Tuesday
May 11, 1999
Part II
= =. B
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 261 et al.
Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV:
Treatment Standards for Wood Preserving
Wastes, Treatment Standards for Metal
Wastes, Zinc Micronutrient Fertilizers,
Carbamate Treatment Standards, and
K088 Treatment Standards; Final Rule
-------
25408
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 90/Tuesday, May 11, 1999/Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 261,262, and 268
BIN 205O-AE05
IEPA H F-98-P3F4-FFFFF; FRL-6335-7]
Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV:
Treatment Standards for Wood
Preserving Wastes, and Treatment
Standards for Metal Wastes, and Zinc
Micronutrient Fertilizers, and
Carbamate Treatment Standards, and
K088 Treatment Standards, Final Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTON: Final rule; technical correction.
SUMMARY: This rule corrects and
clarifies five related rules the EPA
published on May 12, 1997, May 26.
1998, August 31,1998. September 4,
1998. and September 24. 1998. On May
12, 1997. EPA published regulations
promulgating Land Disposal
Restrictions (LDR) treatment standards
for wood preserving wastes, as well as
reducing the paperwork burden for
complying with LDRs. On May 26,1998,
EPA published regulations
promulgating LDR treatment standards
for metal-bearing wastes, as well as
amending the LDR treatment standards
for soil contaminated with hazardous
waste, and amending the definition of
which secondary materials from mineral
processing are considered to be wastes
subject to die LDRs. On August 31.
1998, EPA published an administrative
stay of the metal-bearing waste
treatment standards as they apply to
zinc micronutrient fertilizers. On
September 4, 1998, EPA published an
emergency revision of the LDR
treatment standards for hazardous
wastes from the production of
carbamate wastes. On September 24,
1998. EPA published revised treatment
standards for spent aluminum potliners
from primary aluminum production.
Today's rule makes technical
corrections and clarifications to these
final regulations.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on
May 11.1999.
ADDRESSES: The public may obtain a
copy of this technical correction at the
RCRA Information Center (RIC), located
at Crystal Gateway One, 1235 Jefferson
Davis Highway. First Floor, Arlington,
Virginia.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general information contact the RCRA
Hotline at (800) 424-9346 (toll free) or
(703) 920-9810 in the Washington, DC
metropolitan area. For information on
this rule contact Peggy Vyas (5302W).
Office of Solid Waste, 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460, (703) 308-5477,
e-mail address is
"vyas.peggy@epamail.epa.gov".
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :
I. Reasons and Basis for Today's
Amendments
The Agency has received several
comments from the regulated
community requesting clarification and
correction of certain aspects of five rules
all promulgating and revising Phase IV
of the LDRs. These are: the May 12,
1997 LDR Phase IV final rule (the so-
called "Mini" Rule, 62 FR 25998), the
May 26, 1998 LDR Phase IV final rule
(63 FR 28556), the August 31, 1998
administrative stay of the May 26, 1998
rule's applicability to certain zinc
micronutrient fertilizers (63 FR 46332),
the September 4, 1998 emergency
revisions to the treatment standards for
carbamate production wastes (63 FR
172), and the September 24, 1998
revisions to the treatment standards for
spent aluminum potliners (63 FR
51254). Today's preamble discussion
amendments make clarifications and
technical corrections where appropriate
in light of the comments received.
H. Clarification of the May 12, 1997
LDR Phase IV "Mini Rule"
On May 12, 1997, EPA published
regulations promulgating certain aspects
of the original LDR Phase IV proposal
(60 FR 11702, March 2, 1995), including
a discussion clarifying point of
generation of hazardous wastes (see 60
FR 26006-7, May 12, 1997). That
discussion may have been confusing
with regard to the status of sludge from
high-TOC ignitable waste treated in
entirely tank-based NPDES or POTW
discharge systems. To clarify, EPA's
position is that where wastes are
managed in NPDES or POTW discharge
systems that are entirely tank-based, the
wastes are not destined for land
disposal and, therefore, neither the LDR
disposal prohibitions nor the treatment
standards (or attendant dilution
prohibition) apply. Conversely, where
an NPDES or POTW discharge system
includes a land-based unit (i.e., a
surface impoundment), wastes managed
in the system are considered to be
destined for land disposal, and the LDR
regulations do apply. See 61 FR 15566
at 15570 (April 8, 1996), 53 FR 31136
at 31149 (August 17, 1988).
Accordingly, the management of a
high-TOC ignitable waste in an entirely
tank-based NPDES or POTW discharge
system—whether inadvertent or not—
would trigger no LDR requirements.
Sludge subsequently removed from the
tanks would be considered newly-
generated waste (for LDR purposes)
regardless of any changes in treatability
group, and LDR requirements would
apply with respect to its management
only if the sludge itself is hazardous
waste when removed. If the sludge is a
hazardous waste, the LDR treatment
standard that would apply would
depend on the hazardous waste code
and treatability group (or subcategory)
of the sludge itself.
m. Amendments to and Clarifications
of the May 26, 1998 LDR Phase IV Final
Rule
Several errors exist in the regulatory
language of the LDR Phase IV final rule,
which we are correcting with today's
rule. We are also making several
clarifications to the preamble of the LDR
Phase IV final rule.
A. Corrections to the LDR Phase IV Final
Rule
1. Section 261.2 (e)(l)(iii)
Section 261.2(e) identifies materials
that are not solid wastes when recycled.
The rule added an amendment to
§261.2(e)(l)(iii), which amendment
applies only to secondary materials
generated and reclaimed by the primary
mineral processing industry. The rule
inadvertently deleted language in
§ 261.2(e)(1) (iii) that applies to other
industrial sectors recycling secondary
materials. The Agency did not intend to
eliminate the long-standing regulatory
exclusions for other industrial sectors,
and indeed effectively stated that the
provision was not being amended for
other industry sectors, see 63 FR at
28583-584. We are therefore restoring
the omitted text in this section.
2. Section 261.4
The Hazardous Waste Combustion
Revised Standards published on June
19, 1998 (63 FR 33782) added a
paragraph to § 261.4 (a) (16), which
inadvertently changed what was
promulgated in the LDR Phase IV final
rule. To avoid confusion, we are
redesignating the language promulgated
in §261.4 (a) (16) in the LDR Phase IV
final rule as §261.4 (a) (17).
Section 261.4(a)(17) (as renumbered
in this rule) identifies certain mineral
processing secondary materials as
subject to a conditional exclusion from
subtitle C regulation as follows:
Secondary materials * * * generated
within the primary mineral processing
industry from which minerals, acids,
cyanide, water or other values are recovered
by mineral processing.
As noted throughout the preamble,
however, the same mineral processing
secondary materials are also recovered
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 11, 1999/Rules and Regulations
25409
in beneficiation operations. See, e.g., 63
FR at 28578. EPA did not intend to
restrict the scope of the conditional
exclusion to recovery only in mineral
processing operations. Id. Consequently,
EPA is amending §261.4(a)(17) to
indicate that recovery of these
secondary materials may occur in either
mineral processing or beneficiation
operations.
This same amendment is being made
to § 261.4 (b) (7) (iii), which sets out the
conditions under which wastes from the
co-processing of normal feedstock with
mineral processing secondary materials
remains exempt from subtitle C
regulation under the Bevill Amendment.
In relevant part, the rule states:
A residue derived from co-processing
mineral processing secondary materials with
normal beneficiation raw materials remains
excluded under paragraph (b) * * * if the
owner or operator:
(A) Processes at least 50 percent by weight
normal beneficiation raw materials;
The regulation inadvertently
neglected to address the comparable
situation when Bevill residues come
from mineral processing rather than
beneficiation operations. EPA clearly
indicates in the preamble that the
provisions of paragraph (b)(7)(ii) also
apply to co-processing mineral
processing secondary materials in
beneficiation units. See 63 FR at 28595;
see also 54 FR at 36614, 16619-620,
36629 (Sept. 1, 1989); 54 FRat 15324-
325, 15341 (April 17, 1989) (prior
rulemakings where EPA indicated that
these conditions apply). Consequently,
EPA is adding clarifying language to
§ 261.4 (b) (7) (iii) to affirm that both
beneficiation and mineral processing
operations are included.
3. Section 268.7
The tables in §268.7(a) and (b),
entitled "Generator Paperwork
Requirements Table" and "Treatment
Facility Paperwork Requirements
Table," are now erroneously missing
certain checkmarks, which we are
reinstating in today's rule. The LDR
Phase IV final rule also added a line
eight to the "Generator Paperwork
Requirements Table," and a line five to
the "Treatment Facility Paperwork
Requirements Table," both for
contaminated soil, which inadvertently
erased the previous lines eight and five.
We are correcting this oversight by
reinstating the missing lines as nine and
six, respectively.
4. Section 268.9
The language in §268.9(d)(2)
currently refers to language in
§ 268.7(b)(5). which has been
renumbered as §268.7(b)(4). Today's
rule amends the language in §268.9 to
correct this miscitation. For more
clarification of LDR certifications and
how they apply to soil, see the
discussion in section B.6.C. below.
5. Section 268.40
Today's rule also amends the
treatment standard table found in
§ 268.40. The entry for P015 incorrectly
describes this waste as "beryllium
dust"; the. proper term is "beryllium
powder." Also, the entry for U408 gave
the incorrect CAS number for 2,4,6-
Tribromophenol. We are correcting
these errors in today's rule. For other
errors in the § 268.40 table, see sections
V. and VI. below.
B. Clarifications to the LDR Phase IV
Final Rule
1. Effective Dates
The Agency has received a number of
questions about the dates when various
provisions of the LDR Phase IV final
rule become effective. A memorandum
explaining in further detail the effective
dates of the LDR Phase IV final rule is
available in the RCRA docket for the
rule, and is also available on the
internet at: http://www.epa.gov/
epaoswer/hazwaste/ldr/ldrmetal/
memos/effectiv.pdf.
Part of the confusion over the
compliance dates for the LDR Phase IV
final rule resulted from EPA incorrectly
referring to effective dates as
"compliance dates". In the "Effective
Dates" section in the preamble (see page
28556, middle column), the Agency lists
four exceptions to the August 24, 1998
effective date for the rule. These
exceptions are referred to as
"compliance dates", when, in fact, they
are effective dates.
Another point of clarification relates
to the LDR Phase IV final rule
amendments of the treatment standards
for carbamate wastes, which were
originally promulgated in the LDR
Phase III final rule on April 8,1996 (61
FR 15566). The LDR Phase IV
amendments went into effect August 24,
1998. However, on September 4, 1998,
the Agency changed the compliance
dates for the LDR Phase IV carbamate
treatment standards. If you have any
questions related to compliance with
the carbamate treatment standards, we
direct you to the Emergency Revision of
the Land Disposal Restrictions
Treatment Standards for Listed
Hazardous Wastes from Carbamate
Production, which was published on
September 4, 1998 (63 FR 172).
2. Waste as Fill
In the May 12, 1997 second
supplemental proposed rule, EPA raised
the issue of prohibiting the use of
hazardous waste as fill material unless
it was demonstrated to the Agency (or
authorized State) that the use of the
waste minimized threats to human
health and the environment (see 62 FR
26061). The Agency did not finalize this
issue in the LDR Phase IV final rule, but
the proposal remains pending and
awaiting EPA further action.
3. Cement Kiln Dust
EPA states at 63 FR at 28600/3 that:
The Agency is aware that both cement
kilnfs] and aggregate kilns may both burn
hazardous wast[e] fuels and that the dusts
from air pollution control devices are often
blended into final products. Under existing
regulations, if these dusts resulting from
burning listed hazardous waste fuels are
blended into products that are used on the
land, the product would be subject to RCRA's
'derived from' rules. * * *"
The second sentence refers to a situation
where the Bevill amendment does not
apply to the residue from burning the
hazardous waste derived fuel. The
overall sense and intent of this section
of the preamble remains that EPA
wishes to consider cement kiln dust and
dust from lightweight aggregate kilns
(including dusts from kilns burning
hazardous waste as fuels) in the same
fashion because they are similar
materials managed in similar manners.
4. D004 Treatment Standards
Some confusion also apparently exists
as to whether the Universal Treatment
Standards (UTS) apply to D004 arsenic
wastes. In the preamble to the LDR
Phase IV final rule, we state that the
UTS.apply to both wastewater and
nonwastewater forms of the TC metal
wastes. But a parenthetical then states
that, for TC arsenic wastes, the UTS
applies to the wastewater form only.
The Agency unfortunately has caused
confusion by this parenthetical
language. The parenthetical only meant
to explain that we were revising or
replacing the standard solely for the
nonwastewater form of arsenic in LDR
Phase IV. We did not intend by the
parenthetical to suggest that the
wastewater form of arsenic had changed
or been eliminated, or that the UTS do
not apply. The existing standard for the
wastewater form of arsenic was and
remains the UTS. Therefore, the UTS
have and will continue to-apply to D004
arsenic wastes in both forms.
5. TC Metal Standards and Mixed
Wastes
In the preamble to the final rule, EPA
refers to characteristic metal mixed
wastes that were previously stabilized to
meet the then-existing LDR
-------
25410
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 90/Tuesday, May 11, 1999/Rules and Regulations
requirements and that are now being
stored prior to disposal. We indicate
that these mixed wastes do not have to
be re-treated to meet the revised
treatment standards prior to disposal (63
FR 28575-28576). Mixed wastes are
those that are both radioactive and
hazardous. Although we believe that the
preamble is clear, EPA has received a
number of inquiries on this point. The
Agency wishes to reiterate that, for the
reasons explained in the LDR Phase IV
preamble, if mixed wastes that are
characteristically hazardous for metals
were treated via stabilization to the old
treatment standards before the effective
date of the LDR Phase IV rule, these
wastes do not need to be re-treated to
meet the new treatment standards even
if land disposal of the waste occurs after
the effective date of the LDR Phase IV
rule. Wastes previously treated by
methods other than stabilization will
have to be re-treated, as indicated
clearly in the LDR Phase IV preamble,
unless a site-specific variance is
granted. Please note that the preamble
further indicates EPA's amenability to
grant such variances where, for
example, there is risk of re-exposure to
radiation. See 63 FR at 28576.
6. Soil Issues
EPA has received numerous questions
about the alternative soil treatment
standards. Two important questions and
their answers appear below. Other
questions will be handled through
regular information channels, such as
the RCRA Hotline at 1-800-424-9346.
We also wish to remind readers
generally that before receiving
authorization for the soil treatment
standards, states authorized for other
portions of the LDR program may, for
contaminated soil, use state waivers or
other state authorities to waive the duty
to comply with the LDR treatment
standards for pure hazardous waste and
allow, instead, compliance with the soil
treatment standards. This is discussed
more fully in the guidance
memorandum mentioned above on LDR
Phase IV rule effective dates.
a. What are the certification
requirements for decharacterized soil?
The certification requirements for
decharacterized soil are similar to the
requirements for decharacterized
wastes. The certification language found
in §268.7(b)(4) is to be used if
underlying hazardous constituents in
decharacterized soil have been treated,
either to meet the 90% reduction or the
ten times UTS provisions in the soil
treatment standards. If underlying
hazardous constituents in
decharacterized soil have not been
treated and are above the 10 X UTS soil
standard, the soil still requires
treatment. In this case, the revised
certification language found in
§ 268.7(b) (4) (iv) must be used instead.
See 63 FR at 28620.
b. If constituents of concern in a
hazardous contaminated soil have a
specified method of treatment can a
facility still use the alternative soil
treatment standards? In interpreting the
alternative soil treatment standards
found at § 268.49 (c) (3), questions have
arisen, particularly with respect to: (1)
use of soil treatment standards where
the only constituents of concern are
nonanalyzable, and (2) situations in
which both analyzable and non-
analyzable constituents are present. The
table below details the appropriate
implementation of the language in
§ 268.49 (c) (3), based on language from
the preamble to the proposed and final
rules with respect to contaminated soils
containing both analyzable and
nonanalyzable constituents. Readers
should note that the following
information only applies to constituents
of concern present in a hazardous
contaminated soil that must meet LDRs
before land disposal.
If these constituents are
And if these constituents *
Then soils contaminated with these constituents meet
LDR treatment requirements when you * * *
Nonanalyzable only.
Analyzable and nonanalyz-
able.
Have a method of treatment specified in §268.40
Are organic compounds
analyzable only
Have a method of treatment specified in §268.40 AND
ALSO a concentration-based limit in the §268.48
UTS table.
Have only concentration based limits in §268.40 and
§268.48.
Treat all of these constituents using the treatment
methodfs] specified in §268.40.
Treat analyzable constituents to numerical soil treat-
ment levels; no need to separately treat nonanalyz-
able constituents using method specified in §268.40.
Treat each constituent to numerical soil treatment lev-
els.
Treat each constituent to numerical soil treatment lev-
els.
The preambles to both the final and
proposed rules on contaminated soils
make clear that EPA intended to allow
treatment of analyzable constituents to
serve as a surrogate for treating
unanalyzable constituents only when
the analyzable and unanalyzable
constituents are both organics. The
Phase IV preamble thus states that "[ijn
situations where contaminated soil
contains both analyzable and
nonanalyzable organic constituents,
treating the analyzable constituents to
meet the soil treatment standards is also
reasonably expected to provide
adequate treatment of nonanalyzable
constituents." 63 FR at 28609 (emphasis
added). This sentence indicates that it is
reasonable to expect that treatment for
analyzable organic constituents will be
sufficiently effective for other organic,
but nonanalyzable, constituents. See
also, Phase II proposal, 58 FR at 48124
(col. 2) (Sept. 14, 1993) (likewise stating
that the principle of treating only
analyzable constituents applies only
where analyzable and nonanalyzable
constituents are both organics). We are
accordingly amending the language of
the rule so that it matches these
preamble explanations.
This leaves unaddressed in the rule
situations (which may or may not
actually exist) where analyzable and
unanalyzable hazardous constituents are
not both organics. If the situation exists,
it would not be reasonable to assume in
all situations that organic treatment
would serve as a surrogate for inorganic
or metal treatment, or vice versa. Should
the situation arise, EPA believes it
should be addressed on a site-specific
basis. The relevant factors to be
considered include the types of
hazardous constituents, their
concentrations (for the analyzable
constituents), and their amenability to
common treatment.
c. What are nonanalyzable
constituents? A nonanalyzable
constituent is any constituent that does
not have appropriate test methods or
chemical standards to properly measure
compliance with LDR concentration-
based standards. A constituent is
nonanalyzable under LDR regulation
when (1) the appropriate §268.40 listing
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 90/Tuesday, May 11, 1999/Rules and Regulations 25411
specifies a treatment technology, and (2)
there is no concentration-based limit in
the § 268.48 UTS table. We note, simply
for technical accuracy, that the Phase IV
preamble (63 FR 28609, col. 2) refers in
a parenthetical statement to
nonanalyzable constituents as belonging
only to P and U waste codes. That
preamble parenthetical is not entirely
correct. A limited number of organic
nonanalyzable constituents are also
regulated under K and F waste codes.
This clarification does not affect
implementation of §268.49 (c) (3) in any
way.
7. Intentional Mixing of Hazardous
Waste With Soil or Debris
It is illegal to add soil or debris to a
hazardous waste to change the waste's
treatment classification to soil or debris
and thereby to falsely claim eligibility
for the alternative treatment standards
for soil or debris. Put another way,
addition of soil or debris to a hazardous
waste does not change that waste into
soil or debris for purposes of LDR
treatment. As the Agency stated in the
May 26, 1998 preamble, "[AJny
deliberate mixing of prohibited
hazardous waste with soil in order to
change its treatment classification (i.e.
from waste to contaminated soil) is
illegal. Existing regulations concerning
impermissible dilution already make
this point." 63 FR at 28621. The
conduct is impermissible dilution
because it adds a diluting medium—the
soil—that neither contributes to
effective treatment nor represents a bona
fide substitute for adequate treatment.
Id.
EPA further made clear that this
conduct subjects generators to civil and
criminal penalties. 63 FR at 28621. In
addition, the impermissibly diluted
waste remains subject to the original
treatment standard, "so no benefit in
terms of reduced treatment would
occur." Id.
EPA had earlier established the same
principle for debris: "[ajlthough EPA is
classifying mixtures that are
predominantly debris as debris, this
does not mean that debris can be
deliberately mixed with other wastes in
order to change their treatment
classification. Such mixing is
impermissible dilution under §268.3
since it is a substitute for adequate
treatment." 57 FR at 37224 (Aug. 18,
1992); see also 57 FR at 37243 ("if
debris is intentionally mixed with
contaminated soil or hazardous waste
(e.g. after excavation), and the mixture
is regulated as debris by the application
of the mixture principle and
subsequently immobilized, prohibited
sham mixing has occurred").
To ensure that there is no possibility
of misunderstanding current law, EPA
has decided to amend the definitions in
§ 268.2 to reflect more directly the
preamble language stating that
intentional addition of soil or debris to
hazardous waste is impermissible.
Currently, the definitions of "soil" and
"debris", respectively state that soil or
debris is "made up primarily of soil" or
"primarily of debris." 40 CFR §268.2 (k)
and (g). To remove any possible (albeit
unfounded, given the existence of the
dilution prohibition in §268.3 and the
preamble language quoted above)
confusion regarding the term
"primarily" in the rules, EPA is
incorporating language directly into the
respective definitions that states that
deliberate mixing of process waste to
soil or debris that changes a treatment
classification is impermissible dilution.
These additions merely incorporate
existing preamble text into regulations
and do not establish any new principles.
Thus, today's correction is at most an
interpretive rule because EPA's existing
interpretations are being codified as
clarifications to the definitions of soil
and debris and to the existing dilution
prohibition in §268.3. Moreover, no
new obligations are created because
existing regulations—viz., the dilution
prohibition in §268.3—already make
the conduct illegal. Whether the change
is a technical correction or an
interpretive rule, no opportunity for
notice and comment is required. 5
U.S.C. §553(b).
8. Treatment Residuals and Point of
Generation of a New Hazardous Waste
for LDR Purposes
The Agency has received several
inquiries concerning treating TC metal
wastes and the potential for finding
underlying hazardous constituents at
levels above the UTS in the treatment
residuals that were either not present in
the waste prior to treatment or may have
been present but only at levels below
the UTS. This would occur, for
example, if the treatment process is
such that certain underlying hazardous
constituents (UHCs) might be more
concentrated in treatment residuals than
in the original waste.
Two illustrative scenarios are useful.
The first involves a D007 chromium
waste that is incinerated. Trace
quantities of lead are present in the
original waste, but at levels below the
UTS (thus, lead is not a UHC under 40
CFR § 268.2(i)). The resulting ash is no
longer characteristic for chromium, but
lead is now present at levels above the
UTS. The second involves a D008 lead
wastewater that contains no underlying
hazardous constituents as generated, but
that is treated with dithiocarbamate, a
metal precipitating agent.
Dithiocarbamate is also a hazardous
constituent that appears on the list of
potential UHCs in §268.48. The
dithiocarbamate assists the stabilization
of the lead but, after treatment, is
present at levels above the UTS in the
treatment residuals.
In both of these cases, the treatment
residuals (ash and sludge) demonstrate
that the original waste is
decharacterized. Under §268.2(i), the
only UHCs that must be treated and that
must meet the Universal Treatment
Standards (UTS) are those determined
to be present above UTS levels in the
original waste—either via testing or
generator knowledge. Because the
treatment process results in non-
hazardous residuals, the treatment
facility is not responsible for additional
testing to determine if any different
underlying hazardous constituents are
added or created during the treatment
process itself. Furthermore, only the
original UHCs must meet the UTS.
However, if in either case the
treatment residual is also characteristic
by having constituents that are not only
above the UTS level but also above the
TC level, then the residual is a newly-
generated hazardous waste for LDR
purposes. This result is consistent with
the definition of generator at§260.10:
"Generator means any person, by site,
whose act or process produces
hazardous waste identified or listed in
part 261 * * * " The result is also
consistent with the key LDR principle
that hazardous wastes must meet LDR
treatment standards to minimize threats
before the wastes are land disposed.
See, e.g., Chemical Waste Management
v. EPA, 976 F. 2d 2, 16-18 (D.C. Cir.
1992) (treatment must include treatment
for both characteristic property and for
underlying hazardous constituents). For
these reasons, the Agency regards
generation of a new characteristic
treatment residual as being a new point
of generation for LDR purposes. This
newly-formed hazardous waste would
have to be treated to below the
characteristic, and any underlying
hazardous constituents would have to
be treated to below their UTS levels.'
1 This analysis is consistent with the so-called
change of treatability group principle first stated at
55 FR at 22661. col. 2 (June i, 1990). That principle
states that LDR prohibitions remain attached to the
initial waste as long as the waste remains within the
same treatability group (normally wastewater or
nonwastewater). Thus, if a characteristic
wastewater is treated and a non-wastewater sludge
is generated from the treatment process, the
prohibition for the wastewater does not
automatically apply to the sludge. Id. The situation
discussed in the text above, however, involves the
Continued
-------
25412
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 90/Tuesday, May 11, 1999/Rules and Regulations
Thus, in the first scenario above
regarding a decharacterized waste with
lead in the ash, if the lead is present in
the ash at or above TC levels (i.e., a new
D008 waste has been generated), the
lead must be treated to UTS levels.
Furthermore, the treater has generated
the new hazardous waste for LDR
purposes and is responsible for a new
determination of UHCs that are present
and that require treatment to UTS
levels. The same is true in the second
example if the dithiocarbamate
treatment sludge is characteristic.
EPA notes further, however, that in
determining whether a treatment
process has generated a new hazardous
waste for LDR purposes, the Agency
looks to the entire treatment process,
not to each component part. In general,
as explained below, the determination
of whether a new hazardous waste is
generated—i.e., whether a new point of
generation for LDR purposes is
created—is made at the completion of
the treatment process. Thus:
(i) For residuals that are the end
product of a one-step treatment process
or the end product of a treatment train,
the treater has the obligation to ensure
only that the original UHCs meet UTS
standards and that the treatment
residuals are not themselves
characteristic. If a treatment residual in
this scenario does not meet the
treatment standards for the original
characteristic (i.e., when treatment is
ineffective or incomplete) and requires
further treatment, EPA does not
consider the treatment residue to be
newly generated for LDR purposes.
Such a treatment residue, however,
cannot be land disposed until it meets
the treatment standard applicable to the
original waste. This situation would
normally involve re-treating the waste
residuals on-site. Any UHCs added or
created by the treatment process are not
required to be treated because there is
no new point of generation for LDR
purposes. However, as noted above, if
the treatment residuals are themselves
characteristic due to a new property (for
example, the formerly characteristic
chromium D007 waste is now
characteristic only for D008 lead), then
the treater must make a new
determination of the UHCs present—
either through knowledge or additional
testing. This is the same obligation that
attaches to any generator of a hazardous
waste.
(ii) For treatment residuals that
appear only at intermediate steps of a
status for this hypothetical sludge if it itself exhibits
a characteristic of hazardous waste. EPA views such
a characteristic sludge as being newly generated for
LDR purposes.
treatment train, there is no obligation to
determine UHCs or to determine
whether the residual is itself
characteristic. Intermediate-step
treatment residuals are not newly
generated hazardous wastes for LDR
purposes. Thus, even when an
intermediate treatment residual is sent
off-site for further treatment (such as
incinerator ash going offsite for
stabilization and landfilling), our
current regulations at §268.7(b)(5)
require only that the UHCs identified at
the LDR point of generation be
identified. There is no such requirement
for any new UHCs that may be added or
created during the preceding steps of
the treatment process.
9. Clarification of Footnote 7 in
Preamble
LDR Phase IV, as mentioned earlier,
deals with the status of mineral
processing materials under the RCRA
definition of solid waste at §261.2.
Footnote seven of the preamble to the
LDR Phase IV final rule, as printed in
the Federal Register, reads: "EPA does
note the potential anomaly that non-
mineral processing secondary materials,
at least for the moment, will be
regulated in some cases stringently than
those generated and reclaimed within
the mineral processing industry." 63 FR
at 28583 n. 7. This language reflects a
printing error by the Office of Federal
Register which erroneously omitted the
word "less" before the word
"stringently" in this sentence. The
footnote thus should read: "EPA does
note the potential anomaly that non-
mineral processing secondary materials,
at least for the moment, will be
regulated in some cases less stringently
than those generated and reclaimed
within the mineral processing
industry."
Of course, as EPA noted elsewhere in
the rule, secondary materials within the
mineral processing industry will be
regulated in other instances less
stringently than those from outside the
industry (the principal example being
characteristic spent materials being
reclaimed). The main point, as •
expressed in the footnote, is that the
new rules establish a separate solid
waste classification scheme for the
mineral processing industry that differs
from the generic classification scheme
set out in the remainder of §261.2.
IV. Amendment to the August 31,1998
Stay for Certain Zinc Micronutrient
Fertilizers
On August 31. 1998, EPA issued an
administrative stay of the Phase IV rule
as it applies to zinc micronutrient
fertilizers that are produced from
hazardous wastes exhibiting the toxicity
characteristic. 63 FR 46332. Although
EPA clearly stated throughout the rule
that the administrative stay applied to
"zinc micronutrient fertilizers," the
regulatory language codifying the stay
mistakenly refers instead to "zinc-
containing fertilizers." See 63 FR 46334,
to be codified at 40 CFR §268.40(i).
There exists a remote possibility that
there are fertilizers produced from
toxicity characteristic hazardous wastes
that do not utilize zinc as a
micronutrient but otherwise contain
zinc (possibly as a trace element
without nutritive value). Since the
administrative stay was not meant to
apply to such (hypothetical) fertilizers,
EPA is amending the regulatory
language to cover only zinc
micronutrient fertilizers, as intended.
V. Amendments to the September 4,
1998 Emergency Revision of the
Treatment Standards for Listed
Hazardous Wastes From Carbamate
Production
The September 4, 1998 Emergency
Revision of the LDR Treatment
Standards for Listed Hazardous Wastes
from Carbamate Production (63 FR 172)
adds a paragraph (i) to §268.40, which
inadvertently replaced the existing
paragraph (i) added by the Land
Disposal Restrictions final rule
published on August 31, 1998 (staying
LDR metal standards for zinc
micronutrient fertilizers). Today's rule
redesignates the current paragraph (i) as
paragraph (j), and reinserts the
paragraph (i) from the August 31, 1998
rule (as additionally amended in this
correction notice, see section IV above).
The September 4, 1998 rule also
inadvertently changes footnotes eight
and 11 to the table of treatment
standards found in §268.40. The correct
footnotes are reinstated in today's rule.
A more significant error in the
September 4, 1998 Emergency Rule is
the removal of footnote six for all
constituents listed in the table of
Universal Treatment Standards found in
§ 268.48. In doing so, the rule
mistakenly changes the status of certain
carbamate constituents, which should
not be underlying hazardous
constituents until their newly revised
treatment standards go into effect on
March 4, 1999. By removing the
footnote, these carbamate constituents
are considered underlying hazardous
constituents as of September 4, 1998,
the effective date of the Emergency
Rule. This was and is not the Agency's
intention, and we are therefore
reinstating the footnote with the correct
date of March 4, 1999.
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 90/Tuesday, May 11, 1999/RuIes and Regulations
25413
The treatment standards for K159 in
the Table of Treatment Standards for
Hazardous Wastes in §268.40 are
currently incorrect. The standards were
and should be those promulgated in the
LDR Phase III final rule (61 FR 15566, .
April 8, 1996). However, those
standards were inadvertently and
mistakenly revised in a technical
correction on February 19, 1997 (62 FR
7502). Today's rule reinstates the correct
treatment standards for Kl 59 in the
§268.40 table.
Finally, today's rule also corrects: (1)
the nonwastewater standard for oxamyl,
which was listed incorrectly in the entry
for PI94; and (2) the CAS numbers for
acetophenone and triethylamine, which
were listed incorrectly in the entries for
K156 and U404, respectively.
VI. Amendment to the September 24,
1998 Revision of the Treatment
Standards for Spent Potliners From
Primary Aluminum Reduction (K088)
On September 24, 1998 EPA
promulgated revised LDR treatment
standards for waste code K088. The rule
changes the nonwastewater standard for
arsenic in K088 from 5.0 mg/1 TCLP to
26.1 mg/kg total, and also changes the
nonwastewater standard for fluoride in
K088 from 48 mg/1 TCLP to NA. The
wastewater standard for fluoride is
unaffected by the rule. (That standard
also is not affected by the court's
rationale in Columbia Falls Aluminum
Co. v. EPA, 139 F. 3d 914, 922-23 (D.C.
Cir. 1998) because the standard for
fluoride wastewaters does not involve
the use of the TCLP.) Unfortunately, the
final rule inadvertently omitted
fluoride, and its treatment standards,
from the entry for K088 in the table of
treatment standards in §268.40. Because
of this omission, the change to the
nonwastewater standard for fluoride
was not codified. Today we are restoring
fluoride and its revised standards in the
entry for K088 in the §268.40 table.
VII. Analysis Under Executive Order
12866, Executive Order 12875,
Executive Order 12898, Executive
Order 13045, Executive Order 13084,
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995, the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
and the Paperwork Reduction Act
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a "significant regulatory action" and
is therefore not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget. In
addition, this action does not impose
any enforceable duty, contain any
unfunded mandate, or impose any
significant or unique impact on small
governments as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not
require prior consultation with State,
local, and tribal government officials as
specified by Executive Order 12875 (58
FR 58093, October 28, 1993) or
Executive Order 13084 (63 FR 27655,
May 10, 1998), or involve special
consideration of environmental justice
related issues as required by Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994). Because this action is not subject
to notice-and-comment requirements
under the Administrative Procedure Act
or any other statute, it is not subject to
the regulatory flexibility provisions of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601 etseq.). This rule also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because EPA interprets
E.O. 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on
health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Order has the potential to influence
the regulation. This rule is not subject
to E.O. 13045 because it does not
establish an environmental standard
intended to mitigate health or safety
risks. EPA's compliance with these
statutes and Executive Orders for the
underlying rule is discussed in the May
12, 1997, the May 26, 1998, the August
31, 1998, the September 4, 1998, and the
September 24, 1998 Federal Register
notices.
VIII. Submission to Congress and the
General Accounting Office
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 etseq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. Section 808 allows
the issuing agency to make a good cause
finding that notice and public procedure
is impracticable, unnecessary or
contrary to the public interest. This
determination must be supported by a
brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As
stated previously, EPA has made such a
good cause finding, including the
reasons therefor, and established an
effective date of May 11, 1999. EPA will
submit 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 United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. This action is not a "major
rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
IX. Immediate Effective Date
EPA is making this rule effective
immediately. The rule adopts
corrections which are purely technical
in that they correct outright printing
errors, or are manifestly inconsistent
with the Agency's stated intent.
Comment on such changes is
unnecessary, within the meaning of 5
U.S.C. 553 (b) (3) (B). For the same
reasons, there is good cause to make the
rule effective immediately pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553 (d) (3).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 261
Environmental protection. Hazardous
waste, Recycling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 262
Hazardous waste, Labeling, Manifest,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
40 CFR Part 268
Hazardous waste, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: April 20, 1999.
Timothy Fields, Jr.,
Acting Assistant Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
Subpart A—General
1. The authority citation for Part 261
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921,
6922, 6924(y), and 6938.
2. Section 261.2 is amended by
revising paragraph (c)(3), in Table 1 in
paragraph (c)(4) by revising the
reference "261.4(a)(15)" in the heading
of column 3 to read "261.4 (a) (17)", and
paragraph (e)(l)(iii) is revised to read as
follows:
§ 261.2 Definition of solid waste.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) Reclaimed. Materials noted with a
"*" in column 3 of Table 1 are solid
wastes when reclaimed (except as
provided under 40 CFR 261.4(a)(17)).
Materials noted with a "—" in column
3 of Table 1 are not solid wastes when
reclaimed (except as provided under 40
CFR261.4(a)(17)).
* * * * *
(e) * * *
* * *
-------
25414
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 90/Tuesday, May 11, 1999/Rules and Regulations
(iii) Returned to the original process
from which they are generated, without
first being reclaimed or land disposed.
The material must be returned as a
substitute for feedstock materials. In
cases where the original process to
which the material is returned is a
secondary process, the materials must
be managed such that there is no
placement on the land. In cases where
the materials are generated and
reclaimed within the primary mineral
processing industry, the conditions of
the exclusion found at §261.4(a)(17)
apply rather than this paragraph.
3. Section 261.4 is amended by
redesignating the first paragraph (a) (16)
as (a) (17), and by revising paragraphs
(a)(17) introductory text, (a)(17)(v), and
(b)(7)(iii) introductory text and
(b) (7) (iii) (A) to read as follows:
§261.4 Exclusions.
(a) * * *
(17) Secondary materials (i.e., sludges,
by-products, and spent materials as
defined in §261.1) (other than
hazardous wastes listed in subpart D of
this part) generated within the primary
mineral processing industry from which
minerals, acids, cyanide, water or other
values are recovered by mineral
processing or by beneficiation, provided
that:
*****
(v) The owner or operator provides a
notice to the Regional Administrator or
State Director, identifying the following
information: the types of materials to be
recycled; the type and location of the
storage units and recycling processes;
and the annual quantities expected to be
placed in non land-based units. This
notification must be updated when
there is a change in the type of materials
recycled or the location of the recycling
process.
*****
(iii) A residue derived from co-
processing mineral processing
secondary materials with normal
beneficiation raw materials or with
normal mineral processing raw
materials remains excluded under
paragraph (b) of this section if the owner
or operator:
(A) Processes at least 50 percent by
weight normal beneficiation raw
materials or normal mineral processing
raw materials; and,
PART 262—STANDARDS APPLICABLE
TO GENERATORS OF HAZARDOUS
WASTE
4. The authority citation for part 262
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6906, 6912, 6922-
6925, 6937, and 6938.
Subpart C—Pre-Transport
Requirements
5. Section 262.34 is amended by
revising paragraph (d) (4) to read as
follows:
§262.34 Accumulation time.
*****
(d) * * *
(4) The generator complies with the
requirements of paragraphs (a) (2) and
(a) (3) of this section, the requirements of
subpart C of part 265, the requirements
of 40 CFR268.7(a)(5); and
(b)* * *
(7) * * ,
PART 268—LAND DISPOSAL
RESTRICTIONS
6. The authority citation for part 268
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921,
and 6924.
Subpart A—General
7. Section 268.2 is amended by
revising paragraphs (h) and (k) to read
as follows:
§ 268.2 Definitions applicable in this part.
*****
(h) Hazardous debris means debris
that contains a hazardous waste listed in
subpart D of part 261 of this chapter, or
that exhibits a characteristic of
hazardous waste identified in subpart C
of part 261 of this chapter. Any
deliberate mixing of prohibited
hazardous waste with debris that
changes its treatment classification (i.e.,
from waste to hazardous debris) is not
allowed under the dilution prohibition
in §268.3.
(k) Soil means unconsolidated earth
material composing the superficial
geologic strata (material overlying
bedrock), consisting of clay, silt, sand,
or gravel size particles as classified by
the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, or a mixture of such materials
with liquids, sludges or solids which is
inseparable by simple mechanical
removal processes and is made up
primarily of soil by volume based on
visual inspection. Any deliberate
mixing of prohibited hazardous waste
with soil that changes its treatment
classification (i.e., from waste to
contaminated soil) is not allowed under
the dilution prohibition in §268.3.
8. Section 268.7 is amended by
revising entries 1,3, and 8 to the table
entitled "Generator Paperwork
Requirements Table" in paragraph
(a) (4), by revising entry 1 to the table
entitled "Treatment Facility Paperwork
Requirements Table" in paragraph
(b) (3) (ii), and by revising paragraph
(b) (4) (iv) to read as follows:
§268.7 Testing, tracking, and
recordkeeping requirements for generators,
treaters, and disposal facilities.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
GENERATOR PAPERWORK REQUIREMENTS TABLE
Required information
§268.7(a)(2) §268.7(a)(3) §268.7(a)(4) §268.7(a)(9)
1. EPA Hazardous Waste Numbers and Manifest Number of first shipment.
3. The waste is subject to the LDRs. The constituents of concern for F001-F005,
and F039, and underlying hazardous constituents in characteristic wastes, un-
less the waste will be treated and monitored for all constituents. If all constitu-
ents will be treated and monitored, there is no need to put them all on the LDR
notice
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 90/Tuesday, May 11, 1999/Rules and Regulations
25415
GENERATOR PAPERWORK REQUIREMENTS TABLE—Continued
Required information
§268.7(a)(2) §268.7(a)(3) §268.7(a)(4) §268.7(a)(9)
8. For contaminated soil subject to LDRs as provided in §268.49(a), the constitu-
ents subject to treatment as described in §268.49(d), and the following state-
ment: This contaminated soil [does/does not] contain listed hazardous waste
and {does/does not] exhibit a characteristic of hazardous waste and [is subject
to/complies with the soil treatment standards as provided by §268.49(c) or the
universal treatment standards .
9. A certification is needed (see applicable section for exact wording)
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) * * *
TREATMENT FACILITY PAPERWORK REQUIREMENTS TABLE
Required Information
§268.7(b)
1. EPA Hazardous Waste Numbers and Manifest Number of first shipment.
6. A certification is needed (see applicable section for exact wording).
(4) * * *
(iv) For characteristic wastes that are
subject to the treatment standards in
§ 268.40 (other than those expressed as
a method of treatment), or §268.49, and
that contain underlying hazardous
constituents as defined in §268.2(i); if
these wastes are treated on-site to
remove the hazardous characteristic;
and are then sent off-site for treatment
of underlying hazardous constituents,
the certification must state the
following:
I certify under penalty of law that the
waste has been treated in accordance with
the requirements of 40 CFR 268.40 or 268.49
to remove the hazardous characteristic. This
decharacterized waste contains underlying
hazardous constituents that require further
treatment to meet treatment standards. I am
aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting a false certification, including the
possibility of fine and imprisonment.
*****
9. Section 268.9 is amended by
revising paragraphs (d) (2) introductory
text and (d) (2) (i) to read as follows:
§ 268.9 Special rules regarding wastes that
exhibit a characteristic.
(d) * * *
(2) The certification must be signed by
an authorized representative and must
state the language found in §268.7(b)(4).
(i) If treatment removes the
characteristic but does not meet
standards applicable to underlying
hazardous constituents, then the
certification found in §268.7(b)(4)(iv)
applies.
10. Section 268.40 is amended by
redesignating the first paragraph (i) as
paragraph (j), by revising paragraph (i),
and the table at the end of the section
is amended by revising the entries for
K088, K156, K159, P194, U404 and
U408, and footnotes 8 and 11 to read as
follows:
§268.40 Applicability of treatment
standards.
*****
(i) Zinc micronutrient fertilizers that
are produced for the general public's
use and that are produced from or
contain recycled characteristic
hazardous wastes (D004-D011) are
subject to the applicable treatment
standards in §268.41 contained in the
40 CFR, parts 260 to 299, edition revised
as of July 1, 1990.
TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTES
[Note: NA means not applicable.]
Regulated hazardous constituent
Wastewaters
Nonwastewaters
Waste code
Waste description and treat-
ment/regulatory subcategory' Common name
Concentration in
CAS2 No. mg/l3; or tech-
nology code*
Concentration in mg/
kg s unless noted as
"mg/l TCLP"; or tech-
nology code
K088
Spent potliners from primary
aluminum reduction.
Acenaphthene
Anthracene
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene ..
Benzo(k)fluoranthene ..
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ...
Chrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
83-32-9
120-12-7
56-55-3
50-32-8
205-99-2
207-08-9
191-24-2
218-01-9
53-70-3
206-44-0
0.059 3.4
0.059
0.059
0.061
0.11
0.11
0.0055 1.8
0.059 3.4
0.055 8.2
0.068 3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
6.8
6.8
-------
25416
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 90/Tuesday, May 11, 1999/Rules and Regulations
TREATMENT
STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTES— Continued
[Note: NA means not applicable.]
Regulated hazardous constituent
WactB mrio Waste description and treat-
wasie coae ment/regulatory subcategory >
Common name
!ndeno(1 2 3 -c d)pyrene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene . .
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium (Total)
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Cyanide (Total)7
Cyanide (Amenable)7
Fluoride
CAS 2 No.
1 Q*^QQ_C
QK_n-J_Q
129—00-0
7440—36-0
744(1— •'fR— 9
744O— ^Q— *a
7440—41—7
744O— 4.T— Q
744ft— 47 ^
743Q— Q9 1
7439—97—6
7440—02—0
778° 40 n
7440—22—4
57 12—5
57-12-5
16984-48-8
Wastewaters
Concentration in
mg/l3; or tech-
nology code4
0.0055
0.059
0.067
1.9
1.4
1.2
0.82
0.69
2.77
0.69
0.15
3.98
0.82
0.43
1.2
0.86
as
Nonwastewaters
Concentration in mg/
kg 5 unless noted as
"mg/l TCLP"; or tech-
nology code
3.4
5.6
8.2
1.15 mg/l TCLP
26.1 mg/l TCLP
21 mg/l TCLP
1.22 mg/l TCLP
0.1 1 mg/l TCLP
0.60 mg/l TCLP
0.75 mg/l TCLP
0.025 mg/l TCLP
11 mg/l TCLP
5.7 mg/l TCLP
0.1 4 mg/l TCLP
590
30
NA
K156
Organic waste (including
heavy ends, still bottoms,
light ends, spent solvents,
filtrates, and decantates)
from the production of
carbamates and carbamoyl
oximes.10.
Acetonitrile.
75-05-8
K159
P194
U404
U408
*
Organics from the treatment
of thiocarbamate wastes.10.
•
Oxamyl
AnilinG
Benomyl
.. Benzene
Carbaryl
Carbenzadi m
Carbofuran
Carbosulfan
. Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
o-Dichlorobenzene
Methomyl
. Methylene chloride
. Methyl ethyl ketone
Naphthalene
Phenol
. Pyridine
. Toluene . .
Triethylamine
* *
Benzene
Butylate
EPTC (Eptam)
Molinate
Pebulate
Vemolate
Oxamvl
98-86-2
62-53-3
17804-35-2
71-43-2
63-25-2
10605-21-7
1563-66-2
55285-14-8
108-90-7
67-66-3
95-50-1
16752-77-5
75-09-2
78-93-3
91-20-3
108-95-2
110-86-1
108-88-3
121-44-8
71-43-2
2008-41-5
759-94-4
2212-67-1
1114-71-2
1929-77-7
23135-22-0
* » * »
Triethylamine Triethylamine 121-44-8
* «• * *
2,4,6-Tribromophenol 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 118-79-6
5.6
1.8
0.010
0.81
0.056
0.14
0.006
0.056
0.006
0.028
0.057
0.046
0.088
0.028
0.089
0.28
0.059
0.039
0.014
0.080
0.081
*
0.14
0.042
0.042
0.042
0.042
0.042
9.7
14
1.4
10
0.14
1.4
0.14
1.4
6.0
6.0
6.0
0.14
30
36
5.6
6.2
16
10
1.5
10
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
0.056 0.28
*
0.081 1.5
*
0.035 7.4
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 90/Tuesday, May 11, 1999/Rules and Regulations
25417
TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTES—Continued
[Note: NA means not applicable.]
Waste code
Waste description and treat-
ment/regulatory subcategory '
Regulated hazardous constituent
Common name CAS2 No.
Wastewaters
Concentration in
mg/l 3; or tech-
nology code4
Nonwastewaters
Concentration in mg/
kg 5 unless noted as
"mg/l TCLP"; or tech-
nology code
1 The waste descriptions provided in this table do not replace waste descriptions in 40 CFR 261. Descriptions of Treatment/Regulatory Subcat
egories are provided, as needed, to distinguish between applicability of different standards.
2 CAS means Chemical Abstract Services. When the waste code and/or regulated constituents are described as a combination of a chemical
with its salts and/or esters, the CAS number is given for the parent compound only.
3 Concentration standards for wastewaters are expressed in mg/I and are based on analysis of composite samples.
4 AH treatment standards expressed as a Technology Code or combination of Technology Codes are explained in detail in 40 CFR 268.42
Table 1—Technology Codes and Descriptions of Technology-Based Standards.
5 Except for Metals (EP or TCLP) and Cyanides (Total and Amenable) the nonwastewater treatment standards expressed as a concentration
were established, in part, based upon incineration in units operated in accordance with the technical requirements of 40 CFR Part 264 Subpart O
or Part 265 Subpart O, or based upon combustion in fuel substitution units operating in accordance with applicable technical requirements. A fa
cility may comply with these treatment standards according to provisions in 40 CFR 268.40(d). All concentration standards for nonwastewaters
are based on analysis of grab samples.
* * * * * * *
7Both Cyanides (Total) and Cyanides (Amenable) for nonwastewaters are to be analyzed using Method 9010 or 9012, found in "Test Methods
for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods," EPA Publication SW-846, as incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 260.11, with a sam-
ple size of 10 grams and a distillation time of one hour and 15 minutes.
****** *
8 These wastes, when rendered nonhazardous and then subsequently managed in CWA, or CWA-equivalent systems, are not subject to treat-
ment standards. (See §268.1 (c)(3) and (4)).
*******
10 The treatment standard for this waste may be satisfied by either meeting the constituent concentrations in this table or by treating the waste
by the specified technologies: combustion, as defined by the technology code CMBST at §268.42 Table 1 of this Part, for nonwastewaters; and,
biodegradation as defined by the technology code BIODG, carbon adsorption as defined by the technology code CARBN, chemical oxidation as
defined by the technology code CHOXD, or combustion as defined as technology code CMBST at §268.42 Table 1 of this Part, for wastewaters.
"For these wastes, the definition of CMBST is limited to: (1) combustion units operating under 40 CFR 266, (2) combustion units permitted
under 40 CFR Part 264, Subpart O, or (3) combustion units operating under 40 CFR 265, Subpart O, which have obtained a determination of
equivalent treatment under 268.42 (b).
11. In §268.48, the table in paragraph
(a) is amended by adding footnote
number "6" in column one, under the
heading Regulated Constituents/
Common Name, after the following
chemical names: "Aldicarb sulfone,"
"Barban," "Bendiocarb," "Benomyl,"
"Butylate," "Carbaryl," "Carbenzadim,"
"Carbofuran," "Carbofuran phenol,"
"Carbosulfan," "m-Cumenyl
methylcarbamate," "Dithiocarbamates
(total)," "EPTC," "Formetanate
hydrochloride," "Methiocarb,"
"Methomyl," "Metolcarb,"
"Mexacarbate," "Molinate," "Oxamyl,"
"Pebulate," "Physostigmine,"
"Physostigmine salicylate,"
"Promecarb," "Propham," "Propoxur,"
' 'Prosulfocarb," ' 'Thiodicarb,''
' Thiophanate-methyl,''' Triallate,''
"Triethylamine," and "Vernolate;" and
by adding footnote 6 to read as follows:
§ 268.48 Universal treatment standards.
(a) * * *
6. Between August 26, 1998 and
March 4, 1999, these constituents are
not "underlying hazardous
constituents" as defined in § 268.2 (i) of
this part.
12. Section 268.49 is amended by
revising paragraph (c) (3) as follows:
§ 268.49 Alternative LDR treatment
standards for contaminated soil.
*****
(c)
(3) Soils that contain nonanalyzable
constituents. In addition to the
treatment requirements of paragraphs
(c)(l) and (2) of this section, prior to
land disposal, the following treatment is
required for soils that contain
nonanalyzable constituents:
(A) For soil that contains only
analyzable and nonanalyzable organic
constituents, treatment of the analyzable
organic constituents to the levels
specified in paragraphs (c)(l) and (2) of
this section; or,
(B) For soil that contains only
nonanalyzable constituents, treatment
by the method(s) specified in §268.42
for the waste contained in the soil.
[FRDoc. 99-11271 Filed 5-10-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
-------
------- |