roof
tanks that were in §§264.109 l(b) and
265.1091(b) of subpart CC as
promulgated, were incorporated into
§§264.1084 and 265.1085 by the
November 25,1996, final rule J
amendments (61 FR 59944). That action
also removed and reserved
§§264.1091(b) and 265.1091 (b).
Therefore, the EPA is revising this
provision to reference the paragraphs
that now contain the inspection
requirements. The EPA is also
correcting a previous omission, by
including a reference to the sections of
subpart CC that include inspections
requirements.
n. Subpart E—Manifest System,
Recordkeeping, and Reporting
Today's action also removes
§§264.1091(b) and 265.1091(b) from the
list of sections from which monitoring,
testing, or analytical data, and corrective
action requirements must be included in
the facility operating record. The
monitoring and testing requirements for
floating roof tanks that were in
§§264.1091(b) and 265.1091(b) of
subpart CC as promulgated, were
incorporated into §§264.1084 and
265.1085 by the November 25,1996
final rule amendments (61 FR 59944)
and, as just noted, §§264.1091 (b) and
265.10910)) were removed and reserved.
Therefore, the EPA is revising this
provision to reference the paragraphs
that now contain the appropriate
requirements, and including a reference
to provisions of subpart CC that were
previously omitted through an
oversight.
HI. Subpart AA—Air Emission
Standards for Process Vents
A. Applicability
In today's action, the EPA is
amending §§ 264.1030 (b) (3),
264.1050(b)(3), 265.1030(b)(3), and
265.1050(b)(3) to make clear the EPA's
original intent as to when recycling
units are subject to the subpart AA and
BB rules. The EPA made clear in the
November 25, 1996 preamble that
recycling units which are otherwise
exempt from RCRA subtitle C regulation
under 40 CFR 261.6(c)(l) are not subject
to subpart AA and BB standards unless
some other unit at the facility has to
obtain a RCRA permit. See 61 FR at
59932-33, and 59935. The Agency also
showed how the existing regulation
could be interpreted to give this result
Id. at 59935. Put another way, Subparts
AA and BB are applicable to recycling
units at permitted TSDF and interim
status TSDF. Also, at both TSDF and
generator facilities (generators' 90-day
accumulation units), subparts AA and
BB are applicable to units that are not
recycling units. However, the EPA
believes that the rule language can be
drafted to make this point more clearly,
and is doing so in today's rule, for both
subpart AA and BB.
The EPA is further clarifying that the
RCRA "permit-as-shield" provisions do
not apply to the subpart AA (or the
subpart BB or CC standards); See Section
VI.E of the preamble to the final rule, 59
FR 62910, December 6, 1994. This
means that owners and operators
receiving permits before the date those
rules became effective must
nevertheless comply with the subpart
AA (and the subpart BB and CC)
regulatory standards. The EPA is adding
a sentence to §264.1030(c) which
essentially cross-references the existing
§ 270.4(d) provision stating that
"permit-as-a shield" does not apply to
these units.
The EPA has previously amended 40
CFR 270.4 (see 59 FR 62952, December
6, 1994) to require that owners and
operators of TSDF that have been issued
final permits prior to December 6, 1996,
comply with the air standards under 40
CFR part 265, subparts AA, BB, and CC
until the facility's permit is reviewed or
reissued by the EPA. As was explained
in Section VHI.A of the preamble to the
final rule (59 FR 62920, December 6,
1994), this amendment eliminates
application of the "permit-as-a-shield"
practice for these air standards but does
not require that the EPA or the TSDF
owner or operator initiate a permit
modification to add the requirements of
40 CFR part 264, subparts AA, BB. or
CC. The EPA believes that this
minimizes the administrative burden on
the TSDF owner or operator as well as
limits the additional burden on the
permitting resources of the EPA.
However, when a permit is reopened or
subject to renewal, or when a TSDF
owner or operator submits a Class 3
modification request pertaining to an
existing unit or addition of a new unit
subject to these standards, then the
applicable requirements of 40 CFR part
264, subparts AA, BB, and CC will be
incorporated into the modified permit
conditions. •
The EPA is also amending the
applicability provision of subpart AA by
adding a new §264.1030(d) and
§ 265.1030(d). This provision states that
a process vent is not subject to the
subpart AA standards provided the
owner or operator certifies that all
subpart AA-regulated process vents at
the facility are equipped with and
operating air emission controls in
accordance with the requirements of an
applicable Clean Air Act regulation
codified in Part 60, 61, or 63. The EPA
adopted a similar provision for units
subject to subpart CC as part of the
November 1996 amendments (see
§26471080(d) and §265.1080(d) of
subpart CC) and the logic for applying
the same exemption in the same manner
to subpart AA process vents is identical.
The preamble discussion at Section
IV.C, 61 FR 59938-59939 (November 25,
1996) explains at length why this
exemption avoids unnecessary
duplication with CAA requirements, all
of which discussion applies equally
here. The EPA in fact intended that the
exemption apply to subpart AA process
vents as well (since there is no basis for
distinguishing between subpart AA and
CC units for this purpose), but
inadvertendy omitted the exemption
from subpart AA when it codified the
subpart CC exemption. Today's
amendment corrects that oversight.
This exemption is, however,
implemented slightly differently from
the parallel exemption for subpart CC
units. Both of the compliance
approaches allowed under the existing
subpart AA rules require emission
control or emission limits on a facility-
wide basis. See 40 CFR 264.1032(a)(l)
and (a) (2). Thus, to be equally protective
of human health and the environment,
the EPA considers it necessary that any
alternative compliance demonstration
require control of all of the process
vents at the facility that would have
otherwise been regulated under subpart
AA. Therefore, today's exemption is
only available at a facility where each
and every process vent that would
otherwise be subject to subpart AA is
equipped with, and operating air
-------
Federal Register /Vol. 62, No. 235 /Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64639
emission controls, in compliance with
an applicable CAA standard under Parts
60, 61, or 63. As with the similar
provisions in subparts BB and CC, to
comply with the requirements at
paragraphs §264.1030(d) or
§ 265.1030(c), the emissions from each
subpart AA process vent must be routed
through an air emission control device;
a vent that is in compliance with a CAA
standard under an exemption from
control device requirements is not in
compliance with those provisions of
subpart AA. Despite this minor
restriction, the EPA considers this
alternative to provide the facility owner
or operator with a broader degree of
compliance flexibility, and less
extensive monitoring, recordkeeping,
and reporting requirements under
RCRA, and therefore to warrant
promulgation.
The EPA has received inquiries as to
whether portable equipment that
otherwise meets the definition of a unit
subject to the subpart AA, BB, or CC
regulations, is subject to the
requirements of subparts AA, BB, and
CC. The literal language of the
regulations clearly applies, since there
is no exemption for portable equipment
in the regulations. Nor does the EPA
consider that such an exemption is
appropriate. Portable equipment that is
used to manage hazardous waste
consistent with the applicability
: requirements of these subparts would
emit the same volume of organics that
stationary equipment would emit. The
EPA therefore considers it appropriate
to subject portable equipment to the
same control requirements as stationary,
or non-portable equipment. By this
interpretation, the EPA is not extending
the applicability of the AA, BB, or CC
standards; rather, the EPA is merely
clarifying that these standards do not
contain any exemption or special
criteria for portable equipment.
Moreover, the fact that such portable
equipment may also be used for non-
hazardous waste applications has no
bearing on the EPA's intent to regulate
the portable equipment during instances
when it is used for hazardous waste
applications. The EPA does not consider
that fact to affect the need to control the
equipment when it is in hazardous
waste service.
B. Definitions
"In light liquid service" was defined
in § 264.1031 to be consistent with the
definition of "in light liquid service" in
the NSPS for equipment leaks of VOC in
the synthetic organic chemicals
manufacturing industry (40 CFR part 60,
subpart W). It was the EPA's intent that
the determination of "in light liquid
service" be based on the organic content
of a liquid. However, questions have
been raised by the regulated community
regarding how to account for water in
the determination of "in light liquid
service.'' In response to the questions,
the definition of "in light liquid
service" in §264.1031 is revised by
changing "* * * the vapor pressure of
one or more of the components in the
stream is greater than 0.3 kilopascals
(kPa) at 20 °C, the total concentration of
the pure components having a vapor
pressure greater than 0.3 kilopascals
(kPa) at 20 °C is equal to or greater than
20 percent by weight * * *" to read as
follows "* * *the vapor pressure of one
or more of the organic components in
the stream is greater than 0.3 kilopascals
(kPa) at 20 °C, the total concentration of
the pure organic components having a
vapor pressure greater than 0.3
kilopascals (kPa) at 20 °C is equal to or
greater than 20 percent by weight* * *"
This revision clarifies that the definition
applies only to the organic components
of the waste stream; not to non-organic
chemicals that meet the vapor pressure
criteria (e.g.,'water). The revised
definition is consistent with the
definition of "in light liquid service" in
the recently promulgated NESHAP for
equipment leaks (40 CFR part 63,
subpart H).
C. Standards: Closed-Vent Systems and
Control Devices
The final subpart AA air emission
standards for process vents provided up
to an 18-month implementation -.
schedule after the effective date that a
facility becomes subject to the
provisions of subpart AA, for
installation and operation of closed-vent
systems and control devices. The
February 9, 1996 (61 FR 4911) revisions
to§§264.1033(a)(2) and 265.1033(a) (2)
extended the implementation schedule
to as much as 30 months, consistent
with the requirements of subpart CC.
Consistent with this existing provision,
today's revisions clarify that units
which become newly subject after the
subpart AA effective date of December
21, 1990 as a result of an EPA regulatory
change or statutory change, are also
provided a 30-month implementation
schedule. The provision is also
amended to clarify that units which
become newly subject to subpart AA
after that effective date due to any
reason other than an EPA regulatory
change or statutory amendment are not
allowed to comply using an
implementation schedule; they must be
in compliance on the date that the unit
first becomes subject to subpart AA.
A printing correction is also being
made to this section in
§265.1033(f)(2)(vi)(B). The degree
symbol was inadvertently printed in
lower case rather than as a superscript;
today's action corrects this.
The November 25, 1996, amendments
to the subpart CC standards (at
§ 265.1088(c) (2)(i)) for control devices
and closed-vent systems, added
provisions to allow up to 240 hours per
year for periods of planned, routine
maintenance of a control device; during
such time, the control device is not
required to meet the performance
requirements for emission reductions
specified in the rule. The EPA's
rationale for adding this allowance to
subpart CC is explained in the preamble
to those amendments at 61 FR 59948.
The EPA has determined that, based on
the nature of the affected operation or
the type of unit that is being served by
the control device, there are
circumstances in which a limited
allowance for control device down-time
during maintenance is reasonable. For
example, the EPA made a similar
allowance of up to 240 hours for control
device performance in the HON
requirements for storage vessels, i.e.,
tanks, (see § 63.119(e) (3)); this
allowance was made based on
consideration of the fact that a HON
facility with affected storage vessels
normally would not have adequate
excess storage tank capacity to handle
emptying an affected tank(s) each time
the control device serving the vessel (s)
is shut down for routine maintenance. It
is also important to note that the HON
regulation did not extend this same
routine maintenance allowance for
control devices to other types of units,
or to affected process vents; the HON
allowance is only for control devices
serving storage vessels. The EPA has
judged that the operational practices of
process vents are significantly different
from those of storage vessels, and thus
do not warrant a similar allowance for
control device down-time.
In the amendments to the subpart CC
rule that were published in November
1996, the EPA adopted the provision
from the HON, and further extended
and broadened the control device
allowance in applying it to control
devices that serve not only tanks but
also surface impoundments and
containers (see §264.1087(c)(2)(i)). The
decision to extend the allowance to the
subpart CC hazardous waste
management units was also based on the
consideration of typical operational
practices of affected TSDF. Within the
waste management industry, the
quantities and compositions of the
waste managed vary widely over time;
also, many regulated waste management
units (i.e., tanks and impoundments)
-------
64640 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
have vent flow rates low enough that
several units are controlled using a
single device. For several waste
management units served by a single
control device, it is not feasible in most
cases to have enough excess storage
capacity to handle all the units that
would be served by a single control
device. Therefore, the EPA included the
control device maintenance allowance
in the subpart CC standards for
containers and surface impoundments,
as well as for tanks. As in the case of
the HON, the EPA does not consider it
appropriate to extend the control device
allowance for maintenance time to
control devices serving process vents.
Therefore, the EPA is not extending the
control device maintenance allowance
to subpart AA process vents.
It also has come to the attention of the
EPA that some commenters have
misinterpreted the language relating to
the accuracy of the temperature
monitoring devices that the EPA
specified in the subpart AA standards
for closed-vent systems and control
devices, found at §§264.1033(f) and
265.1033(f). As these commenters
interpret the rule language, the EPA has
specified a degree of accuracy that
precludes monitoring devices with
greater accuracy than is specified in the
regulations. This is not the EPA's intent,
and the Agency does not consider this
to be a reasonable interpretation of the
rule. At numerous places in this rule
and other rules, the EPA has specified
the accuracy of temperature monitoring
devices by requiring "an accuracy of±l
percent of the temperature being
monitored in degrees Celsius (°C) or
±0.5°C, whichever is greater." It is
implicit in the use of this language that
the EPA is providing a range of accuracy
with which the monitoring device must
comply or conform. For example, the
term "±1 percent" indicates that the
accuracy of the device must fall within
the range from plus 1 percent to minus
1 percent. Any device that has an
accuracy within this range complies
with the rule requirement. It was not the
intent of the EPA to preclude the use of
devices with greater (i.e., better)
accuracy than the absolute value
specified.
D. Recordkeeping Requirements
Commenters have stated that the
requirement at § 265.1035 (c) (10) (iv) to
record the maximum instrument reading
measured by Method 21 after a leak has
been successfully repaired or
determined to be not repairable is
unnecessary. They contend that because
other rules which require use of EPA
Method 21, such as the Off-Site Waste
and Recovery Operations NESHAP (40
CFR part 63, subpart DD), do not require
this instrument reading, the requirement
should be removed. Although subpart
DD to part 63 does not contain a similar
recordkeeping requirement for the
instrument reading, as part of the
information recorded when a leak is
detected using Method 21, various other
regulations do have similar
requirements (see §63.181 (d)(4) of 40
CFR part 63, subpart H, National
Emission Standards for Organic
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment
Leaks). The EPA continues to believe
that this information is useful in the
implementation and enforcement of the
air emission regulations. Instrument
monitoring after a repair is an indication
of the success of the repair, information
which EPA considers commensurate
with the initial leak monitoring
requirements at §265.1033(k)(l)(i).
Instrument monitoring upon
determination that a leak is not
repairable is an indication of the
severity of the organic emissions that
will continue to be emitted from the
non-repairable equipment, which EPA
considers valuable information for the
implementation and future review of its
organic air emissions standards.
Therefore, EPA will maintain this
recordkeeping requirement.
IV. Subpart BB—Air Emission
Standards for Equipment Leaks
»
A. Applicability
Today's action adds appropriate
language to the subpart BB applicability
provisions to cross reference and clarify
that the EPA has modified the "permit-
as-a-shield" practice for implementation
of the subpart BB (as well as the subpart
AA and CC) RCRA air rules. The
modification of this practice affects
owners and operators of existing TSDF
for which final RCRA permits have been
issued by the EPA. Paragraph (c) in
§264.1050 and §265.1050 is being
revised to clarify that the owner or
operator is subject to the requirements
of 40 CFR part 265, subpart BB until
such date that the owner or operator
receives a final RCRA permit
incorporating the requirements of 40
CFR part 264, subpart BB.
The EPA has previously amended 40
CFR 270.4 (see 59 FR 62952, December
6, 1994) to require that owners and
operators of TSDF that have been issued
final permits prior to December 6, 1996,
comply with the air standards under 40
CFR part 265, subparts AA, BB, and CC
until the facility's permit is reviewed or
reissued by the EPA to include the part
264 standards. As is explained in
Section Vin.A of the preamble to the
final rule (59 FR 62920, December 6,
1994), this amendment eliminates
application of the "permit-as-a-shield"
practice for these air standards, but does
not require that the EPA or the TSDF
owner or operator initiate a permit
modification to add the requirements of
40 CFR part 264, subparts AA, BB, or
CC. The EPA considers the existing
regulatory text to accurately convey this
intent, and is providing this preamble
discussion in response to commenters'
requests.
B. Standards: Closed-Vent Systems and
Control Devices
The final subpart BB air emission
standards for equipment leaks
referenced the subpart AA closed-vent
system and control device requirements
to provide up to an 18-month
implementation schedule after the
effective date that a facility becomes
subject to the provisions of subpart BB,
for installation and operation of closed-
vent systems and control devices. The
February 9, 1996 (61 FR 4911) revisions
to §§264.1060 and 265.1060 added a
paragraph to extend the implementation
schedule to as much as 30 months,
consistent with the requirements of
subpart CC. Today's amendments clarify
that units that begin operation after the
subpart BB effective date of December
21, 1990, and that become subject to the
requirements of subpart BB because of
an EPA regulatory change or a statutory
change after December 21, 1990, are also
provided a 30-month implementation
schedule. The provision is also
amended to clarify that units which
become newly subject to subpart BB
after that effective date due to any
reason other than an EPA regulatory
change or a statutory amendment are
not allowed to comply using an
implementation schedule; they must be
in compliance on the date that the unit
first becomes subject to subpart BB. In
recognition that facilities have been on
notice since 1990 of the applicability of
subparts AA and BB, and since 1991 of
the applicability of subpart CC, the EPA
considers it reasonable to expect
facilities that become newly-subject to
these subparts, through other than a
statutory or EPA regulatory change, to
be in compliance with the provisions on
the date that they become newly subject.
C. Alternative Standards for Valves
Clarifying language is being added to
the alternative standards for valves in
gas/vapor service or in light liquid
service: skip period leak detection and
repair. The EPA has received comments
on the ambiguity of the skip period leak
detection and repair provisions as
codified. The codified language is
ambiguous because it gives no
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64641
indication of how the alternative work
practice that involves two consecutive
quarterly leak detection periods with
the percentage of valves leaking equal to
or less than 2 percent which allows the
owner or operator to skip one of the
quarterly leak detection periods
[§264.1062(b)(2) or §265.1062(b)(2)]
interacts with the alternative work
practice that involves five consecutive.
quarterly leak detection periods with
the percentage of valves leaking equal to
or less than 2 percent which allows the
owner or operator to skip three of the
quarterly leak detection periods
[§264.1062(b)(3) or §265.1062(b)(3)].
Nor is the codified language clear on
whether the periods with the percentage
of valves leaking equal to or less than
2 percent need to be repeated after the
initial skipped periods, or if the owner
or operator is allowed to continue on
the skip period schedule once the
criteria have been met for one period.
In order to clarify the EPA's intent
regarding the skip monitoring
alternatives, paragraphs in §264.1062(b)
and §265.1062(b) are being amended to
more fully explain that, if the specified
criteria are met under the alternatives,
the owner or operator can monitor for
leaks once every six months (i.e., under
§264.1062(b)(2)) or once every year (i.e.,
under § 264.1062(b) (3)). If an owner or
operator is monitoring equipment every
six months, under §264.1062(b)(2), he is
not complying with the five consecutive
quarterly leak detection requirements of
§ 264.1062(b)(3), and thus does not
qualify to begin monitoring once every
year. Essentially, if an owner or operator
meets the requirements of subsection
(b)(2), he may choose to either begin
monitoring every six months, or he may
choose to continue quarterly monitoring
in an attempt to meet the requirements
of subsection (b)(3); complying with the
provision of subsection (b) (2) excludes
the opportunity to comply with the
requirements of subsection (b)(3).
Once an owner or operator meets the
qualifications of either subsection (b) (2)
or subsection (b)(3), he is then allowed
to continue the skip monitoring of that
provision as long as the percentage of
valves found leaking by the semiannual
or annual monitoring is equal to or less
than 2 percent. These clarifying
amendments reflect the Agency's prior
intent regarding the implementation of
the alternative standards for valves.
D. Recordkeeping Requirements
The recordkeeping provisions of
subpart BB are being amended to
eliminate any owner or operator burden
caused by regulatory overlap. The
subpart BB recordkeeping provisions in
§264.1064(m) and §265.1064(m) are
being amended to allow any equipment
that contains or contacts hazardous
waste that is subject to subpart BB and
also subject to regulations in 40 CFR
part 60, 61, or 63 to determine
compliance with subpart BB by
documentation of compliance with the
relevant provisions of the Clean Air Act
rules codified under 40 CFR part 60,
part 61, or part 63. Because compliance
with subpart BB is demonstrated
through recordkeeping, this
recordkeeping revision has the effect of
exempting equipment that would
otherwise be subject to subpart BB from
subpart BB requirements, provided the
equipment is operated, monitored and
repaired in accordance with an
applicable CAA standard, and
appropriate records are kept to that
effect.
As is described in Section III. A of this
preamble regarding the potential
regulatory overlap of the RCRA air rules
and Clean Air Act regulations, the EPA
is providing this exemption to reduce
the possibility of duplicative or
conflicting requirements for those TSDF
units using organic emission controls in
compliance with a NESHAP but which
are also subject to requirements under
the RCRA standards. The ERA considers
this to be the most appropriate approach
to ensure that air emissions from
equipment managing hazardous waste
are controlled to the extent necessary to
protect human health and the
environment. This exemption was
originally included with the
promulgation of subpart BB on June 21,
1990 (55 FR 25454), in the same format,
but with more specificity as to the CAA
regulations. As discussed in Section
III. A. of this preamble, it was clearly the
Agency's intent to apply the same
rationale explained in the November 25,
1996 preamble at 61 FR 59938, to
extend the applicability exemption to
subpart BB equipment operated,
monitored and repaired in accordance
with an applicable CAA standard under
40 CFR part 60, 61, or 63.
The November 25, 1996 final rule
amendments added a provision to the
applicability of subpart BB that
excludes equipment that contains or
contacts affected hazardous waste for a
period of less than 300 hours per
calendar year. See 61 FR at 59937. One
commenter has requested that the
Agency clarify whether equipment
which is not in service, but contains
hazardous waste residue, is considered
to be in contact with hazardous waste.
The EPA considers the language of the
provision explicit on this point; the
amount of time that equipment contains
hazardous waste, whether at operating
capacity or as a residue, is considered
time that the equipment "contains or
contacts" hazardous waste. Thus, if
subpart BB equipment contains subpart
BB-regulated hazardous waste residues
for more than 300 hours during a
calendar year, that equipment would
not be exempt from subpart BB under
the provisions at § 264.1050(f) or
§265.1050(f). The EPA purposefully
worded the provision to say, "contains
or contacts" because the emissions from
the equipment are related to the organic
hazardous waste that is in the
equipment; even if the process or
equipment is not in service, the organic
hazardous waste in contact with the
equipment has the potential to
volatilize, and EPA considers it
necessary to subject the equipment to
the requirements of subpart BB. Thus,
EPA is today reiterating that the
regulation at § 264.1050(f) and
§265.1050© requires the equipment to
be void of subpart BB-regulated waste
for a minimum of 300 hours per
calendar year.
The same commenter inquired
whether, for the purposes of this same
provision, the period of time which the
equipment contains or contacts subpart
BB-regulated waste must be consecutive
(e.g. 290 consecutive hours), or if it
could be the sum of shorter periods
(e.g., ten periods of 29 hours each). The
provision was intended to exempt
equipment that does not contain or
contact subpart BB-regulated waste a
total of 300 hours of more during a
, calendar year. This provision was
adopted from similar provisions of the
Hazardous Organic NESHAP
promulgated under 40 CFR 63.160. See
preamble discussion at 61 FR 59937,
November 25, 1996. It is implicit in
reading the language at 40 CFR
63.160(a) that the EPA intended the
requirement to refer to a sum, or total,
of 300 hours per calendar year, as
opposed to a single period of 300 hours.
The EPA is today amending regulatory
text at 264.1050(f) and 265.1050(e) and
the associated recordkeeping
requirements at 264.1064(g)(6) and
265.1064(g)(6) to remove the phrase, "a
period of and thus, remove any
ambiguity as to the Agency's intent that
for this regulatory requirement,
instances during which equipment
contains" or contacts subpart BB-
regulated waste need not be
consecutive; it is only required that the
sum of all time that the equipment
contains or contacts subpart BB-
regulated waste is less than 300 hours
per calendar year.
E. Open-Ended Valves and Lines
Several comments have been received
regarding the requirements for open-
-------
64642 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
ended lines or valves as they relate to
gravity piping. Commenters expressed
concern that gravity feed piping that is
equipped with an open valve or line
does not meet the requirements of the
subpart BB standards. Subpart BB
requires that each open-ended valve or
line be equipped with a cap, blind
flange, plug, or a second valve when
managing hazardous wastes with an
organic content equal to or greater than
10 percent by weight. The commenters
have suggested that the EPA amend the
subpart BB requirements to state that
the EPA considers a drain system that
meets the requirements of 40 CFR part
63, subpart RR. National Emission .
Standards for Individual Drain Systems
to be a closed system. The EPA has
examined this issue and has found no
technical basis for making a change to
the existing rule. Moreover, the Part 63
subpart RR requirements are intended
for control of waste in organic
concentrations on the order of
magnitude with the 500 ppmw action
level of the subpart CC standards,
whereas the subpart BB standards in
parts 264 and 265 are applicable to
equipment that contacts waste with an
organic concentration of 10 percent by
weight. There is a significant difference
in the level of required control between
the two standards. The EPA does not
consider it appropriate to allow the
subpart RR drain system requirements
to substitute for the more extensive
open-ended valve and line requirements
of subpart BB, because application of
the subpart RR standards to subpart BB
equipment would not provide an
equivalent level of organic emission
control as would be achieved by
compliance with the applicable subpart
BB requirements. Facility owners or
operators with gravity feed piping that
requires a vent to facilitate draining can
comply with the subpart BB and CC
standards by installing organic emission
control equipment on the pipe vent. The
control requirements in subpart BB are
appropriate and adequate for control of
open-ended lines and valves.
V. Subpart CC—Air Emission
Standards for Tanks, Surface
Impoundments, and Containers
A. Applicability and Definitions
In §§264.1080 and 265.1080. the EPA
is revising the effective date of the
subpart CC rules to be December 6,
1996. This revised effective date was
established in the November 25, 1996
amendments, but this regulatory change
was inadvertently omitted from that
action. Today's revision corrects this
oversight.
In § 265.1081, the definition of "in
light material service" is revised to
correct a typographical error to
capitalize the T in "the" as follows,
"* * * The vapor pressure of one or
more of the organic constituents * * *"
B. Schedule for Implementation of Air
Emission Standards
The final subpart CC standards allow
the owner or operator to prepare an
implementation schedule for
installation of control equipment that
cannot be installed and in operation by
the effective date of the rule (See
§ 265.1082(a)(2)). The EPA intended that
the implementation schedule apply to
any capital projects implemented by the
owner or operator to comply with the
subpart CC requirements. (See 61 FR at
4905, February 9, 1996.) This intent was
expressed in the 1994 final rule; see
Hazardous Waste TSDF Background
Information for Promulgated Organic
Air Emission Standards for Tanks,
Surface Impoundments, and Containers,
EPA-453/R-94-076b ("BID") page 9-7,
which states that the owner's or
operator's approach to complying with
the air emission control requirements
under the subpart CC standards may
involve a major design and construction
project which requires longer than 18
months to complete (e.g., replacing a
large open surface impoundment with a
series of covered tanks). To further
clarify this intent, §265.1082 is revised
by today's action to specify that
compliance can be demonstrated
through an implementation schedule
when either: (1) control equipment or
waste management units can not be
installed and in operation by the rule
effective date; or (2) modifications of
production or treatment'processes to
satisfy subpart CC exemption criteria in
accordance with §265.1083(c) can not
be completed by the rule effective date.
In either case, the implementation
schedule must be entered into the
facility record, and must contain
information demonstrating that the
facility will be in compliance with all of
the requirements of subpart CC, no later
than December 8, 1997. The revisions to
the schedule for implementation also
incorporate the revised effective date of
December 6, 1996.
Commenters have questioned whether
compliance activities other than those
involving the installation of equipment
or the modification of processes may be
accomplished under an implementation
schedule. For example, whether a
facility can delay compliance past the
rule effective date for monitoring or
testing requirements. The preamble to
the February 9, 1996 Federal Register
document clarified that "The EPA
expects such instances to be rare, but in
the event a facility cannot implement
any technical requirement of subparts
AA, BB, or CC, it is the EPA's intent that
the owner or operator document the
necessity for a delay in the facility
operating record. To be in compliance
with the rule, the necessary
documentation must be in place by [the
rule effective date]." See 61 FR at 4905,
February 9, 1996. The EPA maintains
that there may be circumstances in
which a facility owner or operator can
not be in compliance with certain
monitoring or testing requirements by
the effective date of the standards. For
example, if a facility owner or operator
is unable to begin operation of a control
device prior to the rule effective date, he
would not be able to perform the
required monitoring of that device by
that date either. However, to be in
compliance with the subpart CC rules,
the owner or operator must be in
compliance with all the rule
requirements as soon as is practicable,
but no later than December 8, 1997.
(Note: The only exceptions to this final
compliance date are those requirements
applicable to certain tanks in which
stabilization operations are performed, which
must be in compliance no later than June 8,
1998 (see 59 FR at 62912, December 6,
1994)), and requirements delayed by the
Regional Administrator, as discussed below
in this section of today's preamble.
Today's action is also amending
regulatory language to clarify that
owners or operators of facilities and
units that become newly subject to the
requirements of subpart CC after
December 8, 1997, because of an action
other than an EPA regulatory change or
a statutory change under RCRA, must
comply with all applicable rule
requirements immediately (i.e., must
have control devices installed and
operating on the date the facility or unit
becomes subject to subpart CC); the 30-
month implementation schedule does
not apply in this case. The EPA
considered this to be implicit in the
existing language of paragraph (b) of
§265.1082. The Agency is adding new
language in response to questions and
comments from affected facilities
regarding interpretation of the rule
requirements regarding implementation
schedules. The new provision will be
codified as paragraph 265.1082(c).
One commenter expressed concern
regarding the initial monitoring of
closed-vent systems. They noted that
delayed compliance is allowed under
the rules for routine monitoring of those
systems that are either inaccessible or
unsafe to monitor, and requested that
similar provision be allowed for initial
monitoring that may be delayed due to
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64643
weather or process conditions. The EPA
has examined this issue and has
concluded that a change in the rule is
not appropriate. The industry has been
on notice for several years that the
subpart CC rules would require these
monitoring inspections. Any facilities
that become newly subject to the
subpart through an EPA regulatory
amendment or statutory amendment are
typically allowed at least 6 months from
the date of publication of the action; the
EPA considers this to have been
sufficient notice to adequately prepare
for, and perform, the necessary
monitoring.
As published in the December 6,
1994, final rule, paragraph (c) of
§265.1082 allowed the EPA Regional
Administrator to "extend the
implementation date for control
equipment at a facility, on a case by case
basis * * *," In the preamble to the
final rule (see 59 FR 62919, December
6, 1994, and the amendments to the rule
published November 25, 1996, (see 61
FR 59938), the EPA stated its intent to
include the provision to allow the
Regional Administrator to extend the
implementation date in situations
beyond the owner or operators's control,
and that this extension would be
available only in "situations such as
delays in State permit processing." The
Agency went even further in placing
constraints on these limited conditions
by identifying situations associated with
permit processing where the allowance
would not apply (see 59 FR 62919). It
is clear from the literal reading of the
provision that the EPA fully intends that
the Regional Administrator's extension •
of an implementation schedule is only
allowable for a capital project
implemented by a facility owner or
operator to comply with the subpart CC
air emission control requirements. It is
also clear that the Agency does not
intend that this Regional Administrator
allowance for implementation schedule
extensions apply to anything other than
the installation of air emission control
equipment. Today's action re-designates
this provision as paragraph 265.1082(d)
to allow the regulatory amendment
described above in this section of
today's preamble to be codified as
subsection (c); however, the provision
for Regional Administrator extensions of
the final rule compliance date is not
changed.
C. Standards: General
Today's amendments are further
clarifying that the subpart CC RCRA air
rules apply only to units managing a
hazardous waste; to this effect, the EPA
is adding the word "hazardous" in front
of the word "waste" in §§264.1082(b)
and 265.1083(b). This point has been
made by the EPA throughout the
proposal and promulgation of the
subpart CC rules (see 59 FR 62896,
December 6, 1994, and 61 FR 4906,
February 9, 1996); however, there have
remained some questions and
uncertainties regarding applicability of
the rules to non-hazardous wastes. The
changes being made today are intended
to provide additional emphasis that
only hazardous wastes are subject to the
subpart CC controls.
Paragraph 265.1083(c)(2)(i) is revised
to correct a typographical error in the
symbol for the exit concentration limit;
the symbol should be C subscript t
"(CO."
In addition, §§ 264.1082 (c) (3) and
265.1083(c)(3) have been revised to add
as an exempt unit a surface
impoundment used for biological
treatment of hazardous waste in
accordance with subpart CC
requirements. The EPA intended to
exempt surface impoundments used for
biological treatment from the subpart CC
control requirements. The preamble to
the final rule in Section VII(A)(5) (59 FR
62917, December 6, 1994) clearly states
"* * * air emission controls are not
required for a surface impoundment in
which biological treatment of a
hazardous waste is performed under the
same conditions specified in the rule for
tanks." However, surface
impoundments performing biological
treatment were inadvertently left out of
the biological treatment unit exemption
in the November 25, 1996, final rule
amendments (61 FR 59954).
The EPA has received a number of
inquiries asking for interpretations of
the provision of the subpart CC rules
which states that wastes that meet
applicable Land Disposal Restriction
(LDR) treatment standards for organic
hazardous constituents are exempt from
the subpart CC air emission standards.
Section 264.1082(c) (4) exempts from the
RCRA subpart CC air emission
standards:
"A tank, surface impoundment, or
container for which all hazardous
wastes placed in the unit * * *
"(i) Meets the numerical
concentration limits for organic
hazardous constituents, applicable to
the hazardous waste, as specified in 40
CFR part 268—Land Disposal
Restrictions under Table "Treatment
Standards for Hazardous Waste" in 40
CFR 268. 40* * *"
A parallel exemption for interim
status facilities is found at
§265.1083(c)(4). Underthese
provisions, tanks, surface
impoundments, and containers
receiving hazardous wastes that meet
the concentration limits for organics
applicable to the waste under the
generally-applicable treatment
standards of the LDR program are not
subject to the subpart CC air emission
control regulations. See 61 FR 59941 in
the preamble and 59954 in the rule
(Nov. 25, 1996).
A number of members of the regulated
industry (including the Environmental
Technology Council, Chemical Waste
Management, and the Chemical
Manufacturers Association) have
inquired as to how this provision
applies to situations where the wastes in
question are not yet prohibited from
land disposal or consist of mixtures of
different hazardous wastes. This
preamble answers those questions.
Copies of correspondence between EPA
and these entities have been placed in
the public docket for the. rule.
The key phrase in the above
exemption is what treatment standards
are "applicable to the waste." EPA
interprets this phrase expansively to
include the treatment standard for
organics that would apply to the waste
whether or not the waste is currently
prohibited, so that the exemption may
apply to wastes not yet required to be-
treated for organics as a precondition to
land disposal. Under this interpretation,
hazardous wastes could be exempt from
subpart CC regulation if they meet the
treatment standards for organics that
would ultimately be required as a
precondition to land disposal. This is a
reasonable construction of the rule's
language (the phrase "applicable to the
waste" is ambiguous as to its precise
scope), and is supported by the
preamble to the rule (which says that
the exemption can apply to wastes that
are not prohibited, see 61 FR 59941). In
addition, this reading is consistent with
the exemption's underlying principle: if
hazardous wastes meet generally-
applicable LDR treatment standards for
organics, their concentrations of
organics are in virtually every case
going to be less than warrants control
under the subpart CC rules (i.e., volatile
organic concentrations will be less than
500 ppmw).
The EPA recognizes that it could
interpret the language to apply only to
hazardous wastes that are prohibited
and actually subject to a treatment
standard for organics. This more
restrictive interpretation does not seem
desirable because hazardous wastes
which actually meet treatment
standards for organics are likely to have
been treated to remove or destroy the
organics and thus not warrant regulation
under subpart CC. On the other hand, it
is EPA's further interpretation that this
exemption does not apply to hazardous
-------
64644 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
wastes for which there would be no
treatment standards for organics,
namely wastes that are listed solely
because of inorganic content. There is
no potentially "applicable" organic
treatment standard for such wastes, and
the exemption thus does not apply. In
addition, such wastes would not likely
be treated for organic constituents; so in
the event they contain higher
concentrations of organics, this
particular LDR exemption should not
apply. Such wastes may, however, be
exempt from the subpart CC rules
because they contain less than 500
ppmw volatile organics at the point of
waste origination (40 CFR
264.1082(c)(l)).
The following principles set out how
the EPA interprets the rule for this
subpart CC exemption in specific
situations:
1. Listed Waste
(A) If the waste is already subject to
an LDR treatment standard for organics
(for example, the organic spent solvent
listed as F001), the waste is not subject
to subpart CC if it meets the treatment
standards for organic hazardous
constituents in that waste (e.g. the
treatment standards for organics in F001
set out in §268.40);
(B) If the waste is newly listed so that
no treatment standard under §268.40
has yet been established, determine if
the waste was listed for organic
constituents in Part 261 Appendix VH
and if so, if the waste meets the
Universal Treatment Standards (UTS)
for those constituents (set out in
§ 268.40) then the waste is exempt from
subpart CC. The EPA considers the UTS
to be "applicable" because it is clear
that this is the standard which will
apply when the waste is prohibited;
(C) If the waste is listed only because
Jt contains inorganic constituents (e.g.
electroplating wastewater treatment
sludge (F006)), then it is not eligible for
the LDR exemption at §264.1082(c) (4)
but could be exempt for other reasons,
such as containing less than 500 ppmw
volatile organics at the point of waste
origination. This is true whether or not
the waste is already a prohibited
hazardous waste, or is newly listed.
2. Mixtures of Listed Wastes
The same principles as presented
above apply when mixtures of listed
wastes are involved:
(A) If the mixture contains listed
wastes for which there are organic
concentration limits in §268.40 and
newly listed wastes listed (in Appendix
VII of Part 261) for organic hazardous
constituents, the waste would be
exempt from subpart CC if it meets the
treatment standards in §268.40 and the
treatment standards to which the newly
listed waste will be subject. Thus, to be
exempt under § 264.1082 (c) (4), a
mixture of F001 wastes and FXXX (a
hypothetical newly listed waste listed
for presence of benzene) would have to
meet the treatment standards for the
organic hazardous constituents set out
in § 268.40 for F001 plus UTS for
benzene;
(B) If the mixture contains listed
wastes for which there are organic
concentration limits in §268.40 and
listed wastes with treatment standards
only for inorganic constituents (or
which is newly listed, and is listed only
due to presence of inorganic hazardous
constituents), the waste mixture would
be eligible for the §264.1082(c)(4)
variance if it meets the organic
concentration limits in §268.40. Thus, a
mixture of F001 and F006 wastes would
be exempt from subpart CC if it meets
the treatment standard for F001 organic
hazardous constituents;
(C) If the mixture consists of listed
wastes which are exclusively subject to,
or are listed for, inorganic hazardous
constituents, the mixture is not eligible
forthe§264.1082(c)(4) exemption.
Finally, part of the "applicable" LDR
standard for listed wastes is that the
standard not be achieved by
impermissible dilution (as set out in
§268.3 and several EPA interpretations,
such as in 60 FR 11706-11708 (March
2, 1995)). Impermissible dilution could
involve not only mixing an agent to the
waste to increase volume without
contributing to the treatment process,
but also allowing volatilization from the
waste without capture and destruction
of the organic emissions. 52 FR at 25779
(July 8, 1987); Chemical Waste
Management. EPA, 976 F. 2d 2, 17
(D.C. Cir. 1992). In essence, this means
that the LDR standards need to be
achieved by treatment that destroys or
removes the organic hazardous
constituent (or the wastes may meet the
treatment standard as generated). See 60
FR 11708. The subpart CC rules likewise
contain provisions prohibiting dilution
as a means of making a waste eligible for
an exemption from the rule (see, e.g.,
§265.1083(c)(2)(vi)). Thus, to be eligible
for this exemption from the subpart CC
standards, listed wastes must either
meet treatment standards for organics by
treatment which destroys or removes
hazardous organic constituents, or the
wastes must meet those standards as
generated.
3. Characteristic Wastes
• The first principle to bear in mind
regarding characteristic hazardous
wastes is that the subpart CC rule no
longer applies once these wastes are
decharacterized, i.e., no longer exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste. This
is because the subpart CC rules only
apply to wastes that are identified or
listed as hazardous. See, e.g.,
§265.1080(a). Also, since the rules do
not prohibit any method which removes
a hazardous characteristic, dilution can
be used for this purpose; see
§261.3(d)(l). Thus, in the discussion
that follows, it must be understood that
all references to characteristic
hazardous wastes are to wastes which
continue to exhibit a characteristic.
Characteristic wastes can be identified
because of the presence of organic
hazardous constituents, but also can
contain organic "underlying hazardous
constituents"—hazardous constituents
present at levels exceeding the
Universal Treatment Standards but
which do not cause the waste to exhibit
a characteristic; see §268.2(i). Such
hazardous constituents typically must
be treated to meet UTS before a
characteristic waste is land disposed
(see Chemical Waste Managementv.
EPA, 976 F. 2d 2, 16-18), and so UTS
can be considered to be an applicable
standard for purposes of the subpart CC
exemption under discussion in this
preamble.
Principles applicable to specific
situations involving characteristic
hazardous wastes are therefore:
(A) Since subpart CC controls do not
apply to nonhazardous wastes, these
standards do not apply as the result of
managing decharacterized wastes.
(B) If the waste exhibits ignitability,
corrosivity, or reactivity (or is a mixture
which exhibits one or more of these
characteristics), then the waste is
exempt from subpart CC if it meets
treatment standards for any of the
organic underlying hazardous
constituents which are present (and the
waste is no longer subject to subpart CC
if it no longer exhibits a characteristic,
whether or not treatment standards for
underlying hazardous constituents are
achieved). In this example, these
characteristic wastes are prohibited and
subject to the requirement to treat for
underlying hazardous constituents, so
that these standards clearly are
applicable;
(C) If the waste or waste mixture
exhibits a characteristic for an organic
hazardous constituent (so-called
Toxicity Characteristic (TC) organic
wastes), then the waste must meet the
treatment standard for that constituent
plus UTS for any organic underlying
hazardous constituent. These are the
current requirements set out in Part 268
for the waste and so are clearly
applicable;
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64645
(D) If the waste or waste mixture
exhibits a characteristic for a metal, the
waste would be exempt from subpart CC
if it meets UTS for any organic
underlying hazardous constituent which
may be present. This result comes from
the Chemical Waste Management
opinion cited above (although the EPA
has not yet amended the Part 268 rules
to reflect the court's holding with
respect to these wastes), and so can be
viewed as applicable standards for
purposes of the subpart CC exemption.
4. Examples
A number of examples that illustrate
the EPA intent and interpretation of the
subpart CC LDR exemption are
summarized below.
1. F001 + F006. Listed organic plus
listed inorganic. Meet treatment
standards for organics in FOO1;
2. F001 + D018. Listed organic plus
organic TC. Meet treatment standards
for F001, treatment standards for
benzene, and treatment standards for
any organic underlying hazardous
constituent in the DO 18 waste (or
eliminate the DO 18 characteristic before
the waste is managed in a tank,
container or surface impoundment, in
which case only the treatment standards
for F001 waste would have to be
satisfied for the exemption to apply);
3. F001 + D008. Listed organic plus
TC metal. Meet treatment standards for
F001 plus treatment standards for any
organic underlying hazardous
constituents which may be present in
the D008 waste (or eliminate the D008
characteristic before the waste is
managed in a tank, container or surface
impoundment, leaving the F001
standard as the applicable treatment
standard);
4. F006 + D018 + D008. Listed
inorganic, TC organic, TC inorganic.
Meet treatment standard for benzene
and for organic underlying hazardous
constituents in DO 18 and D008 wastes;
5. F006. Ineligible for §264.1082(c)(4)
exemption.
There have also been questions
regarding whether this LDR exemption
applies to mixtures that would meet the
organic constituent concentration limits
specified for the hazardous wastes in
the mixture but for the contribution of
organic constituents from the
decharacterized wastes in the mixture.
The EPA interprets the rule so that the
LDR exemption does not apply in these
circumstances. First, the language of the
rule refers to "all hazardous waste
placed in the unit" having to meet the
treatment standard, which logically
means meeting the standard at the point
the hazardous waste is placed in the
unit. Second, it is reasonable to look at
the point of mixing as a new point of
waste origination in keeping with the
overall thrust of the provision to reserve
the exemption for wastes which actually
are treated. See 54 FR at 26633 (June 23,
1989) where the EPA noted a similar
view in the LDR context. The EPA also
notes that this interpretation is
consistent with other provisions of the
rule where the Agency has indicated
expressly that organic removal is to be
evaluated in the context of each
individual waste stream entering a
treatment process. See section
§265.1083(c)(2)(v)(C).
The last issue addressed on this topic
in today's preamble concerns the
relationship of this exemption and
treatment variances under the LDR
program. The EPA notes that the
exemption from subpart CC standards
applies only to hazardous wastes that
have been treated to meet the treatment
standards set out in 40 CFR 268.40. This
language excludes alternative standards
which are established as part of the
treatment variance process, which
alternative standards are codified in 40
CFR 268.44. This distinction is
intentional. As the EPA recently noted
in the rulemaking amending the
treatment variance standards, it is
possible that a treatment variance may
result in a standard which does not fully
remove volatile organics to the extent
contemplated in creating the subpart CC
exemption. For this reason, the EPA has
indicated explicitly that such wastes
may remain subject to the subpart CC
rules. The EPA reiterates that approach
here.
, The EPA is today amending the
treatment demonstration provision for
valuing waste analysis results below the
limit of detection for an analytical
method. In response to comments, EPA
is today revising paragraphs (A) and (B)
of§264.1082(c)(2)(ix)and
§ 265.1083(c)(2)(ix). The change to
paragraph (A) is being made in
recognition that a relatively high blank
value for Method 25D does not
necessarily indicate that a waste stream
has failed to meet the treatment
demonstration requirements of
§265.1083(c)(2)(i) through (vi). The
blank value required in paragraph 4.4 of
EPA Reference Method 25D (codified in
appendix A to 40 CFR part 60) is an
indication of the organics contained in
the Polyethylene Glycol, not the
organics in the waste. For a Method 25D
analytical result, the method instructs
the operator to report the value of the
instrument results minus the blank
value. In a circumstance that the
instrument results are higher than the
blank value, the reported Method 25D
result would not be non-detect, but
rather, would be a numerical
concentration value. In circumstances
that the instrument results are equal to
the blank value, the reported result
would be non-detect. In the
circumstance resulting in a non-detect,
the Agency does not consider it
appropriate to require the facility owner
or operator to compare the treatment
results of paragraphs (c) (2) (i) through
(vi) in §264.1082 and §265.1083 to one-
half of the blank value, as was required
by the regulatory requirement being
revised today. Therefore, the Agency is
adding a provision that allows the
facility owner or operator to substitute
a value of 25 ppmw for a non-detect
Method 25D result, if one-half the .
Method 25D blank value is more than 25
ppmw. The Agency has selected the
value of 25 ppmw because it represents
95 percent reduction of organics in a
waste stream of 500 ppmw, the required
percent reduction for a waste stream
with a VO concentration equal to the
action level for the subpart CC
standards.
No default value similar to the 25
ppmw value described here is included
in the provisions for non-detect results
in waste determinations performed to
determine whether the hazardous waste
is below 500 ppmw at its point of waste
origination. See 265.1084(a)(3). Such a
provision is necessary in situations
where an owner or operator is
attempting to demonstrate a process has
achieved 95 percent reduction of
organics, because the concentration of
the stream exiting the process unit may
need to be demonstrated to be as low as
25 ppmw. Such is not the case with
waste determinations performed to
demonstrate that the hazardous waste
stream is below the subpart CC action
level of 500 ppmw, where the waste
determination need only demonstrate
that the waste is below 500 ppmw. The
valuing of non-detects for waste
determinations performed at the point
of waste origination is discussed further
in the following section of this
preamble.
The EPA is revising paragraph (B) of
§264.1082(c)(2)(ix)and
§265.1083(c)(2)(ix) to clarify the
Agency's intent that the level of
detection for an analytical method other
than method 25D is the sum of the
limits of detection for each of the
regulated compounds in the waste
sample. As previously written, the
provision did not clearly indicate that
for purposes of this subpart, only the
detection limits for organic compounds
with Henry's Law greater than or equal
to 0.1 Y/X are required to be summed',
to establish the limit of detection for an
analytical method.
-------
64646 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
The EPA is also adding a reference to
organic hazardous constituents in
paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of §264.1082 (which
applies when the LDR standard is a
designated method of treatment), to
make clear that this provision requires
treatment of organics. With this
revision, §264.1082(c)(4)(ii) now
conforms to §264.1082(c)(4)(i). A
conforming change is being made to the
requirement for interim status facilities,
at§265.1083(c)(4)(ii).
D. Waste Determination Procedures
Paragraphs in §264.1083(a)(2) and
§265.1084(a)(2) are revised by changing
"The average VO concentration of a
hazardous waste at the point of waste.
origination may be determined * * *"
to read as follows: "For a waste
determination that is required by
paragraph (a)(l) of this section, the
average VO concentration of a
hazardous waste at the point of waste
origination may be determined * * *"
This waste determination requirement
was explained in Section Vn.A.3, Waste
Determination Procedures, of the
preamble to the final rule (59 FR 62915,
December 6,1994) as follows: "A
determination of the volatile organic
concentration of a hazardous waste is
required by the subpart CC standards
only when a hazardous waste is placed
in a tank, surface impoundment, or
container subject to the rule that does
not use air emission controls in
accordance with the requirements of the
rule. A TSDF owner or operator is not
required to determine the volatile
organic concentration of the waste if it
is placed in a tank, surface
impoundment, or container using the
required air emission controls."
Consistent with this statement, the EPA
is slightly revising the current rule to
make clear that the average VO
concentration determination is required
only for hazardous waste placed in a
unit not using subpart CC air emission
controls and not otherwise exempt from
using subpart CC air emission controls.
Today's action also revises
§ 265.1084 (a) (3) (ii) (B) to clarify the
EPA's intent regarding the number of
samples required for a waste
determination. The amended paragraph
states (as did the published rule
language at § 265.1084(a) (5) (iv) (A) (see
59 FR 62939. December 6,1994)), that
the average of four or more sample
results constitutes a waste
determination for the waste stream. This
amended paragraph further clarifies that
one or more waste determinations may
be needed to represent the average VO
concentration over the complete range
of waste compositions and quantities
that occur during the entire averaging
period (due to normal variations in the
operating conditions for the source or
process generating the hazardous waste
stream). Therefore, to determine the
average VO concentration of a waste
stream generated by a process with large
seasonal variations in waste quantify, or
fluctuations in ambient temperature,
several waste determinations (of four or
more samples each) will be required.
The affected public has been fully
informed of the EPA's intent regarding
the fact that four samples constitute a
waste determination, and that one or
more waste determinations may be
needed to characterize the waste
stream's VO concentration over the
averaging period. To inform the public
of the technical requirements and
compliance options in the amended
subpart CC RCRA air rules, the EPA
conducted a series of six seminars
during August and September of 1995
and an additional six seminars during
August through November of 1996.
During these seminars, the EPA
presented a thorough discussion of the
details associated with making a waste
determination. (Refer to EPA RCRA
Docket No. F-95-CE3A-FFFFF, Item
No. F-95-CE3A-S0017 and Docket No.
F-96-CE3A-FFFFF.)
In another clarifying revision, in each
citation of Method 8260(B) and Method
8270 (C) in "Test Methods for Evaluating
Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical
Methods," EPA Publication SW-846,
the reference to version (B) or (C) is
being deleted by today's action. The
citations that are being revised were
added by the November 25, 1996, final
rule amendments (61 FR 59932) to the
following paragraphs of § 265. 1084:
(b)(3)(iii), (b)(3)(iii)(F), and (b)(3)(iii)(G).
It was the EPA's intent that the
current version of each of these
methods, as applicable to the waste
being measured, be used in making a
waste determination, not necessarily the
specific versions cited. At the time the
November 25, 1996 amendments were
published, the versions 8260 (B) and
8270(C) were only proposed methods;
the published versions were 8260(A)
and 8270 (B). Specifying these particular
versions was an inadvertent error,
which is being corrected by today's
action. As was stated in Section IV.F,
Waste Determination Procedures, of the
preamble to the final rule amendments
(61 FR 59942. November 25, 1996), after
extensive review, the EPA decided that
as alternatives to using Method 25D for
direct measurement of VO concentration
in a hazardous waste for the subpart CC
RCRA air rules, it was appropriate to
add Methods 624, 625, 1624, and 1625
(all contained in 40 CFR part 136,
appendix A) and Methods 8260(B) and
8270 (C) (both in "Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods" in EPA publication
SW-846) when these methods are used
under certain specified conditions. It
was noted that for each of these
methods, there is a published list of
chemical compounds which the EPA
considers the method appropriate to
measure. The owner or operator may
only use these methods to measure
compounds that are contained on the
list associated with that method, unless
specified validation procedures are also
performed. It was further noted that for
the purpose of a waste determination,
the owner or operator must evaluate the
mass of all VO compounds in a waste
that have Henry's Law value above the
0.1 Y/X value. Therefore, it is the EPA's
position that the owner or operator is
responsible for determining that the
analytical method being used for a
waste determination is sufficient to
evaluate all of the applicable organic
compounds that are contained in the
waste.
(Note: Today's action includes a revised
list of known compounds with a Henry's Law
value less than or equal to 0.1 Y/X, contained
in appendix VI of subpart 265; the revisions
correct typographical errors, and format the
list to be alphabetical.)
Also in today's action, a printing error
that placed §265.1084(a)(3)(iii)(A) at the
end of § 265.1084(a) (3) (iii) has been
corrected. In addition, in the November
25, 1996 final rule amendments,
because of a typographical error in
§ 265.1084 (a) (3) (iii) (G), the words
"introduction and analysis" were
omitted from the sample handling steps
for which site-specific procedures must
be documented in the quality assurance
program to minimize the loss of
compounds due to volatilization,
biodegradation, reaction, or sorption.
Today's amendments revise
§ 265.1084(a)(3)(iii) (G) to read as
follows: "Documentation of site specific
procedures to minimize the loss of
compounds due to volatilization,
biodegradation, reaction, or sorption
during the sample collection, storage,
preparation, introduction, and analysis
steps."
Several commenters have stated that
the subpart CC provisions for treatment
of non-detect values in the analysis of
treated waste samples, contained in
§§264.1082(c)(ix)and
265.1083(c)(2)(ix), should also apply to
waste determinations at the point of
waste origination, for purposes of
determining compliance with the 500
ppmw VO concentration action level of
the standards. Commenters requested
-------
Federal Register /Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64647
this application of the non-detect policy
to waste determinations because a waste
determination consists of the average of
four or more samples, and some of the
samples analyzed may yield results that
are below the analytical method's limit
of detection. The commenters' concern
is the same rationale that led EPA to
amend the provisions at sections
264.1082 and 265.1083 in the November
25,1996 final rule amendments;
without such a provision, the owner or
operator does not have a way to assign
a numeric value for a non-detect
reading, when computing the average of
four or more waste samples to calculate
a waste determination. The same logic
applies to both circumstances, and it
was obviously an oversight that EPA did
not include this provision in the
November 25, 1996 final rule
amendments. Thus, the EPA is today
adding to the waste determination
provisions at §265.1084(a)(3) (iv), a
provision for valuing non-detect
analytical-results. The new rule
language provides the appropriate
guidance on the valuing of non-detects
in the calculation of the average of four
or more samples for a waste
determination. •
(Note: A corresponding amendment is not
required at §265.1084(b)(3)(iv) for treated
hazardous waste because those rules,
specifically §264.1082{c)(2)(ix) and
§265.1083(c)(2)(ix), contain provisions for
valuing non-detects when determining
performance of an organic destruction or
removal process.)
The EPA today is also amending
regulatory language to reflect a
clarification that was addressed in the
November 25, 1996 rulemaking
preamble (61 FR at 59943), but was
inadvertently omitted from the
regulatory text. This amendment adds
two new paragraphs to the waste
determination provisions, § 265.1084
(a)(3)(v) and (b)(3)(v), to state that EPA
would determine compliance with the
subpart CC regulations based on the
same test method used by the facility
owner or operator, provided the owner
or operator had used a test method
appropriate for the waste. The
appropriateness of an analytical method
is described in paragraphs §265
(a) (3) (iii) and (b) (3) (iii), respectively.
The November 25,1995 preamble to the
final rule amendments (61 FR 59943)
stated that, "* * * as long as one of the
allowable test methods is being used for
direct measurement of the VO
concentration of a hazardous waste, the
EPA would only enforce against the
facility on that basis (i.e., using the same
test method), unless the method used is
not appropriate for the hazardous waste
managed in'the unit." Today's
amendments-add a paragraph to the
analysis section of the final rule's waste
determination procedures at §265.1084
(a) and (b):to codify this Intended
provision.
As published in the November 25,
1996 final rule amendments (61 FR
59975), paragraph 265.1084(a) (4)(iv)
provides that the results of a direct
measurement of average VO
concentration shall be used to resolve a
disagreement between the Regional
Administrator and the owner or
operator regarding a determination of
the average VO concentration of a
hazardous waste stream using
knowledge. To clarify that in such cases
where there is disagreement regarding
use of knowledge, the owner or operator
has the discretion to choose an
appropriate test method or methods, the
following sentence has been added to
§ 265.1084 (a) (4) (iv): "The owner or
operator may choose one or more
appropriate methods to analyze each
collected sample in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (a) (3) (iii) of
this section."
The EPA is also clarifying the waste
determination requirements for treated
wastes. Prior to today's amendment, the
subpart CC regulatory text required
analysis of all treated waste. As
explained below, a waste determination
is unnecessary for a waste treated by
either a boiler or industrial furnace (BIF)
operated in accordance with subpart H
to 40 CFR part 266, or a hazardous
waste incinerator operated in
accordance with subpart O to 40 CFR
parts 264 or 265; the EPA is amending
the rule to clarify this. Today's action
revises paragraph (b) (1) of §§264.1083
and 265.1084 to require that the owner
or operator perform the applicable waste
determination for each treated
hazardous waste placed in a waste
management unit exempted under the
provisions of paragraphs (c) (2) (i)
through (c)(2)(vi) of §§264.1082 and
265.1083, respectively. Those specific
paragraphs are cited in today's amended
rule language to clarify that a waste
determination is only required for a
hazardous waste placed in a waste
management unit exempted under one
of the treatment demonstration options
that is a performance standard, as
opposed to an equipment specification
standard. As was noted in Section
VII.A.2.b, Treated Hazardous Waste, of
the final rule preamble (59 FR 62914,
December 6, 1994), provisions for
hazardous waste treatment are specified
in the subpart CC standards for the
following processes: (1) An organic
destruction, biological degradation, or
organic removal process that reduces
the organic content of the hazardous
waste and is designed and operated in
accordance with certain conditions
specified in the rule; (2) a hazardous
waste incinerator that is designed and
operated in accordance with the
requirements of 40 CFR part 264 subpart
O or 40 CFR part 265 subpart O; or (3)
a BIF that is subject to the requirements
of 40 CFR part 266 subpart H.
Under today's amendments to the
rule, the EPA is clarifying its original
intent, that a waste determination is
required only for a treated hazardous
' waste placed in a waste management
unit, if the unit is exempt from air
emission control requirements under
provisions contained in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi) of §§264.1082
and 265.1083. The EPA requires waste
demonstrations for those treatment
demonstration options to ensure that the
treatment conditions specified in
subpart CC have been met. As explained
in the December 1994 final rule
preamble (59 FR at 62914, December 6,
1994), the waste demonstration results
are required to indicate that a sufficient
mass of organic constituents have been
removed or destroyed from a regulated
waste stream, prior to it being placed in
a hazardous waste management unit
that is not equipped with air emission
controls. The treatment demonstration
options listed in paragraphs (c)(2)(i)
through (viii) of §§264.1082 and
265.1083 are based on the treatment
process achieving a 95% reduction by
weight of organic constituents in the
waste. For the provisions of (c) (2) (i)
through (c)(2)(vi) of §§264.1082 and
265.1083, the treatment process is not
specified in the regulation; rather the
requirement is based on the removal
efficiency of the treatment process.
Thus, to demonstrate compliance, EPA
considers it necessary that the owner or
operator perform waste determinations
to demonstrate the appropriate removal
efficiency has been achieved. However,
the treatment demonstration provisions
of paragraph (c)(2)(vii) in §§264.1082
and 265.1083 require that the hazardous
waste be treated in an incinerator that
is designed and operated in accordance
with the requirements of subpart O in
40 CFR part 264 or part 265; and the
treatment demonstration provisions of
paragraph (c) (2) (viii) in §§264.1082 and
265.1083 require that the hazardous
waste be treated in a BIF that is
designed and operated in accordance
with the requirements of 40 CFR part
266, subpart H. The EPA considers
compliance with those combustion
standards to be sufficient demonstration
that the organics in the waste will be
destroyed by 95 percent or more, by
weight, and does not consider a waste
-------
64648 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
determination necessary. The EPA has
consistently given verbal guidance that
waste determinations are not required
for waste treated in the above-
mentioned specific units, and is today
making an amendment to the regulatory
text to make the regulatory requirements
consistent with this guidance.
In a further clarification, the EPA
intended that the owner or operator use
the same test method to determine the
average VO concentration at the point of
waste treatment as is used at the point
of waste origination, if these values are
to be used to determine the effectiveness
of a treatment system. As was stated in
Section IV.F, Waste Determination
Procedures, of the preamble to the final
rule amendments (61 FR 59942,
November 25, 1996), "The main point
that must be reemphasized regarding
direct measurement of VO concentration
is that, although the EPA is amending
the rule to allow various test methods
other than Method 25D to be used in a
waste determination, the owner or
operator must use a test method (s) that
is appropriate for the compounds
contained in the waste. The method (s)
used for the waste determination must
be suitable for and must reflect or
account for all compounds in the waste
with a Henry's Law constant equal to or
greater than 0.1 Y/X at 25 degrees
Celsius."
Since the effectiveness of a waste
treatment process must be judged on the
basis of the process's capacity to reduce
the organics in waste relative to their
concentration at the point of waste
origination or at the point of entry to the
treatment system, the method(s) used
for the waste determination at the point
of waste treatment must be appropriate
to detect and measure the compounds in
the waste at the point of waste
origination: to put the measurements on
a common basis and provide an accurate
comparison, the EPA considers it
necessary that the method (s) used at the
point of waste origination must be the
same as the method(s) used at the point
of waste* treatment. To clarify this
requirement, which the EPA has
heretofore considered implicit, the •
following sentence is being added to
§265.1084(b)(3)(iii): "When the owner
or operator is making a waste
determination for a treated hazardous
waste that is to be compared to an
average VO concentration at the point of
waste origination or the point of waste
entry to the treatment system, to
determine if the conditions of
§264.1082(c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi) or
§265.1083(c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi) are
met, then the waste samples shall be
prepared and analyzed using the same
method(s) as were used in making the
initial waste determination (s) at the
point of waste origination or at the point
of entry to the treatment system." (Only
the waste determination provisions in
part 265 are being revised in connection
with this rule clarification and the
following rule clarification, because the
subpart CC waste determination
protocols are contained in part 265, and
the part 264 standards cross-reference
part 265.)
Because of a printing error, the
equations for calculating the actual
organic mass removal rate in
§265.1084(b)(8)(iii) and for calculating
the actual organic mass biodegradation
rate in §265.1084(b)(9)(iv) were out of
place in the November 25, 1996
amendments (61 FR 59978). This
document corrects the placement of
these equations.
In a further clarification to the waste
determination procedures of subpart CC,
paragraph 265.1084(d)(5)(ii) required
that a mixture of methane in air at a
concentration of approximately, but less
than, 10,000 ppmw be used to calibrate
the detection instrument used to
determine no detectable organic
emissions. It was the EPA's intent that
the calibration procedure be consistent
with the procedure specified in the
subpart BB equipment leak test methods
and procedures at §§264.1063 and
265.1063, as they reference the same
monitoring procedure. Paragraph
(b)(4)(ii) of §§264.1063 and 265.1063
specifies that calibration gases for the
detection instrument shall be, "A
mixture of methane or n-hexane and air
at a concentration of approximately, but
less than 10,000 ppm methane or n-
hexane. Consistent with this
requirement, today's action revises the
requirement for calibration gases in
parts 264 and 265 to provide the owner
or operator the choice of using a mixture
of methane or n-hexane and air.
E. Standards: Tanks
Commenters have questioned whether
a facility owner or operator is permitted
to install a closure device on a tank
manifold system or header vent when a
series of tanks have their vents (i.e., tank
openings) connected to a common
header. In many tanks systems, tank
vents are connected to a manifold or
central header, and a closure device (or
pressure/vacuum device such as a
conservation vent) is installed on the
header rather than on the individual
tanks. Prior to today's amendment, the
subpart CC level 1 tank requirements at
paragraph (2)(2)(iii) in §264.1084 and
§265.1085 could have been interpreted
to require that each opening on a Level
1 tank fixed roof must be either
equipped with a closure device or
connected through a closed-vent system
to a control device, with no allowance
for the closure device or pressure/
vacuum device to be installed on the
tank manifold system. The EPA did not
intend the regulatory requirement to
disallow a closure device or pressure/
vacuum device from being installed on
a tank manifold system. The EPA is
aware that such tank manifold or vent
header systems provide a degree of
emissions reduction which is derived
from vapor balancing between tanks
during unloading and inter-tank
transfers; the EPA clearly did not intend
to discourage their use. The EPA is
therefore amending the subpart CC tank
standards to provide that a closure
device can be installed on a manifold
vent header for Level 1 tanks, by
revising paragraph (c)(2)(iii) in
§264.1084 and §265.1085.
In the November 25, 1996 final rule
amendments, the EPA promulgated a
provision that allowed a facility to
install and operate air emission control
devices on Level 1 tanks. As published,
the regulatory language for that
provision inadvertently made it
mandatory that these control devices be
operating at all times when hazardous
waste is managed in the tank, even at
times of routine maintenance. The EPA
is amending the rules today to clarify
that the control device is not required to
be operating during specified periods,
including those instances it is necessary
to provide access to the tank for
performing routine inspections,
maintenance, or other activities needed
for normal operations. Examples of such
activities include those times when a
worker needs to open a port or hatch to
maintain or repair equipment.
Paragraph (B) is being revised in
§264.1084(c)(2)(iii)and
§ 265.1085 (c) (2) (iii) to better convey this
intent.
In the amendments to the final rule
published on November 25, 1996 (61 FR
59944), the preamble at Section G.
Standards: Tanks that discussed the
revisions to the subpart CC tank
standards, stated "* * * an option is
being provided allowing the use of an
enclosure vented through a closed-vent
system to an enclosed combustion
device or a control device designed and
operated to reduce the total organic
content of the inlet vapor stream by at
least 95 percent by weight," in order to
comply with the tank level 2 air
emission control requirements.
However, the latter portion of this
statement was incorrect and the EPA is
clarifying that it was the EPA's intent
that only enclosed combustion devices
can be used as control devices under
this alternative to comply with the Tank
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64649
Level 2 air emission control
requirements. It should also be noted
that the regulation as amended by the
November 25,1996 Federal Register
document (at§§264.1084(d)(5) and
265.1085(d)(5)) was correct and did not
contain the statement regarding the use
of a (non-combustion) "control device
designed and operated to reduce the
total organic content of the inlet vapor
stream by at least 95 percent by weight."
Since publication of the November 25,
1996 preamble, the EPA has
consistently and repeatedly provided
verbal clarification in all forums where
the subject of level 2 tank enclosures
has been raised, that the noted preamble
text is incorrect, and that level 2 tanks
operated inside an enclosure must be
vented to an enclosed combustion
device. The EPA provided this
information publicly at each of the six
seminars EPA conducted in September
through December of 1996; additionally,
an industry trade association provided
this same clarification at the two
seminars the industry trade group
conducted in March and April of 1997
(these seminars are discussed in the
Background section of today's
preamble). Additionally, the
requirement for enclosed combustion
devices on level 2 tank enclosures was
strongly affirmed in the accompanying
printed materials for each of these EPA
and industry trade group seminars;
those printed materials were distributed
to all seminar attendees, and to
additional members of EPA and the
regulated community, for informational
purposes and peer review. Further, the
RCRA Hotline has been clarifying the
regulatory text requirement for enclosed
combustion devices to callers who have
raised the topic to Hotline
representatives. The requirement for
enclosed combustion devices on level 2
tank enclosures is not being amended by
today's action. However, the EPA is
currently considering a future
amendment to this requirement that
would allow owners or operators to
operate a Level 2 tank enclosure vented
to an alternate control device, provided
they make certain site-specific
demonstrations. The reason EPA
currently requires enclosure emissions
to be vented to an enclosed combustion
device is because organic concentrations
in air within the enclosure are very
dilute, due to the inherent dilution in
the enclosure, and are often less than
100 ppm organics by volume. It is not
clear to the EPA that control devices
other than enclosed combustion
devices, can reduce organics in such a
dilute vent stream by the 95 percent
control efficiency required the subpart
CC standards. The EPA has agreed to
investigate the possibility whereby a
facility could make a case-by-case
demonstration of a non-combustion
control device efficiency; the EPA
would require the demonstration to
show that a mass of organics would be
removed from a given waste, using a
particular enclosure and control device,
equivalent to 95 percent reduction of
organics in the tank headspace, if the
tank were to be equipped with a discreet
cover. Though such a demonstration
would likely be fairly detailed and
costly, commenters have indicated that
they would be interested in pursuing
such an option if it were included in the
subpart CC tank enclosure requirements.
The EPA considers that such an
equivalency would be consistent with
the existing tank standards; if a
technically feasible and verifiable
equivalency demonstration technique
can be developed, this could be a
reasonable alternative to the
requirement for enclosed combustion
devices under the Level 2 tank
enclosure control option. The EPA will
continue to investigate this option, and
if a viable approach can be developed,
will publish a future amendment to
incorporate it into the subpart CC Level
2 tank standards.
The EPA has received inquiries as to
whether doors are allowed to be open
on level 2 tank enclosures, and how
doors are regarded under the provisions
for natural draft openings (NDO) in the
"Procedure T—Criteria for and
Verification of a Permanent or - - ,
Temporary Total Enclosure" under 40
CFR 52.741, appendix B ("Criteria T")
requirements. The Criteria T evaluation
of NDO is intended to evaluate the
effectiveness of the enclosure at
capturing emissions from within the
enclosure. Therefore, for purposes of
Criteria T, the evaluation of the
enclosure must be conducted on the
enclosure as it is operated during
hazardous waste management
operations. If the enclosure has a door
that is closed during waste operations,
then the open doorway would not be
considered an NDO; however, cracks or
openings that exist around the door
when it is closed would be considered
NDO. Doors on enclosures are often very-
large, to accommodate waste
transportation vehicles; thus, the
effectiveness of an enclosure is severely
altered by the positioning of such a
door. Obviously, if a door is normally
open during times when hazardous
waste is managed in the enclosed tank,
the open doorway would be considered
an NDO.
By this clarification, the EPA is not
precluding the opening of enclosure
doors. The EPA considers it appropriate
to allow enclosure doors to be open for
the same circumstances that tank covers
can be open under paragraph
265.1085(g)(2)(i)(A) and similar
paragraphs for tanks equipped with
fixed roofs—when necessary to provide
access to the tank for performing routine
inspection, maintenance, or other
activities needed for normal operations.
Also commensurate with paragraph
265.1085(g)(2)(i)(A), following
completion of the activity, the owner or
operator should promptly secure the
door in the position it was in during the
evaluation of the NDO.
It also warrants clarification that the
enclosure door (and other openings not
accounted for as Criteria T NDO) must
be closed at all times that hazardous
waste is managed in the enclosed tank
(unless the tank is exempt from subpart
CC air emission control requirements),
not just when waste is being treated in
the tank. The EPA considers it
inherently obvious within the tank
standards that the enclosure around a
tank must be operated in the same
manner in which it was evaluated for
the Criteria T requirements.
Specifically, paragraphs §264.1084(i)(l)
and §265.1085(i)(l) require that the
enclosure be designed and operated in
accordance with the Criteria T.
The EPA recognizes that it is not
feasible to require all waste transfer to
and from a tank enclosure to be
conducted by enclosed transfer systems.
However, the EPA does consider it
reasonable to interpret the provisions of
§264.1084(0(1) and §265.1085(i)(l) to
require that the enclosure be operated in
the same manner in which it was
evaluated for compliance with Criteria
T. Thus, the EPA is clarifying that
enclosure doors and other openings not
evaluated as NDO shall be closed when
hazardous waste is managed inside the
enclosure, except when it is necessary
to open the door or opening for waste
transfer, equipment access, or worker
access.
In the December 6, 1994 final
regulation, the regulatory text at
,§§264.1084(g) and265.1085(g) allowed
that an owner or operator may install
and operate a safety device on tank
covers, closed-vent systems and control
devices. The amendments published on
November 25, 1996 amended the tank
requirements; in those amendments, the
provision for safety devices was
inadvertently omitted from the tank
requirements for floating roof covers.
Today's action adds new paragraphs
264.1084 (e) (4), 264.1084(f) (4),
265.1085(e)(4), and 265.1085(f)(4)
stating that safety devices are allowed
-------
64650 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
on both internal and external floating
roof tank covers.
Today's action amends
§ 264.1084(f)(3)(iii) to correct a
typographical error. The sentence "Prior
to each inspection required by
paragraph (f)(3)(i) or (f)(3)(ii) of this
Subpart * * *" is revised to read as
follows, "Prior to each inspection
required by paragraph (f) (3) (i) or
(f)(3) (ii) of this section * * *" Also, to
correct another typographical error in
§264.1084(f)(3)(i)(D)(4) and
§265.1085(f)(3)(i)(D)(4). the phrase
"* * * and then dividing the sum for
each seal type by the nominal perimeter
of the tank." is revised to read as
follows "* * * and then dividing the
sum for each seal type by the nominal
diameter of the tank."
In the November 25. 1996 final rule
amendments (61 FR 59932), an
exemption from the control
requirements of subpart CC was added
for a tank, surface impoundment, or
container for which all the hazardous
waste placed in the unit meets the Land
Disposal Restrictions (LDR) as specified
in §§264.1082(c)(4) and 265.1083(c)(4).
However, the EPA inadvertently failed
to add this exemption based on meeting
applicable LDR treatment standards to
the exemption from the closed system
transfer requirements. Today's change
adds paragraph (iii) under
§§264.1084(j)(2) and 265.1085(j)(2) to
correct this oversight. It was originally
the EPA's intent to make this
conforming amendment for closed
system transfer requirements in the
November 25.1996 action. The basic
structure of the subpart CC rule is that
once a hazardous waste is subject to the
provisions of the rule, all containers,
tanks, and impoundments managing the
waste are subject to the rule's
requirements. However, once a waste is
treated to destroy or remove organics in
a manner specified in the rule,
downstream tanks, containers, and
surface impoundments are not subject to
the subpart CC air requirements to
operate the units with covers and/or
control devices.
(Note: Recordkeeping, monitoring, reporting
and testing requirements may apply to those
downstream units.) See Section Vn.A.2.b,
Treated Hazardous Waste, of the preamble to
the final rule (59 FR 62914, December 6,
1994). The EPA inadvertently failed to codify
this core principle for closed system transfer
and Is correcting the omission in today's rule.
F. Standards: Surface Impoundments
Today's action corrects a
typographical error in §§264.1085(b)(2)
and 265.1086(b)(2) by revising the
phrase"* * * paragraph (d) of this
sections." to read "* * * paragraph (d)
of this section." Also, the EPA is
clarifying the requirements of
§§264.1085(d)(l)(iii)and
265.1086(d)(l)(iii) by making a non-
substantive editing change. "Factors to
be considered when selecting the
materials for * * *" is redrafted to read
"Factors to be considered when
selecting the materials of construction
* * *" To correct another typographical
error in §§264.1085(d)(2)(i)(B) and
§265.1086(d)(2)(i)(B), "To remove
accumulated sludge or other residues
from the bottom of surface
impoundment." is revised to read, "To
remove accumulated sludge or other
residues from the bottom of the surface
impoundment."
As is discussed regarding tanks, in
Section E of this preamble, the EPA
inadvertently failed to add the
exemption for hazardous wastes that
have been treated to meet applicable
LDR treatment standards to the
exemption from the closed system
transfer requirements for hazardous
waste that is transferred to a surface
impoundment. Today's action adds this
exemption to the exemptions from
closed system transfer requirements in
§§264.1085(e)(2)(iii)and
265.1086(e)(2)(iii).
G. Standards: Containers
The EPA has received comments from
the regulated community regarding the
inspection requirements for containers;
these comments clearly indicate a wide-
spread misinterpretation of the rule
requirements relevant to container
inspections. Numerous commenters
referenced in their statements to the
EPA that the language in
§264.1086(c)(4)(i) and (d)(4)(i), and the
corresponding paragraphs in 40 CFR
part 265, require a visual inspection to
occur within 24 hours after acceptance
of each regulated container which is
transported to a regulated facility and
which contains hazardous waste at the
time it arrives at the facility. They also
noted that the requirement for an
inspection to be conducted within a 24-
hour time frame is unnecessarily
burdensome in some limited and
infrequent situations.
The visual container inspection
requirement is intended to provide
means for the facility owner or operator
to ensure that the container has no
visible openings or gaps through which
organics could be emitted; see Section
IV.I.3 of the preamble, 61 FR 59948,
November 25, 1996. The amended
container regulations published
November 25, 1996, did not specify the
time frame in which the initial visual
inspection must be conducted. The
regulation states, "In the case when
* * * the container is not emptied (i.e.,
does not meet the conditions for an
empty container as specified in 40 CFR
261.7(b)) within 24 hours after the
container is accepted at the facility, the
owner or operator shall visually inspect
the container * * *" The 24-hour
period in the rule language refers to the
time limit on emptying the container
that triggers the visual inspection; the
rule language in §265.1087(c)(4)(i) and
(d)(4)(i), and the corresponding
paragraphs in 40 CFR part 265, as
published in November 1996, do not
specify the time frame in which the
visual inspections must be conducted.
However, it is the intent of the EPA that
the initial inspection be subject to the
same time requirements as were set out
in the December 6, 1994, final
regulation (see 40 CFR 265.1089(f)(l) of
the December 6, 1994 published
regulation (at 59 FR 62947)).
Specifically, the container inspection
must be conducted on or before the date
that the container is initially subject to
the subpart CC container standards.
Thus, for a container with hazardous
waste that is transported to a regulated
facility, the inspection of the container
is required on or before the date that the
container is accepted at the facility.
In those situations where it would be
infeasible to inspect a container on the
date it is accepted at the facility, for the
purpose of compliance with the subpart
CC container standards, it would be
acceptable for the container to be
inspected prior to that date. For
example, if an owner or operator of an
affected facility accepts a shipment of
containers that arrives at the TSDF on
a truck, and the TSDF owner or operator
is unable to conduct a visual inspection
of the containers at the time of
acceptance of the container shipment, it
is acceptable under the rule to have the
generator or transporter perform the
visual inspection of the individual
containers before or during loading of
the containers onto the truck for
transport to the affected facility. The
transporter or generator could provide
the recipient TSDF with some level of
information (e.g., written
documentation) to confirm the
inspection has been conducted on or
before the date that the container is
accepted at the facility. It is likely that
the TSDF owner or operator would then
perform their own visual inspection
when possible, (e.g., at the time that the
containers are unloaded from the truck
at the TSDF). The EPA considers the use
of generator or transporter supplied
information to comply with the visual
inspection requirements similar to
owner or operator use of generator
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64651
information regarding the organic
content of a hazardous waste as a means
to comply with the waste determination
(i.e., VO concentration determination)
requirements of the rule. It should be
noted that in either case, it is ultimately
the responsibility of the owner or
operator of the affected facility to be in
compliance with all the applicable
regulatory requirements. The EPA is .
amending the language in
§264.1086(c)(4)(i) and (d)(4)(i), and the
corresponding paragraphs in 40 CFR
part 265, to clarify that the 24-hour.
period noted in the rule refers to the
time frame for emptying a container,
and that this 24-hour criterion then
triggers the need for a visual inspection
.that must be conducted on or before the
date that the container is accepted at the
facility.
The amendment to §§264.1086
(c)(4)(i) and (d)(4)(i), and the
corresponding language in part 265, also
clarify the phrase "accepted at the
facility." For the purposes of this
inspection requirement for containers,
the date of acceptance is the date of
signature that the facility owner or
operator enters on Item 20 of the
Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest of
the appendix to 40 CFR part 262 (EPA
Form 8700-22), as required under
subpart E of this part, at §264.71 and
§ 265.71. The instructions to EPA Form
8700-22 at Item 20, Facility Owner or
Operator: Certification of Receipt of
Hazardous Materials Covered by This
Manifest Except as Noted in Item 19,
state, "Print or type the name of the
person accepting the waste on behalf of
the owner or operator of the facility.
That person must acknowledge
acceptance of the waste described on
the Manifest by signing and entering the
date of receipt.'' The EPA considers
acceptance of the waste to occur at the
time of manifest signature. This has
been the EPA's consistent interpretation
of this phrase, and is the guidance that
EPA has supplied both verbally and in
written seminar materials.
The EPA has received questions
regarding when the opening of a cover
or closure device is allowed on
containers. Several of these questions
have concerned the opening of the vent
on vacuum trucks during loading
operations and the opening of
containers vents to allow venting of
vapors for the purpose of worker safety.
With regard to vacuum trucks, the EPA
has always intended the subpart CC
final rules to allow containers to vent
emissions directly to the atmosphere
during filling operations. This would
include use of a vacuum system to fill
a tank truck (i.e., a container under
RCRA). Although the December 6, 1994
final rules only allowed the opening
through which waste was transferred to
be open during waste transfer, this was
inadvertent; the EPA intended to allow
venting during waste transfer
operations, either through the opening
through which the waste is transferred,
or through a second opening that would
serve as a vent. To this effect, the EPA
amended the subpart CC rules on
February 9, 1996 to clarify this point
(see 61 FR 4909). The fact that EPA is
not requiring control of vacuum trucks
is also discussed in the document
Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage,
and Disposal Facilities—Background
Information for Promulgated Organic
Air Emission Standards for Tanks,
Surface Impoundments, and containers;
see EPA-453/R-94-076b, November
1994, Section 6.6.5. where it is clear that
the EPA is fully aware that a practical
means of controlling the exhaust from
the vacuum pump on a vacuum truck
has not been demonstrated. The EPA is
now reiterating that these types of
systems are allowed under the subpart
CC container rules.
In response to commenters, EPA is
providing clarification that venting of
containers for worker safety is also
allowed under the subpart CC container
rules. Provision (iii) of §§264.1086 (c) (3)
and 265.1087(c)(3), which allows
opening of a closure device or cover
when access inside is needed, would
allow the owner or operator to vent a
container prior to sending a worker into
a tanker or other container for clean-out.
This type of venting is necessary to
avoid an unsafe condition when
entering a confined space. For example,
venting both before and during the
cleaning operations is needed to reduce
the organic vapor concentration below
the lower explosive limit (LEL) for
worker safety. In addition, provision (v)
of §§264.1086(c)(3) and 265.1087(c)(3),
which allows opening of a safety device
at any time clearly shows the EPA intent
regarding the implementation measures
necessary to avoid an unsafe condition.
The EPA considers that the current rule
language allows this type of venting for
maintenance of worker safety, and is
providing this preamble discussion in
response to requests from commenters.
An additional interpretive
clarification is required, regarding the
transfer requirements to, from, and
among hazardous waste containers,
specifically when transfers occur in
conjunction with hazardous waste
stabilization operations.
The first clarification addresses
whether the addition of sorbent
materials is considered to be waste
stabilization for the purposes of
compliance with subpart CC, and thus,
whether such activities are required to
be conducted in containers equipped
with level 3 controls. There has been
specific inquiry as to whether the
subpart CC level 3 container standards
apply in situations where an owner or
operator "transfers" hazardous waste
from one container, such as a bulk
container or roll off box, to a second
unit, and adds the sorbent to the waste
after each scoop of waste is placed in
the second unit. The container
standards at §264.1086(b)(2) state that,
"* * * the owner or operator shall
control air pollutant emissions from the
container in accordance with the
Container Level 3 standards specified in
paragraph (e) of this section at those
times during the waste stabilization
process when the hazardous waste in
the container is exposed to the
atmosphere." In its definition of waste
stabilization at 40 CFR 265.1081, the
EPA has stated that stabilization
includes the elimination of free liquids,
but does "not include the adding of
absorbent materials to the surface of a
waste, without mixing, agitation, or
subsequent curing, to absorb free
liquid." The associated preamble
language clearly defined what activities
EPA was excluding from the waste
stabilization definition. See 61 FR at
4905, February 9, 1996. That preamble
discussion stated, "The EPA is also
amending the term "waste stabilization"
to specifically exclude the process of
adding non-reactive absorbent material
to the surface of a waste. The EPA
recognizes that to meet certain criteria
under the Land Disposal Restrictions, or
to prevent the introduction of liquid
into certain combustion devices, owners
or operators apply absorbent material to
the surface of wastes just prior to
disposal. In such procedures, the
container is opened, absorbent material
is placed on the surface of the waste to
absorb a relatively small amount of
liquid, and the container is closed. No
mixing or agitation is involved in the
process."
It is clear from the text of the
regulation, as well as the February 9,
1996 preamble discussion, that addition
of absorbent, even with very limited
mixing or agitation, must be performed
in compliance with the container level
3 standards. In fact, this is the literal
meaning of the provision—such
"transfer" operations result in mixing of
the sorbent material with the waste, a
condition that qualifies as waste
stabilization under subpart CC, and
requires container level 3 controls. (See
also the discussion of the EPA's
intentions regarding requirements for
containers in the February 9, 1996
-------
64652 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
preamble at 61 FR 4903, which makes
clear that a hazardous waste transfer
operation conducted as described above
would not satisfy the EPA's stated intent
with regard to the general transfer
requirements of the container standards.
Therefore, the type of transfer operation
described above can only occur if the
containers meet the container level 3
requirements. The EPA repeats that this
requirement has a sound environmental
basis. Containers would remain open to
the environment during such
operations, and the volatile hazardous
constituents will be released. The
reaction of the sorbent materials with
the hazardous waste would, in fact, be
likely to increase the volatilization of
the organics in the waste, while the
container would remain uncovered as
subsequent layers of waste and sorbent
were applied. Such a situation would
result in organic emissions that the EPA
considers most appropriately controlled
under the container level 3
requirements, and the rules so require.
The EPA recognizes, however, that
there are circumstances where addition
of sorbent is not stabilization and
therefore will not trigger subpart CC
container standards. This is why the
rule states that stabilization "does not
include the adding of absorbent
materials to the surface of a waste,
without mixing, agitation, or subsequent
curing, to absorb free liquid." The chief
example EPA has provided of such an
activity is addition of sorbent just prior
to the final disposition of the material
(the situation given in the February 9,
1996 preamble discussion). Other
examples would involve situations
where tanks are covered immediately
after addition of sorbent and stay
covered thereafter.
Examples could occur when sorbent
is added to a container at the end of a
work day, or at the final completion of
a waste transfer. The EPA's technical
basis for allowing sorbent material to be
placed on the waste surface in these
limited situations, we repeat, is that any
potential for volatilization to the
atmosphere of the organics in the waste
would be prevented by the immediate
application of the container cover.
A similar issue has come to the
attention of EPA, regarding the
container standards at §264.1086(d)(2)
and §265.1087 (d) (2), which require that
transfer of hazardous waste in or out of
a container "* * * be conducted in
such a manner as to minimize exposure
of the hazardous waste to the
atmosphere, to the extent practical
* * *" This provision was an
amendment to the more extensive
transfer requirements that were
promulgated in the December 6,1994
rule. The November 25, 1996
amendment also revised the tank and
surface impoundment transfer
requirements such that only transfer
between and among subpart CC-
regulated tanks and surface
impoundments are required to be
conducted in an enclosed transfer
system. This amendment was made in
recognition that it is often impractical
for waste in containers to be transferred
to tanks or surface impoundments
through an enclosed system. However, it
is the EPA's intent that transfer of
hazardous waste among containers, and
between containers and surface
impoundments or tanks, be conducted
in a manner to minimize waste exposure
to the atmosphere. See §264.1084(j),
§264.1085(e), §264.1086(d)(2) and
corresponding paragraphs in part 265.
Members of the regulated community
have questioned whether it is possible
to evade these less extensive transfer
requirements by including an
intervening non-subpart CC unit when
performing a transfer of hazardous
waste. Specifically, certain regulated
facilities have discussed transferring
waste from a subpart CC-regulated unit
(e.g., a tank or container) to a unit not
subject to subpart CC (e.g., the floor of
a containment building), then
subsequently transferring the waste to a
second subpart CC-regulated unit. Since
the containment building is not a unit
regulated by subpart CC, the subpart CC
standards do not impose transfer
requirements to or from containment
buildings; thus, the facilities suggest
that the subpart CC transfer
requirements would be met. As noted
above, the subpart CC container
requirements state that transfer of
hazardous waste to and from a regulated
container shall be conducted in a .
manner which minimizes the waste's
exposure to the atmosphere, considering
practical factors. The EPA considers an
unnecessary and open-air transfer of
waste to or from a container, conducted
in whole or in part, to avoid the subpart
CC container (or tank) requirements, to
not meet the obvious intent of the
container transfer requirement (e.g., see
264.1086(d)(2)). The EPA is aware of
waste transfer methods that would be
more effective in minimizing exposure
of the waste to the atmosphere—the
owner or operator is responsible for
conducting waste transfer in such a
manner as to minimize exposure of the
hazardous waste to the atmosphere.
Rather than leaving this issue open to
interpretation, the EPA will instruct
permit writers to invoke omnibus
authority under RCRA section
3005 (c) (3) to assure control of such
transfers where necessary to protect
human health and the environment.
There are other aspects of the
container standards that also require
some further clarification; one point that
needs some additional explanation is in
regard to the Department of
Transportation (DOT) compliance
demonstration option for containers.
The subpart CC container standards, as
amended November 25, 1996, allow
three options for compliance
demonstration, one of which is through
compliance with certain applicable DOT
regulations for packaging of hazardous
materials for transportation.
Commenters have stated that they
consider the specification in subpart CC,
as to which DOT packaging
requirements qualify for that
compliance option, to have resulted in
an overly stringent requirement.
However, the EPA has clarified that
demonstration of compliance through
the use of certain DOT packagings is
only one approach to demonstrating
compliance with the container
standards. The regulated industry has
indicated to EPA that the vast majority
of hazardous waste that is shipped in
DOT transport packagings meets the
requirements for container level 1
standards. Thus, if a facility owner or
operator is using a DOT packaging
which is not among those specified
under the subpart CC container
standards, the facility owner or operator
must conduct a visual inspection to
determine that there are no visible
openings, cracks, etc. in the container.
See §265.1087(c)(l)(ii). The EPA
considers the existing regulatory
language to adequately convey this
intent, and is including this preamble
discussion in response to commenters'
requests.
The container option to comply with
applicable DOT packaging regulations,
described at 40 CFR 265.1087(f) and
264.1086(f), includes four requirements
which must all be met to comply with
the subpart CC compliance
demonstration. The regulatory language
of that paragraph clearly indicates (in
fact, literally indicates) that compliance
with all four of the subparagraphs at
§265.1087(f)(l) through §265.1087(f)(4)
is required, since the requirements are
not presented as alternatives. The
following paragraphs provide a detailed
description of each of the four
requirements found at §265.1087(f).
The first requirement, found at 40
CFR 265.1087(f)(l), specifies that the
container must meet the applicable
requirements specified in 40 CFR part
178 or part 179. It is EPA's intent to
require that in order to comply with 40
CFR part 265.1087 (f), a container must
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64653
be subject to 49 CFR part 178 or part
179; it is also the EPA's intent to require
that such a container be in compliance
with all the requirements of 49 CFR
parts 178 and 179 that are applicable.
(Again, this is the direct and literal
reading of the provision.) In developing
the final rule, the EPA determined that
containers subject to and in compliance
with these requirements would achieve
the appropriate level of air emission
control; see the preamble discussion at
Section IV.I.l, 61 FR 59947, November
25, 1996. The Agency could not make
that finding for containers not subject to
these provisions. A container not
subject to 49 CFR part 178 or 179 is thus
not eligible to comply with the subpart
CC rule through the requirements of 40
CFR 265.1087 (c)(l)(i) or (d)(l)(i), nor
the corresponding paragraphs in 40 CFR
part 264; it would have to comply with
the subpart CC rule through the
requirements of 40 CFR 265.1087
or the corresponding paragraphs in 40
CFR part 264, as appropriate.
The second requirement within 40
CFR 265.1 087 (f) for DOT-compliant
containers stipulates that the hazardous
waste must be managed in the DOT
container in accordance with all the
requirements contained in 49 CFR part
107 subpart B, part 172, part 173, and
part 180 that are applicable to that
container and the waste managed in that
container. The EPA listed these
regulatory parts because they were
characterized by the industry and by
DOT as the parts which describe the
requirements for management of
hazardous waste, for the types of
containers that are specified in 49 CFR
parts 178 and 179. The reference to 49
CFR part 107. subpart B is included to
recognize the exemptions for containers
that have been determined by DOT to be
equivalent or superior to those required
within 49 CFR part 178 and 179
standards.
The third and fourth requirements,
listed in 40 CFR 265.1087(f)(3) and (f)(4)
and their corresponding paragraphs in
40 CFR part 264, state that, "* * * For
the purpose of complying with this
subpart, no exceptions to the 40 CFR
part 178 and part 179 regulations are
allowed except as provided for in
paragraph (f)(4) of this section," and
"For a lab pack that is managed in
accordance with the requirements of 40
CFR part 178 for the purpose of
complying with this subpart, an owner
or operator may comply with the
exceptions for combination packagings
specified in 40 CFR 173.12(b)." These
requirements indicate that the DOT-
authorized container must be in
compliance with all applicable
requirements in 49 CFR parts 178 and
179. Paragraph 265.1087(f)(3) of the-
subpart CC rule specifically means that
for the purposes of the subpart CC rule
provisions, compliance with 49 CFR
parts 178 and 179 is required, and no
exceptions to those provisions are
allowed (unless the container were a lab
pack, as described in §265.1087(f)(4)).
As with the earlier provisions discussed
above, this is the literal meaning of the
provision. There are many exceptions,
both explicit and implicit, to the 49 CFR
part 178 and 179 standards which are
contained in other sections of the DOT
standards. The EPA's intent in 40 CFR
265.1087(f)(3) is to disallow any
regulatory provision which removes or
alters a requirement contained in 49
CFR parts 178 or 179, regardless of
where that disallowing regulatory
provision is codified, or whether that
provision is specifically described as an
"exception." For instance, 49 CFR
173.28(e) states that a non-reusable
container may be reused for certain
circumstances; however, the allowance
of that paragraph would not be
recognized for compliance with the
subpart CC container standards at 40
CFR 265.1087(f) or 40 CFR 264.1086(f).
As another example, 49 CFR 173.204
contains an implicit exception for
certain hazardous materials that states,
"packaging need not conform to the
requirements of part 178." However, if
that packaging were used to manage a
hazardous waste subject to the container
regulations of the subpart CC rule, the
effect of 40 CFR 265.1087(f)(3) would be
to require that, for compliance with the
subpart CC rule, such packaging must
comply with the requirements of 49 CFR
part 178. In this example, 40 CFR
265.1087© and 264.1086(f) would
disallow the exception to 49 part 178
provided by 49 CFR 173.204. Thus, as
a general matter, 40 CFR 265.1087(f) and
264.1086(f) have the intended effect of
requiring strict compliance with all
applicable requirements of 49 CFR parts
178 arid 179 (other than the exception
for lab packs at 49 CFR 173.12(b)), for
the purpose of the DOT compliance
option within the subpart CC container
standards. Strict compliance with these
provisions is necessary to ensure that
the emission reduction intended by the
rule is achieved.
Today's action also corrects two
typographical errors in §264.1086. In
§264.1086(c)(2), "* * * Organic vapor
permeability, the effects of the contact
with the hazardous waste * * *" is
revised to read as follows, "Organic
vapor permeability; the effects of the
contact with the hazardous waste
* * *"andin§264.1086(d)(2), "* * *
any one of the following: a submerged-
fill pipe* * *" is revised to read as
follows, "* * * any one of the
following: A submerged-fill pipe * * *"
For containers required to use Level 2
controls under the subpart CC
standards, one option under the final
rules requires that the hazardous waste
be managed in a "container that
operates with no detectable organic
emissions." (See §§264.1086(d)(ii) and
265.1087(d)(ii).) The test for conducting
no detectable organic emissions for the
purpose of complying with this
requirement must be conducted in
accordance with the procedures
specified in Method 21 of 40 CFR part
60, appendix A. However, under
subpart CC, there are no requirements
for periodic Method 21 leak monitoring
of containers. (See Section IV.I.3 of the
preamble to the final rule, 61 FR 59948,
November 25, 1996.) Any Method 21
monitoring to determine if the
containers operate with no detectable
organic emissions is conducted at the
owner's or operator's discretion. In
order to clarify this point, the EPA has
amended the language in paragraph (g)
of the container standards.
H. Standards: Closed-Vent Systems and
Control Devices
The inspection and monitoring
requirements under paragraph (c) of
§264.1087 and §265.1088 are being
amended to clarify that the inspection
and monitoring procedures specifically
cited in paragraph (c)(7) are applicable
to closed-vent systems as well as to the
control devices. The reference to closed-
vent system in paragraph (c) (7) was
inadvertently left out of the sentence
specifying what shall be inspected and
monitored; however, the procedures
specified in the paragraph did cite the
requirements applicable to closed-vent
systems, and it was thus the EPA's
intent that closed-vent systems be
included.
The EPA has received several
comments concerning how a TSDF
owner or operator would demonstrate
compliance with the 95 percent removal
requirement (see §265.1088(c)(l)(i)) for
a vent stream with low concentration
organic vapor entering an organic air
emission control device. The
commenters contended that the 95
percent removal or destruction
performance demonstration is not
feasible for low concentration organic
streams. However, the EPA has not at
this time found adequate technical
reasons to change the 95 percent control
requirement. Similar requirements have
been included in other regulations
controlling air emissions from process
vents on hazardous and non-hazardous
-------
64654 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
waste management operations (e.g.,
subpart DD in 40 CFR part 63) and
guidance regarding compliance with the
95 percent control requirement has been
published by the EPA, see EPA-450/3-
89-021, Hazardous Waste TSDF—
Technical Guidance Document for
RCRA Air Emission Standards for
Process Vents and Equipment Leaks, or
EPA-450/3-91-007, Alternative Control
Technology Document—Organic Waste
Process Vents. The EPA has also
published guidance regarding the
control of low concentration organic
vapor streams: see EPA-450/R-95-003,
Survey of Control Technologies for Low
concentration Organic Vapor Gas
Streams.
It has been suggested that the EPA
include the use of an activated carbon
adsorption control system as a specified
technology and/or use of surrogate
compounds to demonstrate compliance.
Again, the EPA does not have an
adequate technical basis to revise the
control device requirements to include
a carbon adsorption control equipment
specification. Carbon adsorption
systems require considerable
constituent and other site-specific
information for proper control device
design, unlike combustion systems, for
which organic control efficiency is less
dependent on the particular organic
constituent present in the gas stream.
Therefore, the EPA has not included a
carbon adsorption equipment
specification in the rule as an
alternative to the 95 percent organic
removal efficiency demonstration.
Commenters also have requested that
the EPA amend the control device
requirements of the rule to allow that
the temperature sensor for condensers
be placed in the coolant exhaust rather
than in the exhaust vent stream from the
condenser exit. The EPA selected this
monitoring location because its was
judged that monitoring the exhaust gas
provided a better and more direct
characterization of the performance of
the condenser. In addition, the
standards for closed-vent systems and
control devices in subpart AA (see
§ 264.1033(i)) allow that "an alternative
operational or process parameter may be
monitored if it can be demonstrated that
another parameter will ensure that the
control device is operated in
conformance with these standards and
the control devices's design
specifications." This same allowance is
not contained in the part 265 standards
for interim status facilities because the
rules do not have provisions for
reporting and thus there is no direct
mechanism for Agency review of the
appropriateness of the alternative
parameter. The EPA did not seek to
burden the owner or operator of interim
status facilities with the additional
reporting requirements associated with
the technical demonstration of
equivalent characterization of
performance. For those facilities that are
monitoring an alternative parameter,
e.g., condenser coolant exhaust rather
than the condenser vent stream exhaust,
in compliance with provisions of a
Clean Air Act regulation such as the
HON, the owner or operator of the unit
may be able to comply with the RCRA
air rules through one of the Clean Air
Act applicability exemptions contained
in the RCRA air rules at §§264.1030(d)
and 265.1030(d) of subpart AA and
§§264.1080(b)(7) and 265.1080(b)(7) of
subpart CC. The EPA continues to
believe that the monitoring
requirements specified in the 40 CFR
part 265 rules are reasonable, and the
EPA does not consider it appropriate to
allow alternative parameters to be
monitored without a mechanism for
Agency review of the alternative
approach (e.g., a Clean Air Act or RCRA
permit). Therefore, the EPA is not
amending the rule in this regard.
As previously noted in Section III.C of
this preamble, the November 25, 1996,
amendments to the subpart CC
standards for control devices and closed
vent systems (at § 265.1088(c) (2) (i)),
added provisions to allow up to 240
hours per year for periods of planned
routine maintenance of a control device,
during which time the control device is
not required to meet the performance
requirements for emission reductions
specified in the rule. The EPA has
received comments that control devices
such as boilers, industrial furnaces, and
incinerators often require routine
maintenance that takes longer than 10
days per year. In connection with this,
the commenters also requested that the
EPA provide an extension to the repair
period so long as the owner or operator
documents the decision to use an
extension by including certain material
in the operating record. The EPA
considers the emissions from hazardous
waste to be a significant source of
nationwide organic air emissions, and
does not consider it appropriate to
lengthen the time that a control device
may be out of service for routine
maintenance, while hazardous waste is
being managed in the unit. As
promulgated in December 1994, the
subpart CC standards did not allow
provisions for planned maintenance
time, because the modeled emission
reductions attributed to the
implementation of these standards were
based on control device operation at all
times that affected waste is managed in
a unit requiring a control device. In the
November 1996 amendments, the EPA
revised the control device provisions in
recognition that planned or routine
maintenance of control devices, within
reason, would limit the unplanned
malfunctions. However, the EPA
continues to consider that 240 hours per
year is an appropriate maximum
amount of time for hazardous waste to
be managed in units without the
required control device operating. Thus,
the EPA is not amending this provision.
Instances of control device down time
beyond the allowed 240 hours for
maintenance would be considered
periods in which the facility is not in
compliance with the control
requirements of the rule.
The EPA is today clarifying that the
requirements for management of spent
carbon, at §264.1088(c)(3)(ii) and
§ 265.1089(c)(3)(ii) apply only to carbon
that is a hazardous waste. This
clarification has been made in both the
February 9, 1996 technical amendments
(see 61 FR at 4910) and the November
25, 1996 final rule amendments (see 61
FR at 59936). When amending the
regulatory text at §264.1087(c)(3)(ii) and
§265.1088(c)(3)(ii) in the November 25,
1996 action, the EPA inadvertently
omitted the phrases that state the
requirement applies to carbon that is a
hazardous waste, and the requirement
applies regardless of the VO
concentration .of the carbon. These
statements had been included in the
regulatory text prior to that November
25 Federal Register document; today's
amendment clarifies the EPA's intent by
correcting that omission.
/. Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements
In the November 25, 1996 final rule
amendments (61 FR 59952 and 59971)
to parts 264 and 265, the subpart CC
applicability was amended-to exempt
any hazardous waste management unit
that the owner or operator certifies is
equipped with and operating air
emission controls in accordance_with an
applicable Clean Air Act regulation
codified under 40 CFR part 60, part 61,
or part 63. Though the requirement for
owner or operator certification was
established at §264.1080(b)(7), the EPA
inadvertently failed to add the
associated recordkeeping requirement to
the recordkeeping sections of subpart
CC. In order to establish minimum
recordkeeping requirements for those
units that are exempted from the
subpart because the unit is in
compliance with control requirements
under a Clean Air Act regulation, the
subpart CC recordkeeping requirements
are being amended by today's action. A
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62. No. 235 / Monday. December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations . 64655
new paragraph (j) is being added to
§ 264.1089 and §265.1090 that requires
the owner or operator to record and
maintain: (1) a certification that the
waste management unit is equipped
with and operating air emission controls
in accordance with the requirements of
an applicable Clean Air Act regulation
codified in 40 CFR parts 60, 61, or 63;
and (2) identification of the specific
requirements with which the unit is in
compliance.
Adding these requirements also
necessitated a change to paragraph (a) of
§264.1089 and §265.1090 in order to
include paragraph (j) in the list of
information specified for recordkeeping
under the subpart.
In addition, today's action corrects
typographical errors in §264.1089(a)
and §265.1090(a). In the last sentence of
§264.1089(a), "* * * air emission
controls specifiedin§§264.1084
through 264.1087 of this subpart in
accordance with the conditions
specified in §264.1084(d) of this
subpart." is revised to read as follows,
"* * * air emission controls specified
in §§264.1084 through 264.1087 of this
subpart in accordance with the
conditions specified in §264.1080(d) or
§264.1080(b)(7), respectively, of this
subpart." Similarly, in the last sentence
of§265.1090(a)7"* * * air emission
controls specified in §§ 264.1084
through 264.1087 of this subpart in
accordance with the conditions
specified in §264.1084(d) of this
subpart" is revised to read as follows,
"* * * air emission controls specified
in §§265.1085 through 265.1088 of this
subpart in accordance with the
conditions specified in §265.1080(d) or
§ 265.1080(b) (7), respectively, of this
subpart."
Also in the recordkeeping sections of
subpart CC, paragraph (f) of §264.1089
and §265.1090 are being amended to
provide the full citation referenced in
the paragraph; the references to
§ 264.1082(c)(2) and §265.1083(c)(2) are
being expanded to state (c)(2).(i) through
(c)(2)(vi)" in paragraph (f) to cover
specifically each of the exemption
options, for which a waste
determination for a treated hazardous
waste is required.
In a further correction, paragraph
(b)(l)(ii)(B) of §264.1089 and §265.1090
is being amended to correct the sentence
structure and eliminate the redundant
phrase "the following information."
reformat the list to be alphabetical,
correct typographical errors in
compound names (for example,
dimethyl hydrazine (1,) is corrected to
read 1,1-dimethyl hydrazine), and add
CAS numbers that were not available in
the November 25, 1996, final rule
amendments.
There has been some uncertainty
among the regulated community with
respect to whether or not cyanide (CN)
is classified as an "organic" compound.
For purposes of subpart CC, cyanide is
listed in Appendix VI to Part 265 as one
of the compounds with a Henry's Law
Constant less than 0.1 Y/X and as such
it is not necessary to quantify CN as a
part of the volatile organic
concentration determination.
VI Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
Six RCRA dockets contain
information pertaining to today's
rulemaking: (1) RCRA docket number F-
91-CESP-FFFFF, which contains copies
of all BID references and other
information related to the development
of the rule up through proposal; (2)
RCRA docket number F-92-CESA
FFFFF, which contains copies of the
supplemental data made available for
public comment prior to promulgation;
(3) RCRA docket number F-94-CESF-
FFFFF, which contains copies of all BID
references and other information related
to development of the final rule
following proposal; (4) RCRA docket
number F-94-CE2A-FFFFF, which
contains information pertaining to waste
stabilization operations performed in
tanks; (5) RCRA docket number F-95-
CE3A-FFFFF, which contains
information about potential final rule
revisions made available for public
comment; and (6) RCRA docket number
F-96-CE4A-FFFFF, which contains a
copy of each of the comment letters
submitted in regard to the revisions that
the EPA was considering for the final
subpart CC standards. The public may
review all materials in these dockets at
the EPA RCRA Docket Office.
J. Appendix VI to Part 265
Appendix VI to part 265 is revised
and reprinted in total. The revisions
made by today's action correct printing
errors in the November 25, 1996, final
rule amendments (61 FR 59993),
The EPA RCRA Docket Office is
located at Crystal Gateway, 1235
Jefferson Davis Highway, First Floor,
Arlington, Virginia. Hand delivery of
items and review of docket materials are
made at the Virginia address. The public
must have an appointment to review
docket materials. Ap'pointments can be
scheduled by calling the Docket Office
at (703) 603-9230. The mailing address
for the RCRA Docket Office is RCRA
Information Center (5305W), 401 M
Street SW, Washington, DC 20460. The
Docket Office is open from 9 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, except for
Federal holidays.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements of the previously
promulgated RCRA air rules were
submitted to and approved by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)-. A
copy of this Information Collection
Request (ICR) document (OMB control
number 1593.02) may be obtained from
Sandy Farmer, Information Policy
Branch (2136); U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency; 401 M Street, SW;
Washington, DC 20460 or by calling
(202)260-2740.
Today's amendments to the RCRA air
rules should have only a minor impact
on the information collection burden
estimates made previously, and that
impact is expected to be a reduction.
The changes consist of new definitions,
alternative test procedures,
clarifications of requirements, and
additional compliance options. The
changes are not additional
requirements, but rather, are reductions
in previously published requirements.
The overall information-keeping
requirements in the rule are being
reduced. Consequently, the ICR has not
been revised.
C. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866, the
EPA must determine whether the
proposed regulatory action is
"significant" and, therefore, subject to
the OMB review and the requirements
of the Executive Order. The Order
defines "significant" regulatory action
as one that is likely to lead to 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 in
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a 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 thereof; 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 RCRA subpart CC air rules
published on December 6, 1994, were
considered significant under Executive
Order 12866, and a regulatory impact
analysis (RIA) was prepared. The
amendments published today clarify the
-------
64656 Federal Register / Vol. 62. No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
rule, provide more compliance
alternatives, make certain regulatory
provisions more lenient, and correct
structural problems with the drafting of
some sections. The OMB has evaluated
this action, and determined it to be non-
significant; thus it did not require their
review.
D. Regulatory Flexibility
This rule is not subject to notice and
comment rulemaking requirements and
therefore is not subject to the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. However, for the reasons
discussed in the December 6,1994
Federal Register (59 FR 62923), this rule
does not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The changes to the rule do not add new
control requirements to the December
1994 rule. The amendments in fact
reduce the already-existing
requirements. Therefore, the
amendments are also not considered
significant.
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) given that it amends the
rule published in 1994 to reduce the
extent of regulation.
E. Unfunded Mandates Act
Under section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
("Unfunded Mandates Act"), the EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact
statement to accompany any proposed
or final rule that includes a Federal
mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate, or to the
private sector, of $100 million or more.
Under section 205, the EPA must select
the most cost-effective and least
burdensome alternative that achieves
the objectives of the rule and is
consistent with statutory requirements.
Section 203 requires the EPA to
establish a plan for informing and
advising any small governments that
may be significantly or uniquely
impacted by the rule.
The EPA has determined that the
action promulgated today does not
include a Federal mandate that may
result in estimated costs of $100 million
or more to either State, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate or to the
private sector. Therefore, the
requirements of the Unfunded Mandates
Act do not apply to this action.
F. Immediate Effective Date
The EPA has determined to make
today's action effective immediately.
The EPA believes that the corrections
being made in today's action are either
interpretations of existing regulations
which do not require prior notice and
opportunity for comment, or are
technical corrections of obvious errors
in the published rules (for example,
corrections to regulations inconsistent
with or not carrying out statements in
the preamble or Background
Information Document). Comment on
such changes is unnecessary, within the
meaning of 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). In
addition, the EPA notes that many of
these clarifications result from the
public meeting process, so that the
Agency has provided a measure of
opportunity for comment.
VH. Legal Authority
These regulations are amended under
the authority of sections 2002, 3001-
3007, 3010, and 7004 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act of 1970, as amended by
RCRA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6921-
6927, 6930, and 6974).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Parts 264 and 265
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Container, Control
device, Hazardous waste. Inspection,
Monitoring. Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements. Surface
impoundment. Tank, TSDF, Waste
determination.
40 CFR Part 270
Environmental protection.
Administrative practice and procedure.
Air pollution. Confidential business
information, Hazardous waste. Permit
modification. Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: November 28, 1997.
Richard D. Wilson,
Acting Asssistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I, parts 264,
265, and 270 of the Code of Federal
Regulations are amended as follows:
PART 264—STANDARDS FOR
OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT,
STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL
FACILITIES
1. The authority citation for part 264
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6924
and 6925.
Subpart B—General Facility Standards
2. Section 264.15 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(4), and leaving
the "COMMENT" at the end of the
paragraph to read as follows:
§264.15 General inspection requirements.
*****
(b) * * *
(4) The frequency of inspection may
vary for the items on the schedule.
However, the frequency should be based
on the rate of deterioration of the
equipment and the probability of an
environmental or human health
incident if the deterioration,
malfunction, or any operator error goes
undetected between inspections. Areas
subject to spills, such as loading and
unloading areas, must be inspected
daily when in use. At a minimum, the
inspection schedule must include the
items and frequencies called for in
§§264.174, 264.193, 264.195, 264.226,
264.254, 264.278, 264.303, 264.347,
264.602, 264.1033, 264.1052, 264.1053,
264.1058, and 264.1083 through
264.1089 of this part, where applicable.
Subpart E—Manifest System,
Recordkeeping, and Reporting
3. Section 264.73 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(6) to read as
follows:
§264.73 Operating record.
*****
(b) * * *
(6) Monitoring, testing or analytical
data, and corrective action where
required by subpart F of this part and
§§264.19, 264.191, 264.193, 264.195,
264.222, 264.223, 264.226, 264.252—
264.254, 264.276, 264.278, 264.280,
264.302—264.304, 264.309, 264.347,
264.602, 264.1034(c)—264.1034(f),
264.1035, 264.1063(d)—264.1063(i),
264.1064, and 264.1082 through
264.1090 of this part.
Subpart AA—Air Emission Standards
for Process Vents
4. Section 264.1030 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(3) and (c),
leaving the "NOTE" at the end of
paragraph (c), and adding paragraph (e),
to read as:
§264.1030 Applicability.
*****
(b) * * *
(3) A unit that is exempt from
permitting under the provisions of 40
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday. December 8. 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64657
CFR 262.34(a) (i.e., a "90-day" tank or
container) and is not a recycling unit
under the provisions of 40 CFR 261.6.
(c) For the owner and operator of a
facility subject to this subpart and who
received a final permit under RCRA
section 3005 prior to December 6, 1996,
the requirements of this subpart shall be
incorporated into the permit when the
permit is reissued in accordance with
the requirements of 40 CFR 124.15 or
reviewed in accordance with the
requirements of 40 CFR 270.50(d). Until
such date when the owner and operator
receives a final permit incorporating the
requirements of this subpart, the owner
and operator is subject to the
requirements of 40 CFR 265, subpart
AA.
(e) The requirements of this subpart
do not apply to the process vents at a
facility where the facility owner or
operator certifies that all of the process
vents that would otherwise be subject to
this subpart are equipped with and
operating air emission controls in
accordance with the process vent
requirements of an applicable Clean Air
Act regulation codified under 40 CFR
part 60, part 61, or part 63. The
documentation of compliance under
regulations at 40 CFR part 60, part 61,
or part 63 shall be kept with, or made
readily available with, the facility
operating record.
*****
5. Section 264.1031 is amended by
revising the definition of "In light liquid
service" to read as follows:
§264.1031 Definitions.
*****
In light liquid service means that the
piece of equipment contains or contacts
a waste stream where the vapor pressure
of one or more of the organic
components in the stream is greater than
0.3 kilopascals (kPa) at 20°C, the total
concentration of the pure organic
components having a vapor pressure
greater than 0.3 kilopascals (kPa) at 20>C
is equal to or greater than 20 percent by
weight, and the fluid is a liquid at
operating conditions.
****'*
6. Section 264.1033 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) (2) to read as
follows:
§264.1033 Standards: Closed-vent
systems and control devices.
(a) * * *
(2) (i) The owner or operator of an
existing facility who cannot installa
closed-vent system and control device
to comply with the provisions of this
subpart on the effective date that the
facility becomes subject to the
provisions of this subpart must prepare
an implementation schedule that
includes dates by which the closed-vent
system and control device will be
installed and in operation. The controls
must be installed as soon as possible,
but the implementation schedule may
allow up to 30 months after the effective
date that the facility becomes subject to
this subpart for installation and startup.
(ii) Any unit that begins operation
after December 21,1990, and is subject
to the provisions of this subpart when
operation begins, must comply with the
rules immediately (i.e., must have
control devices installed and operating
on startup of the affected unit); the 30-
month implementation schedule does
not apply.
(iii) The owner or operator of any
facility in existence on the effective date
of a statutory or EPA regulatory
amendment that renders the facility
subject to this subpart shall comply
with all requirements of this subpart as
soon as practicable but no later than 30
months after the amendment's effective
date. When control equipment required
by this subpart can not be installed and
begin operation by the effective date of
the amendment, the facility owner or
operator shall prepare an
implementation schedule that includes
the following information: Specific
calendar dates for award of contracts or
issuance of purchase orders for the
control equipment, initiation of on-site
installation of the control equipment,
completion of the control equipment
installation, and performance of any
testing to demonstrate that the installed
equipment meets the applicable
standards of this subpart. The owner or
operator shall enter the implementation
schedule in the operating record or in a
permanent, readily available file located
at the facility.
(iv) Owners and operators of facilities
and units that become newly subject to
the requirements of this subpart after
December 8, 1997, due to an action
other than those described in paragraph
(a) (2) (iii) of this section must comply
with all applicable requirements
immediately (i.e., must have control
devices installed and operating on the
date the facility or unit becomes subject
to this subpart; the 30-month
implementation schedule does not
apply).
§264.1050 Applicability.
*****
(b) * * *
(3) A unit that is exempt from
permitting under the provisions of 40
CFR 262.34(a) (i.e., a "90-day" tank or
container) and is not a recycling unit
—under the provisions of 40 CFR 261.6.
(c) For the owner or operator of a
facility subject to this subpart and who
received a final permit under RCRA
section 3005 prior to December 6, 1996,
the requirements of this subpart shall be
incorporated into the permit when the
permit is reissued in accordance with
the requirements of 40 CFR 124.15 or
reviewed in accordance with the
requirements of 40 CFR 270.50(d). Until
such date when the owner or operator
receives a final permit incorporating the
requirements of this subpart, the owner
or operator is subject to the
requirements of 40 CFR part 265,
subpart BB.
*****
(f) Equipment that contains or
contacts hazardous waste with an
organic concentration of at least 10
percent by weight for less than 300
hours per calendar year is excluded
from the requirements of §§264.1052
through 264.1060 of this subpart if it is
identified, as required in
§264,1064(g)(6) of this subpart.
*****
8. Section 264.1060 is revised to read
as follows:
Subpart BB—Air Emission Standards
for Equipment Leaks
7. Section 264.1050 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(3), (c) and (f) to
read as follows:
§264.1060 Standards: Closed-vent
systems and control devices.
(a) Owners and operators of closed-
vent systems and control devices subject
to this subpart shall comply with the
provisions of §264.1033 of this part.
(b) (1) The owner or operator of an
existing facility who cannot install a
closed-vent system and control device
to comply with the provisions of this
subpart on the effective date that the
facility becomes subject to the
provisions of this subpart must prepare
an implementation schedule that
includes dates by which the closed-vent
system and control device will be
installed and in operation. The controls
must be installed as soon as possible,
but the implementation schedule may
allow up to 30 months after the effective
date that the facility becomes subject to
this subpart for installation and startup.
(2) Any unit that begins operation
after December 21, 1990, and is subject
to the provisions of this subpart when
operation begins, must comply with the
rules immediately (i.e., must have
control devices installed and operating
on startup of the affected unit); the 30-
month implementation schedule does
not apply.
-------
64658 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
(3) The owner or operator of any
facility in existence on the effective date
of a statutory or EPA regulatory
amendment that renders the facility
subject to this subpart shall comply
with all requirements of this subpart as
soon as practicable but no later than 30
months after the amendment's effective
date. When control equipment required
by this subpart can not be installed and
begin operation by the effective date of
the amendment, the facility owner or
operator shall prepare an
implementation schedule that includes
the following information: Specific
calendar dates for award or contracts or
issuance of purchase orders for the
control equipment, initiation of on-site
installation of the control equipment,
completion of the control equipment
installation, and performance of any
testing to demonstrate that the installed
equipment meets the applicable
standards of this subpart. The owner or
operator shall enter the implementation
schedule in the operating record or in a
permanent, readily available file located
at the facility.
(4) Owners and operators of facilities
and units that become newly subject to
the requirements of this subpart after
December 8,1997, due to an action
other than those described in paragraph
(b)(3) of this section must comply with
all applicable requirements immediately
(i.e., must have control devices installed
and operating on the date the facility or
unit becomes subject to this subpart; the
30-month implementation schedule
does not apply).
9. Section 264.1062 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) to
read as follows:
§ 264.1062 Alternative standards for
valves In gas/vapor service or in light liquid
service: skip period leak detection and
repair.
*****
0>)* * *
(2) After two consecutive quarterly
leak detection periods with the
percentage of valves leaking equal to or
less than 2 percent, an owner or
operator may begin to skip one of the
quarterly leak detection periods (i.e.,
monitor for leaks once every six
months) for the valves subject to the
requirements in §264.1057 of this
subpart.
(3) After five consecutive quarterly
leak detection periods with the
percentage of valves leaking equal to or
less than 2 percent, an owner or
operator may begin to skip three of the
quarterly leak detection periods (i.e.,
monitor for leaks once every year) for
the valves subject to the requirements in
§ 264.1057 of this subpart.
*****
10. Section 264.1064 is amended by
revising paragraphs (g)(6) and (m) to
read as follows:
§264.1064 Recordkeeping requirements.
*****
(g)* * *
(6) Identification, either by list or
location (area or group) of equipment
that contains or contacts hazardous
waste with an organic concentration of
at least 10 percent by weight for less
than 300 hours per calendar year.
*****
(m) The owner or operator of a facility
with equipment that is subject to this
subpart and to regulations at 40 CFR
part 60, part 61, or part 63 may elect to
determine compliance with this subpart
either by documentation pursuant to
§ 264.1064 of this subpart, or by
documentation of compliance with the
regulations at 40 CFR part 60, part 61,
or part 63 pursuant to the relevant
provisions of the regulations at 40 part
60, part 61, or part 63. The
documentation of compliance under
regulations at 40 CFR part 60. part 61,
or part 63 shall be kept with or made
readily available with the facility
operating record.
Subpart CC—Air Emission Standards
for Tanks, Surface Impoundments, and
Containers
11. Section 264.1080 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(l) and (c) to read
as follows:
§264.1080 Applicability.
*****
(b)* * *
(1) A waste management unit that
holds hazardous waste placed in the
unit before December 6, 1996, and in
which no hazardous waste is added to
the unit on or after December 6, 1996.
*****
(c) For the owner and operator of a
facility subject to this subpart who
received a final permit under RCRA
section 3005 prior to December 6, 1996,
the requirements of this subpart shall be
incorporated into the permit when the
permit is reissued in accordance with
the requirements of 40 CFR 124.15 of
this chapter or reviewed in accordance
with the requirements of 40 CFR
270.50(d) of this chapter. Until such
date when the permit is reissued in
accordance with the requirements of 40
CFR 124.15 or reviewed in accordance
with the requirements of 40 CFR
270.50(d), the owner and operator is
subject to the requirements of 40 CFR
part 265, subpart CC.
*****
12. Section 264.1082 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b), (c)(2)(ix)(A),
(c)(2)(ix)(B), (c)(3) and (c)(4)(ii) to read
as follows:
§264.1082 Standards: General.
*****
(b) The owner or operator shall
control air pollutant emissions from
each hazardous waste management unit
in accordance with standards specified
in §§264.1084 through 264.1087 of this
subpart, as applicable to the hazardous
waste management unit, except as
provided for in paragraph (c) of this
section.
(c) * * *
(2\ * * *
(ix) * * *
(A) If Method 25D in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A is used for the analysis,
one-half the blank value determined in
the method at section 4.4 of Method 25D
in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, or a
value of 25 ppmw, whichever is less.
(B) If any other analytical method is
used, one-half the sum of the limits of
detection established for each organic
constituent in the waste that has a
Henry's law constant value at least 0.1
mole-fraction-in-the-gas-phase/mole-
fraction-in-the-liquid-phase (0.1 Y/X)
[which can also be expressed as 1.8 x
10 ~6 atmospheres/gram-mole/m3] at 25
degrees Celsius.
(3) A tank or surface impoundment
used for biological treatment of
hazardous waste in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of
this section.
(4) * * *
(ii) The organic hazardous
constituents in the waste have been
treated by the treatment technology
established by the EPA for the waste in
40 CFR 268.42(a), or have been removed
or destroyed by an equivalent method of
treatment approved by EPA pursuant to
40CFR268.42(b).
*****
13. Section 264.1083 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a) (2) and (b)(l) to
read as follows:
§ 264.1083 Waste determination
procedures.
(a) * * *
(2) For a waste determination that is
required by paragraph (a)(l) of this
section, the average VO concentration of
a hazardous waste at the point of waste
origination shall be determined in
accordance with the procedures
specified in 40 CFR 265.1084(a)(2)
through (a)(4).
(b) * * * '
-------
federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64659
(1) An owner or operator shall
perform the applicable waste
determinations for each treated
hazardous waste placed in waste
management units exempted under the
provisions of §264.1082(c)(2)(i) through
(c) (2) (vi) of this subpart from using air
emission controls in accordance with
standards specified in §§ 264.1084
through 264.1087 of this subpart, as
applicable to the waste management
unit.
*****
14. Section 264.1084 is amended by
revising paragraph (c) (2) (iii)
introductory text and paragraph
(c)(2)(iii)(B), adding paragraph (e) (4),
revising paragraph (f) (3) (i) (D) (4) and
paragraph (f)(3)(iii) itroductory text,
adding paragraph (f)(4), and adding
paragraph (j)(2)(iii) to read as follows:
§264.1084 Standards: Tanks.
*****
(c) * * *
(2)*
(iii) Each opening in the fixed roof,
and any manifold system associated
with the fixed roof, shall be either:
* * * * * .
(B) Connected by a closed-vent system
that is vented to a control device. The
control device shall remove or destroy
organics in the vent stream, and shall be
operating whenever hazardous waste is
managed in the tank, except as provided
for in paragraphs (c) (2) (iii) (B) (7) and (2)
of this section.
(1) During periods when it is
necessary to provide access to the tank
for performing the activities of
paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(B)(2) of this section,
venting of the vapor headspace
underneath the fixed roof to the control
device is not required, opening of
closure devices is allowed, and removal
of the fixed roof is allowed. Following
completion of the activity, the owner or
operator shall promptly secure the
closure device in the closed position or
reinstall the cover, as applicable, and
resume operation of the control device.
(2) During periods of routine
inspection, maintenance, or other
activities needed for normal operations,
and for removal of accumulated sludge
or other residues from the bottom of the
tank.
***** ,
(e) * * *
(4) Safety devices, as defined in 40
CFR 265.1081, may be installed and
operated as necessary on any tank
complying with the requirements of
paragraph (e) of this section.
(f) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(D) * * * .
(4) The total gap area shall be
calculated by adding the gap surface
areas determined for each identified gap
location for the primary seal and the
secondary seal individually, and then
dividing the sum for each seal type by
the nominal diameter of the tank. These
total gap areas for the primary seal and
secondary seal are then compared to the
respective standards for the seal type as
specified in paragraph (f)(l)(ii) of this
section.
*****
(iii) Prior to each inspection required
by paragraph (f)(3)(i) or (f)(3)(ii) of this
section, the owner or operator shall
notify the Regional Administrator in
advance of each inspection to provide
the Regional Administrator with the
opportunity to have an observer present
during the inspection. The owner or
operator shall notify the Regional
Administrator of the date and location
of the inspection as follows:
*****
(4) Safety devices, as defined in 40
CFR 265.1081, may be installed and
operated as necessary on any tank
complying with the requirements of
paragraph (f) of this section.
*****
0)* * *
(2) * * *
(iii) The hazardous waste meets the
requirements of §264.1082(c)(4) of this
subpart.
* * * * *
15. Section 264.1085 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(2), (d).(l)(iii),
and (d)(2)(i)(B) and adding paragraph
(e) (2) (iii) to read as follows:
§264.1085 Standards: Surface
impoundments.
(b) * * *
(2) A cover that is vented through a
closed-vent system to a control device
in accordance with the provisions
specified in paragraph (d) of this
section.
(d)
(1)
(iii) The cover and its closure devices
shall be made of suitable materials that
will minimize exposure of the
hazardous waste to the atmosphere, to
the extent practical, and will maintain
the integrity of the cover and closure
devices throughout their intended
service life. Factors to be considered
when selecting the materials of
construction and designing the cover
and closure devices shall include:
Organic vapor permeability; the effects
of any contact with the liquid or its
vapors managed in the surface
impoundment; the effects of outdoor
exposure to wind, moisture, and
sunlight; and the operating practices
used for the surface impoundment on
which the cover is installed.
*****
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) To remove accumulated sludge or
other residues from the bottom of the
surface impoundment.
*****
(e) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) The hazardous waste meets the
requirements of §264.1082(c)(4) of this
subpart.
* * * * *
16. Section 264.1086 is amended by
revising paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(4)(i),
(d)(2), (d)(4)(i), and paragraph (g)
introductory text to read as follows:
§264.1086 Standards: Containers.
* * * *, * ,
(c) * * *
(2) A container used to meet the
requirements of paragraph (c) (1) (ii) or
(c)(l)(iii) of this section shall be
equipped with covers and closure
devices, as applicable to the container,
that are composed of suitable materials
to minimize exposure of the hazardous
waste to the atmosphere and to maintain
the equipment integrity, for as long as
the container is in service. Factors to be
considered in selecting the materials of
construction and designing the cover
and closure devices shall include:
Organic vapor permeability; the effects
of contact with the hazardous waste or
its vapor managed in the container; the
effects of outdoor exposure of the
closure device or cover material to
wind, moisture, and sunlight; and the
operating practices for which the
container is intended to be used.
(4)* * *
(i) In the case when a hazardous waste
already is in the container at the time
the owner or operator first accepts
possession of the container at the
facility and the container is not emptied
within 24 hours after the container is
accepted at the facility (i.e., does not
meet the conditions for an empty
container as specified in 40 CFR
261.7(b)), the owner or operator shall
visually inspect the container and its
cover and closure devices to check for
visible cracks, holes, gaps, or other open
spaces into the interior of the container
when the cover and closure devices are
secured in the closed position. The
container visual inspection shall be
conducted on or before the date that the
-------
64660 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8. 1997 / Rules and Regulations
container is accepted at the facility (i.e.,
the date the container becomes subject
to the subpart CC container standards).
For purposes of this requirement, the
date of acceptance is the date of
signature that the facility owner or
operator enters on Item 20 of the
Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest in
the appendix to 40 CFR part 262 (EPA
Forms 8700-22 and 8700-22 A), as
required under subpart E of this part, at
40 CFR 264.71. If a defect is detected,
the owner or operator shall repair the
defect in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of
this section.
*****
(d) * * *
(2) Transfer of hazardous waste in or
out of a container using Container Level
2 controls shall be conducted in such a
manner as to minimize exposure of the
hazardous waste to the atmosphere, to
the extent practical, considering the
physical properties of the hazardous
waste and good engineering and safety
practices for handling flammable,
ignitable, explosive, reactive, or other
hazardous materials. Examples of
container loading procedures that the
EPA considers to meet the requirements
of this paragraph include using any one
of the following: A submerged-fill pipe
or other submerged-fill method to load
liquids into the container; a vapor-
balancing system or a vapor-recovery
system to collect and control the vapors
displaced from the container during
filling operations; or a fitted opening in
the top of a container through which the
hazardous waste is filled and
subsequently purging the transfer line
before removing it from the container
opening.
*****
(4) * * *
(J) In the case when a hazardous waste
already is in the container at the time
the owner or operator first accepts
possession of the container at the
facility and the container is not emptied
within 24 hours after the container is
accepted at the facility (i.e., does not
meet the conditions for an empty
container as specified in 40 CFR
261.7(b)), the owner or operator shall
visually inspect the container and its
cover and closure devices to check for
visible cracks, holes, gaps, or other open
spaces into the interior of the container
when the cover and closure devices are
secured in the closed position. The
container visual inspection shall be
conducted on or before the date that the
container is accepted at the facility (i.e.,
the date the container becomes subject
to the subpart CC container standards).
For purposes of this requirement, the
date of acceptance is the date of
signature that the facility owner or
operator enters on Item 20 of the
Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest in
the appendix to 40 CFR part 262 (EPA
Forms 8700-22 and 8700-22A), as
required under subpart E of this part, at
40 CFR 264.71. If a defect is detected,
the owner or operator shall repair the
defect in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (d)(4)(iii) of
this section.
*****
(g) To determine compliance with the
no detectable organic emissions
requirement of paragraph (d)(l)(ii) of
this section, the procedure specified in
§ 264.1083 (d) of this subpart shall be
used.
*****
17. Section 264.1087 is amended by
revising paragraphs (c)(3)(ii) and (c)(7)
to read as follows:
§264.1087 Standards: Closed-vent
systems and control devices.
* . * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) All carbon that is a hazardous
waste and that is removed from the
control device shall be managed in
accordance with the requirements of 40
CFR 264.1033(n), regardless of the
average volatile organic concentration of
the carbon.
***** »
(7) The closed-vent system and
control device shall be inspected and
monitored by the owner or operator in
accordance with the procedures
specified in 40 CFR 264.1033(f)(2) and
40 CFR 264.1033(1). The readings from
each monitoring device required by 40
CFR 264.1033(1)(2) shall be inspected at
least once each operating day to check
control device operation. Any necessary
corrective measures shall be
immediately implemented to ensure the
control device is operated in
compliance with the requirements of
this section.
18. Section 264.1089 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a), (b)(l)(ii)(B), and
(f) (1) and adding paragraph 0) to read as
follows:
§264.1089 Recordkeeping requirements.
(a) Each owner or operator of a facility
subject to requirements of this subpart
shall record and maintain the
information specified in paragraphs (b)
through (j) of this section, as applicable
to the facility. Except for air emission
control equipment design
documentation and information
required by paragraphs (i) and (j) of this
section, records required by this section
shall be maintained in the operating
record for a minimum of 3 years. Air
emission control equipment design
documentation shall be maintained in
the operating record until the air
emission control equipment is replaced
or otherwise no longer in service.
Information required by paragraphs (i)
and (j) of this section shall be
maintained in the operating record for
as long as the waste management unit is
not using air emission controls specified
in §§264.1084 through 264.1087 of this
subpart in accordance with the
conditions specified in §264.1080(d) or
§264.1080(b)(7) of this subpart,
respectively.
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) For each defect detected during
the inspection: The location of the
defect, a description of the defect, the
date of detection, and corrective action
taken to repair the defect. In the event
that repair of the defect is delayed in
accordance with the requirements of
§ 264.1084 of this subpart, the owner or
operator shall also record the reason for
the delay and the date that completion
of repair of the defect is expected.
*****
(fj* * *
(1) For tanks, surface impoundments,
and containers exempted under the
hazardous waste organic concentration
conditions specified in §264.1082(c)(l)
or §§264.1082(c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi)
of this subpart, the owner or operator
shall record the information used for
each waste determination (e.g., test
results, measurements, calculations, and
other documentation) in the facility
operating log. If analysis results for
waste samples are used for the waste
determination, then the owner or
operator shall record the date, time, and
location that each waste sample is
collected in accordance with applicable
requirements of § 264.1083 of this
subpart.
*****
(j) For each hazardous waste
management unit not using air emission
controls specified in §§264.1084
through 264.1087 of this subpart in
accordance with the requirements of
§264.1080(b)(7) of this subpart, the
owner and operator shall record and
maintain the following information:
(1) Certification that the waste
management unit is equipped with and
operating air emission controls in
accordance with the requirements of an
applicable Clean Air Act regulation
codified under 40 CFR part 60, part 61,
or part 63.
(2) Identification of the specific
requirements codified under 40 CFR
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64661
part 60, part 61, or part 63 with which
the waste management unit is in
compliance.
PART 265—INTERIM STATUS
STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND
OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND
DISPOSAL FACILITIES
19. The authority citation for part 265
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6924,
6925, and 6935.
Subpart B—General Facility Standards
20. Section 265.15 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(4) to read as
follows:
§ 265.15 General inspection requirements.
*****
(b) * * *
(4) The frequency of inspection may
vary for the items on the schedule.
However, the frequency should be based
on the rate of deterioration of the
equipment and the probability of an
environmental or human health
incident if the deterioration,
malfunction, or any operator error goes
undetected between inspections. Areas
subject to spills, such as loading and
unloading areas, must be inspected
daily when in use. At a minimum, the
inspection schedule must include the
items and frequencies called for in
§§265.174, 265.193, 265.195, 265.226,
265.260, 265.278, 265.304, 265.347,
265.377, 265.403, 265.1033, 265.1052
265.1053, 265.1058, and 265.1084
through 265.1090 of this part, where
applicable.
Subpart E—Manifest System,
Recordkeeping, and Reporting
21. Section 265.73 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(6), and leaving
the "COMMENT" at the end of the
paragraph, to read as follows:
§265.73 Operating record.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) Monitoring, testing or analytical
data, and corrective action where
required by subpart F of this part and by
§§265.19, 265.90, 265.94, 265.191,
265.193, 265.195, 265.222, 265.223,
265.226, 265.255, 265.259, 265.260,
265.276, 265.278, 265.280(d)(l), 265.302
through 265.304. 265.347, 265.377,
265.1034(c) through 265.1034(f),
265.1035, 265.1063(d) through
265.1063(i), 265.1064, and 265.1083
through 265.1090 of this part.
Subpart AA—Air Emission Standards
for Process Vents
22, Section 265.1030 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(3), leaving the
"NOTE" at the end of paragrpah (b)(3),
and adding paragraph (d), to read as
follows:
§265.1030 Applicability.
* * ' * * #
(b) * * *
(3) A unit that is exempt from
permitting under the provisions of 40
CFR 262.34(a) (i.e., a "90-day" tank or
container) and is not a recycling unit
under the requirements of 40 CFR 261.6.
(d) The requirements of this subpart
do not apply to the process vents at a
facility where the facility owner or
operator certifies that all of the process
vents that would otherwise be subject to
this subpart are equipped with and
operating air emission controls in
accordance with the process vent
requirements of an applicable Clean Air
Act regulation codified under 40 CFR
part 60, part 61, or part 63. The
documentation of compliance under
regulations at 40 CFR part 60, part 61,
or part 63 shall be kept with, or made
readily available with, the facility
operating record.
23. Section 265.1033 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a) (2) and
(fj (2) (vi)(B) to read as follows:
§265.1033 Standards: Closed-vent
systems and control devices.
(a)* * *
(2)(i) The owner or operator of an
existing facility who cannot install a
closed-vent system and control device
to comply with the provisions of this
subpart on the effective date that the
facility becomes subject to the
requirements of this subpart must
prepare an implementation schedule
that includes dates by which the closed-
vent system and control device will be
installed and in operation. The controls
must be installed as soon as possible,
but the implementation schedule may
allow up to 30 months after the effective
date that the facility becomes subject to
this subpart for installation and startup.
(ii) Any unit that begins operation
after December 21, 1990, and is subject
to the requirements of this subpart when
operation begins, must comply with the
rules immediately (i.e., must have
control devices installed and operating
on startup of the affected unit); the 30-
month implementation schedule does
not apply.
(iii) The owner or operator of any
facility in existence on the effective date
of a statutory or EPA regulatory
amendment that renders the facility
subject to this subpart shall comply
with all requirements of this subpart as
soon as practicable but no later than 30
months after the amendment's effective
date. When control equipment required
by this subpart can not be installed and
begin operation by the effective date of
the amendment, the facility owner or
operator shall prepare an
implementation schedule that includes
the following information: Specific
calendar dates for award of contracts or
issuance of purchase orders for the
control equipment, initiation of on-site
installation of the control equipment,
completion of the control equipment
installation, and performance of any
testing to demonstrate that the installed
equipment meets the applicable
standards of this subpart. The owner or
operator shall enter the implementation
schedule in the operating record or in a
permanent, readily available file located
at the facility.
(iv) Owners and operators of facilities
and units that become newly subject to
the requirements of this subpart after
December 8, 1997, due to an action
other than those described in paragraph
(a) (2) (iii) of this section must comply
with all applicable requirements
immediately (i.e., must have control
devices installed and operating on the
date the facility or unit becomes subject
to this subpart; the 30-month
implementation schedule does not
apply):
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2).* * *
(vi) * * *
(B) A temperature monitoring device
equipped with a continuous recorder.
The device shall be capable of
monitoring temperature with an
accuracy of ±1 percent of the
temperature being monitored in degrees
Celsius (°C) or ±0.5 °C, whichever is
greater. The temperature sensor shall be
installed at a location in the exhaust
vent stream from the condenser exit
(i.e., product side).
* * * * *
Subpart BB—Air Emission Standards
for Equipment Leaks
24. Section 265.1050 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(3) and (e) to read
as follows:
§265.1050 Applicability.
******
(b)
(3) A unit that is exempt from
permitting under the provisions of 40
CFR 262.34(a) (i.e., a "90-day" tank or
-------
64662 Federal Register / Vol. 62. No. 235 / Monday, December 8. 1997 / Rules and Regulations
container) and is not a recycling unit
under the provisions of 40 CFR 261.6.
* * * * *
(e) Equipment that contains or
contacts hazardous waste with an
organic concentration of at least 10
percent by weight for less than 300
hours per calendar year is excluded
from the requirements of §§265.1052
through 265.1060 of this subpart if it is
identified, as required in
§ 265.1064 (g) (6) of this subpart.
*****
25. Section 265.1060 is revised to read
as follows:
§265.1060 Standards: Closed-vent
systems and control devices.
(a) Owners and operators of closed-
vent systems and control devices subject
to this subpart shall comply with the
provisions of § 265.1033 of this part.
(b)(l) The owner or operator of an
existing facility who can not install a
closed-vent system and control device
to comply with the provisions of this
subpart on the effective date that the
facility becomes subject to the
provisions of this subpart must prepare
an implementation schedule that
includes dates by which the closed-vent
system and control device will be
installed and in operation. The controls
must be installed as soon as possible,
but the implementation schedule may
allow up to 30 months after the effective
date that the facility becomes subject to
this subpart for installation and startup.
(2) Any units that begin operation
after December 21, 1990, and are subject
to the provisions of this subpart when
operation begins, must comply with the
rules immediately (i.e., must have
control devices installed and operating
on startup of the affected unit); the 30-
month implementation schedule does
not apply.
(3) The owner or operator of any
facility in existence on the effective date
of a statutory or EPA regulatory
amendment that renders the facility
subject to this subpart shall comply
with all requirements of this subpart as
soon as practicable but no later than 30
months after the amendment's effective
date. When control equipment required
by this subpart can not be installed and
begin operation by the effective date of
the amendment, the facility owner or
operator shall prepare an
implementation schedule that includes
the following information: Specific
calendar dates for award of contracts or
issuance of purchase orders for the
control equipment, initiation of on-site
installation of the control equipment,
completion of the control equipment
installation, and performance of any
testing to demonstrate that the installed
equipment meets the applicable
standards of this subpart. The owner or
operator shall enter the implementation
schedule in the operating record or in a
permanent, readily available file located
at the facility.
(4) Owners and operators of facilities
and units that become newly subject to
the requirements of this subpart after
December 8, 1997 due to an action other
than those described in paragraph (b) (3)
of this section must comply with all
applicable requirements immediately
(i.e., must have control devices installed
and operating on the date the facility or
unit becomes subject to this subpart; the
30-month implementation schedule
does not apply).
26. Section 265.1062 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) to
read as follows:
§ 265.1062 Alternative standards 1or
valves in gas/vapor service or in light liquid
service: skip period leak detection and
repair.
(b)
* * *
(2) After two "consecutive quarterly
leak detection periods with the
percentage of valves leaking equal to or
less than 2 percent, an owner or
operator may begin to skip one of the
quarterly leak detection periods (i.e.,
monitor for leaks once every six
months) for the valves subject to the
requirements in §265.1057 of this
subpart.
(3) After five consecutive quarterly
leak detection periods with the
percentage of valves leaking equal to or
less than 2 percent, an owner or
operator may begin to skip three of the
quarterly leak detection periods (i.e.,
monitor for leaks once every year) for
the valves subject to the requirements in
§265.1057 of this subpart.
*****
27. Section 265.1064 is amended by
revising paragraphs (g)(6) and (m) to
read as follows:
§265.1064 Recordkeeping requirements.
*****
(g)* * *
(6) Identification, either by list or
location (area or group) of equipment
that contains or contacts hazardous
waste with an organic concentration of
at least 10 percent by weight for less
than 300 hours per calendar year.
*****
(m) The owner or operator of any
facility with equipment that is subject to
this subpart and to leak detection,
monitoring, and repair requirements
under regulations at 40 CFR part 60,
part 61, or part 63 may elect to
determine compliance with this subpart
either by documentation pursuant to
§ 265.1064 of this subpart, or by
documentation of compliance with the
regulations at 40 CFR part 60, part 61,
or part 63 pursuant to the relevant
provisions of the regulations at 40 part
60, part 61, or part 63. The
documentation of compliance under
regulation at 40 CFR part 60, part 61, or
part 63 shall be kept with or made
readily available with the facility
operating record.
Subpart CC—Air Emission Standards
for Tanks, Surface Impoundments, and
Containers
28. Section 265.1080 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(l) and the
introductory paragraph of (c) to read as
follows:
§265.1080 Applicability.
*****
(b) * * *
(1) A waste management unit that
holds hazardous waste placed in the
unit before December 6, 1996, and in
which no hazardous waste is added to
the unit on or after December 6, 1996.
*****
(c) For the owner and operator of a
facility subject to this subpart who has
received a final permit under RCRA
section 3005 prior to December 6, 1996,
the following requirements apply:
*****
29. Section 265.1081 is amended by
revising the definition of "In light
material service" to read as follows:
§265.1081 Definitions.
*****
In light material service means the
container is used to manage a material
for which both of the following
conditions apply: The vapor pressure of
one or more of the organic constituents
in the material is greater than 0.3
kilopascals (kPa) at 20 °C; and the total
concentration of the pure organic
constituents having a vapor pressure
greater than 0.3 kPa at 20 °C is equal to
or greater than 20 percent by weight.
*****
30. Section 265.1082 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 265.1082 Schedule for implementation of
air emission standards.
(a) Owners or operators of facilities
existing on December 6, 1996 and
subject to subparts I, J, and K of this part
shall meet the following requirements:
(1) Install and begin operation of all
control equipment or waste
management units required to comply
with this subpart and complete
modifications of production or
-------
Bederal Register /Vol. 62. No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64663
treatment processes to satisfy exemption
criteria in accordance with §265.1083(c)
of this subpart by December 6, 1996,
except as provided for in paragraph
(a) (2) of this section.
(2) When control equipment or waste
management units required to comply
with this subpart cannot be installed
and in operation or modifications of
production or treatment processes to
satisfy exemption criteria in accordance
with § 265.1083(c) of this subpart
cannot be completed by December 6,
1996, the owner or operator shall:
(i) Install and. begin operation of the
control equipment and waste
management units, and complete
modifications of production or
treatment processes as soon as possible
but no later than December 8, 1997.
(ii) Prepare an implementation
schedule that includes the following
information: specific calendar dates for
award of contracts or issuance of
purchase orders for control equipment,
waste management units, and
production or treatment process
modifications; initiation of on-site
installation of control equipment or
waste management units, and
modifications of production or
treatment processes; completion of
control equipment or waste
management unit installation, and
production or treatment process
modifications; and performance of
testing to demonstrate that the installed
equipment or waste management units,
and modified production or treatment
processes meet the applicable standards
of this subpart.
(iii) For facilities subject to the
recordkeeping requirements of §265.73
of this part, the owner or operator shall
enter the implementation schedule
specified in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this
section in the operating record no later
than December 6, 1996.
(iv) For facilities not subject to
§ 265.73 of this part, the owner or
operator shall enter the implementation
schedule specified in paragraph (a)(2)(ii)
of this section in a permanent, readily
available file located at the facility no
later than December 6, 1996.
(b) Owners or operators of facilities
and units in existence on the effective
date of a statutory or EPA regulatory
amendment that renders the facility
subject to subparts I, J, or K of this part
shall meet the following requirements:
(1) Install and begin operation of
control equipment or waste
management units required to comply
with this subpart, and complete
modifications of production or
treatment processes to satisfy exemption
criteria of §265.1083(c) of this subpart
by the effective date of the amendment.
except as provided for in paragraph
(b) (2) of this section.
(2) When control equipment or waste
management units required to comply
with this subpart cannot be installed •
and begin operation, or when
modifications of production or
treatment processes to satisfy exemption
criteria of §265.1083(c) of this subpart
cannot be completed by the effective
date of the amendment, the owner or
operator shall:
(i) Install and begin operation of the
control equipment or waste
management unit, and complete
modification of production or treatment
processes as soon as possible but no
later than 30 months after the effective
date of the amendment.
(ii) For facilities subject to the
recordkeeping requirements of §265.73
of this part, enter and maintain the
implementation schedule specified in
paragraph (a) (2) (ii) of this section in the
operating record no later than the
effective date of the amendment, or
(iii) For facilities not subject to
§ 265.73 of this part, the owner or
operator shall enter and maintain the
implementation schedule specified in
paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section in a
permanent, readily available file located
at the facility site no later than the
effective date of the amendment.
(c) Owners and operators of facilities
and units that become newly subject to
the requirements of this subpart after
December 8, 1997 due to an action other
than those described in paragraph (b) of
this section must comply with all
applicable requirements immediately
(i.e., must have control devices installed
and operating on the date the facility or
unit becomes subject to this subpart; the
30-month implementation schedule
'does not apply).
(d) The Regional Administrator may
elect to extend the implementation date
for control equipment at a facility, on a
case by case basis, to a date later than
December 8, 1997, when special
circumstances that are beyond the
facility owner's or operator's control
delay installation or operation of control
equipment, and the owner or operator
has made all reasonable and prudent
attempts to comply with the
requirements of this subpart.
31. Section 265.1083 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b), (c)(2)(i),
(c)(2)(ix)(A), (c)(2)(ix)(B), (c)(3),and
(c)(4)(ii) to read as follows:
in §§265.1085 through 265.1088 of this
subpart, as applicable to the hazardous
waste management unit, except as
provided for in paragraph (c) of this
section.
(c)***
(2) * * *
(i) A process that removes or destroys
the organics contained in the hazardous
waste to a level such that the average
VO concentration of the hazardous
waste at the point of waste treatment is
less than the exit concentration limit
(CO established for the process. The
average VO concentration of the
hazardous waste at the point of waste
treatment and the exit concentration
limit for the process shall be determined
using the procedures specified in
§265.1084(b) of this subpart.
* * * * *
(ix) * * *
(A) If Method 25D in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A is used for the analysis,
one-half the blank value determined in
the method at section 4.4 of Method 25D
in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, or a
value of 25 ppmw, whichever is less.
(B) If any other analytical method is
used, one-half the sum of the limits of
detection established for each organic
constituent in the waste that has a
Henry's law constant value at least 0.1
mole-fraction-in-the-gas-phase/mole-
fraction-in-the-liquid-phase (0.1 Y/X)
[which can also be expressed as 1.8 x
10-6 atmospheres/gram-mole/m3] at 25
degrees Celsius.
(3) A tank or surface impoundment
used for biological treatment of
hazardous waste in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of
this section.
(4) * * *
(ii) The organic hazardous
constituents in the waste have been
treated by the treatment technology
established by the EPA for the waste in
40 CFR 268.42(a), or have been removed
or destroyed by an equivalent method of
treatment approved by EPA pursuant to
40CFR268.42(b).
*****
32. Section 265.1084 is amended by
adding paragraphs (a) (3) (v) and (b)(3)(v)
and by revising paragraphs (a) (2),
(a)(3)(ii)(B), (a) (3) (iii) introductory text,
(a)(3)(iii)(A), (a)(3)(iii)(F) introductory
text, (a)(3)(iii)(G), (a) (3) (iii) (G) (I),
§265.1083 Standards: General.
*****
(b) The owner or operator shall
control air pollutant emissions from
each hazardous waste management unit
in accordance with standards specified
, . ,
(b)(3)(iii) introductory text, (b) (3) (iii) (F)
introductory text, (b)(3)(iii)(G)
introductory text, (b)(3)(iv), (b)(8)(iii),
(b)(9)(iv), and (d)(5)(ii) to read as
follows:
§265.1084 Waste determination
procedures.
(a)* * *
-------
64664 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday. December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
(2) For a waste determination that is
required by paragraph (a)(l) of this
section, the average VO concentration of
a hazardous waste at the point of waste
origination shall be determined using
either direct measurement as specified
in paragraph (a) (3) of this section or by
knowledge as specified in paragraph
(a)1(4) of this section.
f 3) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) A sufficient number of samples,
but no less than four samples, shall be
collected and analyzed for a hazardous
waste determination. The average of the
four or more sample results constitutes
a waste determination for the waste
stream. One or more waste
determinations may be required to
represent the complete range of waste
compositions and quantities that occur
during the entire averaging period due
to normal variations in the operating
conditions for the source or process
generating the hazardous waste stream.
Examples of such normal variations .are
seasonal variations in waste quantity or
fluctuations in ambient temperature.
*****
(iii) Analysis. Each collected sample
shall be prepared and analyzed in
accordance with one or more of the
methods listed in paragraphs
(a) (3) (iii) (A) through (a) (3) (iii) (I) of this
section, including appropriate quality
assurance and quality control (QA/QC)
checks and use of target compounds for
calibration. If Method 25D in 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A is not used, then
one or more methods should be chosen
that are appropriate to ensure that the
waste determination accounts for and
reflects all organic compounds in the
waste with Henry's law constant values
at least 0.1 mole-fraction-in-the-gas-
phase/mole-fraction-in-the-liquid-phase
(0.1 Y/X) [which can also be expressed
as 1.8 x 10"6 atmospheres/gram-mole/
m3] at 25 degrees Celsius. Each of the
analytical methods listed in paragraphs
(a) (3) (iii) (B) through (a) (3) (iii) (G) of this
section has an associated list of
approved chemical compounds, for
which EPA considers the method
appropriate for measurement. If an
owner or operator uses Method 624,
625, 1624, or 1625 in 40 CFR part 136,
appendix A to analyze one or more
compounds that are not on that
method's published list, the Alternative
Test Procedure contained in 40 CFR
136.4 and 136.5 must be followed. If an
owner or operator uses EPA Method
8260 or 8270 in "Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods," EPA Publication
SW-846, (incorporated by reference—
refer to § 260.11 (a) of this chapter) to
analyze one or more compounds that are
not on that method's published list, the
procedures in paragraph (a) (3) (iii) (H) of
this section must be followed. At the
owner or operator's discretion, the
concentration of each individual
chemical constituent measured in the
waste by a method other than Method
25D may be corrected to the
concentration had it been measured
using Method 25D by multiplying the
measured concentration by the
constituent-specific adjustment factor
(fm25o) as specified in paragraph
(a) (4) (iii) of this section. Constituent-
specific adjustment factors (fmaso) can
be obtained by contacting the Waste and
Chemical Processes Group, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
(A) Method 25D in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A.
* * * * *
(F) Method 8260 in "Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods," EPA Publication
SW-846 (incorporated by reference—
refer to § 260.11 (a) of this chapter).
Maintain a formal quality assurance
program consistent with the
requirements of Method 8260. The
quality assurance program shall include
the following elements:
* * * * *
(G) Method 8270 in "Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods," EPA Publication
SW-846 (incorporated by reference—
refer to § 260.11 (a) of this chapter).
Maintain a formal quality assurance
program consistent with the
requirements of Method 8270. The
quality assurance program shall include
the following elements:
(1) Documentation of site-specific
procedures to minimize the loss of
compounds due to volatilization,
biodegradation, reaction, or sorption
during the sample collection, storage,
preparation, introduction, and analysis
steps.
*****
(iv) Calculations.
(A) The average VO concentration (C)
on a mass-weighted basis shall be
calculated by using the results for all
waste determinations conducted in
accordance with paragraphs (a) (3) (ii)
and (iii) of this section and the
following equation:
where:
C » Average VO concentration of the
hazardous waste at the point of
waste origination on a mass-
weighted basis, ppmw.
i = Individual waste determination "i"
of the hazardous waste.
n » Total number of waste
determinations of the hazardous
waste conducted for the averaging
period (not to exceed 1 year).
Qi a Mass quantity of hazardous waste
stream represented by G, kg/hr.
Qr = Total mass quantity of hazardous
waste during the averaging period,
kg/hr.
Ci >• Measured VO concentration of
waste determination "i" as
determined in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (a) (3) (iii)
of this section (i.e. the average of
the four or more samples specified
in paragraph (a) (3) (ii) (B) of this
section), ppmw.
(B) For the purpose of determining Q,
for individual waste samples analyzed
in accordance with paragraph (a) (3) (iii)
of this section, the owner or operator
shall account for VO concentrations
determined to be below the limit of
detection of the analytical method by
using the following VO concentration:
(]) If Method 25D in 40 CFR part 60,
Appendix A is used for the analysis,
one-half the blank value determined in
the method at section 4.4 of Method 25D
in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A.
(2) If any other analytical method is
used, one-half the sum of the limits of
detection established for each organic
constituent in the waste that has a
Henry's law constant values at least 0.1
mole-fraction-in-the-gas-phase/mole-
fraction-in-the-liquid-phase (0.1 Y/X)
[which can also be expressed as 1.8 x
10 ~6 atmospheres/gram-mole/m3] at 25
degrees Celsius.
(v) Provided that the test method is
appropriate for the waste as required
under paragraph (a) (3) (iii) of this
section, the EPA will determine
compliance based on the test method
used by the owner or operator as
recorded pursuant to §265.1090(f)(l) of
this subpart.
-------
FederalRegister / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday. December 8. 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64665
(4) * * *
(iv) In the event that the Regional
Administrator and the owner or
operator disagree on a determination of.
the average VO concentration for a
hazardous waste stream using
knowledge, then the results from a
determination of average VO
concentration using direct measurement
as specified in paragraph (a) (3) of this
section shall be used to establish
compliance with the applicable
requirements of this subpart. The
Regional Administrator may perform or
request that the owner or operator
perform this determination using direct
measurement. The owner or operator
may choose one or more appropriate
methods to analyze each collected
sample in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (a) (3) (iii) of
this section.
(b) * * *
(1) An owner or operator shall
perform the applicable waste
determination for each treated
hazardous waste placed in a waste
management unit exempted under the
provisions of § 265.1083 (c) (2) (i)
through (c)(2)(vi) of this subpart from
using air emission controls in
accordance with standards specified in
§§ 265.1085"through 265.1088 of this
subpart, as applicable to the waste
management unit.
**.***
(3) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) A sufficient number of samples,
but no less than four samples, shall be
collected and analyzed for a hazardous
waste determination. The average of the
four or more sample results constitutes
a waste determination for the waste
stream. One or more waste
determinations may be required to
represent the complete range of waste
compositions and quantities that occur
during the entire averaging period due
to normal variations in the operating
conditions for the source or process
generating the hazardous waste stream.
Examples of such normal variations are
seasonal variations in waste quantify or
fluctuations in ambient temperature.
*****
(iii) Analysis. Each collected sample
shall be prepared and analyzed in
accordance with one or more of the
methods listed in paragraphs
(b) (3) (iii) (A) through (b) (3) (iii) (I) of this
section, including appropriate quality
assurance and quality control (QA/QC)
checks and use of target compounds for
calibration. When the owner or operator
is making a waste determination for a
treated hazardous waste that is to be
compared to an average VO
concentration at the point of waste
origination or the point of waste entry
to the treatment system, to determine if
the conditions of § 264.1082(c) (2) (i)
through (c) (2) (vi) of this part, or
§265.1083(c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi) of
this subpart are met, then the waste
samples shall be prepared and analyzed
using the same method or methods as
were used in making the initial waste
determinations at the point of waste
origination or at the point of entry to the
treatment system. If Method 25D in 40
CFR part 60, appendix A is not used,
then one or more methods should be
chosen that are appropriate to ensure
that the waste determination accounts
for and reflects all organic compounds
in the waste with Henry's law constant
values at least 0.1 mole-fraction-in-the-
gas-phase/mole-fraction-in-the-liquid-
phase (0.1 Y/X) [which can also be
expressed as 1.8.x 10-6 atmospheres/
gram-mole/m3] at 25 degrees Celsius.
Each of the analytical methods listed in
paragraphs (b)(3)(iii)(B) through
(b) (3) (iii) (G) of this section has an
associated list of approved chemical
compounds, for which EPA considers
the method appropriate for
measurement. If an owner or operator
uses Method 624, 625, 1624, or 1625 in
40 CFR part 136, appendix A to analyze
one or more compounds that are not on
that method's published list, the
Alternative Test Procedure contained in
40 CFR 136.4 and 136.5 must be
followed. If an owner or operator uses
Method 8260 or 8270 in "Test Methods
for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods," EPA Publication
SW-846, (incorporated by reference-
refer to § 260.11 (a) of this chapter) to
analyze one or more compounds that are
not on that method's published list, the
procedures in paragraph (b) (3) (iii) (H) of
this section must be followed. At the
owner or operator's discretion, the
concentration of each individual
chemical constituent measured in the
waste by a method other than Method
25D may be corrected to the
concentration had it been measured
using Method 25D by multiplying the
measured concentration by the
constituent-specific adjustment factor
(fm25o) as specified in paragraph
(b) (4) (iii) of this section. Constituent-
specific adjustment factors (f^o) can
be obtained by contacting the Waste and
Chemical Processes Group, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
* * * * *
(F) Method 8260 in "Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods," EPA Publication
SW-846 (incorporated by reference
refer to § 260-11 (a) of this chapter).
Maintain a formal quality assurance
program consistent with the
requirements of Method 8260. The
quality assurance program shall include
the following elements:
,*****
(G) Method 8270 in "Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/
Chemical Methods," EPA Publication
SW-846 (incorporated by reference—
referto §260.11(a) of this chapter).
Maintain a formal quality assurance
program consistent with the
requirements of Method 8270. The
quality assurance program shall include
the following elements:
* * * * *
(iv) Calculations. The average VO
concentration (C) on a mass-weighted
basis shall be calculated by using the
results for all waste determinations
conducted in accordance with
paragraphs (b) (3) (ii) and (iii) of this
section and the following equation:
where:
C=Average VO concentration of the
hazardous waste at the point of
waste treatment on a mass-weighted
basis, ppmw.
i=Individual waste determination "i" of
•the hazardous waste.
n=Total number of waste
determinations of the hazardous
waste conducted for the averaging
period (not to exceed 1 year).
Qi=Mass quantity of hazardous waste
stream represented by Q, kg/hr.
Q_T=Total mass quantity of hazardous
waste during the averaging period,
kg/hr.
Ci=Measured VO concentration of waste
determination "i" as determined in
accordance with the requirements
of paragraph (b)(3)(iii) of this
-------
64666 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
section (i.e. the average of the four
or more samples specified in
paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B) of this
section), ppmw.
(v) Provided that the test method is
appropriate for the waste as required
under paragraph (b)(3)(iii) of this
section, compliance shall be determined
based on the test method used by the
owner or operator as recorded pursuant
to §265.1090(f)(l) of thissubpart.
*****
(8)* * *
(iii) The MR shall be calculated by
using the mass flow rate determined in
accordance with the requirements of
paragraph (b)(8)(ii) of this section and
the following equation:
MR=Eb-Ea
Where:
MR=Actual organic mass removal rate,
kg/hr.
Eb-Waste volatile organic mass flow
entering process as determined in
accordance with the requirements
of paragraph (b)(5)(iv) of this
section, kg/hr.
E»*Waste volatile organic mass flow
exiting process as determined in
accordance with the requirements
of paragraph (b)(5)(iv) of this
section, kg/hr.
*****
(9) * * *
(iv) The MRbio shall be calculated by
using the mass flow rates and fraction
of organic biodegraded determined in
accordance with the requirements of
paragraphs (b)(9)(ii) and (b)(9)(iii) of this
section, respectively, and the following
equation:
paragraph (f)(4), and adding paragraph
(j)(2)(iii) to read as follows:
§265.1085 Standards: Tanks.
*****
(c)*
(2)
* *
* *
Where:
MRbk>=Actual organic mass
biodegradation rate, kg/hr.
Eb=Waste organic mass flow entering
process as determined in
accordance with the requirements
of paragraph (b)(5)(iv) of this
section, kg/hr.
Fbio=Fraction of organic biodegraded as
determined in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (b)(9)(iii)
of this section.
*****
(d) * * *
(5) * * *
(ii) A mixture of methane or n-hexane
and air at a concentration of
approximately, but less than, 10,000
ppmv methane or n-hexane.
*****
33. Section 265.1085 is amended by
revising the introductory text of
paragraph (c)(2)(iii), revising
(c)(2)(iii)(B), adding paragraph (e)(4),
revising paragraph (f)(3)(i)(D)(4). adding
(iii) Each opening in the fixed roof,
and any manifold system associated
with the fixed roof, shall be either:
*****
(B) Connected by a closed-vent system
that is vented to a control device. The
control device shall remove or destroy
organics in the vent stream, and shall be
operating whenever hazardous waste is
managed in the tank, except as provided
for in paragraphs (c) (2) (iii) (B) (1) and (2)
of this section.
(7) During periods it is necessary to
provide access to the tank for
performing the activities of paragraph
(c)(2)(iii)(B)(2) of this section, venting of
the vapor headspace underneath the
fixed roof to the control device is not
required, opening of closure devices is
allowed, and removal of the fixed roof
is allowed. Following completion of the
activity, the owner or operator shall
promptly secure the closure device in
the closed position or reinstall the
cover, as applicable, and resume
operation of the control device.
(2) During periods of routine
inspection, maintenance, or other
activities needed for normal operations,
and for the removal of accumulated
sludge or other residues from the bottom
of the tank.
*****
(e) * * *
(4) Safety devices, as defined in
§ 265.1081 of this subpart, may be
installed and operated as necessary on
any tank complying with the
requirements of paragraph (e) of this
section.
(f)* * *
(3) * * *
(l\ * * *
(D)* * *
(4) The total gap area shall be
calculated by adding the gap surface
areas determined for each identified gap
location for the primary seal and the
secondary seal individually, and then
dividing the sum for each seal type by
the nominal diameter of the tank. These
total gap areas for the primary seal and
secondary seal are then compared to the
respective standards for the seal type as
specified in paragraph (f)(l)(ii) of this
section.
*****
(4) Safety devices, as defined in 40
CFR 265.1081, may be installed and
operated as necessary on any tank
complying with the requirements of
paragraph (f) of this section.
* * * * *
(j) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) The hazardous waste meets the
requirements of §265.1083(c)(4) of this
subpart.
*****
34. Section 265.1086 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(2), (d)(l)(iii),
and (d)(2)(i)(B) and adding paragraph
(e)(2)(iii) to read as follows:
§265.1086 Standards: Surface
impoundments.
*****
(b) * * *
(2) A cover that is vented through a
closed-vent system to a control device
in accordance with the requirements
specified in paragraph (d) of this
section.
*****
(d)* * *
(1) * * *
(iii) The cover and its closure devices
shall be made of suitable materials that
will minimize exposure of the
hazardous waste to the atmosphere, to
the extent practical, and will maintain
the integrity of the cover and closure
devices throughout their intended
service life. Factors to be considered
when selecting the materials of
construction and designing the cover
and closure devices shall include:
Organic vapor permeability; the effects
of any contact with the liquid or its
vapors managed in the surface
impoundment; the effects of outdoor
exposure to wind, moisture, and
sunlight; and the operating practices
used for the surface impoundment on
which the cover is installed.
*****
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) To remove accumulated sludge or
other residues from the bottom of the
surface impoundment.
*****
(e)* * *
(2)* * *
(iii) The hazardous waste meets the
requirements of §265.1083(c)(4) of this
subpart.
*****
35. Section 265.1087 is amended by
revising paragraphs (c)(4)(i), (d)(4)(i),
and the introductory text of paragraph
(g) to read as follows:
§265.1087 Standards: Containers.
*****
(c)* * *
{4) * * *
(i) In the case when a hazardous waste
already is in the container at the time
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8. 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64667
the owner or operator first accepts
possession of the container at the
facility and the container is not emptied
within 24 hours after the container is
accepted at the facility (i.e., does not
meet the conditions for an empty
container as specified in 40 CFR
261.7(b)), the owner or operator shall
visually inspect the container and its
cover and closure devices to check for
visible cracks, holes, gaps, or other open
spaces into the interior of the container
when the cover and closure devices are
secured in the closed position. The
container visual inspection shall be
conducted on or before the date that the
container is accepted at the facility (Le.,
the date the container becomes subject
to the subpart CC container standards).
For purposes of this requirement, the
date of acceptance is the date of
signature that the facility owner or
operator enters on Item 20 of the
Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest In
the appendix to 40 CFR part 262 (EPA
Forms 8700-22 and 8700-22A), as
required under subpart E of this part, at
40 CFR 265.71. If a defect is detected,
the owner or operator shall repair the
defect in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (c) (4) (iii) of
this section.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(4) * * *
(i) In the case when a hazardous waste
already is in the container at the time
the owner or operator first accepts
possession of the container at the
facility and the container is not emptied
within 24 hours after the container is
accepted at the facility (i.e., does not
meet the conditions for an empty
container as specified in 40 CFR
261.7(b)), the owner or operator shall
visually inspect the container and its
cover and closure devices to check for
visible cracks, holes, gaps, or other open
spaces into the interior of the container
when the cover and closure devices
-------
64668 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday. December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
Appendix VI to Part 265—Compounds With Henry's Law Constant Less Than 0.1 Y/X
Compound name
CAS No.
Acetaldol
Acetamlde
2-Acetylaminofluorene
3-AcetyI-5-hydroxypiperidine.
3-Acetylpiperidine
1-AcetyI-2-lhiourea
Acrylamide
Acrylicacld
Adenine
Adipicacid
:::::::::::::::::::=^^
Aiacnior •
834-12-8
Amelryn
4-AminobiphenyI
4-AmInopyridine
A it'
Aniline
o-An!s!dine
Anthraquinone
Atrazine98-05-5
Benzenearsonic acid 98-11 3
Benzenesulfonic acid~
Bemldine
Benzo(a)anthfacene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzole acid 191-24-2
Benzo(g,h,i)peiylene '. 50-32-8
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzyl alcohol
gamma-BHC
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Bromochloromethyl acetate.
Bromoxynil
Butyric acid
Capro)actam(hexahydrc-2H-azepin-2-one)
Catechol (c-dihydroxybenzene)
Cellulose
Cell wall.
Chlorhydrin(3-Ch!orc-1,2-propanediol)
Chloroacetic acid
2-Chloroacetophenone
j>Chloroaniline
p-CWorobenzophenone
CWorobenzilate
p-Chloro-m-cresol (6-chloro-m-cresol)
3-Chlorc-2)5-diketopynrolidine.
Chlorc-1 ^-ethane diol.
4-Chlorophenol
CWorophenol polymers (2-chlorophenol & 4-chlorophenol)10&-4&-9
1-(c-Ch!orophenyl)thiourea
Chrysene
==zzii—:=rrz=z±i:zz==:::
108-39-4
95-48-7
iS4ts
1319-77-3
Cresd (mixed isomers)
4-Cumylphenol=7 i
Cyanide57-1
4-CyanomethyI benzoate.
Diazinon
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Dibutylphthalate
2,5-Dichloroaniline(N,N'-dichloroaniline)
2,6-Dichlorobenzonitrilell
2,6-D!chloro-4-nitroaniline
2,5-Dichlorophenol
3,4-Dichlorotetrahydrofuran
Dtchlon/os (DDVP)
Diethanolaniine
N.N-Diethylaniline
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62. No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64669
Compound name
CAS No.
Diethylene glycol
Diethylene glycol dimethyl ether (dimethyl Carbitol)
Diethylene glycol monobutyl ether (butyl Carbitol)
Diethylene glycol monoethyl ether acetate (Carbitol acetate) "
Diethylene glycol monoethyl ether (Carbitol Cellosolve) iii_pnn
Diethylene glycol monomethyl ether (methyl Carbitol) " "
N,N'-Diethylhydrazine ZZZZ"" ' ' """
Diethyl (4-methylumbelliferyl) thionophosphate .'
Diethyl phosphorothioate ' '
N.N'-Diethylpropionamide ZZZZZZZZZ :
Dimethoate
2,3-Dimethoxystrychnidin-10-one
4-Dimethylaminoazobenzene
7,12-Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene
3,3-Dimethylbenzjdine " '
Dimethylcarbamoyl chloride ""
Dimethyldisulfide ZZZZ"""
Dimethylformamide '"
1,1-Dimethylhydrazine '
Dimethylphthalate '"""""". '
Dimethylsulfone :
Dimethylsulfoxide '
4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol ' '
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine ; ZZZZ ' :"
Dipropylene glycol (1,1 '-oxydi-2-propano!)
Endrin ' "
Epinephrine : .'ZZZZZZZZTZZ
mono-Ethanolamine '
Ethyl carbamate (urethane) ' 'c? o
Ethylene glycol ;. ZZZZZZZZZ7 " I07-ai-i
Ethylene glycol monobutyl ether (butyl Cellosolve) '
Ethylene glycol monoethyl ether (Cellosolve) "" " '
Ethylene glycol monoethyl ether acetate (Cellosolve acetate) iii_i«q
Ethylene glycol monomethyl ether (methyl Cellosolve) . " '
Ethylene glycol monophenyl ether (phenyl Cellosolve)
Ethylene glycol monopropyl ether (propyl Cellosolve) " "" "
Ethylene thiourea (2-imidazolidinethione) ' '
4-Ethylmorpholine ZZZZ
3-Ethylphenol ;;" "
Huoroacetic acid, sodium salt '
Formaldehyde ^.ZZZJZZZZZZ'"
Formamide „.. '
Formicacid '
Fumaric acid
Glutaricacid '
Glycerin (Glycerol) ;.;"" '
Qiycidoi ; •
Glycinamide , .""ZZ"
Glyphosate
Quthion ;;;;;;;;;; ;
Hexamethylene-1,6-diisocyanate (1,6-diisocyanatohexane) 822-0&o
Hexamethyl phosphoramide ' ' ~
Hexanoicacid .-. Z'Z'Z'.".".".' ' "
Hydrazine ZZZ ' '
Hydrocyanic acid ." ' '
Hydroquinone
Hydroxy-2-propionitrile (hydracrylonitrile) " '
lhdeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene -..ZZZZ'."
Lead acetate ZZZZZZZZZ"
Lead subacetate (lead acetate, monobasic)
Leucine ZZ.ZZZZ
Malathion '
Maleic acid '"
Maleic anhydride ' '
Mesityl oxide ZZZZ "
Methane sulfonic acid '"""'
Methomyl ;. Z.ZZZZZ " '
p-Methoxyphenol '
Methyl acrylate ' '
4,4'-Methylene-bis-(2-chloroaniline) '.".'.
4,4'-Methylenediphenyl diisocyanate (diphenyl methane diisocyanate) ' '
4,4'-Methylenedianiline
Methylene diphenylamine (MDA). " "
5-Methylfurfural ;„ ....„ _ _ 620-02-0
-------
64670 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday. December 8, 1997 / Rules and Regulations
Compound name
CAS No.
Methylhydrazine60-34-4
Methyliminoacetic acid ec_o-7
Methyl methane sulfonate- 66-27-3
1-Methyl-2-methoxyaziridine.
Methylparathion
Methyl sulfuric acid (sulfuric acid, dimethyl ester)
4-Methylthiophenol
Monomethylformamide(N-methylformamide)
Nabam
atpha-Naphtnol
beta-Naphthol
alpha-Naphthylamine
beta-Naphthylamine
Neopentyl glycoi (dimethylolpropane)
Niacinamide
o-Nitroani!ine
Nitroglycerin
2-Nitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Nitrosoguanldine
N-Nitroso-n-methylurea
N-Nitrosomorpholine(4-nitrosomorpholine)
Oxalicacid
Parathion
Pentaerythrftol
Phenacetin
Phenol
Phenylaceticacid
m-Phenylene diamine
c-Phenylene diamine
p-Phenylene diamine
Phenyl mercuric acetate
Phorate
Phthalic anhydride
alpha-Picdine (2-methyl pyridine) -..
1,3-Propane sulfone
beta-Propiotectone
Proporur (Baygon).
Propylene glycol
Pyrene
Pyridinium bromide39416-48-3
Quinoline
Quinone (p-benzoquinone)
Resorcinol
Stmazine• 22-4-9
Sodiumacetate
Sodium formate ™
Strychnine 57-24-9
Succinfeacid
Succinimide- 23-56-8
Sulfanilic acid
Terephthalic acidooo o =
Tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate3689-24-5
Tetraethylenepentamine
Thfofanox
Tniosemicarbazide
2,4-Tduenediamine
2,6-Toluenediamine 8 2~^
3,4-Toluonediamine ! • I! „
2,4-Toluene dilsocyanate- ••• 584-84-9
p-Tduicacid,
m-Toluidine 1
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifiuoroethane • 76-13-1
Trfethanolamine102-71-6
Triethylene glycol dimethyl ether.
Tripropylene glycol 24800-44-0
Warfarin •• 81-81-2
3,4-Xylenol (3,4-dimethylphenol)• 95-65~8
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 235 / Monday, December 8. 1997 / Rules and Regulations 64671
PART 270—EPA ADMINISTERED
PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMIT
PROGRAM
39. The authority citation for part 270
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912, 6924,
6925, 6927, 6939, and 6974.
Subpart B—Permit Application
40. Section 270.14 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(5) to read as
follows:
§270.14 Contents of part B: General
requirements.
*****
(b) * * *
(5) A copy of the general inspection
schedule required by §264.15(b) of this
part. Include where applicable, as part
of the inspection schedule, specific
requirements in §§264.174, 264.193(i),
264.195, 264.226, 264.254, 264.273,
264.303, 264.602, 264.1033, 264.1052
264.1053, 264.1058, 264.1084, 264.1085
264.1086, and 264.1088 of this part.
[FR Doc. 97-31792 Filed 12-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6S60-50-P
-------
-------
-------
------- |