43874 ' Federal Regstet / Vot.* 56.- ffo." 1?2 / • Thursday.- Sefftembef S. 199t V Ruks
3
action will be effective on fBQ day* from
today).
f&oMctiorrEPAi* approving Rhode
Island's request to redesignate
Providence to attaJamest far carbon
monoxide.
Under B tLSjC. 805(b). I certify that
mis SIP revision will not have a •
ygmfiffflTrt economic impact on a
• substantial number of small pnrlffoft.
(See 46 FR 8709.)
This action has been classified as a
Table 2 action by the Regional
Administrator under the procedures
published in the Federal Register on
-January 19,1989 (54 FR 2214-22251.
The Office of Management and Budget
has exempted this ride from the
requirements of section 3 of Executive
Order 12291. ~~
- Nothing in mis action should be
construed as permitting or allowing or .£
establishing a precedent for any future
request for revision to any State
implementation plan. Each request for
revision to the State implementation
plan shaB be considered separately in
light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to
relevant statutory and regulatory
requirements.
Under section 3Q7(b)(l} of the dean
Air Act petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by November 4,1991.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be fifed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(bH2).)
List of Subjects m 40 CFR Part ftl
Environmental protection. Air
pollution control. National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: Auguet ZI, 1991.
JufieBebs*.
Regional Administrator. Regfan I
40 CFR part 81, subpart 340, is
amended as follows:
PART 81-1 AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 V&C. 7401-7342. uriew
otherwise noted
2. In 5 81.340 the attainment status
designation table for Carbon Monoxide
is revised to read as foBows: •
|»1340 ffeodetetend
RHODE tetAio—CO
DwignatBdi
DOM not meat
Croat t»
.ctassifttd or
bettor Own
IER.DOC. 91-21259 Fifed ff-Muaas tmj
40CFRPsrt266
{FRL-3MO-4*
Hazardous Waste Management
System: Identification and Listing el
Hazardous Waste; Burning of
Hazardous Wast* to Boiler* and
Industrie* Furnaces
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Administrative stay of
applicability and amendment to final
rule. ____
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency is today announcing an
administrative stay of the permitting
standards for boilers and industrial
furnaces adopted pursuant to the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (58 FR 7206, Feb. ZL1991) as they
apply to coke ovens burning certain
hazardous wastes from the coke by-
products recovery process. The primary
effect of the stay is to halt the
application of industrial furnace
standards to coke ovens when they
reprocess these hazardous wastes while
the Agency can evaluate comments on a
. pending regulatory proposal to exclude
such wastes from subtitle C Jurisdiction
when recycled by reprocessing m coke
ovens. Section 266.100(a) is amended by
adding a note to reflect this
administrative stay.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 21,1991.
ADDRESSES: The official record for this
administrative stay is identified at
Docket number F-91-CBS-FFFFF and to
located in the RCRA Docket, room
. M2427.401M Street, SW.. Washington,
DC, 20460. The public may make an
appointment in order to review docket
materials by calling (202} 260-9327. The
docket is open for inspection from » aj&.
to 4 DJ3L, Monday through Friday,
excluding Federal holidays. The public
may copy material from any regulatory
docket at a cost of $0.15 per page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For general information contact the
RCRA/Superfund Hotline, toll free, at
(800) 424-9346, or at (703) 820-8810. For
technical information concerning tins
notice, contact He, Ron Joeephaon,
Environmental Engineer, Office of Solid
Waste (OS-333). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 401M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460. (202) 260-4770.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's notice are Baled HI
the foBowtag octiine:
L Background
n. Justification for Administrative Stay
A. Process DesuiiptioB
B. Agency Action
IB. Effect of the Adsinutnti** Say
A-ESectOBtaduatoy
B. Public fartere»t
IV. Conclusion
V. Effect on State Authorization
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
L Background.
In the final rule establishing
permitting standards for boilers and
industrial furnaces burning hazardous
waste (BIF rule, February 21* 1991,56 FR
7206), the Agency promulgated an
exclusion from the definition of sofid1
waste for coke and coal tar produced
from EPA Hazardous Number K087
(decanter tank tar sludge from coking
operations) and for the process of
producing coke and coal tar by recycling
this waste in coke ovens. See SB FR
7203. In the final BIF rule, the Agency
also raised the issue of other hazardous
' wastes from'the coke by-products
recovery process that may be processed
in the coke oven so the Agency could, ff
necessary, modify the exclusion. M. at n.'
94. . -,
The issue of other wastes being
processed in a coke oven was raised
again by the Agency on July 28.1991 (56
FR 35758-35788) when we proposed new
listings of wastes generated by the coke
by-products industry. In the notice, foe
Agency proposed to add exclusions from
the definition of solid waste {under 40
CFR 261.4(8)) for additional coke by-
products wastes recycled into the coke
oven or mixed with coal tar.
In both the BIF rule and the coke by-
products proposed listings, the Agency
summarized the reasons for the
exclusions as follows:
(I) The wastes being recycled have
• many constituents similar to the raw
material (coal) for the coking process.
01} The non-K087 wastes are very •
similar to K087 and no incremental
environmental risk would result from.
their recycling by coking,
(iii) Recycling of K087 via the coke
oven is already excluded (5 261.4(a){10),
-------
Feddral Register / -Vol. 56; No. 172' /-.Trmrtday; -September1 -5/1691'/ frule^ ancf Regulations 43875
56 FR 7206), and recycling of these.
wastes appeari similar, and . • •.
(iv) Regulation of coke oven emissions
under RCRA would interfere with the
regulatory scheme the Agency is
developing under sections 112(d)(8) and
112(I)(8) of the Clean Air Act (See 56 FR
7208,56 ER 35778-80.) ,-
The comment period on the proposed
additional exclusions ended on August1
16,1991. EPA is presently considering
these comments in the course of
developing final rules. However, the BIF
rule takes effect on August 21, and
absent some type of administrative
action, this would mean that any coke
oven reprocessing a by-product
hazardous waste except K087 could only
do so by complying with the BIF
standards.
n. Justification for Administration Stay
The Agency has studied this industry
extensively over the past few years and
has presented the results in various
publications such as the 1980
Background Document to the K087
tisting,"the proposed and final BIF rule,
the National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
coke ovens under old section 112 of the
Clean Air Act (54 FR 38044. September
14,1989), the NESHAP for benzene
waste operations (55 FR 8346, March 7,
1990), and the new coke by-products
listing proposal With such information.
ETA can briefly summarize technical
and policy reasons for issuing this
administrative stay. <
A. Process Description
Coke used in the iron and steel
industry is manufactured in coke ovens
via the thermal destructive distillation of
coal. In a typical process, 60-70% of the
coal is made into coke, while the
remainder .of the original mass is
converted into "coke oven gas." The gas
undergoes successive cooling and
distillation steps, ending up as a .
"cleaned" gas that is used, among other
things, for providing heat to the coke
ovens. The cooling and distillation steps
lead to the production of coal tar, light
oil. and naphthalene, which in turn are
sent to tar refiners or organic chemical
distillers for the production of end use
chemicals.
The recovery of coal tar at a coke
oven is accomplished by a process that
also involves the generation of
hazardous waste, most of which is
decanter tank tar sludge (EPA
Hazardous Waste No.-K087). Other tar
recovery wastes are sump sludges and
tar storage tank bottoms, proposed to be
listed as K141 and K142 in the July 26,
1991 notice. In addition, the process for
light oil and naphthalene recovery
: involve the generation of various
residuals (proposed K143, K144, and
K145 in the July 26,1991 proposal). The
refining leads to the generation of tar
storage tank bottoms and certain other
distillation residues (proposed K147 and
K148 in the July 26,1991 proposal). The
non-listed (proposed K141-K145, K147,
and K148) residuals are similar in
composition to K087 waste, and many of
them exhibit the Toxitity Characteristic
for benzene.
Recycling of the wastes to the coke
ovens is done by pumping or otherwise
transporting the wastes to a tank or
similar structure where the waste is
heated and often mixed with a diluent
organic fluid to facilitate uniformity,
consistency, and proper viscosity of the
waste or mixture. As a part of this
process, the facilities (or their on-site
contractors) process the wastes in ball
mills and other devices to aid in
providing requisite waste consistency to
facilitate its eventual reinsertion into the
coke oven. Temporary storage of the
material to be recycled is often
accomplished in "heated boxes"
adjacent to the point at which the
wastes are combined with the coal feed.
The waste(s) is then usually sprayed or
combined with coal as it is being
conveyed into the coke ovens. The
industry has found that waste recycling
does not affect the quality of the product
(coke), any of the by-products, or the
emissions from the process. The coke
by-products proposed listing notice (56
FR 35777-35781. July 28,1991) describes
the recycling practices in greater detail.
B. Agency Action
EPA has decided to issue an
administrative stay of the BIF rule .
insofar as it would apply to a coke oven
reprocessing non-KOB7 hazardous
wastes generated by the coke
byproducts recovery process. This
means that on August 21, coke ovens
may continue to process residues from
the byproducts recovery process that
exhibit the TC without the coke oven
having to comply with the BIF
regulations. As explained below, the
Agency is taking this step in order to
allow proper evaluation of the
comments on the proposed rule, to avoid
disrupting beneficial recycling practices
that pose no incremental environmental
risk over current practice, to preserve
the current regulatory status quo, and to
avoid undermining the detailed
regulatory scheme for coke ovens
recently enacted under the amended
Clean Air Act
As explained in the July 26,1991:
proposal, the TC-hazardous wastes from
coke byproducts recovery are
practically identical to K087 in terms of
composition and constituent - - .
concentrations, and are handled
identically to K087. Reprocessing the • •
wastes is just Wee reprocessing K087 .
waste. The process involves the same
equipment and chemical additives, and
for practical purposes is one and the
same.
The Agency is always concerned that
removing one environmental risk will
increase another. Therefore, the Agency
does not want another environmental
medium to incur increased pollutant
loading as a result of a recycling
activity. This will probably not be the .
result of staying the BIF rule's
applicability to non-K087 coke
byproducts hazardous waste. After
considering the processes involved, the
Agency believes that air emissions will
not increase in amount or toxicity as a
result of this activity. The waste added
to the raw material is a small fraction of
the coking process feed and the process
itself can successfully consume (by
thermal destructive distillation) the ,
combined raw material and waste. .
Indeed, the TC byproducts wastes
comprise a small percentage of the total
feed even hi comparison with decanter
tank tar sludge (K087). It appears
anomalous if burning this small amount
of waste which is practically identical .to
K087, and is co-processed with K087,
would subject the coke oven to
regulation under the BIF rule when
burning K087 waste itself does not.
The Agency is also concerned that
RCRA regulations do not disrupt other ..
regulatory programs and Congressional
mandates. See RCRA section 1006. In
this regard, the amended Clean Air Act
establishes an elaborate scheme for
regulating air emissions from coke • .-
ovens, consisting of technology-based
and (eventually) risk based standards
implemented under a phased schedule.
CAA sections 112 (d)(8) and (i)(8). For
many coke ovens, compliance with risk-
based standards is deferred until 2020.
Compliance with the initial technology- ,
based standards commences in 1993
with upgraded standards for certain
ovens to occur in 1998. Imposing the
risk-based and technology-based BIF .
standards on such units now could
effectively abrogate this carefully-
considered scheme by requiring •
compliance with a different potentially
inconsistent set of standards in 1991.
The Agency questions whether this '
disruption of the Clean Air Act process
is warranted given that coke oven
emissions will be identical whether or '
not these TC coke byproducts wastes
are reprocessed. The Agency certainly is
convinced that this potential disruption
is unwarranted while a regulatory <'
-------
43676 federal Register / Vol. 56, No.'172 / Tharsday.* September" 5. W91 J Rates'*nd
pending.
m. Effect of fee Admmbtraffve Stay
It appears that regelating col* ovens
processing TC coke byproduct* wastes
would probably cause industry to stop
recycling these materials (or subject the
units to regulation under the BIF rule).
Current information available to the
Agency indicates that the industry is
currently recycling many of these
wastes (see 56 FR -35786, July 26,1991].
The Agency in fact believes that the ~
data in the coke by-products proposal
are somewhat outdated and tend to ; .
understate the extent of recycling
activities occurring in the industry.
In addition, the Agency has made a
preliminary finding that the wastes are
useful to the industry when they are
recycled with.the raw material (coal).
Similarly, the Agency has proposed a
finding mat the recycled wastes add
material varae without affecting the
coke product and without leading to the-
generation of increased ah* emission*
from the, coking operations.
Industry sources have indicated to the
Agency mat forcing compliance with BIF
rule standards because of recycling wffl
have a negative impact within the
industry and to fee environment The
disincentive to recycle posed by
compliance with the BIF rule wiH fead to
disposal of the wastes instead (not a
desirable option in this case largely
because of loss of recycling benefits and
increased waste transport and handling)
and will lead to greater costs for the iron
and steel industry to transport and
dispose of these wastes as well.
Currently, the benzene NESHAP
imposed pursuant to old section 112 of
the Clean Air Act standards
promulgated by the Agency ta 1988 are
forcing the industry to construct
upgraded equipment at coking fa^ttjtfcg
As a result of these activities, tanks and
other process equipment are being shut
down for deanout and preventive
maintenance, leading to increased
generation of the TC byproducts waste*.
The cost of handling these wastes would
increase significantly if the recycrmg
option were not present as a mesas of
managing these wastes.
EPA also does not anticipate advene
effects on the pnbh'c as a result of
issuing this administrative stay. The
information mat was before tbe Agency
when it proposed the ""fafkm on July
26 suggests that there will be no
incremental increase hi air emissions
resulting from the practice. -The stay will
also protect the resource recovery
benefits of reprocessing coke oven
byproducts wastes. The Agency notes
that this stay will preserve the state*
quo (the traditional function of * stay).
and allow sufficient time to review the
public comment on mis issue; serving
the public interest The Agency ako
believes- that in assessing vhimate
public interest one mast aaaame tkst
the air emissions compliance schedule ''
reflected in amended section 1X2 of the
CAA reflects Congress' view of &e .
public interest and that interest may
best be served by not disrupting the
Congressional scheme to control coke
oven emissjoos. ,, ' •'
IV. Conclusion
EPA has decided to stay the
applicability of the BIF rate to coke
ovens burning TC hazardous waste*
from the coke byproducts recovery
process while EPA reviews the public
comments on this issue. The stay will-
remain in effect while the Agency
considers the comments on the proposed
' rule. The Agency is issuing this
administrative stay pursuant to 5 U^C.
705 which provides that aa agency nay
postpone the effective date of action
taken by it when justice so requires,
pending judicial review. (A number of
steel industry members have petitioned
for review of the BIF rule on this issue,}
For the reasons gives above, the Agency
believes that this standard is satisfied
here. In addition, the Agency can take
final administrative action on the
proposed rule hi a relatively short time,
and is under court order to issue a final
rule no later than July of 1992. and so is
in a position to act quickly should it
reconsider any feature of this action.
The Agency notes that devices that
are a part of the recycling process are
already exempt from regulation mder 40
CFR 261.8(cXl J. In the specific case of
coke by-products wastes, discrete unit*
such as ball mffl« and. processing tank*
would meet the provision* of this
existing exemption when ued to
pretreat the coke by-products recovery
waste before mixing with coal tar or
direct reinsertion to the coke oven. The
exemption does not apply to a recycfing
process that involves land disposal, nor
does this exemption necessarily apply
when media contaminated with listed
wastes are charged to the coke oven
(See 55 FR 22671, June X1980), Thu*, ma
administrative stay issued today does
not apply to such already-exempt
activities.
Commenters to the Jury 28 proposed
rule also have questioned whether the
mixture and derived from rules apply to
residue* from the coke by-products
recovery process. The question was
raised because the regulatory exclusion
promulgated on February 21,1981 (4O ••
CFR 261.4(8^10), 56 FR 7206) doe* not
specifically exclude such residues.
Clearly, the Agency interprets the
exclusion as cutting off appacabMity of
tire derived from rule to other coke by-
products residues. If the derived fiom .
rule applied, it would hsrve been
unnecessary for EPA to have proposed
listing these wastes fa the Jury 26 * '
proposal (or for Congress to have - ~
required EPA to determine whether to
list these wastes in section 9001{eH2}).
The language of the rule likewise makes
clear that the derived from rote does not
apply, as me coke oven process is
excluded from regulation, retting off die
derived from rule from that point
onward. Thus, the coke by-products
wastes proposedfor feting in the July 26
notice are not currently covered by the
K087 waste code.
V. Effect on State Authorization
The effects of the administrative stay
are uniform for all states, as the BIF rule
is based on Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments JHSWAJ authority.
As explained in the BIF rule (56 FR .
7204, February 21,1991). EPA considers .
most of the rule to be based on HSWA
authority. HSWA-based permitting
standards take effect simultaneously in
all states, regardless of authorization ,
status. With respect to these HSWA-
based requirements, the effect of the
administrative stay is to defer in all
stales EPA's implementation and
enforcement of these requirements as •
they apply to coking facilities, beyond
August 21,1991, in accordance with the
administrative stay provisions.
According to the schedule for state
program revisions contained in 40 CFE
271£t(e}, the February 21,1991 BIF rule
is subject to a July 1, 1992 deadline {July
1,1993 if a statutory change is required}
for states to modify their bazardoes
waste programs and thereafter seek
approval from EPA for the program
revision. Since the administrative stay '
will in all probability no.t extend any
effective date for a very long period of
time. EPA considers it unlikely mat any '
state will have received approval front •
EPA to implement the February 21,1981
regulation under RCRA authority with
earlier or more stringent effective date*
as they apply to coke oven* than those
set out in this stay. Nevertheless, state*
may modify their hazardous waste
programs to adopt the BIF rule, even a*
it applies to coke ovens, in the interim.
While EPA encourages states to Inflow
the deferral of the effectiveness of the
BIF rule as ft applies to coke ovens
announced in this stay, state* may elect!
to implement the BIF rule with effective
date earlier than the Agency would Ike
under this stay, as a matter of state law.
Moreover, EPA would approve state
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 172 / Tftiarsday. September 5. 1991 / Rules and Regulations 43877
program with earlier dates became
they -would be more stringent than the
Federal program.
*.'••' •.
VL PjpecwDilt P«^'"*H
This administrative stay does net
contain any information collection
reqairemente subject to OMB review
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1980. MITS.C. 3501 efseg. - -•
List of subjects in 40 CFR part 296 -
Energy. Hazardous waste, Petroleum.
Recycling. Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: August 21. 1991.
F.HMoyHabicbt
AetiiyJlHrnfnfefmfnr' .
PART266-STANDAROS FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF SPECIFIC
HAZARDOUS WASTES AND SPECIFIC
TYPES OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
1. The authority citation-far part 266
continues to read as follows:
AttdwritjRSectinns 1006, 2002{a3. 3004. and
3014 of the Solid Waste Disposal Art. as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976. as amended (42 U.S.C. •
8905. eau(a). §321 and 6834).
2. Section 266.100 is amended by
revising paragraph fa] to read as
follows:
§266.100 Appncabmty.
(a) The regulations of this subpart
apply to hazardous waste burned or
processed in a boiler or industrial
furnace (as defined in 1 260.10 of this
chapter) irrespective of the purpose of
burning or processing, except as
provided by paragraphs (b), (cj, and (d)
of this section. In this subpart, the term
"burn" means burning for energy
recovery or destruction, or processing
for materials recovery or as an
ingredient. The emissions standards of
§5 266.104. 286.10S. 286.106. and 286.1O7
apply to facilities operating wider
interim status or under a RCRA permit
as specified in i§ 268.102 and 268.103.
Not*: Thli provision does sot apply to coke
ovens processing coke by-products wastes
exhibiting tbeToxirity Characteristic
identified in 1 28L24 pending completion of a
rulemsklng proposed on July 26. 1981 f 56 FR
35787]. When (hat ndemaking is complete,
EPA wfll remove mis note.}
[FR Doc. OT-a»ZlFHed «-*-«; MS mm]
•NJJNd CODE SM04MI ' '
40CFRPart721
[OPTS-50575B; fiRL-3802-0]
Alkane Polyol Phosphate Ester,
Revocation of a Significant New Use
Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency JEPA).
ACTION: Final rule.'
SUMMARY: EPA is revoking the
significant new use rule (SNUR) at40
CFR 721.288 that was promulgated under
section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances
Control Act fTSCA] for the above ,
chemical substance baaed on receipt of
new data. The data indicate that the
substance will not present an
unreasonable risk of injury to human
health and further regulation under
section 5 of TSCA is not warranted at
this time.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of
•this rule is November 4.1991.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David KKng, Acting Director. TSCA
Assistance Office (TS-799). Office of
Toxic Substances. Environmental
Protection Agency, on. EB-44.401M St.
SW.. Washington, DC 20460, telephone
(202) 554-1404, TDD {202] 554-0551,
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: in the
Federal Register of April 24,1990, (55 FR
17376) EPA issued a SNUR establishing
significant new uses for alkane polyoi
phosphate ester. Because of additional
toxicity data EPA has received for this
substance. EPA proposed to revoke mis
SNUR in the Federal Register of
February 27,1991 £55 FR 8172).
L Rulemaking Record
The record for the rule which EPA is
revoking was established in docket
number OPTS-50575 (P-89-448). This
record includes information considered
by the Agency to developing this rule
and includes the test data to which the
Agency has responded with this
revocation. .
IL Background
The Agency proposed the revocation
of the SNUR for this substance in the
Federal Register of February 27,1991 (55
FR 8173). The background and reasons
for the revocation of the SNUR are set
forth in the preamble to the proposed
revocation. The Agency received no
public comment concerning the
proposed revocation. As a result EPA is
revoking this SNUR. . •
IH. Objectives and Ratioaale of <
Proposing Revocation of the Ride
During review uf the PMN submitted
for the chemical substance that is the
subject of this revocation. EPA
concluded that regulation was
warranted under section 5{e) of TSCA
pending the development of Information
sufficient to make & reasoned evaluation
bf the health effects of the substance.
and EPA identified the tests considered
necessary to evaluate the risks of the
substance. The basis for such findings is
referenced in the proposed revocation of
this rule. Based on these findings, a
section S(e) consent order was
negotiated with the PMN submitter and
a SNUR was promulgated. EPA
reviewed the toxicity testing conducted
by the PMN submitter for the substance
and determined mat the jnformation
available was sufficient to make a
reasoned evaluation of the health effects
of the substance. EPA concluded that
for the purposes of TSCA section 5. the
substance will not present an
unreasonable risk and subsequently
revoked the section 5(e) consent order.
The revocation of SNUR provisions for
this substance designated herein is
consistent with the revocation of the
section 5(e) order. In light of the above
EPA is revoking SNUR provisions for
this chemical substance. EPA will no
longer require notice of any company's'
intent to manufacture, import or process
this substance.
List of Subjects hi 40 CFR Part 721
Chemicals, Environmental protection.
Hazardous materials, Recordkeeping
and reporting requirements, Significant
new uses.
Dated: August 28,1991.
Victor J.Kimra.
Acting AssJrtaM Administrator for Pesticides
and Toxic Substances.
Therefore, 40 CFR part 721 is amended
as follows:
PART 721—(AMENDED]
. 3. The authority citation for part 721 :
will continue to read as follows:
Authority: 15 US.C. 2604 and 2607.
{721288 {Removed]
2. By removing 5 721288.
[FR Doc. 91-21260 Fikd 9-4-91; 8:45 am]
MLUNa CODE UtO-tO-f
40 CFR Part 721
[OPTS-50582D; FIU.-3893-3]
Polymer of Malelc Anhydride,
Benzenedlcarfaoxyflc Acid and
Disubstltuted Alkylamine; Revocation"
of a Significant New Use Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
------- |