21010
                                                                                            &r?

            Federal Register  /  Vol. 52. No. 107  /  Thursday, }une t^TRules' and Regul^oiTs
 Research and Development Publications. 26
 West St. Clair Street. Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
 F'gure 1. Example Format for Data
 Assessment Report
 Period ending date	——
 Yi;ar
 Company name  	
 1'iant name  	
 Source unit no.	
 GEMS manufacturer
 Model no.	
 CEMS serial no.
CEMS type (e.g., in situ)	.—
CEMS sampling location (e.g.. control device
outlet)	:—,	__	
CEMS span values as per the applicable
regulation. SO2	ppm. Oa	
percent, NOx	ppm, COa	
percent
  I. Accuracy assessment results (Complete
A. B, or C below for each CEMS  or for each
pollutant and diluent analyzer, as
applicable.) If the quarterly audit results
show the CEMS to be out-of-control. report
the results of both the quarterly audit and the
audit following corrective action showing the
CEMS to be operating properly.
  A. Relative accuracy test audit (RATA) for
	(e.g., SOa in ng/J).
  1. Date of audit	_.
  2. Reference methods (RM's) used	
(e.g.. Methods 3 and 6).
  3. Average RM value	(e.g., ng/J,
mg/dsm3. or percent volume).
  4. Average CEMS value .
  5. Absolute value of mean difference [dj
  6. Confidence coefficient {CC]	
  7. Percent relative accuracy (RA)	
 percent.
  8. EPA performance audit results:
  a. Audit lot number (1)	(2)
  b. Audit sample number (1).
  c. Results (mg/dsm3) (1).
                           -(2)
d. Actual value (mg/dsm3)* (1).

e. Relative error* (1).
                                   -(2)
  B. Cylinder gas audit (CGA) for
 e.g.. SO2 in ppm).
                           (2) .
                Audit
                point
                  1
                      Audit
                     point 2
1. Date of audit..
2. Cylinder ID
  number.
3. Date of
  certification.
4. Type of
  certification.
5. Certified audit
  v.ilue.
6. CEMS response
  value.
T. Accuracy	
                    	 (e.g., EPA
                              Proto-
                              col 1 or
                              CRM).
                    	•	 (e.g..
                              ppm).
                    	 (e.g.,
                              ppm).
                    	 percent.
  C. Relative accuracy audit (RAA) for
 	(e.g., SO2 in ng/J).
  1. Date of audit	
                                          2. Reference methods (RM's) used	
                                        (e.g.. Methods 3 and 6).
                                          3. Average RM value	(e.g.. ng/J).
                                          4. Average CEMS value	
                                          5. Accuracy	percent.
                                          6. EPA performance audit results:
                                          a. Audit lot number (1)	(2)
                                          b. Audit sample number (1).
                                 -(2)
   c. Results (mg/dsm3) (1).
                                                                     -(2)
                                            d. Actual value (mg/dsm3) *(1)	
                                            e. Relative error* (1)	(2) _
                                            D. Corrective action for excessive
                                          inaccuracy.
                                            1. Out-of-control periods.
                                            a. Date(s)	
                                            b. Number of davs	,
                                            2. Corrective action taken	
                                                                          -(2)
                                            3. Results of audit following corrective
                                          action. (Use format of A, B, or C above, as
                                          applicable.)
                                            II. Calibration drift assessment.
                                            A. Out-of-control periods.
                                            1. Date(s)	
                                            2. Number of days
                                           B. Corrective action taken-
                                          [FR Doc. 87-12564 Filed 6-3-87; 8:45 am]
                                          BJLUKG CODE (560-H-M
40 CFR Parts 260, 261, 262, 264, 265,
268, 270, and 271

[SWH-FRL-3212-9]

Hazardous Waste Management
System; Land Disposal Restrictions;
Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule: correction.

SUMMARY:  On November 7,1986 (51FR
40572), EPA promulgated the first phase
of the land disposal restrictions under
the authority of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA), as amended by the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA)
of 1984. This notice corrects errors in the
preamble and regulation language of the
November  7,1988 final rule.
DATE: This rule is effective on June 4,
1987.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For general information about this
rulemaking. contact the RCRA Hotline,
Office of Solid Waste (WH-562), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460,
(800) 424-9346 (toll free) or (202) 382- •
3000 in the  Washington, DC
metropolitan  area.
  For information on specific aspects of
this rule, contact: Gary A. Jonesi,
Jacqueline  W. Sales, or Stephen R. Weil,
                                           ' To be completed by the Agency.
 Office of Solid Waste (WH-562B), U.S.
 Environmental Protection Agency. 401 M
 Street. SW., Washington. DC 20460v
 (202) 382-4770.
 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 I. Background

   On November 7,1986 (51 FR 40572),
 EPA promulgated its approach to
 implementing the congressionally
 mandated prohibitions on the land
 disposal of hazardous waste. That rule
 established procedures for setting
 treatment standards for hazarous
 wastes, for granting nationwide
 variances from statutory effective dates,
 for granting extensions of effective dates
 on a case-by-case basis, for evaluating
 petitions for a variance from the
 treatment standards, and for evaluating
 petitions demonstrating that continued
 land dispoal of hazardous wastes is
 protective of human health and the
 environment. In addition, EPA
 promulgated specific treatment
 standards and effective dates for
 hazardous wastes included in the first
 phase of the land disposal prohibitions:
 certain dioxin-containing and solvent-
 containing hazardous wastes.
   Today's notice corrects a number of
 errors contained in the final rule, many
 of which are typographical and
 grammatical errors. The more
 substantive corrections to the preamble
 and regulation language are summarized
 below.

 II. Summary of Corrections

   1. Throughout the preamble (e.g., 51
 FR 40577) and regulatory language (see
 e.g., § 268.1) of the final rule, EPA
 indicated that the Part 268 land disposal
 restriction regulations apply to both
 interim status and permitted facilities.
 The Agency inadvertently omitted a
 cross-reference to the Part 268 standards
 in the applicability sections of Parts 264
 and 265. Today's notice corrects this
 deficiency by adding a new f 264.1 (h)
 and § 265.1(e) which clarify that the Part
 268 standards apply regardless of permit
 status.
  2. In the preamble to the final rule (51
 FR 40611), the Agency summarized the
 quantities of wastes estimated to  be
 land disposed for purposes of
 determining whether nationwide
 capacity variances should be granted. In
 summarizing the quantity estimates
 found in the Background Document, EPA
 inadvertently made several numerical
 and  descriptive errors in the preamble.
Although these errors do not alter the
Agency's capacity determinations,
 today's notice corrects these
inconsistencies so that the preamble

-------
                Federal Register /  Vol. 52.  No. 107  /  Thursday, Jane 4. 1987  /  Rules and Regulations
   properly reflects the calculations
   reached in the Background Document.
     3. In the applicability provision of the
   regulation. EPA specified four
   exemptions to the land disposal
   prohibitions, among them an exemption
   »n § 268.1(c)(4) for small quantity
   generators of less than 100 kilograms of
   hazardous waste per month. The plain
   language of § 268.1 (c)(4) inadvertently
   exempts small quantity generators of
   between 1 kilogram and 100 kilograms
   of acute hazardous wastes per month
   from the land disposal restrictions even
   though these generators are currently
   subject to full regulation under RCRA
   (See 40 CFR 261.5.) The Agency noted in
   tne preamble to the January 14, igae
  proposed rule (51 FR1608]"that acute
  hazardous wastes would remain subject
  lo full regulation when generated in
  quantities greater than 1 kilogram per
  month. In the preamble to the final rule.
  EPA did not indicate any intent to
  exempt generators of greater than l
  kilogram of acute hazardous wastes per
  month. Today's notice corrects the
  language of the final  rule to reflect the
  Agency's intent that  only small quantity
  generators of less than 100 kilograms of
  non-acute hazardous wastes per month
  or less than 1 kilogram of acute
  hazardous waste per month, as defined
  in § 261.5. are exempt from the land
  disposal restrictions.
   4. In the preamble to the final rule (51
  FR 40580). EPA determined that open
  burning and open detonation of
  explosive wastes are not considered to
  be land disposal. References to open
  detonation and open burning were
  inadvertently included in the definition
 of "land disposal" in another portion of
 the preamble (51 FR 40577) and in
 § 268,2. Today's notice deletes the
 incorrect references.
   5. In the preamble to the final rule [51
 FR 40632). EPA characterized the § 268.4
 exemption for treatment in surface
 impoundments as requiring such
 impoundments to be constructed with
 two or more liners and a leachate
 collection system and to be in
 compliance with applicable ground
 water monitoring requirements. This
 characterization inadvertently omitted
 mention of various design or
 performance alternatives allowed such
 impoundments by both RCRA [sections
 3004{o)(2). 3005(j)(2). and 3005(j)(4)) and
 the regulatory language (§ 268.4(a)(3)).
 Today s notice corrects this omission.
  B. In the preamble to the final rule [51
 FR 40601). EPA stated  that wastes
 otherwise prohibited from land disposal
 may be treated in surface impoundments
provided the requirements of § 268.4 are
met. One requirement in § 268.4 is that
residues not meeting the applicable
   treatment standards must be removed at
   least annually for subsequent
   management. Both the preamble and
   § 268.4 prohibit such subsequent
   management in surface imoundments.
   Since § 268.4{al(l) makes this exemption
   conditional upon treatment in the
   impoundment, the removed residues
   must be managed in full compliance
   with the Part 268 requirements (i.e..
   treated to meet the Subpart D standards
   without violating the § 268.3 dilution
   prohibition) or be subject to a case-by-
   case extension under § 268.5, a "no
   migration" exemption under § 268.6, or a
   treatment variance under § 268.44.
   Under any scenario, the residues that
   are removed from the impoundment
   must comply with the § 268.7 waste
  analysis and recordkeeping
  requirements and all other applicable
  Part 268 requirements (e.g., the § 268.50
  storage prohibition).
    Section 268.4{a) does not reflect this
  view. Instead, it mistakenly exempts
  "persons"  from all Part 268 requirements
  rather than exempting the otherwise
  prohibited wastes treated in the
  impoundment(s). Today's notice corrects
  this error by revising § 268.4(a) to reflect
  that § 268.4 is only an exemption from
  the prohibition on placement of
  restricted wastes in surface
  impoundments and not an exemption
  from other  Part 268 requirements when
  residues exceeding the applicable
  treatment standards are removed from
  the impoundments. Furthermore, today's
 corrections clarify that the exemption
 applies only to the wastes treated in the
 exempt impoundments and not to other
 wastes or other non-exempt units owned
 or operated by such persons.
   7. In both the preamble to the final
 rule (51 FR 40602) and § 268.4(a)(3), EPA
 identified two statutory exemptions
 from the minimum technological
 requirements  applicable  to surface
 impoundments. However, in codifying
 these exemptions for purposes of the
 § 268.4 treatment in surface
 impoundments exemption, the Agency
 inadvertently omitted the statutory
 requirements contained in RCRA
 3005(j)(4) and  RCRA 3005(j)(5) that the
 Administrator provide notice and an
 opportunity to comment prior to granting
 any such exemptions. Today's notice
 corrects this omission.   —	.
   8. EPA noted in the preamble to the
 final rule that  RCRA § 3004(h)(4)
 requires that during the period of a
 nationwide variance or case-by-case
 extension, restricted wastes may be
 disposed in a landfill or surface
 impoundment only if such facilities are
 in compliance  with RCRA | 3004(o). The
Agency interprets § 3004(h)(4) to provide
that the minimum technological
   requirements specified in § 3004(o) are
   only applicable to certain new landfill
   and surface impoundment units, and to
   replacements and lateral expansions of
   existing units (51  FR 40603-40604).
   Although § 268.5(h)(2) correctly reflects
   this interpretation, EPA inadvertently
   included contradictory language in
   § 268.5(h)(2)(iii). Today's notice deletes
   the incorrect language.
    9. In both the preamble to the final
   rule (51 FR 40597) and in § 268.7(a), EPA
   provided that generators may determine
   whether their wastes are restricted
   based on waste analysis data,
   knowledge of the waste, or both. The
   preamble (51 FR 40597) stated the
   Agency's intent that where  this
   determination is based solely on the
  generator's knowledge of the waste.
  EPA is requiring that the generator must
  maintain all supporting data used to
  make  this determination. However, the
  reference in the  preamble to the
  generator's "operating record" was an
  error.  It was EPA's intent that such
  records be kept on-site in the generator's
  files (because the requirements for
  formal operating records do not apply to
  generators unless they are also owners
  or operators of treatment, storage, or
  disposal facilities). The Agency also
  inadvertently omitted this recordkeeping
  requirement from the regulatory
  language in § 268.7(a). Today'sV.otice
  corrects these errors.
   10. In the-preamble to the final rule (51
  FR 40597), EPA stated that testing and
  recordkeeping is critical to
  implementation of the land disposal
  restrictions. Although the Agency
  acknowledged that  the ultimate
 responsibility is on  land disposal
 facilities to ensure that restricted wastes
 are not illegally disposed, EPA imposed
 certain waste analysis, notice, and
 recordkeeping requiremetns on
 generators and treatment facilities, as
 well as land disposal facilities. The
 preamble reflects EPA's intent that these
 requirements are  applicable regardless
 of whether the wastes are directly land
 disposed or whether they are treated.
 However, ambiguous language in
 § 268.7(a)(l) could improperly be
 construed as exempting generators from
 these requirements unless restricted
 wastes are either directlyland disposed"
 without treatment or treated and
 subsequently land disposed. Today's
 notice corrects the ambiguous regulatory
 language by revising § 268.7(a)(l)  to
 reflect that the notification requirements
 of this section apply to all generators
 who handle restricted wastes exceeding
 the applicable treatment standards
regardless of whether or when such
wastes are ultimately land disposed.

-------
 21012
Federal Register /  Vol.  52.  .\'o.  107 / Thursday.  June 4. 1387  /  Rules and Reflations
  ^ 11. The preamble to the final rule (51
 FR 40597) expresses the Agency's intent
 ihat the § 268.7 notifications.
 certifications, and waste analysis ciata
 .ire to accompany each waste shipment:
 however. § 268.7 itself could improperly
 be- constr.ied as allowing the submissio'n
 •if sjch documentation at a  later time.
 Toddy's notice corrects this ambiguity
 by revising § 268.7 to conform with the
 preamble discussion.
   12. In § 268.7(a)(3J of the final rule.
 EPA is requiring that where a
 generator's waste is subject to one of
 several variances or exemptions, he
 must forward a notice to the land
 disposal facility receiving his waste
 stating that the waste is exempt from
 the prohibition on land disposal. The
 Agency inadvertently omitted from this
 requirement those wastes subject to the
 statutory extension (codified in
 § 268.1(c)(3)) for contaminated soil and
'debris resulting from  response actions
 tnken under CERCLA § 104 or § 106 or
 RCRA corrective action authority.
 Today's notice corrects this  omission.
   13 In the preamble to the  final rule (51
 FR 40597). EPA recognized the need to
 impose certain waste analysis, notice,
 tind recordkeeping requirements in order
 to ensure that only wastes which meet
 the treatment standards (or are
 ciherwise exempt from the land disposal
 prohibitions) will be transported to land
 disposal facilities. Among these
 r ;quirements is the §  268.7 provision
 s-dting that treatment facilities must
 certify to land disposal facilities that the
 v. astes or treatment residues meet the
 .'pplicable  treatment standards. Section
2/8.7, however, is not completely clear
 with respect to the obligations of
treatment facilities when sending
prohibited wastes or treatment residues
to a different treatment facility for
further treatment. Although the final rule
contemplates that such situations occur
(see. e.g.. § 268.40 which refers to
"further treatment"), the tracking
requirements in § 268.7 deal  explicitly
only with the case of a treatment facility
shipping wastes or residues to a land
disposal facility.
  The Agency intended that in
situations where further treatment is
required, such that shipment is to
another treatment facility, treatment
facilities must comply with the same
notice requirements applicable to
generators shipping to treatment
facilities. EPA believes that this
requirement is already implicit in the
rules, given the existing obligations of
treatment facilities initiating shipments
of hazardous waste to comply with
generator requirements (see  § 264.71(c)
and § 265.7l(c)). To avoid confusion.
                            however, today's notice revises
                            § 2b0.7!b) ;o explicitly state that in cases
                            where the treatment residues do not
                            meet the treatment standards, the
                            treatment facility must comply with the
                            notice requirements applicable to
                            generators in § 268.7(a)(l) if the
                            treatment residues will be further
                            managed at a different treatment
                            facility.
                             14. In the preamble to the final rule (51
                            FR 40597), EPA stated that generators
                            who dispose of restricted wastes on site
                            must put into their operating record the
                            same notification (except for the
                            manifest number), certification, and
                            waste analysis data as required by off-
                            site disposal facilities. However,
                            § 268.7(c) states that only disposal
                            facilities "accepting" restricted wastes
                            must comply with these requirements,
                            implying incorrectly that this
                            requirement applies only to off-site
                            disposal facilities. Today's notice
                            corrects this erroneous implication.
                             15. There are a number of errors in
                            § 268.7(c), which sets out testing and
                           recordkeeping requirements for land
                           disposal facilities. First, the rule
                           incorrectly implies that land disposal
                           facilities have an obligation to test each
                           incoming shipment even if the generator
                           or treatment facility has provided the
                           land disposal facility with waste
                           anaylsis data indicating that the wastes
                           or treatment residues meet the
                           applicable treatment standards. The
                           Agency indicated in the preamble (51 FR
                           40598) that land disposal facilities must
                           test their wastes to determine
                           compliance with the treatment
                           standards as frequently as specified in
                           the facility's waste analysis plan.
                           Testing each shipment is not necessarily
                           required. Rather, the facility's waste
                           analysis plan should specify the
                           frequency required in order to meet the
                           Part 264 or Part 265 obligations. Today's
                           notice revises § 268.7(c) to reflect these
                           points.
                             Second, § 268.7(c) does not state
                           explicitly that the Toxicity
                           Characteristic Leaching Procedure
                           (TCLP) must be used by land disposal
                           facilities to evaluate compliance with
                           the § 268.41 treatment standards.
                           However, this requirement is implicit
                           since disposal facilities are required to
                           test to assure compliance with the
                           treatment standards and the TCLP is the
                           method used for determining compliance
                           (see § 268.7(c) and 51 FR 40593, 40598).
                           Accordingly, today's notice revises
                           § 268.7(c) to indicate explicitly that
                           when a land disposal facility tests, it
                           must analyze an extract developed using
                           the TCLP. (Where a total constituent
                           analysis reveals that individual
 constituents are present in
 concentrations below the applicable
 treatment standards, the TCLP need not
 be run. See Appendix I to Part 268, Step
 1.2.) Aside from this requirement to
 utilize the TCLP, today's notice clarifies
 that existing waste analysis
 requirements specified in § 264.13 and
 § 265.13 remain applicable.
  16. In the November 7.1986 final rule,
 EPA granted several nationwide
 variances from the statutory prohibition
 effective date based on a lack of
 adequate alternative treatment capacity.
 Among these is a 2-year nationwide
 variance for solvent wastes which
 contain less than 1% total F001-F005
 solvent constituents. The Agency
 indicated in the preamble (e.g., 51 FR
 40601, 40623) and in regulatory language
 (e.g., r268.4(a)(2), § 268.7(b)(2), § 268.40)
 that treatment residues from wastes that
 initially contain greater than or equal to
 1% total F001-F005 solvent constituents
 must meet the applicable treatment
 standards. Furthermore. EPA stated in
 the preamble to the final  rule (51 FR
 40575, 40615) and in § 268.41 that F028
 dioxin-containing wastes, which are
 treatment residues resulting from
 incineration or thermal treatment, must
 also meet the applicable treatment
 standards. These passages all state the
 general principle that once a hazardous
 waste is prohibited it must be treated
 until it meets the applicable treatment
 standards.
  However, ambiguous language in
 § 268.30 could improperly be construed
 as allowing treatment residuals to
 qualify for a nationwide variance even
 though these residuals are derived from
 treating wastes that are ineligible for the
 nationwide variance. Today's notice
corrects this ambiguity by revising
 § 268.30(a)(3) to reflect that the
determination as to the availability of
such a 2-year variance is  to be made by
the initial generator of the waste before
the waste has been treated (e.g., by
recycling, incineration, or other
methods). Therefore, for this purpose,
treatment residuals are not to be viewed
as newly generated wastes.
  17. In the preamble to the final rule,
EPA stated that it was granting a two-
year nationwide variance from the
November 8,1986 prohibition effective
date for several categories of wastes
due to a shortage of available
incineration capacity. Although the
preamble correctly identifies "solvent-
containing sludges  and solids" among
the wastes granted such a variance (51
FR 40615), EPA inadvertently omitted
the reference to "solids" from the
regulatory language in § 268.30(a){3).
Today's notice corrects this error.

-------
               Federal  Register / Vol.  52, No. 107  / Thursday. June  4.  1987 / Rules and Regulations
                                                                         21013
    18. EPA correctly stated in both the
  preamble (51 FR 40597) and in
  § 268.7(a)(2) that wastes naturally
  meeting the treatment standards may be
  land disposed without further treatment,
  However language in 5 268.30(c)(1}.
  § 268.31(b)(l). and § 268.41(a) implies
  that all wastes must be treated before
  being land disposed, including those
  wastes that already meet the treatment
  standards. Today's notice corrects these
  erroneous implications.
    19. The final rule established
  procedures in § 268.6 for granting
  petitions allowing continued land
  disposal of prohibited wastes based on
  a demonstration that there will be "no
  migration of hazardous constituents
  from the disposal unit or injection zone
  for as long as the wastes remain
  hazardous." EPA correctly stated in the
  preamble to the final rule (51 FR 40582)
  and in the regulatory language in
  § 268.1(c)(2) and § 268.6{f) that such "no
  migration" petitions, if approved, apply
  only to land disposal of the specific
  waste at the individual disposal unit
 described in the demonstration. Both
  § 268.30(c)(2) and § 268.31 (b)(2) do not
 reflect this waste-specific and unit-
 specific approach. Instead, they could
 improperly be construed as allowing
 exemptions from the land disposal
 prohibitions where a "no migration"
 petition has been granted to a facility
 but not with respect to the wastes and
 units that are the subject of the petition
 demonstration. Today's notice corrects
 this error.
   20. The final rule established
 procedures in § 268.5 for obtaining case-
 by-case  extensions to a prohibition
 effective date. Although it is clear in
 both § 268.5{d) and § 268.1(c)(l) that
 case-by-case extensions apply only to
 those wastes generated at the individual
 facility covered by the application, both
 § 268.30{c)(3) and § 268.31(b)(3) could
 improperly be construed as allowing an
 extension for wastes which are not the
 subject of a successful § 268.5
 demonstration as long as the  applicant
 has obtained such an extension for other
 wastes. Today's notice corrects this
 error.
  21. In § 268.41 of the final rule. EPA
 established a treatment standard of 
-------
2W14       Federal Register / Vol. 52> No. 107 / Thursday.  June 4, 1987  /  Rules and Regulations
December 11,1986 (51 FR 44739);
however, another part of the November
7, 1986 preamble (51 FR 40620}
incorrectly implies that such a dilution
prohibition was included in the final
rule. Today's notice deletes this
erroneous language. !n doing so, EPA is
reiterating that such a prohibition is not
contained in the November 7,1986 final
rule only because it was not proposed
prior to November 7,1986.
  27. In the preamble to the final rule (51
FR 40629), EPA incorrectly indicated
that when the Agency grants a variance
from a treatment standard it must
subsequently make a national capacity
determination regarding the availability
of appropriate treatment capacity for
that waste. Neither the treatment
variance procedures in § 268.44 nor any
other part of the regulatory language or
preamble reflects this view. EPA
recognizes its obligation to make
capacity determinations in order to
grant nationwide variances from the
prohibition effective dates; however, the
Agency did not intend to require such
capacity determinations where a
nationwide variance is not granted.
Today's notice corrects the preamble
language to reflect this view.

III. Rationale for Immediate Effective
Date

  Today's notice does not create any
new regulatory requirements. Rather, it
restates and clarifies existing
requirements by correcting a number of
errors in the November 7,1986 final rule
(51 FR 40572). For these reasons,  EPA
finds that good cause exists under
section  3010(b)(3) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C.
6903(b)(3), to provide for an immediate
effective date. For the same reasons,
EPA finds that there is good cause undei
5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) to promulgate
today's corrections in final form and
that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3) to waive tie requirement that
regulations be published at least 30 days
before thev become effective.
  Dated: May 21. 1967.
J.W. McGraw,            ''•
Acting Assistant Administrator. -••
  The following corrections are made in
the preamble tdvSWH-FRL 3089-5, the
Hazardous Waste Management System;
Land Disposal Restrictions Final Rule,
published in the Federal Register on
November 7,1986 (51 FR 40572):
  1. On page 40577, first column, in the
first paragraph of section B.I., the last
sentence should read "The Agency has
concluded that these methods do not
constitute land disposal." The remainder
of the sentence is deleted.
  2. On page 4Q57B, third column, third
and fourth lines from the bottom, "land
disposal" should read "treatment".
  3. On page 40579, second column, fifth
line in the first! full paragraph, "261.3 (e\
and (f)" should read "261.33 (e) and (f)".
  4. On page 40579, third column, third
line from the bottom, "November 8,
1988" should read "November 8,1986",
  5. On page 4,0581, second column,
eleventh line.^'November 14,1986"
should read.rfknuary 14,1986".
  6. On page 40585, third column,
seventeenth line, "99.999" should read
"99.9999".
  7. On page 40591, second column, in
the first equation, "i = i" should read
"i = l".
  8. On page 40597, first column, fourth
through sixth lines from the
bottom,"maintain in the facility
operating record all supporting data
used to  make this certification." should
read "keep all .'supporting data used to
make this'determination on-site in the
generator's files."
  9. On page 40598, second column, last
line before section C.3., "§ 268:7(b)(l}"
should read "§ 268.7(b)(2)(n)M.
  10. On page 40600. second column,
eleventh line from the bottom,
"3003(h)(2)" should read "3004fh)(2)",
  11. On;page 40601, second column,
fourth line of section D.9., "(h)(4)"
should read "(h)(3)".
  12. Ori page 40603, third cohimn,
seventh/line of section F.l.g..
"3004(h)(4)" should read "3004(h)(3)".
  13. On page 40606, second column, the
fifth line from the bottom should read
"the Agency under § 268.44{c) is
accurate".
  14. On page 40610, third cofumn. the
first sentence in Section D.I should read
"Based on available data from the RIA
Mail Survey, EPA estimates that 2.849
million gallons per year of solvent
wastes are managed in units defined as
land disposal under today's rule."
  15. On page 40611, first column, the
sentence beginning on the tenth line
from the bottom should read "This
change results in an increase in solvent-
water mixtures land disposed of 1.644
million gal/yr and an increase in •
quantity for all other waste types land
disposed of 19 million gal/yr. for a total
increase of 1.663 milion gal/yr."
  16. On page 40611, third column,
twenty-third line, the number "21.7"
should read "20.2".
  17. On page 40611, third column, the
last sentence before section D.2. should
read "Therefore, the overall total
quantity of wastes including small
quantity generator, CERCLA. and RCRA
corrective action wastes is increased to
2,878 million gal/yr for today's.rule."
  18. On page 40611, third column, the
last sentence before the table should
read "These figures do not include
wastes which were deep well injected,
and also do not include small quantity
generator, CERCLA, or RCRA corrective
action wastes."
  19. On page 4O611, third column, the
quantity numbers in the table should be
corrected as follows:
a. Disposal in surface impoundments
  should be "8.8"
b. Waste piles should be ".74"
c. Land application should be "0.0"
d Landfill should be "44^4"
e. Total land disposed should be
  "2.848.9"
  20. On page 40620, the following
diagram should be substituted in place
of the diagram labeled "Sequence 1:
Waste Characterization":
BILLING CODE 6S60-5O-M

-------
              Federal Register / Vol. 52. No. 107 / Thursday. June 4. 1987  / RuiM and Regulations
         Generator of Restricted Waste
      (Including Corrective Action and CERCLA)
                    Identify
                  Applicable
              Treatment Standard
              Part 268 Subpart D
                  Treatment
                   Standard
Go to
Sequence 7
                      Is
                  Treatment
              Standard  Effective
                 Immediately
     Go to
     Sequence 4
                  Does the
           A.   n Waste Meet
           the Part 268 Subpart D
                 Treatment
                  Standard
   Go to
   Sequence 3,
   Sequence 5,
   Sequence 6,
   Sequence 8, or
   Sequence 10
                 Go to
                 Sequence 2
BILLING COM tS*o-M-C

-------
 21016       Federal  Register / Vol. 52. No.  107 / Thursday.  June 4. 1987  /  Rules'and Regulations
   21. On page 40620, first column, tenth
 through fourteenth lines after the
 diagram, the following sentence should
 be deleted: "To require otherwise would
 allow the generator to dilute waste in
 order to circumvent an effective date or
 otherwise alter the applicable treatment
 standard."
   22. On page 406C9, second column, the
 sentence beginning on the seventh line
 is revised by adding the following
 language before the period ending the
 sentence: "where a nationwide variance
 to the prohibition effective date is  .
 granted."
   23. On page 40632. first column, on the
 ninth and tenth lines, "The generator
 may treat" should read "The generator's
 waste may be treated" and on the
 twentieth line, the language "unless it is
 exempt from these requirements
 pursuant to §  268.4(a)(3}" should be
 inserted after "requirements" but within
 the parenthetical reference.
   The following corrections are made in
 the rules for SWH-FRL 3089-5,  the
 Hazardous Waste Management System;
 Land Disposal Restrictions Final Rule,
 published in the Federal Register on
 November 7, 1986 (51 FR 40572):

 §264.1  [Amended]
.  24. On page 40637, second column,
 Part 264 is revised by adding a new
 paragraph (h) to § 264.1 to read as •
 follows:
 «     *     *     *    *
  (hi the  requirements of this part apply
 to owners or operators of all facilities
 which treat, store, or dispose of
 hazardous wastes referred to in Part 268.

 §264.13  [Corrected!
  25. On page 40637. second column,
 fourteenth line from the bottom, "of this
 part of Part 268" should read "of this
 part and Part 268".

 §264.73  [Corrected!
  2fi. On page 40637, third column, in
 § 264.73lb)(14). "notice required undeer"
 should read "notice required under".

 § 265.1  [Amended]
  27. On page 40638. first column, Part
 265 is revised by adding a new
 paragraph (e)  to § 265.1 to read  as
 follows:
 *****
  (e) The requirements of this part apply
 to owners or operators of all facilites
 which treat, store or dispose of
 hazardous waste referred to in Part 268.

 § 268.1  [Corrected]
  28. On page 40638, third column,
 § 268.1(c)(l) should read "Where
 persons have been granted an extension
 to the effective date of a  prohibition
 under Subpart C of this part or pursuant
 to § 268.5. with respect to those wastes
 covered by the extension;".
  29. On page 40638, third column, in
 § 268.1(c)(2), "Where" is inserted at the
 beginning of the sentence and "Persons"
 should read "persons".
  30. On page 40638, third column, in
 I 268.1(c)(2). the word "or" after the
 semi-colon should be deleted.
  31. On page 40638, third column, in
 § 268.1(c)(3), "land disposal of should
 read "where the wastes are" arid
 "Recovery Act." should read "Recovery
 Act; or".
  32. On page 40638, third column,
 § 26S.l(c)(4) should read "Where the'
 waste is generated by small quantity
 generators of less than 100 kilograms of
 non-acute hazardous wastes per month
 or less than 1 kilogram acute hazardous
 waste per month,  as defined in § 261.5 of
 this chapter."

 §268.2  [Corrected]
  33. On pages 40638 and 40639, the
 definition of "Land disposal" in
 § 268.2(a) should read as follows:
  (a) * "
  "Land disposal" means placement in
 or on the land and includes, but is not
 limited to. placement in a landfill,
 surface impoundment, waste pile,
 injection well, land treatment facility,
 salt dome formation, salt bed formation,
underground mine or cave, or concrete
vault or bunker intended for disposal
 purposes.
§268.4 [Corrected]
  34, On page 40639, first column,
§ 268.4(a) should read as follows:
  "(a) Wastes which are otherwise
prohibited from land disposal under this
part may be treated in a surface
impoundment or series  of impoundments
provided thatr"
  35. On page 40639, first column, in
§ 268;4(a)(l), "impoundment" should
read "impoundments".
  36. On page 40639. second column.
first line, "must meet" should read
"meets".
  37. On page 40639, second column,
fourteenth line,  "the Administrator has
granted" should read "the
Administrator, after notice and an
opportunity to comment, has granted".
  38. On page 40639. second column, in
the second  line  of §  268.4{a)(3)(iii), "the
Administrator has granted" Jshould read
"the Administrator,  after notice and an
opportunity to comment, has granted",
  39. On page 40639. second column, in
§ 268.4(a)[4), "must submit"should read
"submits".                i
 §268.5 [Corrected)
   40. On page 40639. third column, in
 § 268.5(a)(5). "on an outline" should
 read "or an outline".
   41. On page 40639, third column, in the
 second line of the certification required
 under § 268.5(b). "and that I am
 familiar" should read "and am familiar",
   42. On page 40640. first column,
 second line, "review" should read
 "renew".
   43. On page 40640, first column, sixth
 line from the bottom, "if the interim
 status" should read "if in interim
 status".
   44. On page 40640, first column,
 second line from the bottom, "in" should
 be inserted after "is" but before
"compliance".
   45. On page 40640, second column,
 seventh and eighth lines, "regardless
 that the unit is not new, expanded, or a
 replacement" should be deleted.
   46. On page 40640. second column,
 fourteenth line, paragraph "(j)" should '
 read paragraph "(i)".

 §268.6  [Corrected]
   47. On page 40640, third column, in the
 second line of the certification required
 under § 268.6(d), "an familiar with"
 should read "am familiar with".
   48. On page 40640, third column, fifth
 line from the bottom, "to"  should be
 inserted after "Prior" but before "the".
   49. On page 40641, first column.
 second line, "reliveve" should read
 "relieve".

 § Zfia.7  [Corrected)
   50. On page 40641, first column,
 twelfth line, "or using knowledge of the
 waste to" should read "or use
 knowledge of the waste, to".
   51. On page 40641. first column, in the
 third and fourth lines of § 268.7(a)(l).
 "requires treatment prior to land
 disposal, for" should read  "exceeds the
 applicable treatment standards, with",
   52. On page 40641, first column, in the
 fifth line of § 268.7[a){2), "for" should
 read "with".
   53. On page 40641, first column, in the
 seventh line of the certification required
 under § 268.7(a)(2)(ii), "beleive" should
 read "believe".
   54. On page 40641. first column, third
 line  from the bottom, "a petition  under
 § 268.6, or a nationwide" should read
 "an  exemption under § 268.6. an
 extension under § 268.1 (c)(3), or a
 nationwide".
   55. On page 40641. first column, last
 line, "with the waste" should be
 inserted between "forward a notice"
 and "to the land disposal".

-------
                       ' Second
      n              '   raSr*P   a)(4)
    should be added to read as follows:
    il,. i    ,  8enerator determines whether
    the waste ,s restricted based solely on
    his knowledge of the waste, all
    supporting data used to make this
    determination must be maintained on-
    sue in the generator's files."
      57. On page 40641. second column
    paragraph (b) should  read as follows:
      "(b) For wastes with treatment
    standards expressed as concentrations
    in the waste extract (§ 268.41) the
    owner or operator of the treatment
    facility must test the treatment residues
    or an extract of such residues developed
    using the test method  described ta  P
    Sffi  ? l °^h''S Part lo assure tha' the
    treatment residues or extract meet the
    applicable treatment standards. Such
    estfng must be performed according to
   the frequency specified in the facility's
   waste analysis plan as required bv
   § 264.13 or § 265.13. Where the
   treatment residues do not meet the
   treatment standards, the treatment
   facility must comply with the notice
   requirements applicable to generators in
   paragraph (ajfl) of this section if the
   treatment residues will be further
   managed at a different treatment
   facility."
    58. On page 40641. second column.
  sixteenth line,  paragraph  "(lor should
  read paragraph "(l)" and  "with each
  waste shipment" should be inserted
  between "must be sent" and "to the
  land .

  5 498°fhi?9ap.r°641' SueC.°nd column- in
  r«3 l -  -fl Jt £ r Leach sh'Pment" should
  read with each shipment" and "treated
  to the performance standards specified
  m Subpart D" should read "treated in
  compliance with the treatment
  standards specified in Subpart D"
  JX: i°n prage 4?641- second colun^-
  sixth line from the bottom, "signficant"
  should read "significant".
    61. On page 40641. second and third
  columns. §  268.7(c) should read as
  follows:
 i  ' Xc IT116 owner or operator of any
 land disposal facility disposing any
 waste subject to reatrictions under this
 part mus have records of the notice and
 certification specified in either
 paragraph (a) or(b] of this-section. The
 owner or operator of the land disposal
 facility must test the waste or an extract
 of the waste developed using the test
 method described in Appendix I of this
 part to assure that the wastes or
 Sit! A6"1 re?,iduuf are in comPliance
 with the applicable treatment standards.
Such testing must be performed
according to the frequency specified in
    the facility's waste analysis plan as
    required by § 264.13 or § 265.13.

    §268.30  [Corrected]
      62. On page 40641, third column, in the
    first line of § 268.30(a)(3), "The solvent
    waste" should read "The initial
    generator's solvent waste" and in the
    th,rd line of §268.30(a)(3). "or solid-
    should be inserted between "sludge"
    and the comma before "or solvent-
    contaminated soil."
    ' 63. On page 40641. third column,
    seventh line from the bottom, "are
    treated to" should be deleted.
      64. On page 40641. third column.
    § 268.30(c)(2) should read "Persons have
    been granted an exemption from a
    prohibition pursuant to a petition under
    S 268.6, with respect to those wastes and
   units covered by the petition: or".
     65. On page 40641. third column,
   § 268.30(c)(3J should read "Persons have
   been granted an extension to the
   effective date of a prohibition pursuant
   to § 268.5. with respect to those wastes
   covered by the extension."
  §268.31  [Corrected]
    66. On page 40642. first column, in
  § 268.3l(a). "F022," should be inserted
  between "F021." and "F023"

  S ™« S?JiSf?,e 20642' first column-in
  § 268.31(b)(lJ, "are treated to" should be
  deleted.
    68. On page 40642. first column,
  § 268.31(b)(2) should read "Persons have
  been granted an exemption from a
  prohibition pursuant to a petition under
  S 268.6. with respect to those wastes and
  units covered by the petition; or ".
    69. On page 40642. first column
  § 268.31(b)(3) should read "Persons have
  been granted an extension from the
  effective date of a prohibition pursuant
  to § 268.5. with respect to those wastes
  covered by the extension."
   70. On page 40642. first column,  in
  I ?68'3?,(cl'the Period after "specified in
  § 268.5fh}[2) should  be deleted and the
 following language should be added to
 end the sentence: "and all other
 applicable requirements of Parts 264 and
 265 of this chapter."

 §268.41  [Corrected]
  71. On page 40642. first column, in the
 section heading for § 268.41,
 "Standards"-should read "standards"   "
  72. On page 40642. first column,
 thirteenth line from the bottom, "extract
 of a waste treatment" should read
 'extract of a waste or waste treatment"
  73. On page 40642.  second column, the
title of the table should read "TABLE
CCWE—CONSTITUENT
CONCENTRATIONS IN WASTE
t»A I rvACT .
       /4. On page 40642, second column, in
     Table CCWE, "1.2-dichlorobenzene"
     should read "1,2-Dichlorobenzene".
      75. On page 40642, second column, in
    Table CCWE, "Ethyle benzene" should
    read "Ethylbenzene".
      76. On page 40642, second column, in
    TABLE CCWE, "l,2,2-Trichloro-l,2.2-
    tnfluroethane" should read "1,1.2-
    Trichloro-l,2,2-Trifluoroethane".
      77. On page 40642. third column, in
    § 268.44, paragraph (c) should be
    redesignated as paragraph (d), and a
    new paragraph (c) should be added to
    read as follows:
    *****

     "(cj Each petition must include the
   following statement signed by the
   petitioner or an authorized
   representative:

     I certify under penalty of law that I have
   personally examined and am familiar with
   the information submitted in this petition and
   all attached documents, and that, based on
   my inquiry of those individuals immediately
   responsible for obtaining the information. I
   believe that the submitted information is true.
   accurate, and complete. I am aware that
   these are significant penalties for submitting
   false information, including the possibility of
   fine and imprisonment.

  § 268.50 [Corrected]

    78. On page 40642, third column, last
  line, "paragraph (b) of should be
  deleted.
    79. On page 40643, first column, fifth
  and sixth lines, "stores such wastes on-
  site" should read "stores such wastes in
  tanks or containers on-site".
    80. On page 40643, first column,
  § 268.50(a)(2) is revised  to  read as
  follows:
    "(2) An owner/operator  of a
  hazardous waste treatment, storage, or
  disposal facility stores such wastes in
  tanks or containers solely for the
 purpose of the accumulation  of such
 quantities of hazardous waste as
 necessary to facilitate proper recoverv
 treatment, or disposal and:
   "(i) Each container is clearly marked
 to identify its contents and  the date each
 period of accumulation begins;
   "(ii) Each tank is clearly marked with
 Description ofits contents, the	 .	
 quantity of each hazardous waste
 received,  and the date each period of
 accumulation begins, or such
 information for each tank is recorded
 and maintained in the operating record
 at that facility. Regardless of whether
 the tank itself is marked, an owner/
 operator must comply with the operating
 record requirements specified  in § 264 73
or § 265.73."

-------
2W18      Federal Register / Vol. 52. N'o. 107  /  Thursday. June 4.  1087  /  Rules and Regulations
   81. On page 40643, first column, in
 §  268.50(a)(3), "may store" should read
 "stores".
   82. On page 40643, first column, in
 §  268.50(d), "or a nationwide variance
 contained  in Subpart C of this part" is
 inserted following "petition under
 §  268.6" and before "or an approved."

 PART 268, APPENDIX I—
 [CORRECTED]

   83. On page 40645, in the equation
 below Step 7.2.3, the colon after
 "Percent" but before "dry solids" should
 be deleted.
             84. On page 40645. third column, in the
           lust line of Step •7.4.1, "of should read
                              , first column, in the
                            f 8.5, "110" should
  85. Op page 406
second jine of Step
read "100".     '£.
  86. On page 40(346. second column, in
the seventh line of the note to Step 8.8,
"is" should be inserted after "device"
but before "defined".
  87. On page 40647, second column, in
the third line of Step 9.2, "estraction"
should read "extraction".
  88. On page 40648, the equation below
Step 9.11 should read as follows:
             Weight of extraction
                  fluid
20 »% soMs (Step 7 1] n weight of waste filleted (Slep 94
	 or 9.8)	

                  too
§271.1  [Corrected]
  89. On page 40653, third column, in
§ 271.1(j), insert "November 7,1986" In
the first column of Table 1 and revise
the third column of Table 1 to read "51
FR 40572."
  90. On page 40654, first column, in
§ 271.1 (j), revise the fourth column of
Table 2 to read "November 7,1986, 51
FR 40572."

|FR Doc. 87-12723 Filed 6-3-67; 8:45 am]
BILLING COM H60-50-M
40 CFR Parts 704, 795 and 799

[OPTS-42076A; FRL-3213-5]

Anthraquinone; Final Reporting and
Recordkeeping Requirements and
Test Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a final rule,
under section 4 of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA), requiring
manufacturers and processors of 9.10-
anthraquinone (CAS No. 84-65-1),
hereinafter anthraquinone, to perform
testing for water solubility,
bioconcentration, sediment toxicity to
benthic organisms, and acute toxicity to
aquatic organisms. The Agency is also
requiring annual reporting, under section
8 of TSCA, by manufacturers (including
importers) of anthraquinone of the
volume of this substance manufactured
or imported during their latest corporate
fiscal year. The rule precludes
duplicative reporting during those years
that industry must report under the
Inventory Update Rule. Testing for
biodogradation and chronic toxicity to
           aquatic organisms will be required if the
           acute toxicity, sediment toxicity, or
           bioconcentration test results suggest a
           hazard potential and the annual
           production/importation level reaches or
           exceeds 3 million pounds (Ib). This rule
           requires the same testing as EPA's
           proposed rule on anthraquinone.
           PATES: In accordance with 40 CFR 23.5,
           this rule will be promulgated for
           purposes of judicial review at 1 p.m.
           eastern ("daylight" or "standard," as
           appropriate) time on June 18,1987.
           These regulations will become effective
           on July 20, 1987. The incorporation by
           reference of certain publications listed
           in the regulations is approved by the
           Director of the Federal Register as of
           July 20,1987.
           FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
           Edwin A. Klein, Director, TSCA
           Assistance Office (TS-799), Office of
           Toxic Substances, Rm. E-543, 401 M St.,
           SW., Washington, DC 20460,  (202-554-
           1404].
           SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is
           issuing a final test rule under section
           4(a) of TSCA to require chemical fate
           and environmental  effects testing of
           anthraquinone. Under section 8{a) EPA
           will also require manufacturers
           (including importers) to report annually
           to EPA the volume of anthraquinone
           manufactured or imported during their
           latest corporate fiscal year.
           I. Introduction

           A.  Test Rule Development  Under TSCA
            This notice is part of the overall
           implementation of section 4 of TSCA
           (Pub. L 94-469, 90 Stat. 2003 et seq.. 15
           U.S.C. 2601 et seq.]. which contains
           authority for EPA to require the
           development of data relevant to
 assessing the risk to health and the
 environment posed by exposure to
 particuldr chemical substances or
 mixtures.
   Under section 4(a)(l) of TSCA, EPA
 must require testing of a chemical
 substance to develop health or
 environmental data if the Administrator
 finds that:
  (Aj(i) the manufacture, distribution in
 commerce, processing, use, or disposal of a
 chemical substance or mixture, or that any
 combination of such activities, may present
 an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
 environment.
  (ii) there are insufficient data and
 experience upon which the effects of such
 manufacture, distribution in commerce.
 processing, use. or disposal of such substance
 or mixture or of any combination of such
 activities on health or the environment can
 reasonably be determined or predicted, and
  (iii) testing of such substance or mixture
with respect to such effects is necessary to
 develop such data; or
  (B)(i) a chemical substance at mixture is or
 will be produced in substantial quantities.
 and (I) it enters or may reasonably be
 anticipated to enter the environment in
 substantial quantities or (I!) there is or may
 be significant or substantial human exposure
 to such substajice or mixture.
  (iij there are insufficient data and
 experience upon which thejeffects of the
manufacture, distribution irTcommerce.
 processing, use, or disposal of such substance
or mixture or of any combination of such
activities on health or the environment can
reasonably be determined or predicted, and
  (iii) testing of such substance or mixture
 with respect to such effects is necessary to
 develop such data.

  For a more complete understanding of
 the statutory section 4 findings, the
reader is directed to the Agency's first
proposed test rule package published in
the Federal Register of July 18,1980 (45
FR 48510), for an in-depth discussion of
the general issues applicable to this
action.
B. Regulatory History

  As published in the Federal Register
of November 29,1984 (49 FR 46931 j, the
Interagency Testing Committee (ITC)
designated anthraquinone for priority
testing consideration and recommended
chemical fate testing, including water
solubility and biodegradation, and
ecological effects testing, including
acute toxicity to fish, aquatic
invertebrates, and algae, and chronic
toxicity to aquatic organisms.
conditional upon results of acute tests.
The Agency evaluated the ITC
recommendation and on April 23,1985
held a public meeting to announce its
preliminary testing decision. Subsequent
to the public meeting. Mobay Chemical
Corp. submitted confidential business

-------

-------