Tl
* .11
n
USGD OIL
nuinmenT STHIIDRRDS
r^
•7A
-------
Used Oil Management
Standards Training
(
AGENDA: Tuesday, April 5,1994
, i
8:30 AM SECTION ONE: Overview of Used Oil Management Standards,
9:00 AM ( SECTION TWO: Used Oil Definition and Applicability
• Definitions
• Mixtures
9:45 AM BREAK
10:00 AM Discussion Questions
10:30 AM Review of Discussion Questions
.11:00 AM SECTION TWO: Used Oil Definition and Applicability (continued)
• Used Oil Rebuttable Presumption
• Materials Derived From Used Oil
12:00 NOON LUNCH
1:00 PM SECTION TWO: Used Oil Definition and Applicability (continued)
• Exemptions From Used Oil Management Standards
1:30 PM Discussion Questions
2:00 PM Review of Discussion Questions
2:30 PM SECTION THREE: Gendt^Descriptioft Q£§^Qil
• Generators >v ,
• Collection Centers and Agf&vgalion Points .,...,
• Transporters .and Transfer facilities
2:45 PM BREAK
3:00 PM "SECTION THREE: General De^pJpiBiof Used Oil.
• Processors and Re-refiners •
• Burners
• Marketers .
3:30PM Discussion Questions v
4:00 PM ADJOURN
-------
AGENDA: Wednesday, April 6,1994
8:30 AM Review of Discussion Questions
9:00 AM SECTION FOUR: Requirements Common to Most Used Oil Handlers
• Storage
• Release Response
• Secondary Containment
• Notification
• Tracking
9:45 AM SECTION FIVE: Requirements Specific to Certain Used Oil Handlers
• Generators,
10:00 AM BREAK
10:15 AM SECTION FIVE: Requirements Specific to Certain Used Oil Handlers (continued)
• Processors/Re-refiners
* Burners
• Marketers
10:45 AM Discussion Questions
11:15 AM Review of Discussion Questions
11:45 AM SECTION SIX: Disposal and Use Constituting Disposal
• Disposal of Used Oil
• Used Oil Filters
\
• Use as a Dust Suppressant
• Contacts for More Information
12:00 NOON ADJOURN
-------
950B9400
1
Used Oil Management
Standards Training
CONTENTS
SECTION 1
Overview of Used Oil Management Standards
Used Oil Rulemakings and Technical Correction Notices 1-3
Effective Date 1-13
SECTION 2
Used Oil Definition and Applicability
Used Oil Definition 2-3
Used Oil Determination Flowchart 2-5
Mixtures of Used Oil with Other Materials 2-17
Rebuttable Presumption of Mixing 2-31
Rebuttable Presumption Analysis Flowchart 2-33
Materials Derived From Used Oil 2-38
Exemptions From Used Oil Management Standards 2-42
SECTION 3
General Description of Used Oil Handlers
Used Oil Generators 3-4
Used Oil Collection Centers and Aggregation Points 3-7
Used Oil Transporters and Transfer Facilities 3-11
Used Oil Processors and Re-refiners 3-16
Used Oil Burners 3-30
Used Oil Marketers 3-36
i
-------
SECTION 4
Requirements Common to Most Used Oil Handlers
Storage Provisions 4-6
Response to Releases 4-8
Secondary Containment 4-9
Notification Requirements 4-10
Tracking . . 4-12
SECTION 5
Requirements Specific to Certain Used Oil Handlers
Recycling Presumption 5-3
Used Oil Generators 5-4
Used Oil Processors and Re-refiners 5-8
Used Oil Burners 5-20
Used Oil Marketers 5-22
SECTION 6
Disposal and Use Constituting Disposal
Disposal of Used Oil 6-3
Used Oil Filters 6-5
Use as a Dust Suppressant 6-8
Contacts for More Information 6-10
APPENDIX 1
Discussion Questions
Section 2 Questions
Section 3 Questions
Section 4 Questions
Section 5 Questions
Descriptions of the Hazardous Waste Characteristics
-------
APPENDIX 2
Federal Register Notices
March 4,1994
June 17,1993
May 3,1993
March 23,1993
September 10,1992
May 20, 1992
September 23,1991'
June 27, 1988
November 29,1985
APPENDIX 3
Used Oil Correspondence and Memoranda
Definition of Used Oil
Rebuttable Presumption
Used Oil Mixtures
Used Oil Transportation
Definition of Used Oil Processor
Used Oil Burning
Used Oil Filters
Miscellaneous
APPENDIX 4
Questions and Answers From the RCRA Hotline
APPENDIX 5
Additional Used Oil Information
State Used Oil Contacts
Environmental Fact Sheet: Management Standards Issued to Control
Potential Risks From Recycled Used Oil—No Hazardous Waste Listing
Environmental Fact Sheet: No Hazardous Waste Listing for Used Oil
That Is Being Disposed
Total Nonhousehold Facilities Handling Used Oil in 1991
Revised 1988 Used Oil Flows in the U.S.
Automobile Oil Flow Chart
iii
-------
Guide to the Symbols in This Training Manual
The majority of the information in this training manual is taken from the
September 10,1992, Federal Register notice, which promulgates the
used oil management standards. Some of the information, however, is
taken from other Federal Register notices. The following symbols are
used throughout the manual to identify information from the Technical
Correction Notices of May 3, 1993, and June 17, 1993, and the Final
Rule of March 4, 1994, respectively:
J
TG
-6/17/93,
-------
» r*
5*
n
it
(0 O
Section 1
Overview of Used Oil
Management Standards
-------
Section 1
Overview of
Used Oil
Management
Standards
Notes:
1-1
-------
Section Overview
• Used oil rulemakings
• Technical correction notices
• Issues under litigation
• Effective dates and
authorization issues
Notes:
1-2
-------
November 29,1985, Final Rule
(50 FR 49164)
First of four final rules that regulate used oil:
• Provided controls for used oil marketing and
burning for energy recovery activities
• Prohibited burning of off-
specification used oil in
nonindustrial boilers and
furnaces
• Incorporated in 40 CFR
Part 266, Subpart E1
Notes:
1 As of March 8,1993, Part 266, Subpart E was removed. These provisions
were eventually transferred to Part 27^.
The rule requires marketers and burners to notify EPA of their activities
and to comply with certain notice and recordkeeping requirements.
HSWA required EPA to propose whether to identify or list used automobile
and truck crankcase oil by November 8,1985.
The rule proposes listing all used oil as hazardous waste (50 FR 49258).
On November 19,1986 (51 FR41900), EPA issued a decision not to list
used oil that is recycled as a hazardous waste because of the stigma
associated with a listed hazardous waste.
The rule also proposes management standards for generators and
transporters of recycled oil and owners and operators of used oil recycling
facilities (50 FR 49212).
A copy of the November 29,1985, final rule (50 FR49164) can be found in
Appendix 2.
1-3
-------
May 20,1992, Final Rule
(57 FR 21524)
Second rule that regulates used oil:
m Decided not to list used oil destined
for disposal as a hazardous waste
• Categorically exempted non-terne
plated used oil filters from the
definition of a hazardous waste at
40 CFR §261.4
Notes:
• EPA concluded that any plausible mismanagement of used oil destined for
disposal is addressed by current requirements (e.g., UST, NPDES, storm
water, municipal solid waste landfill rule). If used oil destined for disposal
exhibits a characteristic, it is regulated as a hazardous waste.
• EPA deferred a decision on listing and management standards for used oil
that is recycled and on whether or not to list residuals from the processing
and re-refining of used oil.
• A copy of the May 20,1992, final rule (57 FR 21524) can be found in
Appendix 2, and the Environmental Fact Sheet can be found in Appendix 5.
1-4
-------
September 10,1992, Final Rule
(57 FR 41566)
Third rule that regulates used oil:
m Decided not to list used oil destined
for recycling as a hazardous waste
• Promulgated management
standards for used oil destined
for recycling
• Incorporated in a new
40 CFR Part 2 79
Notes:
• EPA concluded that the risks associated with the mismanagement of used
oil during recycling can be adequately controlled through management
standards.
• The rule is designed to meet the statutory mandate to address hazards while
considering the effects of regulation on the used oil recycling industry.
• A copy of the September 10,1992, final rule (57 FR41566) can be found in
Appendix 2, and the Environmental Fact Sheet can be found in Appendix 5.
1-5
-------
Creation of New 40 CFR Part 279
• Subparts A-F and I are RCRA provisions
• 40 CFR Part 279, Subparts G and H, replace
40 CFR Part 266, Subpart E, which covered
standards for burners and marketers of
used oil
• Former 40 CFR Part 266, Subpart E, contained
HSWA requirements for burning used oil for
energy recovery and marketing used oil fuel
• Most provisions in Subparts G and H are
HWSA1
Notes:
1 Only those provisions in 40 CFR Part 279, Subparts G and H, that appear in
Table 1 are HSWA.
1-6
-------
TABLE 1
PROVISIONS MOVED FROM PART 266 TO PART 279
Former Provisions of 40 CFR
Part 266, Subpart E
§266.40(a)
§266.40(b)
§266.40(c) (rebuttable presumption)
§§266.40(d)(l) and (2)
§266.40(e)
§§266.41(a)(l) and (2)
§§266.41(bXD and (2)
§266.42(a)
§266.42(b)
§266.42(c)
§266.43(a)(l)
§266.43(a)(2)
§266.43(b)(l)
§266.43(b)(2)
§266.43(b)(3)
§§266.43(b)(4XiHv)
§266.43(b)(4)(vi)
§§266.43(b)(5Xl) and (ii)
§266.43(bX6XO
§266.43(b)(6Xii)
§266.44(a)
§266.44(b)
Recertified Provisions Within
40 CFR Part 279
§279.60(a)
§279.1'
§§279.63(a),(b),and(c)2
§§279.10(bX2) and (3)
§279.11
§279.60(c)
§279.71
§279.61(a)
§279.23(a)
§279.60(a)
§279.70(a)
§279.60(a)
§§279.70(a) and (b)(l)
§279.70(5X2)
§279.72(a)
§279.71
§279.73(a)
§279.74(a)
not included
§279.75(a)
§§279.74(b) and (c)
§279.72(5)
§279.74(a)
§279.75(5)
§279.61(a)
§279.23(a)
§279.62(a)
'Contains additional new definitions that were not included in the 1985 rule.
Paragraphs (c)(l) and (2) of §279.63 contain new exemptions from the rebuttable presumption that
were not part of the 1985 rule.
1-7
-------
Major Regulatory Provisions of
Part 279
Subpart A
Subpart B
Subpart C
Subpart D
Subpart E
Subpart F
Subpart G
Subpart H
Subpart I
279.1
279.10
279.20
279.30
279.40
279.50
279.60
279.70
279.80
Definitions
Applicability
Generators
Collection center and aggregation points
Transporters and transfer facilities
Processors and re-refiners
Off-specification burners
Fuel marketers
Use as a dust suppressant and disposal
Notes:
1-8
-------
Technical Amendments and
Corrections to Used Oil
Management Standards
EPA promulgated a Technical
Correction Notice on May 3, 1993
(58 FR 26420), to correct technical
and typographical errors and clarify
amendments
Notes:
The TCN was promulgated to fulfill several needs, including:
• Clarifying the different situations concerning enforcement for states
that have authorization for the HS WA provisions.
• Adding a criminal enforcement authority under §271.16.
• Clarifying that residuals or sludges from processing are used oil.
• Clarifying the definition of marketer.
• Complementing Part 761 TSCA requirements for management of PCB-
contaminated used oil.
• Clarifying the applicability of Part 279 to materials with no free-
flowing oil.
A copy of the May 3,1993, Technical Amendments and Corrections
(58 FR 26420) can be found in Appendix 2.
indicates that the points explained on the slide may not appear
the September 10,1992, Federal Register notice but are: partially
or wholly addressed in the May 3,1993, Technical Correction
Notice.
1-9
-------
Technical Amendments and Corrections
to Used Oil Management Standards (cont.)
EPA promulgated a Technical Correction Notice
on June 17,1993 (58 FR 33341), to correct errors
in the May 3,1993, Federal Register notice:
• Restored original language from the September
10, 1992, final rule dealing with notification
requirements for used oil handlers
Notes:
A copy of the June 17,1993, Technical Amendment and Corrections can be
found in Appendix 2.
r^v\.
TCN
6/17/93^" indicates that the point explained on the slide may not appear in
the September 10,1992, Federal Register notice but are partially or
wholly addressed in the June 17,1993, Technical Correction Notice.
1-10
-------
Petitions Filed for Review of
September 10,1992, Rule
• American Petroleum Institute
Raised the issue that EPA did not address proposed exemptions
for used oil inserted in the petroleum refining process
• Edison Electric Institute
Challenged the types of activities encompassed by the definition
of used oil processor
Hazardous Waste Treatment Council, Natural
Resources Defense Council, American Petroleum
Re-refiners, and Safety-Kleen
Challenged EPA's failure to list used oil destined for disposal and
used oil destined for recycling, as well as some of the specific
management standards
Notes:
indicates that these points on this slide are addressed in the
March 4, 1994, final rule.
The March 4,1994, rule responds to issues raised by the American Petroleum
Institute and Edison Electric Institute.
1-11
-------
March 4,1994, Final
Rule (59 FR 10550)
Fourth rule that regulates used oil:
m Clarified that the existing crude oil pipeline
exemption is intended to apply to pre-pipeline
units
• Expanded the crude oil pipeline exemption to
include other petroleum refinery applications, such
as inserting used oil prior to distillation or cracking
• Clarified the existing definition of used oil
processor
• Is referred to as the Petroleum Refinery
Exemption/Used Oil Processor Clarification
Notes:
• A copy of the March 4,1994, final rule (59 FR 10550) can be found
in Appendix 2.
1-12
-------
Effective Date in Unauthorized
States ^^^
• The used oil management standards (all
subparts) are federally enforceable in
states without authorized RCRA
programs on March 8,1993
• Unauthorized states include Alaska,
Hawaii, Iowa, Wyoming, and various U.S.
territories1
Notes:
1 Territories include American Samoas, Northern Marianas Islands, Puerto
Rico, and the Virgin Islands.
1-13
-------
Effective Date in RCRA
Authorized States
19 states and territories with an authorized RCRA
base program are also authorized for former 40
CFR Part 266, Subpart E1:
• 40 CFR Part 279, Subparts G and H, are state
and federally enforceable as of March 8,
19932
• These states must establish standards equal
to or more stringent than the ones in 40 CFR
Part 279 in the time frames set out in 40 CFR
Part 271
Notes:
1 As of November 30,1993, these states and territories are AR, AZ, CA, CT,
GA, ID, IL, MN, MO, NC, NE, NV, NY, OH, SD, TX, UT, VT, and Guam.
2 States that are authorized for Part 266, Subpart E are automatically
authorized for the equivalent provisions in Part 279, Subparts G and H. Part
266, Subpart E, does not contain all the provisions in Part 279, Subparts G
and H (see Table 1).
• See Appendix 5 for a list of state used oil contacts.
1-14
-------
Effective Date in RCRA
Authorized States (cont.)
28 states and territories with an authorized
RCRA base program are not authorized for
former 40 CFR Part 266, Subpart E:
• 40 CFR Part 279, Subparts G and H, are
federally enforceable as of March 8, 19931
• These states must establish standards equal
to or more stringent than the ones in
40 CFR Part 279 in the time frames set out in
40 CFR Part 2 71
Notes:
1 This includes only those provisions in Part 279, Subparts G and H, that
were also in Part 266, Subpart E (see Table 1).
• See Appendix 5 for a list of state used oil contacts.
1-15
-------
Section Summary
Major used oil rulemakings:
• November 29,1985 (50 FR 49164)
• May 20,1992 (57 FR 21524)
September 10,1992 (57 FR 41566)
r*s**\
TCN
May 3,1993 (58 FR 26420)\f593r
June 17, 1993 (58 FR 33341)
March 4, 1994 (59 FR 10550)
Notes:
1-16
-------
Section 2
•o
•2.
Used Oil Definition and
Applicability
o
0)
a
-------
Section 2:
Used Oil
Definition and
Applicability
Notes:
2-1
-------
Section Overview
Definition of used oil
Mixtures of used oils with other
materials
Rebuttable presumption
Materials derived from used oil
Exemptions from used oil
management standards
Notes:
2-2
-------
Used Oil Definition, §279.1
Used oil is any oil that has been
refined from crude oil or any
synthetic oil that has been used and
as a result of such use is
contaminated by physical or
chemical impurities
Notes:
2-3
-------
YES
Mixed
with a
characteristic
hazardous
waste?2
Used as a
lubricant,
hydraulic fluid,
heat transfer
fluid, or for a
similar use?
Mixed with a
listed
hazardous
waste?
Mixed with an
ignitable-only
characteristic
hazardous
waste?1
Begin
used oil
determination
Petroleum
based or
synthetic oil?
Mixture still
characteristic?
Handle as
nonhazardous
sol id waste
Hazardous
waste?
Mixture still
ignites?
LEGEND
= Starting point
Decision
= Ending point
Handle as
hazardous
waste
Contains
>1,000 ppm
halogens?
Handle as used
oil under the
Part 279
management
standards
Rebut
successfully?
11gnitable-only characteristic
waste is a hazardous waste
that is characteristic only
because it is ignitable.
2 These characteristic wastes
include all characteristic
waste(s) other than a
characteristic waste that is
ignitable only. These
wastes may have multiple
characteristics, including
ignitability.
2-5
-------
Waste Oils
Waste oils or oily wastes include
bottom cleanout waste from virgin
fuel storage tanks, virgin fuel oil spill
cleanup, or other oil wastes that have
not been used
Notes:
Waste oils or oily wastes do not have specific regulatory definitions but are
generally understood to include wastes that are not used oil because they
have never been used (50 FR 49174; November 29,1985).
2-7
-------
Synthetic Oi
Definition of used oil encompasses used
synthetic oils, including those derived from
coal, shale, or a polymer-based starting material
Synthetic oils are generally used for the same
purposes as petroleum-based oils, are usually
mixed and managed hi the same manner, and
present the same level of hazard
Examples: Mobil 1, Castrol Syntec
Notes:
Synthetic oils have been added to the regulatory definition of used oil (see
57 FR 41574).
2-8
-------
Examples of Used Oil
• Motor oil1
• Refrigeration coolant
• Metalworking fluids and oils
• Laminating oils
• Hydraulic fluid
• Copper and aluminum wire drawing
solution
• Electrical insulating oil
Notes:
1 This includesy^asoline, diesel, automotive, truck, marine, aviation,
locomotive, and heavy equipment engine crankcase oils.
• Common used oil constituents include:
• Lead
• Cadmium
• Chromium
• Benzoflouranthene
• EPA has found that automotive crankcase oil, piston-engine aircraft oil, and
gasoline powered marine craft oil frequently exhibit the RCRA toxicity (
characteristic.
2-9
-------
Types of Used Oils
EPA expects that most used oils regulated
under the standards will be:
• Lubricants
• Heat transfer fluids
• Hydraulic fluids
• Similar uses1
Notes:
1 An example would be oils used for their buoyancy properties (e.g., to keep
transmitting cables afloat on the water surface)
• Animal and vegetable oils do not meet the definition of used oil regardless
of how they are used because they are not synthetic or derived from crude.
• Materials refined from crude or manufactured from synthetic materials and
used as cleaning agents or solely for their solvent properties are not
considered used oil (57 FR 41574).
• Antifreeze is not considered used oil.
2-10
-------
Examples of Used
Lubricants
• Motor oils
• Greases
• Metalworking lubricants
• Emulsions
Notes:
2-11
-------
JANUARY 1993
THE NATIONAL OIL A LUBE NEWS
PAGE 11B
NJ
NJ
Lubrication Basics
by Stan Storer
There are (our specific tasks that
motor oil must accomplish Inside an
engine.
The (our tasks are: lubrication, cool-
ing, sealing and keeping the engine
Interior clean.
Let*s address each of these (unc-
tions Individually:
Lubrication
Lubrication refers to the slippery oil
film between the metal surfaces inside
the engine.
The goal of lubrication Is to reduce
friction and prevent wear during start-
up and during normal engine opera-
tion.
The majority of engine wear occurs
between start-up and warm-up. The
wear takes place in the upper areas ol
the engine; the camshaft and valve
train. •
Reducing wear at start-up is clearly a
The Four Functions of Motor Oil
function of the motor oil's viscosity and
how fast it is pumped.
Mulligrade oils, such as SAE 5W-30,
are very easily pumped at cold tem-
peratures and can significantly reduce
start-up wear.
Engine wear during normal engine
operation (driving at highway speeds)
is very minimal due to elevated engine
and oil temperature.
These higher temperatures allow the
oil to circulate much faster inside the
engine.
It Is interesting to note that the mov-
ing metal parts In the engine parts In
the engine do not touch each other
because they are separated by an oil
(ilm.
This is referred to as hydrodynamic
lubrication.
Cooling
Motor oil comes in contact with some
very hoi areas inside the engine ... the
pistons and (he upper cylinder walls.
The oil absorbs heat from these ar-
eas, travels back to the oil pan, is
exchanged with cooler oil and the pro-
cess repeats itself.
Thinner oils do a better job cooling an
engine than thick oils. A comparatively
thin oil (SAE 5W-30) does a better job
at cooling compared to a thick oil (SAE
20W-50) because the thinner oil flows
faster.
Engineers would say that thinner oils
are better heat transfer agents.
Sealing
The sealing function of motor oil re-
fers to the seal between the piston
. rings and the cylinder wall.
If this seal Is lost due to either excess
wear or lack of oil, a number of very
negative events take place.
These are loss of compression, poor
fuel economy, reduced horsepower,
higher oil consumption, and increased
amounts of contamination in the crank-
case due to higher levels of blowby
gases leaking past the rings.
Bear in mind that thick oil is not
required to seal the combustion cham-
ber.
PENNZOlf
Performance.
Proleclion.
Quality."1
In modern engines with tight clear-
ances between the piston rings and
cylinder wall, an SAE 5W-30 or SAE
10W-30 viscosity grade does an excel-
lent job of sealing the combustion cham-
ber.
Keeping The Engine
Interior Clean
The function of a detergent In an
engine oil Is to prevent engine deposits
(sludge) from accumulating.
These detergents are chemicals that
suspend contaminants (carbon from
partially burned fuel) In the oil.
In other words, a detergent mainly
functions to keep an engine clean, not
to clean up an engine.
These chemicals we call detergents
do not function like laundry soap to
clean things up.
A better term for what we call deter-
gents would be a dispersanl, dispers-
ing and suspending contaminants in-
side the oil. .
See Basics, page 13B
-------
Examples of Used Heat
Transfer Fluids
Heat transfer fluids include:
• Coolants
• Heating media
• Refrigeration oils
• Electrical insulation oils
Notes:
Examples of processes in metalworking that use heat transfer fluids include:
• Cutting
• Grinding
• Machining
• Stamping
• Quenching
2-13
-------
Examples of Used
Hydraulic Fluids
• Transmission fluids
• Brake fluids
• Fluids used in any hydraulic
equipment (e.g., dump trucks,
fork lifts)
Notes:
2-14
-------
Oil Contaminated Through Use
For a material to be a Part 279
regulated used oil, it must be:
• Derived from crude or synthetic oil
• Used as a lubricant, heat transfer fluid,
hydraulic fluid, or for similar uses
• Contaminated from use with chemical
or physical impurities
Notes:
2-15
-------
Used Oils That Exhibit
Hazardous Characteristics
A used oil that exhibits one
or more RCRA hazardous
characteristics by its own
nature is managed under
40 CFR 279 and not as
hazardous waste
Notes:
Under requirements for recyclable materials, §261.6(a)(4) exempts used oil
that exhibits a hazardous characteristic from regulation as hazardous waste
and subjects it to Part 279 when recycled. The Part 279 standards apply to
all used oil, characteristic or not.
2-16
-------
Mixtures
Used oils are sometimes mixed with
other substances after use
EPA is concerned that mixing may
render the used oil hazardous
Mixtures of used oil and other
substances1 must be managed
according to §279.10 standards
Notes:
1 Other substances of concern include RCRA listed hazardous waste, PCBs,
characteristic hazardous wastes, and total halogens.
2-17
-------
Used Oil and Listed Hazardous
Waste Mixtures, §279.10(b)(1)(i)
Mixtures of used oil and listed hazardous
waste must be managed as a listed
hazardous waste
Notes:
Listed hazardous wastes are identified at 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart D.
Hazardous waste management requirements are identified in 40 CFR Parts
261-266,268,270, and 124.
2-18
-------
Used Oil and Characteristic
Hazardous Waste Mixtures, §279.10(b)
EPA distinguishes between two types
of used oil and characteristic
hazardous waste mixtures
• Ignitable-only characteristic
hazardous waste
Characteristic hazardous waste
Notes:
This category includes any nonlisted RCRA hazardous waste that exhibits
any hazardous characteristic(s), with the exception of characteristic waste
that is ignitable only.
Ignitable-only characteristic hazardous waste:
• Exhibits the characteristic of ignitability and none of the other
characteristics.
• Is not listed in 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart D, except for hazardous
waste listed solely because it exhibits the characteristic of
ignitability (e.g., F003).
2-19
-------
Used Oil and Ignitable-Only Characteristic
Hazardous Waste Mixtures, §279.10(b)(2)(iii)
or
only
Characteristic
Hazardous ,
'• Waste
Mixtures of used oil and ignitable-only characteristic
hazardous waste can be managed as used oil if the
resultant mixture does not exhibit the ignitability
characteristic
Notes:
• The resultant mixture can have characteristics acquired from the used oil but
the characteristic of ignitability must be removed entirely to be managed as
used oil.
• This provision was challenged in petitions filed for review of the September
10,1992, rule.
2-20
-------
Examples: Used Oil and Ignitable-Only
Characteristic Waste Mixtures,
§279.10(b)(2)(ii)
• Paint thinner containing 1% to 10% TOC
mixed with used oils containing oxidizers
(e.g., chlorine, ozone, peroxides)
• Perchlorates mixed with used oils containing
reducing agents (e.g., sulfur dioxide, alkali
salts)
• Ignitable waste containing sodium or
potassium mixed with used oil containing
oxidizers
Notes:
2-21
-------
Used Oil and Characteristic Hazardous
Waste Mixtures, §279.10(b)(2)(ii)
Mixtures of used oil and characteristic hazardous
waste can be managed as used oil if the resultant
mixture does not exhibit any hazardous
characteristic
Notes:
1 This could be one or more of the characteristics except ignitable only.
• The resultant mixture could have picked up a characteristic from the used
oil.
• The resultant mixture formed from used oil and a characteristic waste, other
than solely ignitable waste, must be tested for all characteristics.
2-22
-------
From 40 CFR Fart 261 RCRA Hazardous Waste Regulations
TABLE 1—MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION OF CON-
TAMINANTS FOR THE TOXICITY CHARACTERIS-
TIC
EPA HW
No.1
D004
D005
D018
0006
0019
D020
0021
0022
0007
0023
0024
0025
0026
0016
0027
0028
D029
0030
0012
0031
0032
0033
0034
0008
0013
0009
0014
0035
0036
0037
0038
0010
0011
0039
0015
0040
0041
0042
0017
0043
Contaminant
Arsenic
Barium
Benzene
Cadmium . .
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform
Chromium
o-Cresol
m-Cresoi
p-Cresol
Cresol.
2,4-0 _
1 ,4-Dichlorotoenzene
1,2-Oich»oroethane
1 1 -Oichkxoetnylene
2 4-Oinitrototuene
Endrin .. _ _ .. ..
Heptachlor (and its
epowde).
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Mexacrrforoe thane
Lead
Undane
Mercury _„
Methoxycfikx ......
Methyl ethyl ketone
Nitrobenzene
Pentrachkxopheno!
Pyridine
Selenium ...„.._ „
Silver
Tetrachloroethylene
Toxaphene.. :
Trichloroetnytene
2,4.5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trtchkxophenol
2 4.5-TP (Sirvex)
Vinyl chloride...:... H
CAS No.2
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
71-43-2
7440-43-9
56-23-5
57.74.9
108-90-7
67-66-3
7440-47-3
95-48-7
108-39-4
106-44-5
94-75-7
106-46-7
107-06-2
75-35-4
121-14-2
72-20-8
76-44-a
118-74-1
87-68-3
67-72-1
7439-92-1
58-89-9
7439-97-6
72-43-5
78-93-3
98-95-3
87-86-5
110-86-1
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
127-18-4
8001-35-2
79-01-6
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
75-01-4
Regula-
tory
Level
(mg/L)
50
100.0
0.5
1.0
0.5
0.03
100.0
60
50
* 200.0
4 200.0
42000
* 200.0
10.0
7.5
0.5
0.7
3 0.13
0.02
0.008
S0.13
0.5
3.0
5.0
0.4
0.2
10.0
200.0
2.0
100.0
8 5.0
1.0
5.0
0.7
0.5
0.5
400.0
2.0
1.0
0.2
1 Hazardous waste number.
2 Chemical abstracts service number.
3 Quantitation limit is greater than the calculated regulatory
level. The quantitatkxi limit therefore becomes the regulatory
level.
4 If o-. m-, and .p-Cresol concentrations cannot be differen-
tiated, the total cresol (0026) concentration is used. The
regulatory level of total cresol is 200 mg/l.
2-23
-------
Example 1: Used Oil and Characteristic
Hazardous Waste Mixture, §279.10(b)(2)(ii)
• Mixture of used oil and characteristic
hazardous waste:
• Premising used oil has 55 C flashpoint
• Premixing characteristic hazardous waste has
6 mg/L lead
• Resultant mixture has 63 C flashpoint and
4 mg/L lead
• Manage as used oil because no hazardous
characteristic is exhibited
Notes:
• An example of a used oil and characteristic hazardous waste mixture that
can be managed as used oil after mixing. This mixture, therefore, must be
managed as hazardous waste.
2-24
-------
Example 2: Used Oil and Characteristic
Hazardous Waste Mixture, §279.10(b)(2)(ii)
• Mixture of used oil and characteristic
hazardous waste:
• Premising used oil has 2 mg/L cadmium
• Premixmg characteristic hazardous waste
has pH of 2
• Resultant mixture has 0.9 mg/L cadmium
and pH of 2
• Manage as hazardous waste because
corrosivity is exhibited
Notes:
• An example of a used oil and characteristic hazardous waste mixture that
exhibits a hazardous characteristic after mixing. This mixture, therefore,
must be managed as hazardous waste.
2-25
-------
Example 3: Used Oil and Characteristic
Hazardous Waste Mixture, §279.10(b)(2)(ii)
• Mixture of used oil and characteristic
hazardous waste:
• Premixing used oil has 20 ppm lead
• Premixing characteristic hazardous waste has
a flashpoint of 120 F and 5 ppm cadmium
• Resultant mixture has 0.5 ppm cadmium,
150T flashpoint, and 10 ppm lead
• Manage as hazardous waste because the
toxicity characteristic for lead is exhibited
Notes:
• An example of a used oil and characteristic hazardous waste mixture that
exhibits a hazardous characteristic after mixing. This mixture, therefore,
must be managed as hazardous waste.
2-26
-------
Used Oil and CE-SQG1 Waste
Mixtures, §279.10(b)(3)
Mixtures of used oil and CE-SQG
hazardous waste are subject to regulation
as used oil (§279.10(b)(3))
Notes:
1 CE-SQG stands for conditionally exempt small quantity generator, as
defined in 40 CFR 261.5.
• The quantity of hazardous waste generated is determined prior to mixing it
with used oil.
2-27
-------
Used Oil and Household Hazardous
Waste Mixtures, §261.4(b)(1)
Household Hazardous Waste
Household hazardous waste is exempt from RCRA
hazardous waste regulations; it is not considered a
hazardous waste when mixed with used oil
Notes:
2-28
-------
Materials Containing or Otherwise
Contaminated With Used Oil, §279.
If free-flowing oil is removed, the material is not regulated
as used oil but must be managed as a hazardous waste
under RCRA Subtitle C or as a solid waste under RCRA
Subtitle D
Materials from which used oil has been removed continue
to be regulated as used oil if they are to be burned for
energy recovery, regardless of the degree of removal
Notes:
• Any used oil that is drained or removed from the mixture is regulated as
used oil. For example, used oil recovered from industrial wipers and other
absorbent materials and used oils recovered from scrap metals are all
subject to Part 279 standards when they are recycled.
• The removal of excess used oil from materials containing or otherwise
contaminated with used oil does not subject the generator to the used oil
processor standards (§279.20(b)(2)(ii)(E)). This is discussed in more detail
in Section 5: Requirements Specific to Certain Used Oil Handlers.
2-29
-------
Used Oil and Fuel/Fuel Product1
Mixtures, §279.10(d)(1)
Mixtures of used oil and fuels or other
fuel products are subject to regulation as
used oil
Notes:
1 The May 3,1993, Technical Correction Notice added "fuel" to "product" to
specify the type of product.
2-30
-------
Rebuttable Presumption of Mixing
• The rebuttable presumption is an objective test to
determine if used oil has been mixed with hazardous
waste
• Used oil containing greater than 1,000 ppm total
halogens is presumed to be a hazardous waste
• Generators, transporters, processors, re-refiners, and
burners must determine whether the total halogen
content of used oil is greater than 1,000 ppm
or
Notes:
The rebuttable presumption has been expanded to all used oil handlers.
Despite the fact that the wording in §279.21 is different from
§279.10(b)(l)(ii), §279.44, §279.53, and §279.63, the Agency's intent is
that generators must comply with all provisions of the rebuttable
presumption.
Used oil handlers need not test the used oil; they may rely on their
knowledge of whether mixing has occurred.
EPA's enforcement experience indicates that used oil with halogen levels
greater than 1,000 ppm has most likely been mixed with chlorinated
hazardous waste.
2-31
-------
Handle as
used oil under
the Part 279
management
standards
Begin
hazardous
waste mixing
determination
Is halogen
content below
1,000ppm?
= Starting
point
Does the used oil consist of
metalworking oils/fluids
containing chlorinated paraffins that
are recycled under a tolling
arrangement?
= Intenm
conclusion
= Ending point
Has the GFC-
contaminated used
oil been mixed with
used oil from other
sources?
Can handler
document that the
used oil was not
mixed with
hazardous waste?
Is the used oil contaminated
with CFCs removed from
refrigeration units where the
CFCs are destined for
reclamation?
Used oil presumed to be mixed
with a hazardous waste
Does used oil handler
want to rebut the
hazardous waste
presumption?
Handle as a
hazardous
waste
2-33
-------
Exemptions From Rebuttalble
Presumption
• Metalworking oils or fluids containing
chlorinated paraffins:
• Must be processed through a tolling arrangement to
reclaim oils or fluids
• CFC-contaminated used oils removed from
refrigeration units where the CFCs are destined
for reclamation
• Both of these types of used oil are sitill subject
to other 40 CFR Part 279 standards
Notes:
•~ A tolling arrangement is a contractual agreement pursuant to which
reclaimed oil is returned by the processor or re-refiner to the generator for
use as a lubricant, cutting oil, or coolant (§279.24(c)). Used oil generators
may arrange for the used oil to be transported without an EPA Identification
number.
The tolling arrangement must indicate:
• The type of used oil and the frequency of shipments.
• That the vehicle used to transport the used oil and recycled used oil
is owned and operated by the processor or re-refiner.
• That reclaimed oil will be returned to the generator.
• The presumption applies to metalworking oils or fluids if they are recycled
in any other manner or disposed.
• Used oil contaminated with CFCs cannot be mixed with used oil from
sources other than refrigeration units to be exempt from rebutting the
presumption. The mixture would be fully subject to the rebuttable
presumption.
2-35
-------
Successful Rebuttal
A used oil handler may rebut the hazardous waste mixing
presumption by demonstrating that the used oil does not contain
significant concentrations of halogenated hazardous constituents
listed in Appendix Vffl of Part 261
If it can be demonstrated that used oil has not been mixed with a
regulated hazardous waste, the presumption may be successfully
rebutted 1
For example:
Household Hazardous Waste With
Total Halogens of 1,000 ppm
Notes:
There is no formal regulatory definition of significant concentrations. For
hazardous halogenated solvent constituents, EPA has stated that a handler whose
oil has concentrations below 100 ppm can generally rebut the presumption (50 FR
49176; November 29,1985).
EPA recommends the use of SW-846 method 8010 for determining total halogen
content in used oil. SW-846 Edition III is available from the Government Printing
Office:
Superintendent of Documents
P.O. Box 371954
Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954
Document Number: 955-001-00000-1
Cost is $319.
2-36
-------
Total Halogen Confusion
The following table illustrates how total halogen content
affects requirements for managing used oil:
Hazardous Waste
Determination
Used Oil Fuel
Determination
Total Halogen Content Rebuttable Presumption Acceptable Units
Less than 1,000 ppm Used oil: no rebuttal
needed
Between 1,000 and
4,000 ppm
More than 4,000 ppm
Hazardous waste:
successful rebuttal needed
to manage as used oil
Hazardous waste:
successful rebuttal needed
to manage as used oil
May be burned in an
on-specification unit if used oil
meets other specifications
With successful rebuttal, may be
burned in an on-specification
unit if used oil meets other
specifications
With successful rebuttal, must be
burned in an off-specification
unit regulated under 40 CFR
Part 2/9, Subpart G, or undergo
further processing to be burned
as on-specification
Notes:
2-37
-------
Materials Derived From Used Oil,
§279.10(e)(1)
• Materials reclaimed from used oil that are
used beneficially are:
• Not managed as used oil
• Not managed as solid waste
• "Used beneficially" means used oil not
burned for energy recovery nor used in a
manner constituting disposal (e.g.,
re-refined lubricants)
Notes:
2-38
-------
Materials Derived From Used Oil,
§279.10(e)(2) _^
• Materials reclaimed from used oil that
are burned for energy recovery are:
• Managed as used oil
• Example:
• Off-specification used oil fuel from
re-refining
Notes:
2-39
-------
Materials Derived From Used Oil,
§279.10(e)(3) ____
• Materials reclaimed from used oil that
are disposed of or used in a manner
constituting disposal are:
• Not managed as used oil
• Managed as solid waste, requiring
determination of whether or not the
waste is hazardous
Notes:
2-40
-------
Materials Derived From Used Oil,
§279.10(e)(1) __
• Re-refining distillation bottoms that are used as
feedstock for asphalt products are:
• Not managed as used oil
• Not managed as solid waste
• If re-refining distillation bottoms are disposed
of or used hi a manner constituting disposal,
they are managed as solid waste, which
requires determination of whether the waste is
hazardous
Notes:
2-41
-------
Wastewater, §279.10(f)
• Wastewater contaminated with de
minimis quantities of used oil is not
subject to 40 CFR Part 279 requirements
• Wastewater discharge must be subject to
NPDES or POTW regulations
• Used oil recovered from
wastewater is subject to
40 CFR Part 2 79
requirements
Notes:
Separation of de minimis quantities of used oil from wastewater is not
considered processing because the de minimis mixture is not considered
used oil.
Wastewater contaminated with used oil that is discarded as a result of
abnormal manufacturing operations, resulting in substantial leaks, spills, or
other releases, is not exempt from Part 279.
2-42
-------
De Minimis Quantities of Used Oil
• Small spills, leaks, or drippings from
pumps, machinery, pipes, and other
similar equipment during normal
operations
• Small amounts of oil lost
to the wastewater treatment
system during washing or
draining operations
Notes:
2-43
-------
Used Oil Introduced Into
Crude Oil Pipelines
• §279.10(g) of the September 10, 1992,
rule exempted used oil placed directly
into a crude oil pipeline
• API petitioned EPA regarding the
adequacy of the September 10,1992,
pipeline exemption and failure to
address proposed exemptions for used
oil inserted into the petroleum refining
process
Notes:
2-44
-------
March 4,1994: Petroleum
Refinery Exemption
In response to the API petition, EPA
issued a final rule (59 FR 10550) on
used oil that clarified and expanded
the existing exemption on used oil
being inserted into the petroleum
refining process
Notes:
2-45
-------
Petroleum Refining
Facility, §279.1
Rule establishes a definition for petroleum
refining facility to distinguish between petroleum
refining facilities and used oil re-refiners:
• An establishment primarily engaged in producing
gasoline, kerosene, distillate fuel oils, residual fuel oils,
and lubricants, through fractionation, straight
distillation of crude oil, redistillation of unfinished
petroleum derivatives, cracking, or other processes (i.e.,
facilities classified as SIC 2911)
• Primary feedstock: Crude oil
Notes:
2-46
-------
Used Oil Introduced Into
Crude Oil Pipelines,
§279.10(g)(1)
Clarified that the September 10, 1992,
exemption applies to used oil mixed
with crude or natural gas liquids in
pre-pipeline units
Notes:
2-47
-------
Transportation and
Storage, §279.10(g)(2)
The expanded exemption applies to:
• Mixtures of used oil and crude oil containing
less than 1% used oil that are stored or
transported to a petroleum refining process for
insertion prior to distillation or cracking
• All modes of transportation of such mixtures
• Storage of such mixtures in discrete units at a
remote location or at a petroleum refinery
Notes:
2-48
-------
Used Oil Inserted Without
Prior Mixing, §279.10(g)(3)
Used oil inserted directly into the
petroleum refinery process may be
exempt from Part 279 provided
that it constitutes less than 1% of
the crude oil process unit feed at
any given time
Notes:
2-49
-------
Exemption Applies at
the Point of Mixing
Prior to insertion, the used oil
remains subject to Part 279
Notes:
2-50
-------
Prior to Mixing
Used oil generated at the pipeline or
petroleum refining facility is subject to
Part 279, Subpart C, standards for used
oil generators
Used oil received at the pipeline from off
site is subject to Part 279, Subpait E,
standards for used oil transporters
Used oil received at the petroleum
refining factory is subject to Subpart F
standards for used oil processors
Notes:
2-51
-------
Used Oil Inserted After Distillation
or Cracking, §279.10(g)(4)
Used oil inserted in the refining process
after distillation or cracking is exempt
provided it meets the used oil
specification before insertion
Refineries that are the first to claim that
the used oil is on-specification are
subject to the used oil marketer
requirements (Part 279, Subpart H)
Notes:
2-52
-------
Used Oil Captured by the Wastewater
Treatment System and Inserted Into the
Refinery Process, §279.10(g)(5)
• Used oil generated from routine refinery
operations that incidentally enters a refinery's
wastewater treatment system is exempt
• Used oil intentionally introduced into a
wastewater treatment system is subject to the
used oil processor standards unless exempted
under §279.10(g)(2) or §279.10(g)(3)
• Used oil cannot be introduced to a refinery's
wastewater treatment system to avoid
regulation
Notes:
2-53
-------
Recovered Oil Tanks
Used oil that is intentionally introduced into
the refinery's recovered oil tanks is exempt
provided the used oil/recovered oil mixture
constitutes less than 1% of the crude oil that is
being inserted prior to distillation or cracking
Used oil/recovered oil mixtures inserted after
distillation or cracking are exempt provided
they meet the used oil specification before
insertion
Notes:
2-54
-------
Stock Tank Bottoms,
§279.10(g)(6)
Tank bottoms from stock tanks
containing exempt mixtures of used
oil and crude oil or natural gas liquids
are exempt
Tank bottoms are subject to all other
applicable requirements (i.e., §262.11
requirement) to determine if they are
hazardous
Notes:
2-55
-------
Section Summary
40 CFR §279.10 identifies mixtures of used oil
and other substances that must be managed
under the 40 CFR Part 279 standards1
Rebuttable presumption:
• Used oil containing more than 1,000 ppm total
halogens is presumed to be a hazardous waste
Used oil mixed with crude or natural gas
liquids in pre-pipeline units is exempt
from 40 CFR Part 279 standards
Notes:
1 Other substances of concern include RCRA listed hazardous waste, PCBs,
RCRA characteristic hazardous waste, and halogens.
2-56
-------
Section 3
General Description of
Used Oil Handlers
i
xo
S3
(D to.
35
-------
Section 3:
General
Description of
Used Oil
Handlers
Notes:
3-1
-------
Section Overview
General description of used oil handlers:
• Generators
• Collection centers and aggregation points
• Transporters and transfer facilities
• Processors and re-refiners
• Burners
• Marketers
Notes:
3-2
-------
Types of Used Oil Handlers
• Generators (subject to Subpart C standards)
• Collection centers and aggregation points
(subject to Subpart D and Subpart C standards)
• Transporters and transfer facilities (subject to
Subpart £ standards)
• Processors and re-refiners (subject to Subpart F
standards)
• Burners (subject to Subpart G
standards)
• Marketers (subject to Subpart H
standards)
Notes:
Each of these used oil handlers is regulated under the subparts of Part 279
listed above. The standards for each type of used oil handler include some
requirements that are identical or similar for most used oil handlers. These
common requirements are discussed in Section 4. Requirements and
provisions that are specific to each used oil handler are discussed in Section
5. This section defines the different used oil handler types.
3-3
-------
Definition: Used Oil Generators
• A used oil generator is any person,
business, or government agency whose
act or process produces used oil or
whose act first causes the used oil to
become subject to regulation
• Used oil generators are regulated under
40 CFR Part 279, Subpart C
Notes:
Used oil generators comprise the largest segment of the used oil handler
universe.
3-4
-------
Used Oil Generators:
Household "Do-lt-Yourselfers"
• Household "do-it-yourself" (DIY) used
oil generators are private individuals
who generate used oil through the
maintenance of their personal vehicles
• Household DIY used oil generators
are exempt from 40 CFR Part 279,
Subpart C, regulations
Notes:
The used oil management standards do not exempt any class of generators
based upon a generation rate (i.e., there is no general small quantity generator
exemption).
Once DIY used oil is collected, it is subject to all applicable Part 279
standards.
3-5
-------
Examples: Used Oil Generators
Examples of used oil generators include:
• Vehicle repair shops and service stations
• Taxi, delivery, and moving companies
• Public transportation authorities
• Car dealers
• Shipyards
• Government motorpools
• Metalworking industries
• Chemical industries
• Automobile manufacturers
Notes:
3-6
-------
Definition: Used Oil Collection
Centers
• A used oil collection center is any site or
facility that is authorized by a state or local
government to manage used oil and accepts,
aggregates, and/or stores used oil collected
from used oil generators
• A DIY used oil collection center is any site or
facility that accepts, aggregates, and/or stores
used oil collected only from DIY household
generators
• DIY used oil collection centers do not need to be
authorized
Notes:
• A used oil collection center can become authorized by being
registered/licensed/permitted/ recognized by a state, county, or municipal
government to manage used oil.
3-7
-------
Definition: Used Oil Aggregation
Points
A used oil aggregation point is any site or
facility that accepts, aggregates, and/or
stores used oil collected only from other
used oil generation sites owned or
operated by the owner or operator of the
aggregation point, or collected from
household DIY generators
Notes:
3-8
-------
Requirements: Used Oil Collection Centers, DIY
Collection Centers, and Aggregation Points
• Used oil collection centers, DIY collection
centers, and aggregation points are regulated
under 40 CFR Part 279, Subpart D
• Owners or operators of used oil collection
centers and aggregation points must comply
with the generator standards in Subpart C
• There are no restrictions on used oil quantities
or length of storage for collection centers or
aggregation points
Notes:
• The major distinction between used oil collection centers and aggregation
points is that the owner or operator of an aggregation point also owns or
operates the generation sites that send their used oil to the aggregation point.
Used oil collection centers may accept used oil from other generators but
must be authorized by a state or local government if they accept used oil from
sources other than DIY household generators. Both aggregation points and
used oil collection centers may accept DIY-generated used oil.
3-9
-------
Used Oil Generators: Self-Transport
Used oil generators may transport no
more than 55 gallons of used oil at
any time generated on site or
collected from household DIYs to
collection centers or aggregation
points without an EPA identification
number
The generator must transport
the used oil in his or her own
vehicle
Notes:
Used oil shipments of more than 55 gallons must be transported by a
transporter who has an EPA identification number. However, a used oil
transporter cannot deliver used oil to collection centers or aggregation points.
EPA believes that it is necessary to allow used oil generators to self-transport
small quantities of used oil to off-site collection centers or aggregation points
to encourage persons who generate small quantities of used oil at one or more
sites to recycle their used oil. If generators of small quantities of used oil
were required to contract with a transporter with an EPA ID number to
transport the used oil, the cost of employing the transporter might discourage
generators from recycling their used oil. In addition, EPA believes that the
self-transport provision will discourage small quantity generators from
storing used oil on site for long periods.
3-10
-------
Definition: Used Oil Transporters
A used oil transporter is any person
who transports used oil or collects
used oil from more than one generator
and transports the collected used oil
Used oil transporters
are regulated under
40 CFR Part 279,
Subpart E
Notes:
• Transporter requirements do not apply to the transportation of used oil
collected through a curbside collection program and delivered to a regulated
used oil generator, collection center, aggregation point, transporter/transfer
facility, processor/re-refiner, or burner as specified in §279.40(a)(4).
3-11
-------
Definition: Used Oil Transfer
Facilities
• A used oil transfer facility is any
transportation-related facility that holds
used oil for longer than 24 hours during
the normal course of transportation but
not longer than 35 days. Examples of
used oil transfer facilities include:
• Loading docks
• Parking areas
• Tank and container storage areas
Notes:
3-12
-------
Definition: Used Oil Transfer
Facilities (cont.)
• An owner or operator of a used oil transfer
facility is also considered to be a used oil
transporter
• A facility that stores used oil for less than
24 hours is not subject to the transfer facility
storage requirements (§279.45)
• A facility that stores used oil for more than
35 days is subject to regulation as a used oil
processor
Notes:
3-13
-------
Used Oil Transportation
Deliveries, §279.43
A used oil transporter must deliver all used oil
received to one of the following:
• Another used oil transporter who has obtained an
EPA identification number
• A used oil processor or re-refiner who has
obtained an EPA identification number
• An off-specification used oil burner who has
obtained an EPA identification number
• An on-specification used oil burner
Notes:
3-14
-------
Used Oil Transporters and Transfer
Facilities: Blending and Processing
Restrictions
• Transporters may consolidate or aggregate
loads of used oil for purposes of transportation
• Transporters may not, however, blend used oils
with virgin oils to meet fuel specifications
• Transporters may conduct incidental
processing operations that occur in the normal
course of transportation (e.g., settling and
water separation)
Notes:
• Transporters who conduct operations that are designed to produce or make
more amenable for production used oil-derived products must comply with
the processor and re-refiner standards of Subpart F.
3-15
-------
Definition: Used Oil
Processors and Re-refiners
• A used oil processor or re-refiner
is a facility that processes used
oil
• Used oil processors and
re-refiners are regulated
under 40 CFR Part 279,
Subpart F
Notes:
3-16
-------
Definition: Used Oil Processing
Used oil processing or re-refining
involves chemical or physical operations
designed to produce from used oil, or to
make used oil more amenable for
production of, fuel oils, lubricants, or
other used oil-derived products
Notes:
3-17
-------
Examples: Used Oil Processing
Examples of used oil processing include:
• Blending used oil with virgin petroleum
products
• Blending used oil to meet the fuel
specification
• Filtration
• Simple distillation
• Chemical or physical separation
• Re-refining
Notes:
Processors and re-refiners who burn some used oil for purposes of processing
are considered to be burning incidentally to processing and are not subject to
the Part 279, Subpart G, burner standards.
3-18
-------
Definition: Used Oil Re-refiner
A used oil re-refiner is a facility
that processes used oil to
produce lube base stock and
greases, industrial fuels, asphalt
extenders, diesel-like fuels, and
other products
Notes:
3-19
-------
Used Oil Processing and
Re-refining Products
The products of used oil processing and
re-refining include:
m On- or off-specification fuel
• Lube base stock
• Distillate fuel
• Asphaltic bottoms and extenders
• Diesel-like fuel
Notes:
3-20
-------
March 4,1994: Used Oil
Processor Clarification
EEI petitioned EPA regarding the scope of the
activities encompassed by the September 10,
1992, definition of used oil processing
hi response to the EEI petition, EPA issued a
final rule (59 FR 10550) clarifying those
generator activities that are subject to the
used oil processor management standards
Notes:
3-21
-------
Used Oil Processor
Clarification, §279.20(b)(2)(ii)
The rule clarifies that generators who
perform a specific set of on-site
maintenance, filtering, and separation
activities are not considered used oil
processors as long as the used oil is
generated on site and is not being sent to
an off-site burner
Notes:
3-22
-------
Generator Activities That Are Not
Considered Processing,
§279.20(b)(2)(ii)
(A) Reconditioning used oil prior to
reuse by the generator
m This activity is not subject to the
used oil processor standards
because it is designed to extend the
life of reusable oil
Notes:
3-23
-------
Oil Removed From Electrical
Equipment in the Field, §279.41
Draining used oil from the transformer or turbine
constitutes generation of used oil
The used oil must be transported to a central
maintenance location by a used oil transporter
The location at which the used oil is filtered is
considered a used oil transfer facility provided the oil
is stored for more than 24 hours and less than 35 days
prior to filtering
Once the used oil has been filtered, it is no longer
subject to regulation under §279.10(e)(l)
Notes:
• The definition of transfer facility was revised to include activities performed
pursuant to §279.20(b)(2).
3-24
-------
Filtering Oil From Electrical
Equipment, §279.20(b)(2)(ii)
Electrical transformers may be transported
to a central location where the oil is
removed, filtered, and replaced
The transporter of the transformer is not a
used oil transporter
The central maintenance location would
become a used oil generator when the used
oil is drained from the transformer
Notes:
3-25
-------
Generator Activities That Are Not
Considered Processing,
§279.20(b)(2)(ii)
(B) Separating used oil from wastewater
• This activity is not subject to the used oil
processor standards because it is designed to
ensure that wastewater meets established
limits for water discharge to streams and
POTWs
• Any used oil removed from separator units is
subject to the used oil generator standards
Notes:
3-26
-------
Generator Activities That Are Not
Considered Processing,
§279.20(b)(2)(ii)
(C) Using oil mist collectors to remove
droplets of used oil from in-plant air
• This activity is not subject to the used oil
processor standards because it is intended
to make plant air suitable for continued
recirculation
• Any oil removed from oil mist collectors is
subject to the used oil generator standards
Notes:
3-27
-------
Generator Activities That Are Not
Considered Processing,
§279.20(b)(2)(ii)
(D) Removing used oil from materials containing
or otherwise contaminated with used oil
• This activity is not subject to the used oil
processor standards because it is conducted
primarily to clean the materials.
Notes:
If no free-flowing oil remains, materials containing or otherwise
contaminated with used oil are not considered used oil except when burned
for energy recovery.
3-28
-------
Generator Activities That Are Not
Considered Processing,
§279.20(b)(2)(ii)
(E) Filtering, separating, or otherwise
reconditioning used oil before burning it in
a space heater
• This activity is not subject to the used
oil processor standards because filtering
small volumes of used oil prior to
burning poses insignificant risk
Notes:
3-29
-------
Definition: Used Oil Burners
40 CFR Part 279, Subpart G, regulations
apply to used oil burners who burn
off-specification used oil fuel in r
a boiler, industrial furnace, < -
or hazardous waste incinerator
subject to regulation under
40 CFR Parts 264 or 265,
Subpart O
r*
Notes:
3-30
-------
Used Oil Burner Specifications
• Used oil fuel is considered off-specification if it
exceeds any of the specification levels listed in
40 CFR 279.11, Table 1
• Constituent/Property Allowable Level
Arsenic 5 ppm maximum
Cadmium 2 ppm maximum
Chromium 10 ppm maximum
Lead 100 ppm maximum
Total halogens 4,000 ppm maximum
Flashpoint 100'F minimum
Notes:
• Facilities that burn used oil fuel that meets all of these specifications are not
subject to Part 279, Subpart G, standards.
3-31
-------
Total Halogen Confusion
The following table illustrates how total halogen content
affects requirements for managing used oil:
Hazardous Waste
Determination
Used Oil Fuel
Determination
Total Halogen Content Rebuttable Presumption Acceptable Units
Less than 1,000 ppm
Between 1,000 and
4,000 ppm
More than 4,000 ppm
Used oil no rebuttal
needed
Hazardous waste:
successful rebuttal needed
to manage as used oil
Hazardous waste:
successful rebuttal needed
to manage as used oil
May be burned in an
on-spedfication unit if used oil
meets other specifications
With successful rebuttal, maybe
burned in an on-spedfication
unit if used oil meets other
specifications
With successful rebuttal, must be
burned in an off-specification
unit regulated under 40 CFR
Part 279, Subpart G, or undergo
further processing to be burned
as on-spedfication
Notes:
3-32
-------
Burners of Off-Specification Used Oil for
Energy Recovery: Acceptable Units
• Off-specification used oil fuel may be
burned in the following devices:
• Industrial furnaces
• Industrial boilers located at a facility engaged
in a manufacturing process where substances
are transformed into new products by
mechanical or chemical processes
• Utility boilers used to produce electric power,
steam, heated or cooled air, or other gases or
fluids for sale
Notes:
• 40 CFR 260.10 defines an industrial furnace as an enclosed device that is an
integral component of manufacturing processes and that uses thermal
treatment to accomplish recovery of materials or energy. These devices
include:
• Cement, lime, aggregate, or phosphate kilns.
• Coke ovens.
• Blastfurnaces.
• Smelting, melting, and refining furnaces.
• Titanium dioxide chloride process oxidation reactors.
• Methane reforming furnaces.
• Pulping liquor recovery furnaces.
• Combustion devices used in the recovery of sulfur values from spent
sulfuric acid.
• Halogen acid furnaces meeting certain specifications.
3-33
-------
Burners of Off-Specification Used Oil for
Energy Recovery: Acceptable Units (cont.)
Off-specification used oil fuel also may
be burned in hazardous waste
incinerators subject to regulation under
40 CFR Parts 264 and 265, Subpart O
Notes:
Prior to being burned in a hazardous waste incinerator, off-specification used
oil is subject to Part 279, Subpart G, standards.
3-34
-------
Marine and Diesel Engines:
Acceptable Units
• Off-specification used oil may be burned
in diesel and marine engines
• It is unclear whether diesel and marine
engines meet the definition of boiler
(50 FR 49193)
• The burner and marketer requirements do
not apply to used oil burned in diesel and
marine engines
Notes:
3-35
-------
Definition: Used Oil Marketers
A used oil fuel marketer is any person who
performs either of the following activities:
• Directs a shipment of off-specification used oil
from his or her facility to a used oil burner
• First claims that used oil that is to be burned for
energy recovery meets the used oil fuel
specifications r
-------
Definition: Used Oil Marketers (cont.)
The regulations covering used oil fuel marketers have
been moved from 40 CFR Part 266, Subpart E, to 40 CFR
Part 279, Subpart H, with minor modifications
Marketers will also come under regulation
as a generator, transporter, and/or
processor or re-refiner; no used oil
handler can be solely a marketer
Notes:
3-37
-------
Section Summary
General descriptions of used oil handlers:
• Generators
• Collection centers and aggregate points
• Transporters and transfer facilities
• Processors and re-refiners
• Burners
• Marketers
Notes:
3-38
-------
Section 4
Requirements Common to
Most Used Oil Handlers
Ota
si
»
55 3T
-------
Section 4:
Requirements
Common to Most
Used Oil
Handlers
Notes:
4-1
-------
Section Overview
• Storage
• Release response
• Secondary containment
• Notification
• Tracking
Notes:
4-2
-------
Used Oil Management System
Requirement
Storage
Response to
Releases
Notification/
EPA ID Number
Tracking
Generator/
Collection
Center
Yes
Yes
No
No
Transporter/
Transfer Facility
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Off-Spec
Burner
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Processor/
Re-refiner
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Marketer
N/A
N/A
Yes
Yes
Notes:
Storage and release response issues are not applicable to marketers, because
marketers must be at least one other type of handler.
Standards will be discussed in more detail throughout this section.
4-3
-------
Standards Common to All
Used Oil Handlers
• Storage:
• In good condition
• Labeling
• Release response:
• Stop the release
• Contain the release
• Cleanup and properly manage the release
• Remove/repair/replace the container
Notes:
4-4
-------
Standards Common to Transporters,
Processors and Refiners, and
Off-specif! cat! on Burners
• Storage:
• Floor and secondary containment
impervious to used oil
• Notification and EPA identification
number
• Tracking the acceptance and delivery of
used oil
Notes:
4-5
-------
Storage Provisions
• Are applicable to all used oil handlers,
including generators
• Require used oil to be stored in containers,
tanks, or units subject to regulation under
40 CFR Parts 264 and 2651
• Prohibit storage of used oil in lagpons, pits, or
surface impoundments that are not subject to
regulation under 40 CFR Parts 264 and 265
• Wastewaters containing de minimis
quantities of used oil are not subject to this
prohibition
Notes:
1 EPA has distinguished between units subject to regulation under 40 CFR
Parts 264 and 265, Subpart K, and units in compliance with the regulations
Units subject to regulation are permitted or under interim status; they may,
store used oil. In compliance with indicates that the units meet the
requirements but are not permitted or are not under interim status; they are
prohibited from storing used oil.
• EPA has documented numerous cases of environmental damage from
storage of used oil in units not subject to regulation.
4-6
-------
Storage Provisions (cont.)
• Require containers and tanks to be in
good condition:
• No severe rusting or apparent structural
defects or deterioration
• No visible leaks
• Require labeling of storage units
• Containers, aboveground tanks,
and underground storage tank
fill pipes must be labeled clearly
with the words "Used Oil"
Notes:
Used oil generators, transporters and transfer facilities, processors and
re-refiners, burners, and marketers are subject to all spill prevention and
control and countermeasures regulations (40 CFR Part 112), in addition
to requirements for used oil management.
Used oil handlers are also subject to the Underground Storage Tank
(40 CFR Part 280) standards whether or not the used oil exhibits any
characteristic of a hazardous waste.
4-7
-------
Response to Releases
In the event of a release to the environment from
aboveground storage tanks and containers, a
used oil handler must take specific steps:
• Stop the release
• Contain the released used oil
• Clean up and properly manage the released
used oil and materials used in cleanup1
• If necessary, remove the tank or container from
service, and repair or replace it before
returning to service
Notes:
1 "Clean up and properly manage" could mean recycling and/or disposal.
Whether the used oil destined for disposal contains hazardous constituents
must first be determined, then management should proceed according to the
appropriate regulations.
• This requirement applies only when a release to the environment occurs.
Used oil handlers are required to report the release of used oil containing a
CERCLA hazardous substance (such as lead) when the release is equal to or
greater than the reportable quantity for the substance. Such releases must be
reported to the National Response Center (CERCLA Section 103).
• Releases within contained areas, such as concrete floors or impervious
containment areas, are subject to response only if the release goes beyond
the contained areas.
• The response to release provisions does not require cleanup of past releases
to the environment that occurred prior to the effective date of the used oil
program.
4-8
-------
Secondary Containment
A secondary containment system is required
at transfer, processing/re-refining, and
off-specification burning facilities and:
• Is required for containers and tanks
• Must consist of dikes, berms, or retaining
walls and a floor or an equivalent secondary
containment system
• Must be sufficiently impervious to used oil to
prevent migration to soil, ground water, or
surface water
Notes:
• The floor in the containment area for existing tanks must cover the entire
area within the containment structure except where the existing tanks meet
the ground. Retrofitting the tanks is not necessary due to the financial
burdens that would be incurred. The floor in the containment area for new
tanks must cover the entire area within the containment structure, including
the area under the new tank.
• EPA did not specify the type of oil-impervious construction material to be
used. The selection of suitable materials depends on the size of the storage
or processing units and the characteristics of the site.
• The cost analysis that accompanies the used oil rules estimated the cost of a
secondary containment area that includes a 3-inch asphalt floor with an
annual application of sealant. Such a floor is adequate to contain releases
because vehicular traffic around the storage area or within the bermed,
diked, or walled area should be minimal. Selection of construction
materials depend on the floor's thickness and the type of floor installed.
4-9
-------
Notification Requirements
• Used oil handlers who have not
previously notified EPA of their
hazardous waste or used oil activities
must obtain an EPA Identification Number
• Exception: Used oil generators or those
regulated as generators
(collection sites and
aggregation points) are not
required to obtain an EPA
identification number
Notes:
To notify EPA, submit one of the following to either the EPA Regional
Administrator or the appropriate state director:
• EPA Form 8700-12 in accordance with §3010 of RCRA.
• A letter stating the location of the facility and the types of used oil
management activities taking place.
4-10
-------
Page 2 of EPA Form 8700-12 Notification of Regulated Waste Activities
Please print or type with ELITE type (12 characters per inch) in the unshaded areas only
Fcm Aeprvvea, OMB No. 2050-CC28 Expms 9-30-96
GSA No. 0246-EPA-OT
VIII. Type of Regulated Waste Activity (Mark 'X'in the appropriate boxes; Refer to Instructions)
ID - For Official Use Only
A. Hazardous Waste Activity
B. Used Oil Recycling Activities
1. Generator (See Instructions)
n a. Greater tran10(Mkg/mo (2^00 Ibs.)
Q b. 100 to 1000 kg/mo (200-2,200 Ibs.)
Q c. Less than 100 kg/mo (220 Ibs)
2. Trarsporter (Indicate Mode in boxes 1-5
below) -" '••: -'.•••
Q a. For own waste only
Q b. For commercial purposes
U 3.
Mode of Transportation
1. Air
2. Rail
3. Highway
4. Water
5. Other-specify
JL_
IX. Description of Hazardous Wastes (Use additional shoots H necessary)
DS.
Treater, Storer, Disposer (at
installation) Note: A permit is
required for this activity; see
instructions. ; •]"•''.
Hazardous Waste Fuel
a. Generator Marketing to Burner
b. Other Marketers
c. Boiler and/or Industrial Furnace
1. Smelter Deferral
2. Small Quantity Exemption
Indicate Type of Combustion
Devices)
1. Utility Boiler
2. Industrial Boiler
£] 3. Industrial Furnace
Underground Injection Control
B
1. Used Oil Fuel Marketer
Q a. Marketer Directs Shipment of Used
: Oil to Off-Specification Burner
Q b. Marketer Who First Claims the Used
Oil Meets the Specifications ;
2. Used Oil Burner - Indicate Type(s) of
Combustion Device(s)
a. Utility Boiler
b. Industrial Boiler
c. Industrial Furnace !
3. Used Oil Transporter - Indicate Type(s)
of Actlvlty(ies)
a. Transporter
b. Transfer Facility
4. Used Oil Processor/Re-refiner- Indicate
Type<3) of Actjvity(tes)
Qa. Process
LJb. Re-refine
i i
B
B
A. Characteristics of Nonlisted Hazardous Wastes. (Mark 'X' in the boxes corresponding to the characteristics of
nonllsted hazardous wastes your installation handles; See 40 CFR Parts 26130 - 26134)
l.lgnitabto 2. Corrosive 3. Reactive 4. Torlctty
(O001) (D002) (D003) Characteristic (U«t ip«ciflc EPA hmrdou» wa»1« numb»r<») lor th» To»icity ctuneartoOc cootaniliMBti(i))
D
B. Listed Hazardous Wastes. (See 40 CFR 261.31 - 33; See instructions if you need to list more than 12 waste codes.)
C. Other Wastes. (State or other wastes requiring a handler to have an I.D. number; See instructions.)
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a
system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my Inquiry of the person
or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the Information submitted Is, to the
best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information!
Including the possibility of fine and Imprisonment for knowing violations.
Signature
Name and Official Title (Type or print)
Date Signed
XI. Comments
Note: Mail completed form to the appropriate EPA Regional or State Office. (See Section III of the booklet for addresses.)
EPA Form 8700-12 (Rev. 11-30-93) Previous edition is obsolete.
4-11
-------
Tracking
Used oil transporters, processors and
re-refiners, off-specification burners,
and marketers must keep a record of
each used oil shipment accepted from
or delivered to another party:
• Names and addresses of handlers
• Handlers' EPA identification numbers
• Quantity of used oil
• Signature and date1
Notes:
1 Rail carriers are exempt from signature requirements (§279.46(a)(5)(ii).
• Generators are not required to maintain tracking records unless they also
function as marketers. EPA determined that the information maintained by
transporters provides sufficient records of used oil transport activities
without burdening used oil generators with additional tracking activities.
• The tracking requirement consists of the same information as required in
40 CFR Part 266, Subpart E.
4-12
-------
Tracking (cont.)
Records may take the form of a log,
invoice, manifest, bill of lading, or
other shipping document
Records must be maintained for three
years
Notes:
4-13
-------
Section Summary
• Standards common to all used oil
handlers:
• Storage
• Release response
Notes:
4-14
-------
Section Summary (cont.)
Standards common to transporters/
transfer facilities, processors and
re-refiners, and off-specification
burners:
• Secondary containment system
• Notification and EPA identification
number
• Tracking the acceptance and delivery
of used oil
Notes:
4-15
-------
Section 5
Requirements Specific to
Certain Used Oil Handlers
i
O"
!"
tt.0
3 E.
§
(D r»
-------
Section 5
Requirements
Specific to
Certain Used Oil
Handlers
Notes:
5-1
-------
Section Overview
Requirements specific to different types
of used oil handlers:
• Generators
• Processors/Re-refiners
• Burners
• Marketers
Notes:
5-2
-------
Recycling Presumption
All used oil presumeably will be
recycled
A generator must manage used oil
according to the 40 CFR Part 279
standards until a person disposes of
the oil on site or sends it off site for
disposal, whether or not the generator
intends to recycle the used oil
Notes:
5-3
-------
Used Oil Generators:
Farmers, §279.20(a)(4)
Farmers who generate an average of
25 gallons or less per month of used oil
in a calendar year are exempt from
40 CFR Part 279, Subpart C, regulations
Notes:
5-4
-------
Used Oil Generators:
Vessels, §279.20(a)(2)
Vessels that generate used oil at sea or in
port are not subject to 40 CFR Part 279,
Subpart C, regulations
The owner or operator of the vessel and
the person(s) removing or accepting used
oil from the vessel are co-generators once
the oil is transported ashore
Notes:
• Separation of used oil and water that takes place on the ship is not
regulated as used oil processing under Part 279, Subpart F.
5-5
-------
Used Oil Generators:
Diesel Fuel, §279.20(a)(3)
Generators who mix used oil with diesel
fuel for use in their own vehicles are
exempt from 40 CFR Part 279, Subpart C,
regulations
Notes:
A used oil/diesel fuel mixture is not subject to generator standards once it
has been mixed. Prior to mixing, the generator of the used oil is subject to
the Subpart C standards.
5-6
-------
Used Oil Generators: Burning in
On-Site Space Heaters, §279.23
Generators may burn used oil in on-site
space heaters provided that:
• The heater burns only used oil that the owner
or operator generates or collects from
household DIY generators
• The heater has a maximum capacity of not
more than 0.5 million Btu per hour
• The combustion gases from the heater are
vented to the ambient air
Notes:
• The used oil generator must manage the used oil according to Part 279,
Subpart C, standards prior to burning it in a space heater.
• A generator that filters used oil prior to burning it in a space heater is not
considered a processor.
5-7
-------
Used Oil Processors and
Re-refiners: Specific Requirements
EPA believes that used oil processors and
re-refiners pose the largest threat to
human health and the environment:
• 25 sites on National Priorities List identify
used oil as a major constituent of concern
• EPA discovered several RCRA facilities
mismanaging their used oil
Notes:
5-8
-------
Used Oil Processors and Re-refiners:
Specific Requirements (cont.)
Requirements specific to used oil processors
and re-refiners include the following:
• General facility standards
• Preparedness and prevention
• Contingency plan and emergency procedures
• Unit closure
• Used oil analysis plan
• Operating record
• Biennial reporting
Notes:
5-9
-------
Used Oil Processors and Re-refiners:
General Facility Standards, §279.52
Preparedness and prevention
requirements and contingency plan and
emergency procedure requirements are
similar to those established for
hazardous waste facilities in 40 CFR
Parts 264 and 265, Subpart C
Notes:
5-10
-------
Used Oil Processors and
Re-refiners: Unit Closure, §279.54(h)
• Owner and operators who store used oil
in aboveground tanks or containers must
perform the following activities at the
time of closure:
• Empty the tanks and remove the containers
from the site
• Remove or decontaminate used oil residues
• Remove or decontaminate containment
system components, contaminated soils,1
and other equipment and structures
Notes:
1 If contaminated soil cannot be practicably removed or decontaminated,
then the hazardous waste landfill closure and postclosure care
requirements must be applied.
• Owners and operators who store used oil in underground storage tanks
must comply with the closure requirements of 40 CFR Part 280, Subpart
G.
• There are no financial responsibility requirements for processors and
re-refiners.
5-11
-------
Used Oil Processors and
Re-refiners: Unit Closure (cont.)
Owners and operators must manage
material as hazardous waste if it
meets the definition of hazardous
waste
Notes:
5-12
-------
Used Oil Processors and
Re-refiners: Analysis Plan, §279.55
• Used oil processors and re-refiners must
develop and follow a written analysis plan that
describes procedures for analyzing the used oil
managed at their facility
• The analysis plan includes procedures to
comply with the analysis requirements for the:
• Rebuttable presumption for used oil in §279.53
• On-specification used oil fuel determination in
§279.72
Notes:
• EPA is not providing a specific schedule for sampling and analysis;
however, processors and re-refiners are required to establish a tailored
schedule that is appropriate for their facility and meets all applicable
requirements.
5-13
-------
Used Oil Processors and
Re-refiners: Analysis Plan (cont.)
Rebuttable presumption:
• The analysis plan must specify procedures used to
ensure that used oil is not mixed with hazardous waste
• Processors and re-refiners must include at least one of
the following types of information in their analysis
plans (if applicable):
• Sampling methods and frequency
• Analytical methods and whether analysis will be performed on
or off site
• The type of information used to determine the halogen content
of used oil1
Notes:
1 This information would include the source and type of knowledge used to
determine halogen content or rebut the hazardous waste presumption.
5-14
-------
Used Oil Processors and
Re-refiners: Analysis Plan (cont.)
On-speciflcation used oil fuel determination:
• Processors and re-refiners who claim that
their used oil fuel is on-specification must
develop and follow an
analysis plan that includes s\ Use40VV
procedures for analyzing
the used oil fuel
specifications
Notes:
5-15
-------
Used Oil Processors and Re-refiners:
Analysis Plan (cont.)
On-speciftcation used oil fuel determination
(cont.):
• Processors and re-refiners who claim that
their used oil fuel is on-specification must
include at least one of the following types
of information in their analysis plans (if
applicable):
• Sampling methods
• Whether used oil will be analyzed prior to or
after any processing or re-refining
Notes:
• If a used oil processor or re-refiner markets on-specification used oil fuel,
he or she must document in the facility operating record that the used oil
meets the specifications and must cross-reference documentation that the
used oil meets the specification to the burner or marketer.
5-16
-------
Used Oil Processors and Re-refiners:
Analysis Plan (cont.)
On-specification used oil fuel determination
(cont.):
• Frequency of sampling, and whether
analysis will be performed on site or off site
• Methods used to analyze for used oil fuel
specifications
• The type of information used to make the
on-specification used oil fuel determination
Notes:
5-17
-------
Used Oil Processors and
Re-refiners: Operating Record, §279.57(a)
Processors and re-refiners must keep an
operating record at the facility that
includes the following information:
• Records and results of used oil analyses
performed as described in the analysis
plan
• Summary reports and details of all
incidents that require implementation of
the contingency plan
Notes:
5-18
-------
Used Oil Processors and Re-refiners:
Biennial Reporting, §279.57(b)
Used oil processors and re-refiners must
submit a biennial report to EPA that
includes the following information:1
• EPA identification number, name, and address
• The calendar year of the report
• The quantities of used oil accepted for
processing or re-refining
• The manner hi which the used oil is processed
or re-refined, including the specific processes
used
Notes:
1 The biennial report must be submitted in the form of a letter by March 1
of each even-numbered year.
5-19
-------
Used Oil Burners, §279.10(i):
PCB-Contaminated Used Oil
• Burning used oil and PCB mixtures:
• Burning of used oil containing greater than 50 ppm
PCBs is fully subject to TSCA1
• Used oil containing between 2 ppm and 50 ppm
PCBs may be burned as off-specification used oil
fuel
• Used oil containing less than 2 ppm PCBs2 may be
burned as on-specification used oil
• Blending used oil and PCBs for the purpose of
reducing the concentration of PCBs is
prohibited3
Notes:
1 40 CFR Part 761.
2 Two ppm is the quantifiable level.
3 If any PCBs at a concentration of 50 ppm or greater have been added to
the container or equipment, then the total container contents must be
considered as having a PCB concentration of 50 ppm or greater. See
§761.20(e)(2)(ii).
5-20
-------
Burners of Off-Specification Used Oil for
Energy Recovery: Mixing Restrictions
• Used oil burners may not aggregate off-
specification used oil with virgin oil or
on-specification used oil for purposes of
producing on-specification used oil
• Used oil burners may aggregate off-
specification used oil with virgin oil or
on-specification used oil for purposes of
burning the used oil mixture as off-
specification
Notes:
• Burners who process off-specification fuel to meet specification levels
must comply with the processor and re-refiner standards of Part 279,
Subpart F. Such a burner would also be subject to the used oil marketer
standards of Part 279, Subpart H, if the burner is the first person to claim
that the used oil fuel meets the specification.
5-21
-------
Used Oil Marketers:
Off-Specification Fuel, §279.75
Before a marketer directs the first shipment of
off-specification used oil fuel to a burner, the
marketer must obtain a one-time written and
signed notice from the burner certifying that:
• The burner has notified EPA of its location and
its general used oil management activities
• The burner will burn the off-specification used
oil only in a device identified in 40 CFR 279.61
Notes:
The certification must be maintained for three years from the date that the
last shipment of off-specification used oil is shipped to the burner.
5-22
-------
Used Oil Marketers:
On-Specification Fuel, §279-72
A marketer may determine that used oil
meets the fuel specification by:
• Performing analyses
• Obtaining copies of analyses
• Obtaining other information
documenting that the used oil fuel
meets the specification
Notes:
• Analyses of the used oil or other information used to make the
on-specification determination must be kept for three years.
5-23
-------
Used Oil Marketer: On-Specification
Used Oil Delivery, §279.74(a)
In addition to the tracking information
that the other used oil handlers must
maintain, marketers are required to
include a crossreference to the used
oil analyses or other information
used to make the on-specification
determination
Notes:
5-24
-------
Summary
Besides the requirements common to
all the used oil handlers, there are
additional requirements that apply to
particular types of handlers
Notes:
The March 4, 1994, final rule clarified activities a used oil generator can
perform without being considered a processor.
5-25
-------
coo
f»
5-2
ffl-8
DO
SLa
Section 6
Disposal and Use
Constituting Disposal
-------
Section 6
Disposal and
Use Constituting
Disposal
Notes:
6-1
-------
Section Overview
Disposal of used oil
Used oil filters
Use as a dust suppressant
Contacts for more information
Notes:
6-2
-------
Disposal of Used Oil
• Used oil is presumed to be recycled
• If characteristic used oil is to be disposed of,
it must be managed hi accordance with
RCRA Subtitle C requirements
• If nonhazardous used oil
is to be disposed of, it must be
managed hi accordance with
RCRA Subtitle D requirements
(i.e., disposed of hi an industrial
or municipal solid waste landfill)
Notes:
According to the recycling presumption, used oil is managed under Part 279
requirements until it is sent off site for disposal or disposed of on site
regardless of whether or not it exhibits a characteristic of hazardous waste.
Some states regulate the disposal of used oil as a hazardous waste regardless
of whether or not it exhibits a characteristic. See Appendix 5 for a list of
used oil state contacts.
6-3
-------
Surface Impoundment
Prohibition
Storage or disposal of used oils in
surface impoundments is not allowed
unless the impoundments are
managed as hazardous waste units
Notes:
• These units are subject to regulation under 40 CFR Parts 264 and 265.
6-4
-------
Used Oil Filters,
§261.4(b)(13)
Non-terne-plated used oil filters that
have been gravity hot-drained are
excluded from the definition of
hazardous waste
Notes:
The Filter Manufacturers Council will establish a regulatory hotline and
database to encourage the proper disposal of used oil filters. By calling
the hotline, companies wishing to dispose of used filters will be able to
access the proper disposal requirements for their particular states. The
database will contain:
• Overviews of federal and state regulations relevant to the use and
disposal of filters.
• Addresses and phone numbers of the regulatory agencies
governing the disposal of used filters in each state.
• A listing of companies, by state, that transport, process, and
recycle used filters.
6-5
-------
Used Oil Filters (cont.)
Notes:
The exclusion promulgated on May 20, 1992, does not
apply to terne-plated filters because they contain an
alloy of lead
Terne-plated filters are still eligible for the scrap metal
exemption in §261.6(a)(3)(iv) if they will be recycled
According to the Filter Manufacturers Council,
manufacturers are phasing out production of terne-
plated used oil filters
This exclusion does not apply to fuel filters,
transmission oil filters, or specialty filters, such as
cloth or railroad filters (57 FR 21524; May 20, 1992)
6-6
-------
Used Oil Filters (cont.)
Used oil filters can be hot-drained using
one of the following methods:
• Puncturing the filter anti-drain back valve or
the filter dome end and hot-draining
• Hot-draining and crushing
• Dismantling and hot-draining
• Any other equivalent hot-draining method that
will remove used oil
Notes:
6-7
-------
Dust Suppressant Prohibition
• 40 CFR §279.82 prohibits the use of all
used oils as a dust suppressant except
when a state has successfully petitioned
for an exemption
• This new regulation does not replace 40
CFR §266.23(b), which prohibits the use
of used oil as a dust suppressant if it
exhibits a hazardous characteristic or has
been contaminated with a hazardous
waste or dioxin
Notes:
6-8
-------
Use as a Dust Suppressant
States can petition EPA to allow the use
of nonhazardous used oil as a dust
suppressant:
m A state must have a program in place to
prevent the use of characteristic used oil
or used oil that is mixed with hazardous
waste as a dust suppressant
• The petition should demonstrate how the
state will minimize the impact of such use
on the environment
Notes:
• States can petition EPA as part of their authorization package.
• Currently, no guidance is available, nor is there any plan to develop
guidance on how states should petition EPA.
6-9
-------
Contacts for More Information
• Office of Solid Waste
Characterization and Assessment Division
Regulatory Development Branch
Special Projects Section
• Michaelle Wilson (Section Chief) (202 260-4669)
• Eydie Pines (202 260-3509)
• Becky Daiss (202 260-8718)
• Bryan Groce (202 260-9550)
• RCRA/CERCLA Hotline: (800424-9346)
Notes:
6-10
-------
Section Summary
• Disposal of hazardous used oil is subject to
the RCRA Subtitle C requirements
• Disposal of nonhazardous used oil is subject
to the RCRA Subtitle D requirements
• Non-terne-plated used oil filters that: have
been gravity hot-drained are excluded from
the definition of hazardous waste
• The use of used oil as a dust suppressant is
prohibited unless a state has successfully
petitioned for an exemption
Notes:
6-11
-------
Appendix 1
Discussion Questions
g
(0
88
DO
c 55
w *>
10 •*
ft- *•
o
(0
-------
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
-------
Section 2
-------
Definition of Used Oil
1. Palm Oil Co. has developed a hydraulic pump that uses pure vegetable oil as the hydraulic
fluid. Pump You Up Corp., before buying the pump, calls EPA to determine if oil
contaminated during use of the pump needs to be managed under Part 279 standards.
Are Part 279 used oil standards applicable?
Yes No
Explain: .
2. Willy's Widget Works stores virgin fuel onsite until it is burned in an industrial boiler for
energy recovery. Each year the facility cleans the tanks by raking the tanks' floor for oily
residues and sludges. These residues do not exhibit any hazardous characteristics. The
facility does not burn the sludge but sends it off site for processing.
Are Part 279 used oil standards applicable?
Yes No
Explain:
-------
3. Fine Refinery has generated a petroleum distillate. The refinery used the distillate to
remove paint from old machinery and pipes. It now intends to store the spent distillate on
site until it contracts with a transporter.
How should the distillate be managed?
A. As a used oil
B. As a solid or hazardous waste
Explain:
4. Ocean Data Co. uses Bopar, a substance refined from synthetic oil, inside cables that send
data from distant instruments back to ships. The cable is a heavy plastic sheath that protects
the enclosed data-transmitting wires. Because Bopar is lighter than water and is non-
conductive, Ocean Data Co. uses it to make the cables float on the ocean surface.
Occasionally, the plastic sheath breaks, and saltwater or other impurities (such as dirt) enter
the cable. When this happens, the company personnel remove the Bopar from the cable and
store the contaminated Bopar in a drum on shore until there is enough Bopar to make it
economically feasible for a transporter to pick it up.
4a. Does the contaminated Bopar meet the definition of used oil?
Yes No
Explain:
4b. Which Federal Register page best supports your answer? (See Appendix 2.)
A. 57 FR 21528
B. 57 FR 41574
C. 58 FR 26420
-------
5. You Wreck 'Em, We Fix 'Em is an auto body shop. The facility uses a polymer-derived
solvent, Vandol, to remove primer from equipment.
5a. After being used to remove primer from equipment on site, would Vandol be a used oil?
Yes No
Explain:
5b. Recently, You Wreck 'Em, We Fix 'Em discovered that Vandol is also an effective
lubricating oil for some of its power equipment on site. The company drains the oil out of
its equipment and stores it on site before recycling.
If You Wreck 'Em, We Fix 'Em uses Vandol as a lubricant instead of a solvent, would it be
a used oil?
Yes No
Explain:
-------
Used Oil or Hazardous Waste
For questions 6,7, and 8, let's say we want to develop a directory of used oil handlers and a separate
directory of hazardous waste handlers. You must decide to which directory each of the following
facilities belongs. (Refer to the descriptions of the hazardous waste characteristics at the end of this
appendix.)
6. Entry number 1: Re-coil Co. generates a corrosive hazardous waste. The facility mixes the
waste with a used oil that is solely ignitable. The resultant mixture no longer exhibits the
ignitable characteristic but still exhibits corrosivity.
In which directory would you recommend listing this company?
A. Used oil handlers directory
B. Hazardous waste handlers directory
7. Entry number 2: Victor's Video Rentals and Explosives Corp. is a conditionally exempt
small quantity hazardous waste generator that generates a purely reactive hazardous waste.
The facility mixes the waste with a used oil that is solely ignitable. The resultant mixture no
longer exhibits the reactivity characteristic but still exhibits ignitability.
In which directory would you recommend listing this company?
A. Used oil handlers directory
B. Hazardous waste handlers directory
8. Entry number 3: Tom's Firecrackers, Inc., generates a used oil that exhibits the
characteristic of reactivity. The facility mixes this used oil with a liquid hazardous waste that
is solely ignitable. After mixing, the used oil mixture no longer exhibits the ignitability
characteristic but is still reactive.
In which directory would you recommend listing this company?
A. Used oil handlers directory
B. Hazardous waste handlers directory
-------
Mixtures of Used Oil and Other Materials
9. Yesterday, workers at Smooth Sally's, Inc., waxed and polished their shop floor. Early this
morning, two facility workers spilled used oil on the shop floor and used a rag to absorb it.
9a. Would the rag/used oil mixture be a used oil?
Yes No
Explain:
9b. If Smooth Sally's subsequently drained the rag of all free-flowing used oil before disposing
of it, would the rag be a used oil?
Yes No
Explain: ;
9c. If Smooth Sally's drained the rag of all free-flowing used oil before burning it for energy
recovery, would the rag be a used oil?
Yes No
Explain:
9d. How would the used oil separated from the rag be managed?
-------
9e. Which Federal Register page best supports your answer? (See Appendix 2.)
A. 57 FR 21532
B. 57 FR 41581
C. 58 FR 15435
(This ends the first group of discussion questions.)
10
-------
Rebuttable Presumption
10. A household has generated a'mixture of used oil and hazardous waste with greater than
1,000 ppm total halogens and is storing it at home.
lOa. Is the used oil subject to the rebuttable presumption?
Yes No
Explain:
lOb. If the do-it-yourselfer takes the used oil to a collection center, can the presumption be
rebutted successfully?
Yes No
Explain:
11. Used oil containing inorganic road salts has 2,700 ppm total halogens.
11 a. Is the used oil subject to the rebuttable presumption?
Yes No
lib. If yes, can the presumption be rebutted successfully?
Yes No
Explain:
11
-------
12. Rightway Trucking Co. transports a used oil shipment that has not been mixed with a
characteristic hazardous waste. The shipment passes the rebuttable presumption but exhibits
the ignitability and toxicity characteristics.
Would Rightway be regulated as a hazardous waste transporter?
Yes No
Explain:
13. Gorgon Co. generates used oil containing 50,000 ppm total halogens. The company also
generates crankcase oil that is not contaminated with halogens. Suppose Gorgon blends the
crankcase oil with the used oil containing 50,000 ppm total halogens to bring the total
halogen below 1,000 ppm.
Has Gorgon successfully rebutted the presumption of hazardous waste mixing?
Yes No
Explain:
12
-------
14. Each year, Food Giant, a local supermarket, generates refrigeration oil containing 50,000
ppra chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) during its annual cleaning activities. Food Giant has
contracted with an off-site processor to reclaim the CFCs. Food Giant has also generated
some 25 gallons of crankcase oil that it stores in a warehouse on site. Food Giant lias leased
the refrigerator unit from Carol's Cool Cats, who services the unit. Carol's Cool Cats has
agreed to take both used oils off site.
Carol's Cool Cats considers blending the crankcase oil with the refrigerator coolant before
transporting the mixture to be reclaimed for CFCs. Would the mixture be subject to the
rebuttable presumption?
Yes No
Explain:
15. Used oil from metalworking has 1,500 ppm total halogens. The; oil is being sent to be
recycled and will not be returned to the generator.
15a. Is the used oil subject to the rebuttable presumption?
Yes No
15b. If yes, can the presumption be rebutted successfully?
Yes _ No
Explain:
13
-------
16. A local facility has been classified as a conditionally exempt small quantity generator of
hazardous waste. The facility also generates a noncharacteristic used oil. The facility
routinely mixes its exempt hazardous waste with the used oil. The resultant mixture exceeds
the rebuttable presumption level for total halogens. Because the hazardous waste is exempt
from RCRA regulation, the facility maintains that the mixture should not be managed as a
hazardous waste but as a used oil.
Is the facility correct?
Yes No
Explain:
17. You are inspecting an industrial plant, Royal Chemicals, Inc., that claims to be generating
a used oil during normal operations. You notice during your visit that Royal Chemicals'
used oil storage tanks accept used crankcase oil from another company that is located
nearby. You test the oil and it contains 4,000 ppm total halogens.
Can Royal Chemicals rebut the presumption for total halogens?
Yes No
Explain:
14
-------
Wastewater Exemption
18. Drain ofThought Co., a service station specializing in oil changes, has installed a system of
floor drains that will collect any spilled or dripped used oil. At the end of the day, the shop
floor is hosed down so that all used oil is washed into the floor drain. The drain system
pumps the water/used oil mixture through an oil/water separator.
18a. Is the service station a used oil processor?
.Yes No
Explain:
18b. How should the recovered used oil be managed?
18c. How should the separated water be managed?
19. A worker at your manufacturing plant knocks over a full 55-gallon drum of used oil. The
spill is hosed down a floor drain and then it is pumped through an oil/water separator.
Is the used oil/wastewater mixture subject to'Part 279 standards?
Yes No
15
-------
Used Oil Introduced Into Petroleum Refining Facility Processes
20. E.P. Petroleum, Inc. (EP), generates used oil from several processes and activities
throughout its primary refinery. Some of this used oil is burned on site for energy recovery
in accordance with the standards in Part 279, Subpart G. All the used oil burned on site is
off-specification fuel. EP wants to recycle some of their used oil back into the refining
process by introducing it at a point after catalytic cracking has occurred.
Is this activity allowed? If so, how is it regulated under the Part 279 standards?
Yes No
Explain:
21. Fuels 'R' Us, Inc., uses a crude oil/used oil mixture as feedstock in one of their refinery
process units. This feedstock is composed chiefly of crude oil, with used oil accounting for
approximately 0.7 percent of the mixture. The unit to which this mixture is introduced is
located at an early point in the process, before distillation or cracking. Fuels 'R' Us
accumulates this crude oil/used oil mixture in tanks on site before using it in the process.
Periodically, the tank is emptied for cleaning, and settled sludges are removed from the
bottom of the tank.
21a. What Part 279 standards apply to the used oil described in this scenario? How are the
sludges removed from the storage tank regulated?
21b. Due to fluctuating used oil generation rates from month to month, Fuels 'R' Us sometimes
stores used oil separately on site and removes only the amount needed to mix with crude oil
for insertion into the refining process.
How is the used oil in the separate tank regulated?
16
-------
22. Sometimes Fuels 'R' Us accepts used oil from off site and stores it separately on site before
inserting it directly in the crude distillation unit.
How is the used oil in the separate tank regulated?
Answer: Prior to being directly inserted into the crude distillation unit, used oils are
subject to all applicable Part 279 standards (§279.10(g)(3)). In this case, the
used oil is subject to the processor standards in Part 279, Subpart F.
17
-------
Section 3
-------
Used Oil Collection Centers, DIY Collection Centers, and Aggregation Points
23. Lube and Tool, Inc., operates service stations that offer oil-changing services. At each of its
stations, Lube and Tool places used oil into 55-gallon drums. The amount of time that it
takes Lube and Tool service stations to fill a drum ranges from one to four days, depending
on business conditions. Once a drum is full, it is transported in one of Lube and Tool's
trucks to a central location used by all of Lube and Tool's area service stations.
A representative of Lube and Tool calls you and asks what used oil standards she is subject
to in carrying out these activities. How would the service stations; and central location be
regulated?
24. Oil Collectors, Inc., collects used oil from DIY generators and sells it to processors and re-
refiners. The company also has diversified into the vehicle repair business and operates
several service stations. At a central location, Oil Collectors accumulates 55-gallon
shipments of used oil that are self-transported from its repair shops. A household DIY
collection center in the area has approached Oil Collectors and asked if it can send its used
oil in 55-gallon shipments to Oil Collectors' central accumulation point.
Can Oil Collectors accept this used oil at its accumulation point?
Yes No
Explain:
21
-------
Used Oil Generators: Self-Transport
25. Chemoil, Inc., generates small quantities of used oil. The company places used oil in a 55-
gallon container and transports it off site once the container is full. The used oil is delivered
to a processor who produces a used oil fuel.
How would Chemoil be regulated in performing this activity?
22
-------
Used Oil Transporters and Transfer Facilities: Definition
26. Drillings, Inc., has seven small oil wells at several sites within a 50-square-mile area. Each
site generates approximately 400 gallons of used oil per month. Once a month, a bulk
shipment of used oil is transported from each site for aggregation at Drillings' central storage
tank.
How is the transport of used oil to the central storage tank regulated? How is the storage
tank regulated?
27: Rail User, Inc., has stationed one of its rail cars in a rail yard, where it is used to collect and
aggregate used oil shipments greater than 55 gallons generated at the rail yard and by other
businesses. When the rail car reaches capacity, Rail User transports it directly to a
processing facility. It normally takes under one month to fill the rail car with drums
containing used oil.
27a. Under which Part 279 requirements would the owner or operator of the rail car be regulated
while the rail car sits in the rail yard?
27b. When the rail car is filled up, it is moved to an unloading area in a neighboring town, where
it remains for two months before being emptied. To which Part 279 requirements would the
owner or operator of the rail car be subject?
23
-------
Used Oil Transporters and Transfer Facilities:
Blending and Processing Restrictions
28. You are a used oil transporter and want to aggregate your used oil from several sources into
one shipment.
Is this practice allowable? If so, what used oil management standards must you follow for
this activity?
Yes No
Explain:
29. You are a used oil transporter and want to blend used oil with virgin oils to meet the fuel
specifications for burning.
29a. Is this practice allowable? If so, what used oil management standards must you follow?
Yes No
Explain:
29b. Which Federal Register page best supports your answer? (See Appendix 2.)
A. 57 FR 41567
B. 57 FR 41577
C. 57 FR 41589
24
-------
Used Oil Processor Clarification
30. Used oil is generated in an industrial process. As part of this process, the used oil is filtered
and returned to its original use through a closed-loop system. The process is continuous, and
the used oil is not removed from the manufacturing loop for processing.
Does this activity meet the definition of used oil processing?
Yes No
Explain:
31. A generator filters used oil prior to burning it in an on-site space heater.
Is the generator subject to regulation as a used oil processor?
Yes No
Explain:
32. A manufacturing facility uses a central filtration system to remove contaminants from metal
working fluids (e.g., lubricants and coolants) that it uses in its machining and grinding
equipment. The filtered used oil is collected and sent off site to a used oil burner.
Is the facility subject to regulation as a used oil processor?
Yes No
Explain:
25
-------
33. Paula's Fully Parts, Inc. (PPP), generates a wastewater stream that contains used oil. PPP
uses oil/water separators to remove used oil from this oil/wastewater mixture to make the
wastewater acceptable for discharge in compliance with an NPDES permit. PPP also uses
oil/water separators to recover used oil from oily wastewater that is brought to the facility
from off site.
How is the oil/water separation activity regulated in each case?
26
-------
Burners of Used Oil for Energy Recovery
34. A used oil burner receives off-specification used oil and aggregates it in a tank with virgin
oil. The resultant mixture meets specification for used oil fuel.
Can the burner bum the resultant mixture as an on-specification used oil fuel?
Yes No
Explain:
27
-------
Definition of Used Oil Marketers
35. Your company generates large quantities of off-specification used oil that you burn as fuel
in an industrial furnace on site.
Is your company subject to marketer standards of Part 279, Subpart H?
Yes __ No
Explain:
36. Your company generates on-specification used oil, and you want to bum the fuel on site as
part of your company's production process.
Is your company subject to marketer standards of Part 279, Subpart H?
Yes No
Explain:
37. Royal Manufacturing generates off-specification used oil and wants to sell it as a marine
engine fuel to a shipping company.
Is this allowable? If so, how would Royal be regulated? How would the shipping company
be regulated?
Yes No
Explain:
28
-------
Section 4
-------
Storage Provisions
38. On June 1, you are inspecting a used oil transfer facility that has four aboveground tanks.
Three of the tanks are in service, and one is abandoned. The records for the active tanks
indicate the following storage start dates: May 15, April 25, and April 29. The abandoned
tank is not labeled and has no secondary containment system. One of the active tanks has
several rust spots and a deteriorating wall in the secondary containment system. The facility
also stores used oil in a'surface impoundment, which is in compliance with Subpart K of 40
CFR Part 264.
38a. Is the facility complying with the used oil storage standards? If not, what steps should the
facility operator take to address the problems you identified?
Yes No
Explain:
38b. Suppose this facility was a generator storage site instead of a transfer facility. Would this
affect the problems you identified?
Yes No
Explain:
31
-------
Notification
39. You have recently begun transporting used oil and have been transporting hazardous waste
for five years under EPA identification number LAD010395127.
Is notification necessary?
Yes No
Explain:
40. You transport three 10-gallon drums of DIY used oil from your house to a DIY collection
center.
Is notification necessary?
Yes No
Explain:
41. You routinely transport three 55-gallon drums of DIY used oil from a DIY collection center
to a recycling facility.
Is notification necessary?
Yes No
Explain:
32
-------
Sections
-------
Recycling Presumption
42. Otto's Auto Repair Shop routinely generates used oil from oil changes. The facility owner
determines that his oil is characteristic for lead and cadmium. The owner intends to store
the used oil on site until he can contract with a transporter.
42a. What storage requirements must the generator follow?
42b. Can a used oil transporter accept Otto's Auto Repair Shop's used oil and deliver it to a
landfill?
Yes No
Explain:
35
-------
From 40 CFR Part 261 RCRA Hazardous Waste Regulations
§26131 Characteristic of ignitabUity.
(a) A solid waste exhibits the characteristic of ignitabUity if a representative sample of the waste has
any of the following properties:
(1) It is a liquid, other than an aqueous solution containing less than 24 percent alcohol by
volume and has flash point less man 60°C (140°F), as determined by a Pensky-Martens Closed Cup
Tester, using the test method specified in ASTM Standard D-93-79 or D-93-80 (incorporated by
reference, see §260.11), or a Setaflash Closed Cup Tester, using the test method specified in ASTM
Standard D-3278-78 (incorporated by reference, see §260.11), or as determined by an equivalent test
method approved by the Administrator under procedures set forth in §§260.20 and 260.21.
(2) It is not a liquid and is capable, under standard temperature and pressure, of causing fire
through friction, absorption of moisture or spontaneous chemical changes and, when ignited, burns so
vigorously and persistently that it creates a hazard.
(3) It is an ignitable compressed gas as defined in 49 CFR 173.300 and as determined by the
test methods described in that regulation or equivalent test methods approved by the Administrator
under §§260.20 and 260.21.
(4) It is an oxidizer as defined in 49 CFR 173.151.
(b) A solid waste that exhibits the characteristic of ignitability has the EPA Hazardous Waste Number
ofDOOl.
[45 FR 33119, May 19,1980, as amended at 46 PR 35247, July 7,1981; 55 FR 22684, June 1,1990]
§26132 Characteristic of corrosivity.
(a) A solid waste exhibits the characteristic of corrosivity if a representative sample of the waste has
either of the following properties:
(1) It is aqueous and has a pH less than or equal to 2 or greater than or equal to 12.5, as
determined by a pH meter using either an EPA test method or an equivalent test method approved by
the Administrator under the procedures set forth in §§260.20 and 260.21. The EPA test method for
pH is specified as Method 5.2 in "Test Methods for the Evaluation of Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical
Methods" (incorporated by reference, see §260.11).
(2) It is a liquid and corrodes steel (SAE 1020) at a rate greater than 6.35 mm (0.250 inch) per
year at a test temperature of 55°C (130*F) as determined by the test method specified in NACE
(National Association of Corrosion Engineers) Standard TM-01-69 as standardized in "Test Methods
for the Evaluation of Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods" (incorporated by reference, see
§260.11) or an equivalent test method approved by the Administrator under the procedures set forth in
§§260.20 and 260.21.
(b) A solid waste that exhibits the characteristic of corrosivity has the EPA Hazardous Waste Number
ofD002.
[45 FR 33119, May 19,1980, as amended at 46 FR 35247, July 7,1981; 55 FR 22684, June 1, 1990]
-------
§261.23 Characteristic of reactivity.
(a) A solid waste exhibits the characteristic of reactivity if a representative sample of the waste has
any of the following properties:
(1) It is normally unstable and readily undergoes violent change without detonating.
(2) It reacts violently with water.
(3) It forms potentially explosive mixtures with water.
(4) When mixed with water, it generates toxic gases, vapors or fumes in a quantity sufficient
to present a danger to human health or the environment
(5) It is a cyanide or sulfide bearing waste which, when exposed to pH conditions between 2
and 12.S, can generate toxic gases, vapors or fumes hi a quantity sufficient to present a danger to
human health or the environment.
(6) It is capable of detonation or explosive reaction if it is subjected to a strong initiating
source or if heated under confinement
(7) It is readily capable of detonation or explosive decomposition or reaction at standard
temperature and pressure.
(8) It is a forbidden explosive as defined in 49 CFR 173.53, or a Class A explosive as defined
in 49 CFR 173.53 or a Class B explosive as defined hi 49 CFR 173.88.
(b) A solid waste that exhibits the characteristic of reactivity has the EPA Hazardous Waste Number
ofD003.
[45 FR 33119, May 19,1980, as amended at 55 FR 22684, June 1,1990]
§261.24 Toxicity characteristic.
(a) A solid waste exhibits the characteristic of toxicity if, using the test methods described in appendix
n or equivalent methods approved by the Administrator under the procedures set forth in §§260.20
and 260.21, the extract from a representative sample of the waste contains any of the contaminants
listed in table 1 at the concentration equal to or greater than the respective value given in that table.
Where the waste contains less than 0.5 percent filterable solids, the waste itself, after filtering using
the methodology outlined hi appendix n, is considered to be the extract for the purpose of this section.
(b) A solid waste that exhibits the characteristic of toxicity has the EPA Hazardous Waste Number
specified in Table I which corresponds to the toxic contaminant causing it to be hazardous.
[55 FR 11862, Mar. 29, 1990, as amended at 55 FR 22684, June 1,1990; 55 FR 26987, June 29,
1990]
-------
From 40 CFR Part 261 RCRA Hazardous Waste Regulations
TABLE 1—MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION OF CON-
TAMINANTS FOR THE TOXICITY CHARACTERIS-
TIC
EPAHW
No.1
D004
D005
D018
D006
0019
0020
D021
D022
D007
0023
0024
0025
0026
0016
0027
0028
0029
0030
D012
0031
0032
0033
0034
0008
0013
0009
0014
0035
0036
0037
0038
0010
0011
0039
0015
0040
0041
0042
0017
0043
Contaminant
Arsenic
Barium :
Benzene
Cadmium
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlordane
Chlorobenzene
Chloroform. _
Chromium
o-Cresol
m-Cresol_
p-Cresol
Cresol . _
2.4-0 „
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
1.2-Oichtoroethane
1 . 1 -Dichtoroethylene
2.4-Oinitroto*uene._
Er>dnn.._
Heptachtor (and its
epoxxle).
Hexachkxobenzene...
Hexachkxobutadiene
Hexachkxoethane
Lead
LJndane ___.._ ........
Mercury
Methoxychkx .
Methyl ethyl ketone
Nitrobenzene
Pentrachtorophenol
Pyridine
Soiemim _ „
Silver.
Tetrachloroethylene
Toxapheoe..,..,..
TrichloroetnyJene
2.4.5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-TricMorophenoJ
2.4.5-TP (Savex)
Vinyl chloride :
CAS No.;
7440-38-2
7440-39-3
71-43-2
7440-43-9
56-23-5
57.74.9
108-90-7
67-66-3
7440-47-3
95-48-7
108-39-4
106-44-5
94-75-7
106-46-7
107-06-2
75-35-4
121-14-2
72-20-6
76-44-8
118-74-1
87-68-3
67-72-1
7439-92-1
58-89-9
7439-97-6
72-43-5
78-93-3
98-95-3
87-86-5
110-86-1
7782-49-2
7440-22-4
127-18-4
8001-35-2
79-01-6
95-95-4
88-06-2
93-72-1
75-01-4
Regula-
tory
Level
(mg/L)
5.0
1000
0.5
1 0
0.5
0.03
100.0
60
5.0.
« 200.0
*2000
4 200.0
« 200.0
10.0
7.5
0.5
0.7
»0.13
0.02
0.008
»0.13
0.5
3.0
8.0
0.4
0.2
10.0
200.0
2.0
100.0
»5,0
1.0
5.0
0.7
0.5
0.5
400.0
2.0
1,0
0.2
1 Hazardous waste number.
* Chemical abstracts service number.
3 Quanttation limit is greater than the calculated regulatory
level. The quantitation limit therefore becomes the regulatory
level.
4 If o-, m-, and p-Cresol concentrations cannot be differen-
tiated, the total cresol (0026) concentration is used. Tho
regulatory level of total cresol is 200 mg/l.
-------
Appendix 2
Federal Register Notices
S
-------
CONTENTS
APPENDIX 2 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES
March 4,1994
June 17,1993
May 3,1993
March 23,1993
September 10,1992
May 20, 1992
September 23,1991
June 27,1988
November 29,1985
-------
Friday
March 4, 1994
Part V
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Parts 271 and 279
Hazardous Waste Management System;
Identification and Listing of Hazardous
Waste; Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Final Rule
-------
10550 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday. March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 271 and 279
[EPA/530-2-42-011; FRL^t845-2]
Hazardous Waste Management
System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Recycled Used Oil
Management Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: On September 10,1992, EPA
exempted used oil inserted into crude
oil pipelines from the part 279 used oil
management standards. EPA is today
clarifying the existing pipeline
exemption and expanding the
exemption to other petroleum refinery
applications. Today's document clarifies
that the exemption from the used oil
management standards did not intend to
exclude used oil mixed with crude oil
or natural gas liquids (hereinafter
referred to as "crude oil") in pre-
pipeline units (e.g., stock tanks,
production separators) prior to being
introduced into the crude oil pipeline.
In addition, today's rule expands the
used oil exemption to include
transportation and/or storage of
mixtures of small amounts of used oil
(i.e., less than 1%) and crude oil that are
destined for insertion into a petroleum
refining facility process at a point prior
to crude distillation or catalytic
cracking.
Today's rule exempts from the part
279 standards, used oil that is inserted
into the petroleum refining facility
process after distillation or catalytic
cracking operations provided that the
used oil meets the used oil specification
prior to insertion.
Today's rule also exempts from the
part 279 standards used oil that
incidentally enters and is recovered
from a refinery's hydrocarbon recovery
system or wastewater treatment system
(i.e., process sewer, storm sewer, or
wastewater treatment units), if the
recovered used oil is subsequently
inserted into the petroleum refinery
process.
In addition, today's rule expands the
definition of transfer facility to allow
used oil to be held more than 24 hours
but less than 35 days prior to specified
activities.
Finally, EPA is today amending the
used oil processor standards to clarify
that a specific set of on-site
maintenance, filtering, and separation
activities were not intended to be
covered under the used oil processor
standards. EPA is also correcting errors
in regulations that appeared in the May
3,1993, Federal Register.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 4, 1994.
ADDRESSES: The regulatory docket for
this rulemaking is available for public
inspection at room 2427, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401
M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460
from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except for Federal holidays. The
docket number is F-94-UOTA-FFFFF.
The public must make an appointment
to review docket materials by calling
(202) 260-9327. The public may copy a
maximum of 100 pages from any
regulatory document at no cost.
Additional copies cost $.20 per page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general information contact the RCRA
Hotline, Office of Solid Waste, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401
M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460;
Telephone (800) 424-9346 (toll free) or,
in the Washington DC, metropolitan
area at (703) 920-9810.
For information on specific aspects of
this rule, contact Ms. Eydie Pines,
telephone (202) 260-3509, U.S. EPA,
401 M Street SW., Washington, DC
20460.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are listed
in the following outline:
I. Authority.
II. Background.
A. Summary of Recent Regulatory Actions
Pertaining to Used Oil.
1. Summary of May 20, 1992, Federal
Register Notice.
2. Summary of September 10, 1992,
Federal Register Notice.
3. May 3, 1993, and June 17,1993
Correction Notices.
B. Summary of the 1985 Comments.
C. Summary of 1991 Comments.
in. Analysis of New Part 279 Provisions.
A. Summary of Comments from Interested
Parties.
B. Definition of petroleum refining facility,
used oil re-refining facility.
C. Used Oil Introduced into Crude Oil
Pipelines or Petroleum Refineries.
1. Used Oil Introduced into Crude Oil
Pipelines.
2. Storage and Transportation of Mixtures
of Used Oil and Crude Oil.
3. Used Oil Inserted into the Petroleum
Refining Process without Prior Mixing
and Mixtures of Greater Than One
Percent Used Oil.
4. Used Oil Inserted Into the Petroleum
Refining Process after Crude Distillation
or Catalytic Cracking.
5. Used Oil Captured by the Refinery's
Hydrocarbon Recovery System or
Wastewater Treatment System and
Inserted into Petroleum Refining Process.
6. Stock Tank Bottoms.
D. Used Oil Transportation. Definition of
Transfer Facility.
E. Used Oil Processing by Generators and
Transfer Facilities.
1. Definition of Used Oil Processor.
(A) Reconditioning used oil before
returning it for reuse by the generator.
(B) Separating used oil from wastewater to
make wastewater acceptable for
discharge or reuse.
(C) Using oil mist collectors to remove
droplets of used oil from in-plant air to
make plant air suitable for continued
recirculation.
(D) Removing used oil from materials
containing or otherwise contaminated
with used oil in order to remove
excessive oil.
(E) Filtering, separating, or otherwise
reconditioning used oil before burning it
in a space heater.
F. Restrictions on transporters who are not
also processors or re-refiners and
changes to the definition of transfer
facility.
G. Tracking.
H. Correction to the Regulatory Language.
1. Requirements for enforcement authority.
2. Rebuttable Presumption.
3. Characteristic Hazardous Waste.
I. Correction to the Preamble Language.
IV. State Authorization.
V. Executive Order 12866.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act.
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act.
VIII. Administrative Procedure Act.
Authority
The regulations promulgated today
are issued under the authority of
sections 1004, 1006, 2002(a), 3014, and
7004 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended by the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, and as amended by
the Used Oil recycling Act, as amended,
42 U.S.C. 6903, 6905, 6912(a), 6935, and
6974.
II. Background
A. Summary of Recent Regulatory
Actions Pertaining to Used Oil
1. Summary of May 20,1992, Federal
Register Notice
On May 20,1992, EPA published a
final listing determination for used oils
that are destined for disposal (see 57 FR
21524). The Agency determined that
used oils destined for disposal did not
have to be listed as a hazardous waste
because used oils do not typically and
frequently meet the technical criteria for
listing a waste as hazardous. EPA gave
considerable attention, in reaching its
determination, to the current Federal
regulations that govern the management
of used oils that are disposed, including
the requirement for used oil that
exhibits a characteristic of hazardous
waste under subtitle C of RCRA.
The May 20,1992, Federal Register
notice also included a categorical
exemption from the definition of
hazardous waste in § 261.4 for non-
terne-plated used oil filters that have
been hot-drained to remove used oil.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 10551
EPA based this exemption on data
submitted to the Agency indicating that
these filters do not typically and
frequently exhibit the toxicity
characteristic.
2. Summary of September 10,1992,
Federal Register Notice
On September 10,1992, EPA
promulgated a final listing decision for
used oils that are recycled and
simultaneously promulgated
management standards for used oil,
codified at 40 CFR part 279 (see 57 FR
41566). EPA determined that used oil
destined for recycling did not have to be
listed as a hazardous waste because the
used oil did not meet the technical
criteria for listing a waste as hazardous,
particularly in light of the new
management standards and other federal
requirements which control the risks
posed by improper management of used
oil. The standards cover used oil
generators, transporters, processors, re-
refiners, off-specification burners and
marketers. The standards included an
exemption from the management
standards for used oil placed directly in
a crude oil pipeline.
3. May 3, 1993, and June 17, 1993
Correction Notices
On May 3, 1993, EPA published
technical amendments and corrections
to the May 20, 1992 and September 10,
1992, Federal Register Notices (see 58
FR 26421). On June 17, 1993, EPA
corrected several errors in the May 3,
1993, notice (see 58 FR 33341).
B. Summary of the 1985 Comments
Regarding Used Oil Mixed With Crude
Oil Destined for Refineries
On November 29,1985, EPA proposed
to list all used oil as a hazardous waste
(50 FR 49248). Commenters responded
that used oil mixed with crude oil be
exempt from such regulation because
the small quantities of used oil mixed
with crude oil posed no threat to the
environment when refined with crude
oil.
C. Summary of 1991 Comments
On September 23,1991, EPA
proposed that the two exemptions from
subtitle C requirements promulgated in
1985 (see 40 CFR 261.6(a)(3) (v)-(viii))
for oil-bearing hazardous waste and
fuels derived from these wastes, also
apply to used oils. (56 FR 48026, 48042)
EPA proposed exemptions from the
used oil management requirements
(whether or not EPA ultimately listed
used oil as a hazardous waste) for: (1)
Used oils that are reinserted as
feedstocks at primary petroleum
refineries; and (2) fuels derived from
those used oils.
Commenters (mainly the primary
petroleum refining industry) stated that
if EPA chose to list used oil as
hazardous waste, the Agency should
exempt used oil that is reintroduced
into the refinery process from hazardous
waste or used oil management standards
requirements. Commenters further
stated that if EPA did not adopt this
exemption, the entire refinery process
could be subject to hazardous waste
management requirements, including
permits. Commenters stated that this
would be unwarranted because the
reintroduction of used oil into the
refining process contributes only
insignificant concentrations of metals to
the crude oil or finished petroleum
product. Other commenters stated that
refiners that handle used oil should be
subject to the same requirements for
used oil management as are used oil re-
refiners.
Commenters from the primary
petroleum refining industry also stated
that EPA should not limit lie exemption
to those instances where used oil is
inserted before fluid catalytic cracking
or distillation, since other conversion
and distillation processes in the refinery
would also remove, alter or immobilize
impurities in the oil. They asserted that
limiting the point of insertion could
foreclose the future development of
used oil recycling activities. These
commenters also stated that limiting the
insertion point could preclude refineries
from accepting DIY oil. Commenters
asserted that DIY oil might have to
undergo certain pre-processing at
refineries prior to its insertion into the
refining process. They also asserted that
under the proposed exemption, this pre-
processing would not be exempt and
would be a hazardous waste activity.
Commenters stated that these activities
are part of the refining process.
Commenters from the primary
petroleum industry further stated that
EPA should extend the exemption to
apply to used oil inserted into the
pipeline at marketing, E&P and pipeline
facilities for use in the refinery process.
They asserted that used oil recovered
from oil and gas exploration and
production is placed in pipelines and
trucks and returned to the refinery from
other petroleum facilities. Commenters
stated that the recovered oils are useful,
valuable raw materials that are
reintroduced into the crude stream for
their economic value.
III. Analysis of New Part 279 Provisions
On September 10,1992, EPA
promulgated a final listing decision for
used oils that are recycled and
simultaneously promulgated standards
in 40 CFR part 279 for the management
of used oil under RCRA section 3014.
Under § 279.10(g) of part 279, EPA
granted an exemption for used oils
introduced directly into crude oil
pipelines from part 279 standards at the
point at which they are introduced. EPA
did not address the proposed
exemptions for used oil inserted into the
petroleum refining facility process
either prior to or after crude distillation
or catalytic cracking.
The American Petroleum Institute
filed a petition for review of the
September 10, 1992, rule, on December
8, 1992, raising the issue that EPA had
not addressed the proposed exemptions
for petroleum refining, production, and
transportation in the September 10,
1992, final rule. Today's rule responds
to comments and addresses outstanding
issues related to used oil and petroleum
refining facility processes.
A. Summary of Comments From
Interested Parties
Today's rule was distributed in draft
form for comment to the litigants and
intervenors concerning the 1992 rule,
and other concerned members of the
regulated community, States, and
environmental groups. The primary
substantive comments received on the
draft and EPA's responses to those
comments are summarized below.
EPA received several comments from
the petroleum industry on the
exemption from part 279 for storage and
transportation of mixtures of used oil
and crude oil that contain less than 1%
used oil and are destined for insertion
into petroleum refining process. These
commenters objected primarily to
provisions in the draft final rule limiting
the exemption to mixtures that contain
less than 1% used oil. The commenters
also objected to limiting the amount of
used oil that can be directly inserted
into the petroleum refining process to
1% of the crude oil process unit
throughput at any given time. EPA has
retained the 1% limit in both cases in
today's final rule for reasons discussed
in section III.B.2 of this preamble.
EPA received comments from used oil
re-refiners (i.e., "secondary" petroleum
industry—a type of used oil processor)
regarding the regulatory status of
petroleum refineries that receive used
oil from off-site and store the used oil
on-site before mixing it with crude oil.
The draft rule proposed to regulate
petroleum refining facilities as used oil
transfer facilities in these
circumstances. Commenters stated,
however, that petroleum refiners that
receive used oil from off-site pose the
same potential concerns from receipt of
-------
10552 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
adulterated used oil and improper
storage of used oil as re-refiners and
should therefore be subject to the
requirements for used oil processor/re-
refiners prior to mixing. EPA agrees and
has revised the draft rule accordingly.
These changes are discussed in greater
detail below.
EPA also received numerous
comments on provisions clarifying what
constitutes a used oil processor.
Provisions contained in the draft
document would have prohibited both
on- and off-site burning of used oil
generated from specified activities that
EPA is today clarifying are not subject
to the used oil processor standards.
Commenters stated that the used oil
generated from these activities would be
suitable for burning in accordance with
the part 279, subpart G standards and
that burning should not be further
restricted. In response to these
comments, EPA has decided to allow
on-site burning of the used oil generated
from these activities but has retained the
prohibition against off-site burning. The
basis for this decision is discussed in
section III.C of today's preamble.
B. Section 279.1—Definition of
Petroleum Refining Facility
Today's rule establishes a regulatory
definition for "petroleum refining
facility." EPA believes it is necessary to
define this term in order to provide a
clear distinction between what the
Agency considers to be and regulates as
primary petroleum refining facilities
and facilities that EPA considers to be
used oil re-refiners for regulatory
purposes. Under today's rule,
"petroleum refining facility" is defined
as follows:
"Petroleum refining facility" means an
establishment primarily engaged in
producing gasoline, kerosine, distillate fuel
oils, residual fuel oils, and lubricants,
through fractionation, straight distillation of
crude oil, redistillation of unfinished
petroleum derivatives, cracking or other
processes (i.e., facilities classified as SIC
2911).
A used oil re-refiner, in contrast, is a
facility that processes used oil to
produce lube base stocks and greases,
industrial fuels, asphalt extenders,
diesel like fuels, and other products.
EPA is aware that petroleum refiners
and used oil re-refiners employ similar
production processes and produce
similar products. Consequently, the
Agency has avoided defining these
facilities in terms of the process steps
employed to produce a finished product
or the type of products produced. As
defined by today's rule, petroleum
refining facilities and used oil re-
refining facilities differ primarily in the
material that constitutes the primary
initial feed to the process. In order for
a facility to be considered a petroleum
refining facility, the material fed to the
front end of the refining process must be
comprised primarily of crude oil. In
order to be considered a used oil re-
refiner, the material entering the front
end of the process must be comprised
primarily of used oil.
C. Section 279.10(g)—Used Oil
Introduced Into Crude Oil Pipelines or
Petroleum Refining Facilities
1. Section 279.10(g)(l)—Used Oil
Introduced Into Crude Oil Pipelines
The September 10, 1992, final used
oil regulations provided an exemption
at § 279.10(g) from management
standards for used oil that is placed
directly into a crude oil pipeline (see 57
FR 41613). Today's rule replaces
§ 279.10(g) with § 279.10(g)(l) which
clarifies the original intent of the
pipeline exemption. Section 279.10(g) of
the September 10, 1992, final rule
provided that "Used oil that is placed
directly into a crude oil, oil or natural
gas pipeline is subject to the
management standards of [part 279]
only prior to the point of introduction
into the pipeline. Once the used oil is
introduced to the pipeline, the material
is exempt from the requirements of [part
279]."
EPA is concerned that the phrase,
"placed directly into a crude oil or
natural gas pipeline," can be literally
interpreted to apply more narrowly than
the Agency had intended. EPA
understands that it is standard practice
to first mix small amounts of used oil,
typically less than 1%, with crude oil in
stock tanks, production separators or
other tank units that are connected via
pipeline to the petroleum refining
facility (i.e., pre-pipeline units). It was
not EPA's intent to exclude used oil that
is mixed with crude oil in these pre-
pipeline units from the § 279.10(g)
pipeline exemption. Rather, EPA
intended to include this practice within
the meaning of "direct insertion."
Because used oil is typically inserted
into the petroleum pipeline through
these pre-pipeline units, to exclude
these units from the pipeline exemption
would effectively render the exemption
meaningless. Clearly this was not EPA's
intent. Today's rule revises the language
of the exemption to clarify that used oil
may be inserted into the pipeline via
pre-pipeline units (which contain crude
oil) exempt from the requirements of
part 279. It should be noted here that
the § 279.10(g)(l) pipeline exemption
established by today's rule is limited to
pipelines that convey crude oil from off-
site locations to the petroleum refining
facility. The exemption does not apply
to pipelines that convey crude oil from
one on-site location within a petroleum
refinery to another. If such on-site
piping contains used oil, it is exempt
only if it qualifies under
§§ 279.10(g)(2)-(5) discussed below.
Also, if processing of the used oil is
performed prior to mixing with crude
oil in these pre-pipeline units, such
processing remains subject to the part
279, subpart F standards for used oil
processors and re-refiners. Used oil that
is generated and stored at the pipeline
is subject to the used oil generator
standards prior to mixing with crude
oil. Used oil that is transported to the
pipeline and immediately mixed with
crude oil or stored for less than 24 hours
prior to such mixing is subject to all
Subpart E transporter standards except
for § 279.45 which applies to transfer
facilities. Used oil that is transported to
and subsequently stored at the pipeline
for more than 24 hours and less than 35
days prior to mixing with crude oil is
subject to all the part 279, subpart E
transporter/transfer facility
requirements.
2. Section 279.10(g)(2)—Storage and
Transportation of Mixtures of Used Oil
and Crude Oil
Section 279.10(g)(2) of today's rule
expands the used oil management
standard exemption to include: (1)
Mixtures of used oil and crude oil
containing less than 1% used oil that
are being stored at the petroleum
refining facility or in discrete units
remotely located from the pipeline, as
long as the mixture is destined for the
refinery and inserted prior to crude
distillation or catalytic cracking; and (2)
mixtures of used oil and crude oil
containing less than 1% used oil that
are being transported (via truck, rail, or
vessel) to the petroleum refinery or the
pipeline for insertion into the petroleum
refining process prior to crude
distillation or catalytic cracking. The
former exemption provided at
§ 279.10(g) did not apply either to
mixtures of used oil and crude oil that
are stored at the petroleum refinery or
in remotely located units, or to the
transportation of mixtures of used oil
and crude oil. The previous, more
narrow exemption was based on the
assumption that used oil was placed
directly into the pipeline (or into units
directly connected to the pipeline as
previously discussed). EPA assumed
that the mixing of used oil and crude oil
occurred at the point at which used oil
was inserted into the pipeline. EPA has
since learned, however, that mixing
frequently occurs at exploration and
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 10553
production sites that are remotely
located from the pipeline or the
petroleum refinery.
For example, used oil generated
during on- and off-shore drilling
activities (e.g. from compressors, trucks
and other heavy equipment) is routinely
mixed with crude oil in units (e.g.
production separators, seagoing vessels,
stock tanks, etc.) located at the
exploration and production site and
then transported, as a mixture, to the
pipeline or petroleum refining facility.
Depending on the location of the
drilling activities, the mixture of used
oil and crude oil may need to be
transported (by vessel, truck, rail, etc.)
to a separate location for introduction
into the pipeline or the petroleum
refining facility. In the case of off-shore
drilling sites for example, conveyance of
the mixture may involve multiple
modes of transportation (i.e., from the
off-shore platform to land by vessel or
pipeline and then to the crude oil
pipeline by land-based transport).
Today's exemption covers all modes of
transportation of mixtures of used oil
and crude or natural gas liquids, as long
as the mixture contains less than 1%
used oil and is destined for insertion
into a petroleum refining facility
process at a point prior to crude
distillation or catalytic cracking. In
addition, today's exemption covers
storage of mixtures of used oil and
crude oil, provided that the mixture
contains less than 1% used oil and is
inserted into a petroleum refining
facility process prior to crude
distillation or catalytic cracking.
Used oil that is generated at
exploration and production sites
continues to be subject to used oil
generator standards prior to being mixed
with crude oil such that it is exempt
under today's rule. Used oil that is
generated off-site and transported to or
stored at an exploration and production
site is subject to the transporter and
transfer facility standards, as applicable,
up until the point at which the used oil
is mixed with crude oil such that it is
exempt under § 279.10(g)(2).
EPA is exempting mixtures of used oil
and crude oil held in discrete units at
a refinery or at remote locations because
the Agency understands that the amount
of used oil contained in these mixtures
is extremely small relative to the large
quantities of crude oil. In developing
today's rule, EPA held numerous
discussions with petroleum refinery
industry representatives regarding the
maximum amount of used oil contained
in mixtures of used oil and crude oil
that are destined for insertion into a
petroleum refining process prior to
crude distillation or catalytic cracking.
Industry representatives repeatedly
informed the Agency that used oil
constitutes less than 1% of these
mixtures. In gathering information for
today's rule, EPA held conference calls
with representatives from a number of
petroleum refining companies (e.g.,
Mobil Oil Corporation and Phillips
Petroleum Inc.,). The Agency also
conducted several site visits, including
visits to an Amoco refinery in Whiting,
Indiana and a Mobil Oil Corporation
refinery in Paulsboro, New Jersey. In
each case, EPA was informed that used
oil does not currently, and will not
comprise greater than 1% of the crude
oil/used oil mixture because of the sheer
volumes of crude oil that are
continuously being produced and
processed relative to the amount of used
oil that is generated at production sites
or refineries. This recent information is
consistent with comments submitted in
response to the 1985 Used Oil Proposed
Rule in which Exxon Company, USA
stated that the average percentage of
used oil in refinery feed stock streams
is less than 0.02% and Texaco, Inc.,
indicated that used oil would constitute
no more than 0.01% of the refinery
input.
EPA does not believe it is necessary
to apply the used oil management
standards to the less than 1% fraction of
used oil that is being held temporarily
in discrete units or transported from
those units to the pipeline or the
petroleum refinery for recycling as part
of a mixture that is composed
overwhelmingly of crude oil. In essence,
because of the high ratio of crude oil to
used oil, EPA considers the mixture to
be equivalent to crude oil for regulatory
purposes. EPA's part 279 standards
were designed to control those
particular risks associated with the
management of used oil (e.g.,
uncontrolled burning, improper storage
practices by used oil handlers) pursuant
to section 3014 of RCRA.
The reason for EPA's imposition of a
1% limit on the amount of used oil
contained in mixtures of used oil and
crude oil being stored or transported to
a crude oil pipeline or petroleum
refinery prior to insertion into the
refining process is that, while we have
determined that the small amounts of
used oil that are being added to crude
oil under current practices pose no
incremental risk over normal crude oil,
we have not evaluated whether larger
amounts of used oil also pose no
incremental risk. Given the information
provided to EPA by the petroleum
refining industry regarding the inherent
limitations on the amount of used oil
that is or should be contained in
mixtures of used oil and crude oil (i.e.,
less than 1%), and given that EPA has
received no information, either recently,
or in response to previous rulemakings
that provides basis for an alternative
limit, the Agency sees no point in
imposing a higher cap. Imposition of a
higher cap could have the effect of
encouraging mixing of used oil with
crude oil that would not otherwise
occur during the normal course of
petroleum refining operations. Such an
incentive might lead to increased
incremental risk from management of
large amounts of used oil, exempt from
the part 279 standards, at petroleum
refineries. EPA also concluded that a
less precise limit (i.e., "de minimis" or
"small amounts"), as was suggested by
some commenters from the petroleum
refining industry, would needlessly
cause uncertainty, given that EPA was
told repeatedly that amounts currently
introduced are far less than 1%.
3. Section 279.10(g)(3)—Used Oil
Inserted Into the Petroleum Refining
Process Without Prior Mixing and
Mixtures of Greater Than One Percent
Used Oil
As previously stated, under today's
rule, mixtures of used oil and crude oil
containing less than 1% used oil that
are transported to or stored at a
petroleum refinery, and are introduced
prior to crude distillation or catalytic
cracking, are exempt from part 279
standards under § 279.10(g)(2). It is
EPA's understanding, based on
information received from petroleum
industry representatives, that used oil
can potentially be inserted directly into
the petroleum refining process prior to
crude distillation or catalytic cracking
without either: (1) Mixing the used oil
with crude oil feedstocks, or (2) pre-
processing of the used oil to ensure that
any contaminants in the used oil will
not interfere with the refining process
(e.g., contaminants fouling a catalyst,
etc.). Based on this understanding,
today's exemption also applies to used
oil that is introduced directly into the
petroleum refining process at a point
prior to crude distillation or catalytic
cracking as long as the used oil
comprises less than 1% of the crude oil
feed to a petroleum refining facility
process unit at any given time. Again,
because of the high ratio of crude oil to
used oil, EPA considers these mixtures
to be equivalent to crude oil for
regulatory purposes. Therefore, the
Agency believes that this activity would
pose no significant increase in risk.
Used oil that is inserted directly into
the petroleum refining process (at a
volume of less than 1% of the crude oil
process unit feed at any given time) is
considered mixed, and therefore exempt
-------
10554 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
from part 279, at the point at which it
enters the process. This exemption
applies both to used oil generated at the
petroleum refining facility where the
used oil is being inserted, and to used
oil generated off-site that is collected
and transported to the petroleum
refining facility for insertion into the
refining process prior to crude
distillation or catalytic cracking.
Used oil that is inserted into the
petroleum refining process without first
being mixed with crude oil feedstocks
(e.g. in crude oil stock tanks) is subject
to part 279 standards prior to insertion.
Used oil that is generated on-site and
then stored without prior mixing and
used oil generated on-site that
constitutes greater than 1% of a mixture
of used and crude oil continues to be
subject to the part 279, subpart C
standards for generators. With the
exception of used oil that is exempt
from the part 279 standards because it
constitutes less than 1% of a mixture of
used oil and crude oil, used oil that is
generated off-site and then transported
to or stored at a petroleum refining
facility, continues to be subject to the
applicable part 279 requirements i.e., to
the requirements for used oil
transporters and transfer facilities while
being transported and to the
requirements for used oil processors
upon receipt at the petroleum refining
facility. Petroleum refining facilities that
receive used oil from off-site for direct
insertion into the petroleum refining
process are subject to the used oil
processor standards from the point at
which they receive the used oil up until
the point at which the used oil is
inserted into the petroleum refining
process. Finally, it is important to
reiterate that the exemptions provided
under both §§ 279.10(g)(2) and
279.10(g)(3) of today's rule apply at the
point of mixing and only to mixtures
that contain less than 1% of used oil.
Although petroleum industry
representatives have raised concerns
that a 1% limit on the amount of used
oil that can be inserted directly into the
petroleum refining process may be
technology limiting, EPA has not
received any information that would
support this position, nor has the
Agency received information to support
an alternative level. The Agency
believes that by limiting the amount of
used oil that can be introduced directly
into the refining process exempt from
the used oil processing standards, it can
better ensure against mixing only to
avoid compliance with the part 279
processing standards. If information
becomes available that the 1% limit is
inhibiting used oil recycling, the
Agency will consider whether any
change to the rules is necessary.
In the draft rule, EPA proposed to
regulate petroleum refining facilities
that receive used oil from off-site as
used oil transfer facilities prior to
mixing. However, EPA agrees with
comments on the draft rule that
petroleum refining facilities that receive
used oil from off-site pose the same
potential concerns associated with
receipt of adulterated used oil and
improper storage of used oil as used oil
re-refiners. Petroleum refining facilities
that receive used oil from off-site may
not have adequate information to ensure
that the used oil has not not been
improperly mixed with listed hazardous
waste. Also, the volumes of used oil that
may be managed require adequate
planning for dealing with emergency
releases. EPA has therefore revised the
final rule to provide that petroleum
refining facilities that receive and store
used oil from off-site are subject to the
used oil processor standards prior to
mixing. The principal effect of this
change is that petroleum refiners that
receive used oil from off-site must
prepare a waste analysis plan to ensure
that the used oil has not been mixed
with hazardous waste and must
maintain an operating record to
document compliance with the waste
analysis plan. In addition, such
refineries will have to adopt or amend
emergency contingency plans to address
used oil in accordance with § 279.52 of
the used oil management standards.
4. Section 279.10(g)(4)—Used Oil
Inserted Into the Petroleum Refining
Process After Crude Distillation or
Catalytic Cracking
Under § 279.10(g)(4) of today's rule,
used oil that is inserted into the
petroleum refining process after crude
distillation or catalytic cracking is
exempt from the part 279 standards
provided that the used oil meets the
used oil specification prior to insertion.
Used oil remains subject to part 279
standards up until its actual insertion
into the petroleum refining process. As
previously discussed, used oil generated
on-site must be stored according to part
279, subpart C standards for used oil
generators. Used oil generated off-site
must be transported according to the
part 279, subpart E standards for
transporters and transfer facilities and
stored according to the part 279, subpart
F standards for used oil processor/re-
refiners.
EPA's use of the terms "before" and
"after" crude distillation or catalytic
cracking is intended to distinguish
between the initial part of the petroleum
refining process where crude oil is the
primary feedstock and is refined by
undergoing crude distillation or
catalytic cracking and the latter part of
the petroleum refining process where
crude oil residuals constitute the
primary feed, and coke and asphalt are
the primary products. Refinery
processes that occur after crude
distillation or catalytic cracking do not
provide refining to the same extent as
that which occurs as a result of crude
distillation or catalytic cracking. Crude
distillation or catalytic cracking is
expressly designed to remove, alter, or
otherwise immobilize contaminants in
the normal course of the refining
process. EPA has insufficient
information on post-crude distillation or
catalytic cracking units identified by
commenters (e.g., asphalt towers,
petroleum cokers), and is concerned
about the possible environmental effects
(e.g., air emissions, transfer of
inorganics to asphalt or petroleum coke)
of placing large amounts of off-
specification used oil into the petroleum
refining process without passing
through the crude distillation or
catalytic cracking units. In contrast, on-
specification used oil may be burned in
the same manner as virgin petroleum
fuel in other situations, therefore it
makes little sense to restrict its use as
a feedstock to the petroleum coker (or in
any other process "after" crude
distillation or catalytic cracking).
It should be noted that if off-
specification used oil is inserted into
petroleum refining processes after crude
distillation or catalytic cracking (e.g., a
coker), the facility would be subject to
the used oil processing requirements in
part 279, subpart F. In addition,
petroleum refining facilities that wish to
insert on-specification used oil into the
refining process after crude distillation
or catalytic cracking and that are the
first to claim that the used oil is on-
specification (whether generated at the
refinery, or at an off-site location),
would be defined as marketers subject
to the requirements for used oil
marketers found in part 279, subpart H.
5. Section 279.10(g)(5)—Used Oil
Captured by the Refinery's Hydrocarbon
Recovery System or Wastewater
Treatment System and Inserted Into
Petroleum Refining Process
Section 279.10(g)(5) of today's rule
exempts from the part 279 standards
used oil that incidentally enters and is
recovered from a petroleum refining
facility's hydrocarbon recovery system
or its wastewater treatment system (e.g.,
process sewer, storm sewer, or
wastewater treatment units), if the
recovered used oil is subsequently
inserted into the petroleum refining
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
10555
process. Oil (that may contain small
amounts of used oil) that has been
recovered from a refining facility's
hydrocarbon recovery or wastewater
treatment system is typically used as a
feedstock in petroleum refining to
produce more petroleum products. EPA
understands that used oil, generated
from routine refinery process operations
and that incidentally enters a refinery's
recovery or wastewater treatment
system (e.g., drips, leaks, and spills from
compressors, valves, and pumps),
represents a small portion of the total oil
that enters (and is then recovered from)
the recovery or wastewater treatment
system. Thus, the oil recovered from the
system is more properly characterized
as crude feedstock than used oil.
Provided the used oil is inserted into
the petroleum refining process, EPA
believes that regulation under part 279
standards is unwarranted. This
exemption from the part 279 standards
does not extend to used oil which is
intentionally introduced into a
petroleum refinery's recovery or
wastewater treatment system (e.g.,
pouring collected used oil into any part
of the hydrocarbon recovery system,
storm or process sewer system or into
wastewater treatment units). Used oil
may not be introduced to the refinery's
hydrocarbon recovery or wastewater
treatment system as a way to avoid
meeting the conditions specified in
§279.10(g)(4).
For the purposes of the exemption in
today's rule, the examples cited in the
existing de minimis wastewater
exclusion (§279.10(f)) provide guidance
on what types of releases to a refinery's
hydrocarbon recovery or wastewater
treatment system would be considered
"routine" or "incidental". The
exemption is intended to cover losses
from drippage, minor spillage, etc., that
cannot be reasonably avoided. For
example, used oil that has been
collected from equipment or vehicle
maintenance activities and intentionally
introduced into a refinery's wastewater
treatment system would not be exempt
under § 279.1(g)(5) from the part 279
standards once recovered. Similarly,
used oil that is generated off-site and is
brought to the refinery may not be
added to any portion of the refinery's
wastewater treatment system (i.e.,
process sewer, storm sewer, or
wastewater treatment units), and still be
exempt under § 279.10(g)(5) once
recovered; such oil is clearly not
"incidentally captured" by the
refinery's wastewater treatment system.
In fact, unless specifically exempted
under § 279.10(g)(2) or § 279.10(g)(3) of
today's rule, this type of activity would
meet the definition of used oil
processing under the existing used oil
management standards (see 40 CFR
279.1).
Today's rule does not preclude
intentional introduction of used oil in to
the facility's recovered oil tanks. EPA is
aware that used oil from both on- and
off-site is often added directly to the
petroleum refining facility's recovered
oil tanks. Mixtures of used oil and
recovered oil that contain greater than
1% used oil are regulated as used oil.
Mixtures of used oil and recovered oil
that contain less than 1% used oil and
are inserted into the petroleum refining
process prior to crude distillation or
catalytic cracking are exempt from the
part 279 used oil management standards
under § 279.10(g)(2). Mixtures of used
oil and recovered oil that contain less
than 1% used oil and are inserted into
the petroleum refining process after
crude distillation or catalytic cracking
are exempt from the part 279 standards
(under § 279.10(g)(4)) only if the used
oil meets the used oil specification prior
to mixing with recovered oil.
6. Section 279.10(g)(6)—Stock Tank
Bottoms
Section 279.10(g)(6) of today's rule
exempts tank bottoms from stock tanks
containing exempt mixtures of used oil
and crude oil from the part 279
standards. Like the actual mixtures of
used oil and crude oil, the bottoms from
these mixtures are expected to contain
insignificant amounts of used oil.
Therefore, the Agency does not believe
that the bottoms from tanks (or other
units) containing mixtures of used oil
and crude oil should be subject to the
used oil management standards. The
tank bottoms are subject to all other
applicable requirements, i.e., the
§ 262.11 requirement to determine if
they are hazardous waste.
D. Used Oil Transportation
Section 279.1—Definition of Transfer
Facility
Today's rule revises the definition of
transfer facility to allow used oil to be
held at a location (i.e., a transfer facility)
temporarily prior to activities that are
not subject to the processor standards as
a result of today's rulemaking. In the
September 10,1992 final rule, a transfer
facility was defined as a transportation-
related facility where shipments of used
oil are held for more than 24 hours but
less than 35 days during the normal
course of transportation. Today's rule
expands that definition to allow used oil
to be held for more than 24 hours but
less than 35 days during the normal
course of transportation or prior to an
activity performed pursuant to
§ 279.20(h)(2). Under the amended
definition, as discussed below in section
F of this preamble, a site to which used
oil from oil-bearing electrical
transformers is transported for filtering
prior to reuse would be considered a
transfer facility under today's definition.
E. Section 279.20(b)(2)(ii)—Used Oil
Processing by Generators and Transfer
Facilities
Since the promulgation of the
September 10,1992, Used Oil
Management Standards, a number of
parties have raised concerns regarding
the definition of used oil processor and
the types of activities that are covered
by that definition. The commenters are
concerned that a broad construction of
the term processor inappropriately
includes a number of very basic on-site
generator activities that the Agency did
not intend to regulate under the used oil
processor standards (e.g.
reconditioning/maintenance to extend
the life of used oil, separation of used
oil from wastewater discharge, etc.).
EPA agrees that activities such as these,
when performed by the generator, were
not intended to be covered under the
used oil processor standards because
used oil processing is not their primary
purpose, as explained below in greater
detail. In fact, too broad an
interpretation of the processor
definition may discourage
environmentally beneficial recycling
and waste minimization activities by
imposing an unwarranted regulatory
burden on owners and operators that
EPA did not intend to regulate as used
oil processors.
Therefore, today's rule revises the
used oil management regulations to
clarify the Agency's intent regarding the
definition of a used oil processor by
specifying those on-site maintenance,
filtering, and separation activities that
are not, and were not intended to be
subject to the used oil processing
standards. Under today's rule,
generators 1 who only handle used oil in
a manner specified under
§ 279.20(b)(2)(ii) are not processors
provided that the used oil is generated
on-site and is not being sent directly off-
site to a burner of on- or off-
specification used oil fuel. (Section
279.20(b)(2)(ii) also applies to collection
i A used oil generator is any person, by site,
whose act or process produces used oil or whose
act first causes used oil to become subject to
regulations. For example, generators include all
persons and businesses who produce used oil
through commercial or industrial operations and
vehicle services, including government agencies,
and/or persons and businesses who collect used oil
from households and "do-it-yourself oil changes.
-------
10556 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
centers and aggregation points since
these entities are regulated as
generators.)
Activities that EPA did not intend to
include under the definition of used oil
processor are described below. EPA
does not believe that the activities
identified in § 279.20Cb)(2)(ii) should be
subject to the used oil processor
standards because used oil processing is
not the primary purpose of these
activities i.e., the primary purpose of
these activities is not to produce from
used oil or to make it more amenable for
the production of used oil derived
products, and the Agency does not
expect these limited activities will pose
the same kinds of environmental
problems that may occur at processor
facilities. Instead, in these cases, the act
of mixing, filtering, separating, draining
etc., used oil by the generator
constitutes a basic step that is incidental
or ancillary to a primary activity which
is distinct from used oil processing. It is
important to note, however, that owners
or operators who generate used oil as a
result of any of the activities specified
in § 279.20(b)(2)(ii) are considered used
oil generators and are subject to the
generator standards in subpart C.
EPA is allowing on-site but not off-
site burning of used oil generated from
designated on-site activities because the
Agency believes that this approach best
enables EPA to strike a reasonable
balance between encouraging beneficial
on-site reuse and recycling activities
that should pose very limited risks, on
one hand, and ensuring that activities
undertaken primarily to make used oil
more amenable for burning (i.e., used oil
processing) are adequately controlled
under the more stringent used oil
processing standards.
The definition of a used oil processor
is based on the purpose for which used
oil is being filtered, separated, or
otherwise reconditioned (i.e., whether
the activity is designed to produce used
oil derived products or to make used oil
more amenable for the production of
used oil derived products). The Agency
is concerned that in situations where
used oil is being filtered, separated or
otherwise reconditioned and then sent
to off-site burners, the purpose of the
activity may prove difficult to discern
and that consequently, § 279.20(b)(2)(ii)
provisions may be used as a means to
avoid compliance with the used oil
processor standards (i.e., by persons
who claim not to be used oil processors
under the § 279.20(b)(2)(ii) provisions
but whose primary purpose is to make
the used oil more suitable for burning).
Therefore, EPA believes it is necessary
to adopt an objective measure of the
purpose of the activity. The Agency
believes that a prohibition against
sending used oil generated from
specified on-site activities to off-site
burners provides the most practical and
effective way to ensure that activities
undertaken only to make used oil more
amenable for burning are subject to the
used oil processor standards.
1. Definition of Used Oil Processor
(A) Reconditioning used oil before
returning it for reuse by the generator.
Under today's rule facility owners or
operators who clean, separate, or
otherwise recondition used oil
generated on-site and then reuse it are
not considered used oil processors,
provided that the reconditioned used oil
is being reused by the owner or operator
who generated it. Examples of activities
covered under this category include
filtering of metalworking fluids for
reuse, and filtering and then replacing
oil from oil-bearing transformers and
turbines during routine maintenance.
Most manufacturing facilities have in
place central filtration systems designed
to remove contaminants from and
extend the life of water-soluble metal
working fluids (e.g., lubricants and
coolants), used in machining, grinding,
and boring equipment. These filtration
systems are on-site systems that filter
chips, metal fines, dirt, water, and other
contaminants from cutting fluids,
drawing lubricants and coolants used in
machining operations. The filtration of
these extraneous materials is designed
to extend the life of the reusable
coolants and lubricants and is
incidental to the production process.
Today's rule clarifies that this type of
filtration activity is not subject to the
used oil processing standards when the
generator reuses the filtered oil.
Similarly, during regularly scheduled
maintenance of oil-bearing transformers
and turbines, the oil in the electrical
equipment is removed so that repairs/
maintenance can be performed. In some
instances, the oil is filtered prior to
replacement. The filtering of the used
oil is done to extend the life of the used
oil, not because the oil is no longer
useful, and is therefore ancillary to the
equipment repair and maintenance.
While, under today's rule, the owner or
operator would not be considered a
processor in these cases, the draining of
the used oil from the transformer
constitutes generation of used oil so that
the facility would be considered a used
oil generator.
The Agency is aware that not all used
transformer oil is drained and filtered in
the field. Instead, the oil-bearing
electrical equipment may be transported
to a central location where the oil is
removed, filtered, and replaced. Or, the
used oil may be removed from the
transformers or turbines in the field and
then transported separately in a tanker
truck to a central location where it is
filtered and put back into electrical
equipment. Under today's rule, in cases
where electrical equipment containing
used oil is transported to a central
location, the transporter of the oil
bearing electrical equipment would not
be considered a used oil transporter.
However, the owner or operator would
become a generator at the point at which
the used oil is drained from the
equipment (i.e., at the site where the oil
is drained and filtered).
In cases where the used oil is
removed from the transformers or
turbines in the field and then
transported separately in a tanker truck
to a central location for filtering prior to
replacement into electrical equipment,
the owner or operator would become a
generator in the field (i.e., at the point
at which the used oil is drained). The
person who then transports the used oil
would also be considered a used oil
transporter subject to the transporter
standards. In these cases, the location at
which the used oil is filtered would be
considered a used oil transfer facility
subject to the transfer facility standards
in § 279.45, provided that the used oil
is stored at the site for more than 24
hours and less than 35 days. If the used
oil is filtered within 24 hours of being
drained (i.e., during transport) only the
part 279 standards for used oil
transporters would apply. This filtering
activity should not raise the kind of
environmental concerns that would be
present at used oil processors;
essentially, the filtering is incidental to
the transportation and storage and
should not change a facility's regulatory
status. As discussed in more detail
below, today's rule provides that
transporters of used oil that is removed
from electrical transformers and
turbines and filtered by the transporter
or at a transfer facility prior to being
returned to the same use are not subject
to the processor or re-refiner
requirements in subpart F. In
accordance with § 279.10(e), once the
used oil has been reclaimed to the point
where it is ready for reuse without
further processing, it is not subject to
regulation as used oil.
(B) Separating used oil from
wastewater to make wastewater
acceptable for discharge or reuse.
Today's rule clarifies that oil/water
separation activities designed to make
wastewater acceptable for discharge or
reuse are not subject to the used oil
processor standards. Facilities often use
oil/water separators to remove oil
(which may contain used oil) from oil/
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 10557
water mixtures collected from the
facility's storm sewer, process sewer,
sumps and other wastewater
containment areas. These separation
systems use chemical and physical
methods to break the oil/water emulsion
and recover oil from the wastewater in
order to make the wastewater or storm
water acceptable for discharge or reuse
in compliance with local, state and
federal regulations.
This type of pretreatment of
wastewater containing oil is designed
primarily to ensure that the wastewater
meets established limits for water
discharge to streams and POTWs, and
not to produce used oil derived
products or to make used oil more
amenable for the production of used oil
derived products. This type of oil/water
separation activity is therefore not
subject to the used oil processor
standards as clarified under today's
rule. It should be noted, however, that
any used oil recovered from separator
units would be subject to the used oil
generator standards. It is also important
to note that this provision applies only
to used oil that is generated on-site. The
provision would apply, for example, to
simple oil water separation activities
conducted (for purposes of wastewater
discharge) by a used oil processor on
wastewater which has been generated
by that processor. However, persons
who perform oil/water separation
activities on oily wastewater received
from off-site would be considered used
oil processors.
(C) Using oil mist collectors to remove
droplets of used oil from in-plant air to
make plant air suitable for continued
recirculation. As clarified under today's
rule, the act of removing used oil from
ambient air in the workplace is not
subject to the used oil processor
standards. At manufacturing facilities,
droplets of used oil from machining
operations are often dispersed into in-
plant air. Oil mist collectors physically
remove the small droplets of oil present
in the ambient air. This activity is not
subject to the used oil processing
standards because it is intended
primarily to make plant air suitable for
continued recirculation and not to
produce products from used oil or to
make it more amenable for the
production of used oil derived products.
However, the oil removed from oil mist
collectors is subject to the used oil
generator standards.
(D) Removing used oil from materials
containing or otherwise contaminated
with used oil in order to remove
excessive oil. Under § 279.10(c) of the
used oil standards, materials containing
or otherwise contaminated with used oil
from which the used oil has been
properly drained or removed to the
extent possible such that no visible
signs of free-flowing oil remain in or on
the material are not used oil except
when burned for energy recovery.
Today's rule clarifies that the Agency
does not consider the removal of used
oil from materials containing or
contaminated with used oil in order to
remove excess oil in accordance with
§ 279.10(c) to be used oil processing.
The production of used oil derived
products is clearly not the primary
reason for removing used oil from
materials containing or contaminated
with used oil. Instead, the activity is
conducted primarily to clean the
materials (e.g., machine tools, scrap
metal, etc.) prior to reuse, recycling, or
disposal and is therefore not subject to
the used oil processing standards as
clarified by today's rule. However, in
removing the used oil from the
materials, the owner or operator
becomes a used oil generator subject to
the Subpart C used oil generator
standards.
(E) Filtering, separating, or otherwise
reconditioning used oil before burning it
in a space heater. Under § 279.23 of the
used oil standards, used oil may be
burned in a used oil-fired space heater
under specified conditions, and
provided that the space heater burns
only used oil that the owner or operator
generates and/or used oil obtained from
household DIY oil changers. Prior to
burning, the used oil must often be
filtered to remove impurities. Today's
rule clarifies that filtering of used oil for
the purpose of removing contaminants
prior to burning the used oil in a space
heater is not considered processing of
used oil.
EPA provided a regulatory exemption
from the used oil burning standards for
generators who burn used oil in on-site
space heaters (in accordance with
§ 279.23) because the Agency believes
that burning of small amounts of used
oil in space heaters poses insignificant
risks due to the small volume of used oil
burned (see 50 FR 49194, Nov. 29,
1985). The Agency believes that,
because of the small volumes of used oil
involved, filtering, separating, or
otherwise reconditioning used oil that is
generated on-site prior to burning it in
a space heater would also not pose
significant risk. Therefore, although the
purpose of the filtering activity in this
case is to make the used oil more
amenable for burning, because of the
small amounts of used oil being filtered
for this purpose, the Agency does not
believe that imposition of the used oil
processor standards is warranted. EPA
is therefore adding a regulatory
clarification (§ 279.20(b)(2)(ii)(F)) that
the used oil processor standards do not
apply to filtering of used oil prior to
burning it in a space heater, provided
that the used oil is generated on-site or
obtained from households or "do-it-
yourself oil changes.
F. Section 279.41—Restrictions on
transporters who are not also processors
or re-refiners and changes to the
definition of transfer facility.
Today's rule amends § 279.41 to
provide that transporters of used oil that
is removed from oil-bearing
transformers and turbines and filtered
by a transporter or at a transfer facility
before being returned to its original use
are not subject to the used oil processor
and re-refiner requirements. As
previously discussed, during routine
maintenance of oil-bearing transformers
and turbines (or similar equipment), the
oil in the electrical equipment is
removed so that repairs/ maintenance
can be performed. In some cases, the
used oil is removed from the
transformers or turbines in the field and
then transported separately in a tanker
truck (subject to the used oil transporter
standards) to a central location where it
is filtered and put back into electrical
equipment. As discussed above, under
today's rule the filtering of the used oil
would not be considered used oil
processing provided that the filtered oil
is reused in the same or similar manner.
And, in these cases (i.e., where the used
oil is removed from the equipment and
transported to a separate location for
filtering), the location at which the oil
is filtered would be considered a
transfer facility provided that the used
oil is stored for more than 24 hours and
less than 35 days. If, as sometimes
occurs, the used oil is filtered within 24
hours of being stored at the central
location (i.e., during transport) the only
applicable standards would be the part
279 standards for used oil transporters
(i.e., the § 279.45 requirements for used
oil storage at transfer facilities would
not apply).
Section 279.41(c) of today's rule
provides conforming changes to the
used oil transportation standards to
allow transporters or transfer facilities
to filter the used oil without being
subject to the used oil processor
standards. It should be clearly noted,
however, that if the used oil is stored at
a site for more than 35 days, greater
environmental concerns may be present,
so the site would no longer be
considered a transfer facility and the
processor standards would apply.
hi addition, this rule expands the
definition of transfer facility to allow
used oil to be held at a location (i.e., a
transfer facility) temporarily prior to
activities that are exempt from or
-------
10558 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
performed pursuant to the part 279
standards as a result of today's
rulemaking. Under today's revised
definition, used oil can be held at a
transfer facility for more than 24 hours
but less than 35 days prior to an activity
and performed pursuant to
§ 279.20(b)(2). As a result of this change,
a site where used oil that has been
drained from oil-bearing transformers
and turbines is held for more than 24
hours and less than 35 days prior to
being filtered for reuse would be
considered a transfer facility.
G. Section 279.46— Tracking Today's
rule revises the § 279.46 tracking
requirements as they apply to rail
transporters. Under amended § 279.46, a
signature is not required on records of
acceptance or records of delivery of
used oil shipments that are exchanged
between rail transporters. The Agency is
making this change in response to
comments submitted by the railroad
industry regarding the impracticability
of requiring signed receipts when used
oil is transferred from one rail
transporter to another. EPA is aware that
rail cars are typically transferred from
one railroad company to another
without the face-to-face contact that
occurs in, for example, the motor carrier
industry. The Agency also recognizes
that, unlike non-rail transporters,
railroads rely on sophisticated
electronic tracking and information
systems for recording rail-to-rail transfer
of cargo. Given these unique
circumstances, and in light of the fact
that 40 CFR 263.20(f) regulations for
hazardous waste transporters do not
include signature requirements for
intermediate rail carriers, EPA agrees
that the signature requirements are
unduly burdensome and unnecessary
when applied to intermediate used oil
rail transporters. EPA is therefore
revising the used oil regulations to
eliminate the § 279.46 signature
requirements between intermediate rail
carriers.
H. Corrections to the Regulatory
Language
1. Requirements for Enforcement
Authority
The Agency published a correction
notice on May 3,1993, which amended
several sections of the part 279 used oil
management standards that were
originally promulgated on September
10, 1992. In the May 3, 1993, correction
notice, EPA incorrectly amended
regulatory § 271.16, that addressed the
requirements for States to have adequate
criminal enforcement authority for
hazardous waste. EPA amended the
regulation to include enforcement
authority for used oil handlers that
manage used oil incorrectly, but EPA
inadvertently deleted from § 271.16
enforcement authority for the improper
management of hazardous waste.
Therefore, today's rule corrects this
section to include enforcement
authority for the improper management
of both hazardous waste and used oil.
2. Rebuttable Presumption
The final used oil regulations
published on September 10,1992, allow
persons to rebut the presumption that
used oil containing more than 1,000
ppm total halogens is a hazardous waste
by using an analytical method from
SW-846, Third Edition, to show that the
used oil does not contain hazardous
waste. In the regulations, the Agency
provided information on the cost of
SW-846, Edition III and how to obtain
it. However, the Agency misquoted the
cost of the document. The actual cost
was $319.00 rather than $110.00 as
quoted throughout the September 10,
1992, regulations. To avoid having to
amend the regulations as a result of
future changes in the cost of the
document, the Agency is deleting
reference to the cost of SW-846, Edition
III from the used oil regulations.
3. Characteristic Hazardous Waste
Today's rule revises § 279.10(b)(2)(iii)
by deleting reference to the listing status
(under part 261, subpart D) of a
hazardous waste that is mixed with
used oil. This change is necessary to
correct a contradiction in the
regulations regarding applicability of
the used oil management standards to
mixtures of used oil and hazardous
waste that is listed in subpart D solely
because it exhibits one or more of the
characteristics of hazardous waste
identified in subpart C. In technical
corrections to the used oil management
standards published on May 3,1993, (57
FR 26420), EPA amended § 279.10(b)(2)
to correct an error in the September 10,
1992, standards regarding how these
mixtures are regulated. At that time,
conforming changes should have been,
but were not made to § 279.10(b)(2)(iii).
As amended by today's rule,
§ 279.10(b)(2)(iii) correctly provides that
mixtures of used oil and hazardous
waste that solely exhibits one or more
hazardous waste characteristic and
mixtures of used oil and hazardous
waste that is listed in subpart D solely
because it exhibits one or more subpart
C hazardous characteristics are
regulated as used oil if the mixture is of
used oil and a waste which is hazardous
solely because it exhibits the
characteristic of ignitability and the
resultant mixture does not exhibit the
characteristic of ignitability.
IV. State Authorization
As explained in the preamble to the
May 3, 1993, Technical Correction to
the September 10, 1992, rule, EPA is
treating the majority of the final used oil
management standards in the same
manner as "non-HSWA" Subtitle C
requirements. The used oil management
standards became effective on March 8,
1993, only in those States and
Territories that do not have RCRA base
program authorization and on Indian
lands. States are required to revise their
Subtitle C base programs to adopt the
new used oil requirements (including
those promulgated in today's rule) by
July 1, 1994, or by July 1, 1995, if a
statutory change is necessary. See 58 FR
26420 and 57 FR 41605.
Authorized States are only required to
modify their programs when EPA
promulgates Federal standards that are
more stringent or broader in scope than
the existing Federal standards. Section
3009 of RCRA allows States to impose
standards more stringent than those in
the Federal program. For those Federal
program changes that are less stringent
or reduce the scope of the Federal
program, States are not required to
modify their programs. See 40 CFR
271.l(k). Except for the amendments
made to § 279.20(b), the standards
promulgated today are less stringent
than or reduce the scope of the existing
Federal requirements. The amendments
made to § 279.20(b) merely provide
clarification of the existing used oil
regulations and are therefore not
considered to be less stringent than the
current Federal program. Therefore,
with the exception of the provisions
added at § 279.20(b)(2)(i), authorized
States would not be required to modify
their programs to adopt requirements
equivalent to or substantially equivalent
to the provision listed above.
V. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866, 58 FR
51735 (October 4,1993) the Agency
must determine whether the regulatory
action is "significant" and therefore
subject to OMB review and the
requirements of the Executive Order.
The Order defines "significant
regulatory action" as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an
annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities;
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 10559
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipient thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles
set forth in the "Executive Order."
OMB has exempted this regulatory
action from E.0.12866 review.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
The reporting and recordkeeping
requirements of part 279 have been
approved by OMB and generally
assigned the control number 2050-0124
(See 58 FR 34374 (June 25,1993)),
which remains in effect. As today's rule
does not impose any new such
requirements, a separate information
collection request was not prepared.
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Today's rule does not impose any new
regulatory requirements, and indeed,
decreases the costs of compliance for a
number of facilities. I therefore certify
that today's rule will not have a
significant impact or a substantial
number of small entities.
VIII. Administrative Procedures Act
Today's rule takes final action on
EPA's 1985 and 1991 proposals to
exempt used oil inserted into primary
refining processes from the used oil
management standards. EPA did not
address these issues in its September 10,
1992, final rule, and therefore those
proposals remained outstanding until
today's rule. Since these issues were
fully addressed in those proposals,
further public comment on today's rule
is unnecessary. The other changes being
made in today's rule either correct
errors or clarify the language contained
in the September 10,1992 rule. No
comment is necessary on these
provisions.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information,
Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indians—lands,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Water pollution control,
Water supply.
40 CFR Part 279
Petroleum, Recycling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Used oil.
Dated: February 25,1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 271—REQUIREMENTS FOR
AUTHORIZATION OF STATE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAMS
1. The authority citation for part 271
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), and
6926.
2. Section 271.16 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii) to read as
follows:
§271.16 Requirements for enforcement
authority.
(a) * * *
(3)* * *
(ii) Criminal remedies shall be
obtainable against any person who
knowingly transports any hazardous
waste to an unpermitted facility; who
treats, stores, or disposes of hazardous
waste without a permit; who knowingly
transports, treats, stores, disposes,
recycles, causes to be transported, or
otherwise handles any used oil
regulated by EPA under section 3014 of
RCRA that is not listed or identified as
a hazardous waste under the state's
hazardous waste program in violation of
standards or regulations for
management of such used oil; or who
makes any false statement, or
representation in any application, label,
manifest, record, report, permit or other
document filed, maintained, or used for
purposes of program compliance
(including compliance with any
standards or regulations for used oil
regulated by EPA under section 3014 of
RCRA that is not listed or identified as
hazardous waste). Criminal fines shall
be recoverable in at least the amount of
$10,000 per day for each violation, and
imprisonment for at least six months
shall be available.
PART 279—STANDARDS FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF USED OIL
3. The authority citation for part 279
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sections 1006, 2002(a), 3001
through 3007, 3010, 3014, and 7004 of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended (42
U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921 through 6927,
6930, 6934, and 6974); and sections 101(37)
and 114(c) of CERCLA (42 U.S.C. 9601(37)
and 9614(c)).
4. In § 279.1 the definition of
"Petroleum refining facility" is added in
alphabetical order and the definition of
"Used oil transfer facility" is revised to
read as follows:
§279.1 Definitions.
*****
Petroleum refining facility means an
establishment primarily engaged in
producing gasoline, kerosine, distillate
fuel oils, residual fuel oils, and
lubricants, through fractionation,
straight distillation of crude oil,
redistillation of unfinished petroleum
derivatives, cracking or other processes
(i.e., facilities classified as SIC 2911).
*****
Used oil transfer facility means any
transportation related facility including
loading docks, parking areas, storage
areas and other areas where shipments
of used oil are held for more than 24
hours and not longer than 35 days
during the normal course of
transportation or prior to an activity
performed pursuant to § 279.20(b)(2).
Transfer facilities that store used oil for
more than 35 days are subject to
regulation under subpart F of this part.
§279.10 [Amended]
5. Section 279.10(b)(l)(ii) is amended
by removing the phrase "for the cost of
$110.00."
6. Section 279.10 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and (g) to
read as follows:
§279.10 Applicability.
*****
(b)* * *
(2j* * *
(iii) Regulation as used oil under this
part, if the mixture is of used oil and a
waste which is hazardous solely
because it exhibits the characteristic of
ignitability (e.g., ignitable-only mineral
spirits), provided that the resultant
mixture does not exhibit the
characteristic of ignitability under
§261.21 of this chapter.
*****
(g) Used oil introduced into crude oil
pipelines or a petroleum refining
facility. (1) Used oil mixed with crude
oil or natural gas liquids (e.g., in a
production separator or crude oil stock
tank) for insertion into a crude oil
pipeline is exempt from the
requirements of this part. The used oil
is subject to the requirements of this
part prior to the mixing of used oil with
crude oil or natural gas liquids.
(2) Mixtures of used oil and crude oil
or natural gas liquids containing less
than 1% used oil that are being stored
or transported to a crude oil pipeline or
petroleum refining facility for insertion
into the refining process at a point prior
to crude distillation or catalytic cracking
-------
10560 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 1994 / Rules and Regulations
are exempt from the requirements of
this part.
(3) Used oil that is inserted into the
petroleum refining facility process
before crude distillation or catalytic
cracking without prior mixing with
crude oil is exempt from the
requirements of this part provided that
the used oil constitutes less than 1% of
the crude oil feed to any petroleum
refining facility process unit at any
given time. Prior to insertion into the
petroleum refining facility process, the
used oil is subject to the requirements
of this part.
(4) Except as provided in paragraph
(g)(5) of this section, used oil that is
introduced into a petroleum refining
facility process after crude distillation
or catalytic cracking is exempt from the
requirements of this part only if the
used oil meets the specification of
§ 279.11. Prior to insertion into the
petroleum refining facility process, the
used oil is subject to the requirements
of this part.
(5) Used oil that is incidentally
captured by a hydrocarbon recovery
system or wastewater treatment system
as part of routine process operations at
a petroleum refining facility and
inserted into the petroleum refining
facility process is exempt from the
requirements of this part. This
exemption does not extend to used oil
which is intentionally introduced into a
hydrocarbon recovery system (e.g., by
pouring collected used oil into the
waste water treatment system).
(6) Tank bottoms from stock tanks
containing exempt mixtures of used oil
and crude oil or natural gas liquids are
exempt from the requirements of this
part.
*****
7. Section 279.20 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as
follows:
§279.20 Applicability.
*****
(b)* * *
(2) (i) Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(2)(ii) of this section, generators who
process or re-refine used oil must also
comply with subpart F of this part.
(ii) Generators who perform the
following activities are not processors
provided that the used oil is generated
on-site and is not being sent off-site to
a burner of on- or off-specification used
oil fuel.
(A) Filtering, cleaning, or otherwise
reconditioning used oil before returning
it for reuse by the generator;
(B) Separating used oil from
wastewater generated on-site to make
the wastewater acceptable for discharge
or reuse pursuant to section 402 or
section 307(b) of the Clean Water Act or
other applicable Federal or state
regulations governing the management
or discharge of wastewaters;
(C) Using oil mist collectors to remove
small droplets of used oil from in-plant
air to make plant air suitable for
continued recirculation;
(D) Draining or otherwise removing
used oil from materials containing or
otherwise contaminated with used oil in
order to remove excessive oil to the
extent possible pursuant to § 279.10(c);
or
(E) Filtering, separating or otherwise
reconditioning used oil before burning it
in a space heater pursuant to § 279.23.
*****
8. Section 279.41 is amended by
adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 279.41 Restrictions on transporters who
are not also processors or re-refiners.
*****
(c) Transporters of used oil that is
removed from oil bearing electrical
transformers and turbines and filtered
by the transporter or at a transfer facility
prior to being returned to its original use
are not subject to the processor/re-
refiner requirements in subpart F of this
part.
§279.44 [Amended]
9. Section 279.44(c) introductory text
is amended by removing the phrase "for
the cost of $110.00."
10. Section 279.46 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(5) and fb)(5) to
read as follows:
§279.46 Tracking.
*****
(a) * * *
(5) (i) Except as provided in paragraph
(a)(5)(ii) of this section, the signature,
dated upon receipt of the used oil, of a
representative of the generator,
transporter, or processor/re-refiner who
provided the used oil for transport.
(ii) Intermediate rail transporters are
not required to sign the record of
acceptance.
(b)* * *
(5) (i) Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(5)(ii) of this section, the signature,
dated upon receipt of the used oil, of a
representative of the receiving facility or
transporter.
(ii) Intermediate rail transporters are
not required to sign the record of
delivery.
§279.53 [Amended]
11. Section 279.53(c) introductory text
is amended by removing the phrase "for
the cost of $110.00."
§279.63 [Amended]
12. Section 279.63(c) is amended by
removing the phrase "for the cost of
$110.00."
[FR Doc. 94-4818 Filed 3-3-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 115 / Thursday, June 17, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 33341
therefore, subject to the RACT
correction requirement. Indiana's SIP
revision request which it submitted in
response to the SIP call letter, also
responds to pan of the RACT correction
requirement.
On April 10.1989. the IDEM
submitted a new rule, Title 326 of the
Indiana Administrative Code (326IAC)
8-2-13, Marine Vessel S;irface Coating.
This new rule applies to only one .
source. Jeffboat. located in Clark -.
County, Indiana which is designated
nonattainment for ozone and classified
as a moderate nonattainment area. 326
IAC 8-2-13 was developed in response
to USEPA's May 26,1988, SIP call
letter. '. •
USEPA proposed to disapprove the
requested SIP revision on February 24,
1993, (see 58 FR 11200) because of the
State's failure to demonstrate that the
rule represents RACT for Jeffboat. The'
public comment period on the proposed
rule closed on April 26,1993. No
comments were received in response to
USEPA's solicitation of comments on
the requested SIP revision and the
proposed rulemaking action.
Final Ruiemaking Action
USEPA is disapproving this rule.
Marine Vessel Surface Coating (326 IAC
8-2-13), because the State has not
adequately demonstrated that the rule
represents RACT for Jeffboat. Therefore,
the rule does not meet the requirement
under section 182(a)(2)(A) of the Act
that Indiana correct that rule so that it
meets the RACT requirement of section
172 of the Act as amended in 1977. This
action becomes effective July 19,1993.
, This action has been classified as a
Table 3 action by the Regional
Administrator under the procedures
published in the Federal Register on
January 19,1989 (54 FR 2214-2225). On
January 6.1989. the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) waived
Table 2 and 3 SIP revisions (54 FR 2222)
from the requirements of Section 3 of
Executive Order 12291 for a period of 2
years. USEPA has submitted a request
for a permanent waiver for Table 2 and
3 SIP revisions. OMB has agreed to
continue the temporary waiver until
such time as it rules on USEPA's
request.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
5 U.S.C. 600 et seq.. USEPA must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis
assessing the impact of any proposed or
final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603
and 604. Alternatively, USEPA may -
certify that the rule will not have a,
significant impact on a substantial - -
number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small not-for-
profit enterprises, and government
entities with jurisdiction over
populations of less than 50,000.
This disapproval affects only one
source, Jeffboat. Therefore, it does not
have a significant impact on a .
substantial number of small entities."
The request does not meet the
requirements of the CAA and USEPA
cannot approve the request. Therefore,
USEPA has no option but to disapprove
the submittal. . '
Under Executive Order 12291, today's
action is not "Major".
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: June 3,1993.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Admin: '~ator.
[FR Doc. 93-14252 Filed 6-16-93; 8:45 am)
BILLING CODE esao-so-p
40 CFR Part 279
[FRL-4667-8] .
Identification and Listing of Hazardous
Waste; Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Correction
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule: correction.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is correcting errors in the
hazardous waste regulations that
appeared in the Federal Register on
May 3,1993 (58 FR 26420). In that
document. EPA published corrections to
the used oil management standards that
were originally promulgated on
September 10,1992 (57 FR 41566). In
the May 3 notice, EPA inadvertently
amended several sections of part 279 .•
dealing with notification requirements
for used oil handlers. This action
corrects this error and restores the
original language from the September
10.1992 final rule. In addition. EPA
inadvertently omitted the explanation
for a correction in the May 3 notice.
This action corrects this error.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 17, 1993.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
general information, contact the RCRA/
Superfund Hotline at (800) 424-9346
(toll-free) or (703) 920-9810 in the
Washington, DC metropolitan area. For
specific information concerning the
used oil management standards
rulemaking, contact Ms. Eydie Pines at
(202) 260-3509 or Bryan Grace at (202)
260-9550. Office of Solid Waste. U.S.
EPA, 401 M Street. SW., Washington,
DC, 20460. .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Reason for This Document
The Agency promulgated
management standards for recycled.
used oils on September 10,1992 (57 FR
41566) and published a Subsequent
correction notice on May 3,1993 (58 FR
26420). In the correction notice, EPA
inadvertently amended four regulatory
sections of Part 279 dealing with
notification requirements for certain
used oil handlers. Specifically, the
correction notice revised paragraph (a)
of §§ 279.42. 279.51, 279.62, and 279.73.
These amendments were mistakenly
included in the correction notice; the
Agency did not intend to change these
provisions. Therefore, today's notice
corrects these four sections and restores
the original language contained in the
September 10 final rule.
In the May 3 notice, EPA also
inadvertently omitted the explanation
for one of the corrections clarifying the
applicability of the part 279 regulations
to on-specification used oil. This
correction included the removal of the
last sentence of §279.72 (a). This
sentence, originally placed in subpart H,
Standards for Used Oil Marketers,
establishes that on-specification used oil
"that is to be burned for energy recovery
is not subject to the requirements of this
part." EPA was concerned that this
provision might be unclear in light of
the more complete explanation of the
applicability of these regulations to on-
specification used oil found in § 279.11.
The final sentence of § 279.11 reads as
follows: "Once the used oil that is to be
burned for energy recovery has been
shown not to exceed any specification
and the person making that showing
complies with §§ 279.72, 279.73, and
279.74(b), the used oil is no longer
subject to this part." EPA therefore
removed the sentence in §279.72(a) to
avoid any confusion about the
applicability of the Part 279 regulations
to on-specification used oil.
II. Administrative Procedures Act
Requirements
This action does not create any new
regulatory requirements; rather, it
reinstates existing language that was
inadvertently changed by the Agency in
a correction notice and restores an
inadvertently omitted explanation. For
this reason, EPA finds that good cause
exists under section 3010(b)(3) of RCRA
(42 U.S.C 6930(b)(3)) and under 5
U.S.C. 553(d) to provide for an
immediate effective date. EPA also
believes good cause exists to waive the
-------
33342 federal Register / VoL 58. Na 115 / Thursday, June 17. 1993 / Rules and Regulations
notice «nd comment requirements of the
APA. As this rule merely correct* erroro
in a previous final rule., notice and
comment are unnecessary.
m. Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12291, EPA
must judge whether a regulation Is
"major" and. therefore, subject to the
requirement of a Regulatory Impact
Analysis (RIA). Due to the nature of this
regulation (correction notice), the j
amendment is not "major;" therefore, no
RIA is required.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Put 279
Petroleum, Recycling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements. Used oil.
Dated: May 28,1983.
Richard J. Gnimond,
Assistant Surgeon Genera], USPHS Acting
Assistant Administrator.
The following corrections are made to
the rules in. Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Recycled Used Oil
Management Standards; Corrections,
published in the Federal Register on
May 3,1993 (58 FR 26420J.
PART 279—STANDARDS FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF USED OH.
1. The authority citation for part 279
continues lo read as follows:
Aathtrrity: Sections 1008.2002M. 3001
through 3007,3010.3014. and 7004 of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended (42
U.SX16905,6912(a), 6921 through 6927,
6930, 6934. and 6974); and sections 101(37)
and 114{c) of CERCLA (42 U.S.C 9601(37),
and 9614(cJJ. '
2. Paragraph {a} of § 279.42 is revised
to read as follows:
$279.42 Notification.
(a) Identification numbers. Used oil
transporters who have not previously
complied with the notification
requirements of RCRA section 3010
must comply with these requirements
and obtain an EPA identification
number.
* * * « •
3. Paragraph (a) of §279.51 is TO vised
to read as follows:
1279.51 NotWerion.
(a) Identification numbers. Used oil
processors and re-refiners who have not
previously complied with the
notification requirements of RCRA
section 3010 must comply with these
requirements and obtain an EPA
identification number.
4. Paragraph (aj of $ 279.62 is revised
to read as follow*:
1279.62
(a) Identification numbers. Used oil
burners which hew not previously
complied with the notification
requirements of RCRA section 3010
must comply with these requirements
and obtain an EPA identification .
number. ' •
S, Paragraph
-------
May 3, 1993
Part IV
40 CFR Part 261, et aS.
Hazardous Waste Management System;
Identification and Listing of Hazardous
Waste; Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Final Rule
-------
26420 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 83 / Monday, May 3, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 261, 254, 265, 271, and
279
[EPA/530--Z-93-Q04; FftL-4619-7]
BIN 2050-AC17
System.; identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Recycled Used Otl
Management Standards
AGENCY; Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule; technical
amendments and corrections.
SUMMARY: This action corrects several
technical errors and provides clarifying
amendments to the final recycled used
oil management standards rule. The
final rule was published on September
10, 1992 (57 FR 41566). This action also
corrects an error in the final used oil
rale published on May 20, 1992 (57 FR
21524), These revisions provide
clarification and correct unintended
consequences of both rules.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 8, 1993.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Eydie Pines at (202) 260-3509 or Bryan
Groce at (202) 260-9550, Office of Solid
Waste (OS-332), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A.I. Burning and Blending
Requirements (Former Part 266,
Subpart E)
On September 10, 1992, EPA
promulgated regulations to govern the
management of recycled used oils. In
the discussion of the state authorization
process in the final rule (57 FR 41566),
EPA stated that the new part 279
regulations were being promulgated
under section 3014(a) of RCRA. and
noted that section 3014(a) "predates the
1984 HSWA amendments." The Agency
went on, in that section, to explain that
the part 279 requirements would take
effect in states without final RCRA
authorization 6 months after publication
(March 8, 1993) and that the part 279
standards would become effective in
states with RCRA base program
authorization only after the state revised
its RCRA program to include the new
requirements. This discussion implied
that all of the requirements being
promulgated under part 279 are RCRA
requirements that are not mandated
under the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) and that,
therefore, the new standards governing
the management of recycled used oils
would not be immediately enforceable
by EPA in authorized states.
The discussion of the status of the
part 279 requirements in authorized
states was based in large part on the fact
that section 3006(h) of RCRA, which
was added by Congress as part of the
Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorizatian Act of 1986, allows
EPA to authorise state used oil programs
in the same manner as state hazardous
waste programs. EPA believes thnt
Congress did not express an intent to
treat used oil requirements under
section 3014(a) as "HSWA"
requirements, that is, as directly
enforceable by EPA prior to State
authorization under Section 3006(h).
After publication of the September 10,
1992 notice, however, EPA realized that
its position was arguably inconsistent
with statements made in the preamble
to the November 29, 1985 final rule
promulgating standards for the burning
of used oil, and that further clarification
is necessary.
Some of the part 279 provisions
promulgated in the used oil
management standards consist of
existing requirements that have been
recodified from 40 CFR part 266,
subpart E, as adopted in 1985. On
November 29, 1985 (50 FR 49201), EPA
issued the used oil burning
requirements pursuant to the authority
of section 8 of the Used Oil Recycling
Act of 1980 (UORA), now incorporated
as section 3014(a) of RCRA. At that
time, there was no section 3006(h) and,
therefore, no statutory mechanism
existed to authorize states to operate
programs for the recycling of non-
hazardous used oil. EPA, therefore, took
the position that the used oil burning
requirements adopted under section
3014{a) would be Federally enforceable
in both authorized arid non-authorized
states. With the addition of section
3006(h) to RCRA in 1986, however, that
statutory authority to authorize states to
regulate nonhazardous used oil
recycling now exists. This raises the
question of whether the old part 266,
subpart E requirements should be
treated like the other section 3014(a)
requirements issued in 1992, that is, not
Federally enforceable in states that have
been authorized for the RCRA base
program, but are not authorized for the
subpart E requirements. EPA believes
that, by the addition of section 3006(h)
to RCRA, Congress could not have
intended to make these requirements
suddenly unenforceable in authorized
states where they had been previously
enforceable. Indeed, EPA believes that
Congress intended for these
requirements to be enforced both prior
to and following the 1986 amendment to
RCRA. Therefore, EPA is clarifying that
all existing used oil burning
requirements originally promulgated in
1985 remain Federally enforceable in all
States which are not yet authorized for
the former part 286, subpart E, whether
or not the State has received RCRA
subtitle C base program authorization.1
States must modify their programs to
include requirements equivalent to the
Federal provisions or may promulgate
more stringent regulations.
Table 1 of § 271.26 identifies which
part 279 requirements represent the
previous part 266, subpart E provisions
that will continue to be Federally
enforceable in States not authorized for
these provisions. The regulatory text in
part 279, subparts G and H has not been
substantially changed from that
previously found in part 266, subpart E.
When revisions were made, the
revisions were for clarification purposes
only. Thus, §§ 279.10, 279.11, and most
provisions of § 279.1 and of part 279,
subparts G and K will continue to be
Federally enforceable in states that have
not yet adopted requirements equivalent
to the previous part 266, subpart E
requirements and received authorization
from EPA to implement and enforce
those requirements. For all other
provisions of part 279, EPA continues to
believe that it is the most consistent {
with the intent of Congress to treat these
requirements in the same manner as
non-HSWA provisions of the hazardous
waste regulations, and as such, subject
them to the RCRA state authorization
program requirements. In the case of all
new provisions (those not previously
contained in part 266, subpart E), these
provisions do not become effective in
authorized stales until individual states
adopt the provisions and EPA grants the
states authorization for the provisions.2
In the case of those few states (Alaska,
Hawaii, Iowa, Wyoming, and the U.S.
Territories) that are not authorized for
the RCRA base program, all part 279
provisions will be effective and
Federally enforceable six months after
promulgation of the part 279 provisions
(March 8, 1993).
1 In order to retain authorization for the RCRA
program, states have been authorized to enforce the
part 266, subpart E requirements. These states
remain authorized to implement and enforce these
provisions, and today's notice and the final
recycled used oil regulations do not affect these
states' authorities regarding the existing provisions.
For convenience, authorization/processing of state
applications is considered within HSWA Cluster I
by EPA.
2 As stated in the final rulemaking for recycled
used oil management standards, authorized states
must modify their programs by luly 1, 1994 if no
statutory changes are required, or by July 1,1995
if statutory changes are necessary (see 57 FR 41605).
-------
^^^^^^g^ter/VoLSB, NO. 83 / Monday, May 3, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
1 of §271.26, EPA notes
26421
CFR 266.43(b)(4)(vi). Tie Agency
that the information required part 266," is unnecessary and
rmer § 266.43(b)(4)(vi), i.e., a redundant. Therefore, EPA has not
statement reading "This used oil is included this requirement in the new
subject to EPA regulation under 40 CFR used oil management standards.
Status of State
RCRA Base Pro-
Non-authorized
gram.
Authorized RCRA Base Program
Non-authorized part 266 subpart
Authorized RCRA Base Program
Authorized part 266 subpart E.
Before 3/8/93
40 CFR part 266 subpart E Feder-
ally enforceable.
40 CFR part 266 subpart E is
Federally enforceable.
40 CFR part 266 subpart E
State enforceable.
is
As of 3/8/S3
40 CFR part 279 is Federally enforceable.
40 CFR part 279 subparts A-F and I are not enforceable until the
state is granted authorization. 40 CFR part 279 subparts G and H
are Federally enforceable.
40 CFR part 279 subparts A-F and I are not enforceable until the
state is granted authorization. 40 CFR part 279 subparts G and H
are state enforceable1.
140 CFR part 279, subparts G and
those provisions for which it obtained
H contain certain provisions which were not in part 266, subpart E. The State will continue to enforce only
authorization (those provisions are listed in Table 1 of §271.26).
B. Technical Corrections
1. Corrections to the Preamble Language
This action corrects several errors that
were published in the September 10
final rule. There are several
typographical errors in the preamble, as
well as misstatements and incorrect.
references to regulatory and preamble
sections. These corrections are
described below.
1, On page 41579, in the second
column, remove the word "and" in line
ten so the line reads as follows: "is to
be burned for energy recovery, the used
bil will have to * * *"
2. On page 41581, in the first
paragraph in the middle column, the
reference to § 260,40(d)(2) should read
§ 266.40(d)(2).
3. On page 41583, in the middle
column, six lines from the bottom,
remove the reference to "section
VI.D.3." of the preamble.
4. On page 41585, in the first
paragraph of the first column, the
reference to section "V.D.l.h." should
read "VI.D.l.h."
5. On page 41585, in the last sentence
of the section entitled b. Used oil
generated on ships, the reference to
"§ 279.10(e)(3)" should read
"§279.10(f)".
6. On page 41587, the word "send" in
line 18 in paragraph two of the second
column should be revised to "sent".
7. On page 41590, in footnote 17, the
reference to "section VI.E.5." of the
preamble should read "section VI.D.4.",
referring to the discussion of secondary
containment provisions at processing/
re-refining facilities.
8. On page 41590, in the first column,
revise the heading and the first sentence
of section (e) with the following text:
"DOT Requirements. Persons offering
used oil for transportation as well as
persons transporting used oil that meets
the definition of a hazardous material in
49 CFR 171.8, must comply with all
applicable regulations in 49 CFR Parts
171 through 180." Also add the
additional new text after the first
sentence. "On February 2, 1993, the
Department of Transportation published
an interim final rule which amended the
DOT's hazardous materials regulation
by regulating oil as a hazardous
material. The interested reader is
referred to this document for further
information regarding the applicability
of this rule."
9. On page 41591, in the second
paragraph of the middle column, and on
page 41596, in the first paragraph of the
first column, the reference to "40 CFR
112.79(c)" should read "40 CFR
112.7(c)".
10. In footnote 21 on page 41595, the
reference to preamble section "VI.E.5."
should read "VI.D.3."
11. On page 41598, in the last
sentence of the first paragraph of the
section entitled 1. Closure, remove the
phrase "per 40 CFR 261.3(d)," and add
the following sentence to the end of the
paragraph: "For a determination of
hazard regarding contaminated media
and other materials, sea 40 CFR 261.3,
as well as EPA's 'contained-in principle'
(57 FR 983 (Jan. 9, 1992) and 57 FR
37225 (Aug. 18, 1992))."
12. On the same page, in the last
sentence of the last full paragraph in the
third column, remove the phrase "per
40 CFR 261.3(d) or 261.4(b)" and add
the following sentence to the end of the
paragraph: "For a determination of
hazard regarding contaminated media
and other materials, see 40 CFR 261.3,
261.4(b), as well as EPA's 'contained-in
principle' (57 FR 983 (Jan. 9, 1992) and
57 FR 37225 (Aug. 18,1992)),"
13. On page 41599, under part 5(a)
revise the reference to "266.41", in the
third sentence, to read "266.40".
14. On page 41600, under 5.f. Storage
Requirements, after the last word of the
first paragraph, add the following text ",
or units subject to regulation under 40
CFR parts 264 or 265."
15. On page 41600, in the first
paragraph of the middle column, the
reference to preamble "section VI.5,f."
should read "section VI.D.4."
16. On page 41600, in the section
entitled h. Used oil fuel analysis
(halogens), the reference to "§ 266.40"
should read more specifically as
"§266.40(c)".
17. On page 41605, in the first
column, first complete paragraph,
second sentence, add the words "and on
Indian lands" after the word "states" so
that the text reads as follows: "The rules
will take effect in states and on Indian
lands that do not have final
authorization . . ."
18. On page 41605, second column,
first complete paragraph, second
sentence, after the word "states" add the
words "and Indian lands" so that the
text reads as follows: "That is, in the
unauthorized states and Indian lands, a
used oil. . ."
2. Clarification of Issues Discussed in
the Preamble
In addition to the corrections listed
above, EPA wishes to clarify several
issues discussed in the preamble of the
May 20, 1992 and September 10, 1992
rule.
EPA is clarifying the definition of
used oil processing as it relates to the
act of gravity hot-draining used oil from
non-terne plated used oil filters. The
definition of used oil processing was
intended to regulate the process of
making used oil more amenable for
production of fuel oils, lubricants and
other used oil derived products. The act
of physically separating used oil from
non-terne plated used oil filters does not
fall under the processing definition if
the act is conducted for the purpose of
removing the used oil for management
under part 279. The Agency did not
intend to regulate the removal of used
-------
26422
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 83 / Monday, May 3, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
oil from non-tsrne plated used oil filters
under the § 279.1 processing definition,
and therefore clarifies the distinction
between the "removal of used oil from
solid waste," which does not fit i,4i«der
the processing definition, and "mi'ting
used oil more amenable for production
of fuel oils, lubricants and other used oil
derived products" which does fit under
the processing definition.
On page 41574, in the third column,
the first sentence of the first full
paragraph incorrectly states that
residues or sludges from the processing
of used oil are not regulated under part
279. In fact, as evidenced by § 279.10(e),
EPA did intend to regulate such
residuals if burned for energy recovery
or used in a manner constituting
disposal, with the exception of re-
refining distillation bottoms that are
used as feedstock to manufacture
asphalt products.
On page 41583, in the first column at
the end of section g.iii, EPA incorrectly
states that mixtures of used oil and
diasel fuel mixed by a generator for use
in its own vehicles "must be managed
in accordance with the used oil fuel
specification regulations." In fact, as the
language of section 279.20(a)(3) states,
EPA does not intend to regulate such
mixtures under any provision of part
279 once the mixing has occurred.
On page 41587, near the middle of the
first column, EPA cites Alabama's
Project ROSE as an example of a
program that runs "do-it-yourself used
oil collection centers. This is not
entirely accurate. While Project ROSE
may administer some collection centers
that accept used oil solely from
household DIY generators, the preamble
correctly describes the Alabama
program in stating that it accepts used
oil from commercial generators as well.
Therefore, Project ROSE is not the best
example of a "DIY used oil collection
center," since by definition, such
collection centers are not authorized to
accept used oil from regulated
generators. The Project ROSE program
provides a better example of a "used oil
collection center," as defined in § 279,1
and discussed above.
On page 41582, in footnote 9, EPA
misquotes the words of § 279.61(a)(3) to
say that off-spec, used oil may be
burned in an incinerator "in compliance
with subpart O of 49 CFR parts 264/
265." The language of the regulation
actually reads "subject to regulation
under 40 CFR part 264 or 265." EPA
makes the same or similar errors on
page 41586 in the last full paragraph of
the first column, on page 41599 in
section b.(4), and on page 41600 in
footnote 23.
On page 41601, the first paragraph of
section 6 states that the requirements for
marketers formerly contained in
§ 266.43 were recodified in part 279,
subpart H "without modification." In
fact, EPA did introduce certain changes
to these requirements. EPA added
certain exemptions to the "rebuttable
presumption" of mixing used oil with
hazardous waste, added additional
definitions, and made certain changes to
the record-keeping requirements on
marketers. EPA also amended the
definition of "marketer" to include only
those persons who initiate the shipment
of off-specification used oil fuel directly
to a used oil burner or who are the first
to claim that a used oil fuel meets the
specification. The former definition of
marketer included those who market
off-specification fuel to other marketers.
EPA made this change because those
persons who initiate shipments of off-
specification fuel to other marketers are
already covered by the new tracking
requirements in part 279 for generators,
transporters, or recycling facilities.
Similarly, the first full sentence in the
middle column following Table VI.6.
implies that there is an entity called a
"fuel oil dealer" who is neither a
generator, transporter, or recycling
facility who may be selling on-
specification fuel. This statement is
misleading in light of the revised
definition of marketer in part 279. "Fuel
oil dealers" who never handle used oil
fuel were never intended to be regulated
by part 266, subpart E, and are not
regulated under the new part 279,
subpart H. Persons who accept off-
specification used oil fuel from a
generator, transporter, or recycling
facility and market it to a burner are
subject to regulation under part 279 as
marketers.
EPA discussed the requirements for
used oil storage at several places in the
preamble. The regulations at
§§279.22(a), 279.45(b), 279.54(a), and
279.64(a) state that used oil generators,
transporters, processors/re-refiners, and
burners must not store used oil in units
other than tanks, containers, or units
subject to regulation under part 264 or
265 of 40 CFR. In the preamble
discussions of storage (57 FR 41586,
41591, 41594, and 41600), EPA makes
reference to compliance with parts 264
or 265 only with respect to surface
impoundments (parts 264 or 265,
subpart K). EPA clarifies that nothing
precludes a used oil handler from
storing used oil in a container or tank
that is subject to regulation under the
applicable requirements of part 264 or
265 (i.e., subparts I and J, respectively).
These requirements are more stringent
than the used oil management standards
promulgated on September 10 and,
therefore, provide an adequate level of
protection of human health and the
environment. As stated on page 41591
in the discussion of storage at used oil
transfer facilities, any used oil transfer
facility that is currently in compliance
with the part 265, subpart J
requirements (for aboveground tanks)
will be deemed in compliance with the
requirements promulgated today. Such
is the case for other types of used oil
handlers and other types of storage units
as well.
On page 41599, EPA explained that
off-specification used oil may be burned
only in certain devices. In the preamble
to the 1985 regulations, EPA explained
that the regulations were designed only
to address the burning of used oil in
such devices and that they did not
apply to the burning of used oil in other
devices such as diesel and marine
engines because EPA did not develop
the used oil specification with these
types of devices in mind (see 50 FR
49192). EPA wishes to clarify that the
provisions of §§279.12(c) and 279.61(a)
were not intended to alter this pre-
existing policy. Therefore, the burning
of used oil in devices such as diesel and
marine engines is not subject to
regulation under part 279, subpart G.
3. Corrections to the Regulatory
Language
In the September 10 rule, EPA
exempted from regulation both as used
oil and as hazardous waste, those
distillation bottoms from used oil re-
refining that are used for making asphalt
products from regulation [§ 279.10(e)].
This action moves part of that provision
without change to § 261.4(b), the
appropriate location for an exclusionary
provision from the definition of
hazardous waste. In addition, this notice
corrects a numbering error that was
made in the May 20,1992 final rule (57
FR 21534) and repeated in the
Correction Notice of July 1,1992 (57 FR
29220). In both the May 20 final rule
and the subsequent correction notice,
the exclusion for non-terne plated used
oil filters was codified as subparagraph
(b)(15) of § 261.4 even though EPA had
not yet promulgated paragraphs (b)(13)
or (b)(14). This action corrects these
errors by redesignating the used oil filter
exclusion as § 261.4(b)(13).
The Agency is amending § 271.16,
Requirements for Enforcement
Authority, to add language regarding
violations of the used oil management
standards. This section sets out the
requirements for criminal enforcement
authority for states seeking
authorization to operate state programs
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No, 83 / Monday, May 3, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
26423
in lieu of subtitle C programs. Congress
amended RCRA in 1986 to clarify that
EPA's criminal enforcement authorities
for violations of subtitle C requirements
extend to violations of requirements for
used oil that is regulated under section
3014 of RCRA but not listed or
identified as a hazardous waste.
Congress also amended section 3006(h)
to require EPA to apply the same
standards end procedures in its review
of state programs for nonhazardous used
oil, that it applies when reviewing
programs for hazardous wastes under
subtitle C. In other words, state
programs for nonhazardous used oil
must be equivalent to and consistent
with the federal program (and programs
in other states). Such programs must
also provide for adequate enforcement.
Congress clearly felt that criminal
enforcement authorities were essential
to successful implementation of federal
regulatory program for nonhazardous
used oils. EPA believes that criminal
enforcement authority is equally
important to adequate enforcement of
state programs for nonhazardous used
oils. Consequently, EPA is amending
§ 271.16 to clarify that any state that
decides to regulate recycled used oil as
nonhazardous waste and apply to EPA
for authorization to operate its stele
program in lieu of the federal program
must show that it has authority to bring
criminal enforcement actions for
specified violations of its used oil
program.
hi addition, EPA is amending
§ 279.10(i), dealing with PCB-
contaminated used oil. The language
codified in the September 10 rule
indicated that used oils contaminated
with PCBs, which are regulated under
part 761 of the TSCA regulations, are
exempt from the part 279 requirements.
EPA's intent was to avoid duplicative
regulation of such used oils, and the
Agency mistakenly included this
language in § 279.10(i), assuming that
the requirements in § 761.20(e)
comprehensively regulated such oils.
The language in § 761.20(a), however,
incorporates by reference the
requirements of the former part 266,
subpart E and supplements them, rather
than substitutes for them, such that
PCB-contaminated used oils are
currently subject to both RCRA and
TSCA regulations governing the burning
of used oil for energy recovery. EPA did
not intend, by the promulgation of part
279, to relax the existing requirements
on used oils containing PGBs. EPA,
therefore, is amending § 279.10(i) to
accurately reflect the complementary
nature of the RCRA and TSCA
regulations. Marketers and burners who
market used oil containing any
quantifiable level of PCBs must comply
with applicable standards of part 279 as
well as additional standards and
restrictions under 40 CFR 761.20(e).
Consistent with this change to the
regulations, in the preamble statement
on page 41583, in section (v) in the
middle column, PCB-contaminated used
oils, the following clarifying sentences
should be added to the end of the
paragraph: "Marketers and burners of
used oi! who market used oil fuel
contain ing any quantifiable level of
PCBs are subject to applicable standards
on marketing and burning used oil
containing PCBs found at 40 CFR
761.20(0). Blending for the purpose of
reducing the concentration of PCBs to
below 50 ppm or the level of detection
is prohibited,"
On page 41581 of the preamble, EPA
explained that it was adopting a "no
free flowing oil" concept to address the
regulation of materials containing or
otherwise contaminated with used oil.
EPA explained that if there was no
visible sign of free-flowing oil on or in
a material, the material would not be
regulated as used oil. Materials
containing or otherwise contaminated
with used oil would be regulated as
used oil until the used oil was removed
from the material, and the oil removed
from such a material would also be
regulated as used oil. The regulatory
language in § 279.1Q(c), however,
unintentionally suggests that such
materials continue to be regulated as
used oil even after the oil is removed.
Therefore, EPA is amending § 279,10(c)
to implement the "free-flowing oil"
concept to be consistent with its original
intent.
EPA has added e paragraph to
§ 279.12(c) so that it is consistent with
the language in § 279.61(a).
The language in § 279.21(a)
mistakenly suggests that used oil
generators may not mix used oil with
hazardous waste if the resulting mixture
is hazardous. In fact, EPA meant only to
clarify that used oil generators must
comply with § 279.10(b) as well as any
subtitle C requirements that may apply
to the mixture. EPA has amended the
provision accordingly.
The storage provisions in the
September 10,1992 rule (§§ 279.22,
279.45, 279.54, and 279,64) all contain
similar errors. Each provision contains a
reference to the "de minimis"
wastewater provision of § 279.10(f)
which is unnecessary and somewhat
confusing. EPA is deleting these
references. In addition, all four
provisions refer to used oil
"generators," even though only § 279.22
applies to generators. EPA corrects these
errors. EPA also corrects the reference to
"generators" in § 279,74(a).
EPA is amending the first sentence of
§ 279,4G(a)(4) by deleting the misleading
phrase "from the initial generator." EPA
did not intend for do-it-yourselfers to be
considered generators. Rather, the
generator is to be considered the person
who accepts or picks up tb.a DIY oil for
proper management.
EPA is revising the language in
§ 279.43 (b), which merely cross-
references DOT hazardous materials
transportation regulations in title 49 of
the CFR to which used oil transporters
may be subject. The original language
could have been interpreted to expand
the scope of the DOT regulations, which
was not EPA's intent.
EPA is revising the language in
§ 279.45(d)(l) by adding a paragraph
(d)(l)(iii) to this section. Paragraph
(d)(l)(iii) provides an equivalent
secondary containment system for used
oil stored in containers. EPA already
provides an equivalent secondary
containment system for used oil stored
in existing and new aboveground tanks.
Therefore, EPA is now providing this
regulation for used oil stored in
containers to allow for consistency in
the storage of used oi! stored in
aboveground tanks and containers. This
revision is also added to § 279.54(c)(l).
Administrative Procedures Ac! (APA)
Today's rule is issued without prior
notice and comment. Ali changes being
made either correct errors or help to
clarify the language contained in the
May 20, 1992 and September 10, 1992
final rules. No further public comment
is necessary.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Port 261
Hazardous waste, Recycling,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements,
40 CFR Part 284
Hazardous waste, Packaging and
containers, Security measures, Surety
bonds.
40 CFB Part 265
Hazardous waste, Packaging and
containers, Security measures, Surety
bonds.
40 CFR Part 271
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Hazardous materials
transportation, Hazardous waste,
Indians-lands, Intergovernmental
relations, Penalties, Reporting and
-------
26424 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 83 / Monday, May 3, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
recordkeeping requirements, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
40 CFR Part 279
Petroleum, Recycling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Used oil.
Dated: March 22, 1993.
Richard J. Guimond,
Assistant Surgeon General, USPHS, Acting
Assistant Administrator.
For ths reasons set out in the
preamble title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
USTWG OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
I. The authority citation for part 261
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C, 6905, 6912(a), 6921-
6927, 6930, 6934, 6935, 6937, 6938, 0939,
and 6974.
§261.4
2. Section 261.4 is amended by
redesignating paragraph (b)(15) as
3. Section 261.4 is amended by
adding paragraph (b)(14) to read as
follows:
§261.4 EseSusions.
* * ft A *
(b)* * *
(14) Used oil re-refining distillation
bottoms that are used as feedstock to
manufacture asphalt products.
PART 26S~-JNTERiM STATUS
STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND
OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND
DISPOSAL FACILITIES
7. The authority citation for part 265
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6924,
6925, 6935, and 6936.
8. Section 265.1 is amended by
revising paragraph (c)(6) to read as
follows:
§ 265.1 Purpose, scop®, and applicability.
*****
(c) * * *
(6) The owner or operator of a facility
managing recyclable materials described
in § 261.6 (a)(2), (3), and (4) of this
chapter (except to the extent they are
referred to in part 279 or subparts C, D,
F, or G of part 266 of this chapter).
PART 271—REQUiREWSENTS FOR
AUTHORIZATfON OF STATE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAMS
9. The authority citation for part 271
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a). and
6926.
10. Section 271.16 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(3)(ii) to read as
follows:
§261.5
4. In paragraph (j), revise the phrase
"subpart G of part 279," to read "part
279."
PART 264—STANDARDS FOR
OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT,
STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL
FACILITIES
5. The authority citation for part 264
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6924,
and 6925.
6. Section 264.1 is amended by
revising paragraph (g)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 264.1 Purpose, scopa, and applicability.
* * M * *
(g)* * *
(2) The owner or operator of a facility
managing recyclable materials described
in § 261.6 (a)(2), (3), and (4) of this
chapter (except to the extent they are
referred to in part 279 or subparts C, D,
F, or G of part 266 of this chapter).
§271.16
authority.
(a)* * *
(3)* * *
(ii) Criminal remedies shall be
obtainable against any person who
knowingly transports, treats, stores,
disposes or recycles any used oil
regulated by EPA under section 3014 of
RCRA that is not listed or identified as
a hazardous waste under the state's
hazardous waste program in violation of
standards or regulations for
management of such used oil; or who
makes any false statement or
representation in any application, label,
manifest, record, report, permit or other
document filed, maintained, or used for
purposes of program compliance
(including compliance with any
standards or regulations for used oil
regulated by EPA under section 3014 of
RCRA that is not listed or identified as
hazardous waste).
§271.26 [Amended]
11. The second sentence in § 271.26(g)
is amended by adding a parenthesis
after the phrase "as part of its
authorization petition submitted to EPA
under §271.5"
12. Section 271.26 is amended further
by adding paragraph (b.) and Table 1 to
read as follows:
§ 271 .26 Requlremants for usad oil
(h)(l) Unless otherwise provided in
part 271, state programs shall have
standards for the marketing arid burning
of used oil for energy recovery that are
at least as stringent as the requirements
and prohibitions that EPA adopted on
November 29, in 40 CFR part 266,
subpart E of this chapter. The part 279
of this chapter requirements specified in
Table 1 (except those provisions
identified in footnotes 1 and 2 of Table
1) are Federally enforceable in those
states that have not adopted state
requirements equivalent to 40 CFR part
279, subparts G and H of this chapter
requirements and have not been
authorized to enforce the state
requirements.
TABLE 1 .—REGULATIONS ADOPTED
NOVEMBER 29, 1985 REGARDING
THE BURNING OF USED OIL FOR
ENERGY RECOVERY
[Those Part 279 provisions will continue
to be enforced by EPA]
Former provisions cf
40 CFR part 266, sub-
part E (1992)
Sec. 266.40(a)
Sec. 266.40(b)
Sec. 266.40(c) [rebut-
table presumption].
Sec. 266.40(d)(1)anct
(2).
Sec. 268.40(e)
Sec. 266.41 (a)(1) and
(2).
266.41 (b)(1) and (2) ...
Sec. 266.42(a)
Sac. 266.42(b)
Sec. 266.42(c)
Sec. 266.43(a)(1)
Sac. 266.43(a)(2)
Sec. 266.43(b)(1)
Sec. 266.43(b)(2)
Sec. 266.43(b)(3)
Sec. 266.43(b)(4)(i-v)
Sec. 266.43(b)(4)(vi)
Sec. 266.43(b)(5)(i)
and (ii).
Sec. 266.43{b)(6)(i) ....
Sec. 266.43(b)(6)(ii)
Sec. 266.44(a)
Sac. 266.44(b)
Sec. 266.44(c)
Sec. 266.44(d)
Recodified provisions
within 40 CFR part
279
Sec. 279.60(a)
Sec. 279.11
Sec. 279.83(a), (b)
and (c)2
Sec. 279.10(b)(2)
and (3)
Sec. 279.11
Sec. 279.60(c)
Sec. 279.71
Sec. 279.61 (a)
279.23(a)
Sec. 279.60(a)
Sec. 279.70(a)
Sec. 279.60(a)
Sec. 279.70(a) and
(b)(1)
Sec. 279.70(b)(2)
Sec. 279.72(a)
Sec. 279.71
Sec. 279.73(a)
Sec. 279.74(a)
not included
Sec. 279.75(a)
Sec. 279.74(b) and
(c)
279.72(b)
Sec. 279.74(a)
Sec. 279.75(b)
Sec. 279.61 (a)
Sec. 279.23(a)
Sec. 279.62(a)
Sec. 279.66(a)
Sec. 279.72(a)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 83 / Monday, May 3, 1993 / Rules and Regulations 26425
TABLE 1 .-—REGULATIONS ADOPTED
NOVEMBER 29, 1985 REGARDING
THE BURNING OF USED OIL FOR
ENERGY RECOVERY—Continued
[These Part 279 provisions will continue
to be enforced by EPA]
Former provisions of
40 CFR part 266, sub-
part E (1992)
Sec. 266.44{e)
Recodified provisions
within 40 CFR part
279
Sac 279 65(a) and
(•«
Sec. 279.66{b)
Sec. 279.72(b)
1 Contains additional new definitions that
were not included in the 1985 rule
2 Paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of §279.63
contain new exemptions from Bie rebuttable
presumption that were not part of the 1985
rule.
(2) In states that have not been
authorized for the RCRA base program,
all requirements of Part 279 will be
Federally enforceable effective March 8,
1993.
PART 27&—STANDARDS FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF USED QSL
13. The authority citation for part 279
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sections 1006, 2002(a), 3001
through 3007, 3010, 3014, and 7004 of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended (42
U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921 through 6927,
6930, 6934, and 6974); and sections 101(37)
and 114(c) of CERCLA (42 U.S.C. 9601(37)
and 9614(c)).
§279.1 [Amended]
14. In § 279.1, the definition of "used
oil," is amended by revising the phrase
"if contaminated" to read "is
contaminated."
15. Section 279.10 is amended by
revising paragraph (bj(2) introductory
text to read as follows:
§279.10 Applicability.
*****
(b) * * *
(2) Characteristic hazardous waste.
Mixtures of used oil and hazardous
waste that solely exhibits one or more
of the hazardous waste characteristic
identified in subpart C of part 261 of
this chapter and mixtures of used oil
and hazardoas waste that is listed in
subpart D solely because it exhibits one
or more of the characteristics of
hazardous waste identified in subpart C
are subject to:
*****
16. Section §279,10(b)(2)(ii) is
amended by adding the phrase "Except
as specified in § 279.10(b)(2)(iii)" at the
beginning of the paragraph.
17. In § 279.10(b)(2)(iii) revise the
phrase "because if exhibits" to read
"because it exhibits".
18. In § 279.10(d)(l) revise the phrase
"or other products" to read "or other
fuel products",
19. In § 279,10(e){3)(ii) revise the
phrase "if the materials are identified as
hazardous waste" to read "if the
materials are listed or identified as
hazardous wastes."
20. Section 279.10 is amended further
by revising paragraph (c), paragraph
(e)(4) and paragraph (i) to read as
follows:
§279.10 Applicability.
*****
(c) Materials containing or otherwise
contaminated with used oil. (I) Except
as provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section, materials containing or
otherwise contaminated with used oil
from which the used oil has been
properly drained or removed to the
extent possible such that no visible
signs of free-flowing oil remain in or on
the material:
(i) Are not used oil and thus not
subject to this part, and
(ii) If applicable are subject to the
hazardous waste regulations of parts
124, 260 through 266, 268, and 270 of
this chapter.
(2) Materials containing or otherwise
contaminated with used oil that are
burned for energy recovery are subject
to regulation as used oil under this part.
(3) Used oil drained or removed from
materials containing or otherwise
contaminated with used oil is subject to
regulation as used oil under this part.
* * A * *
(e) * * *
(4) Used oil re-refining distillation
bottoms that are used as feedstock to
manufacture asphalt products are not
subject to this part.
*****
(i) Used oil containing PCBs. In
addition to the requirements of 40 CFR
part 279, marketers and burners of used
oil who market used oil containing any
quantifiable level of PCBs are subject to
the requirements found at 40 CFR
761.20(e).
21. The table in § 279.11 is emendad
by adding a note to the end to read as
follows:
§ 279.11 Ussd oil specification*.
* * * * *
Note: Applicable standards for the burning
of used oil containing PCBs are imposed by
40 CFR 761.20(e).
22. Section 279.12 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(3) to read as
follows:
§278.12 Prohibitions.
(3) Hazardous waste incinerators
subject to regulation under subpart O of
parts 264 or 265 of this chapter.
A * tt * *
23. Section 279.21 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§279.21 Hazardous waste mixing.
(a) Mixtures of used oil and hazardous
waste must be managed in accordance
with § 279.10(b).
§279.22 [Amended]
24. The first sentence of § 279.22 is
removed.
§279.23 [Amended]
25. In § 279.23 remove paragraph (b)
and redesignate paragraph (a) as
introductory text and paragraphs (a)(l)
through (3) as (a) through (c)
respectively.
26. In the first sentence of § 279.40
(a)(4), revise the words "generated by,"
to read "from" and remove the words
"from the initial generator."
27. In § 279.40 (d)(4), the phrase "of
the partial Marketers" is removed,
(c)
§279.42
28. In § 279.42 paragraph (a) is revised
to read as follows:
§279.42 Notifietion.
(a) Identification numbers. Used oil
transporters that have previously
notified EPA of hazardous waste and
other used oil management activities
and obtained a U.S. EPA Identification
Number must renotify to identify their
used oil transporter activities.
* * * * A
29, In § 279.42(b)(l), revise the phrase
"To obtain EPA Form 8700-12" to read
"To obtain ordering information for EPA
Form 8700-12".
30. Section 279.43 is amended by
revising paragraph (b) to read ss follows:
§279.43 Used oil transportation.
* * * * a
(b) DOT Requirements. Used oil
transporters must comply with all
applicable requirements under the U.S.
Department of Transportation
regulations in 49 CFR parts 171 through
180. Persons transporting iiSKti oil that
meets the definition of a hazardous
material in,49 CFR 171.8 must,comply
with all applicable regulations in 49
CFR parts 171 through 180.
§279.49 [Amended]
31. Section 279,45 is amended by
removing the first sentence and revising
-------
28426
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 83 / Monday, May 3, 1993 / Rules and Regulations
the word "generators" in the third
sentence to read "transporters".
32. In § 279.45 add paragraph
(d)(l)(iii) and revise the period at the
end of paragraph (d)(l){ii) to read "; or"
as follows:
§ 279.45 Used oii storage »i transfer
facilities.
(d). * .
(1)* * *
(iii) An equivalent secondary
containment system.
§ 275.51 [Amended]
33. Paragraph (a) of § 279.SI is revised
to read as follows:
§279.51 Notification.
(a) Identification numbers. Used oil
processors/rerefiners that have
previously notified EPA of hazardous
waste and other used oii management
activities and obtained a U.S. EPA
Identification Number arms' renotify to
identify their used oil processors/
rerefiners activities.
§279.52 [Amendad]
34. In § 279.52(b)(6Hviii)(C) revise the
phrase "paragraph Qi) of this section" to
read "paragraphs (b){6)(viii) (A) and (B)
of this section.".
§279.54 [Amended]
35. In § 279.54, remove the first
sentence and revise the word
"generators" in the third sentence to
read "processors/re-refiners"
36. In § 279.54{a) remove the words
"or process".
37. Section 279.54 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(l}(iii) and by
revising the period after paragraph
(c)(l)(ii) to read "; or" as follows:
§279.54 Used oil management
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) - * *
(iii) Aa equivalent secondary
containment system.
§ 279.60 [Amended]
38. In § 279.60 (b)(l) revise "this
subpart" to read "with subpart".
§279.S2 [Amended]
39. In § 279.62 paragraph (a)(l) is
revised to read as follows:
§279.62 Notification.
* * * ^ *
(a) Used oil burners that have not
previously notified EPA of their used oil
burning activities must notify EPA to
identify their used oil burning activities.
Even if a burner has previously notified
EPA of hazardous waste management
activities under section 3010 of RCRA
and obtained an identification number,
the used oil burner must renotify to
identify used oil burning activities.
§279.64 [Amended]
40. Section 279.64 is amended by
removing the first sentence of this
section and revising the word
"generators" in the third sentence to
read "burners".
§273.70 [Amended]
41. In § 279.70(a), revise the word
"section" to read "subpart."
42. In § 279,72(a), remove the last
sentence.
43. In § 279.73(a), revise "this
section" to read "this subpart."
44. In § 279.73 paragraph (a) is revised
to read as follows:
§27S.?3 NetlfleaUorc.
(a) Used oil fuel marketers that have
not previously notified EPA of their
used oil fuel marketing activities must
notify EPA to identify these used oil
fuel marketing activities. Even if a used
oil fual marketer has previously notified
EPA of hazardous waste management
activities under section 3010 of RCRA
and obtained an identification number,
the used oil fuel marketer must renotify
to identify used oil fuel marketing
activities.
§279.74 [Amended]
45. In the first sentence of § 279.74(a),
revise the word "generator" to read
"marketer."
[FR Doc. 93-10212 Filed 4-30-93; 8:45 am]
BILLING COOE 8S80-SO-P
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 54 / Tuesday, March 23. 1993 / Rules and Regulations 15435
|FR Doc. W-6449 Filed 3-22-93. 8:45 ami
HUJNO coot mo n *
40 CFR Part 761
IOPPTS-66016; FLfl 40KMJ
Polychlodnatod Slptwnylt; Use of
Waste Oil
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Find rule; technical
amendment
SUMMARY: EPA issued • final rule on
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs);
exclusions, exemptions and use
authorizations which was published in
the Federal Register of June 27.1988
(53 FR 24206: TSCA Docket No. OPTS-
620S3A). Among other things, that rule
prohibited the use of waste oil
containing any detectable level of PCBs
(i.e., PCB concentration of 2 ppm or
greater), but authorized the marketing
and burning of used oil with a PCB
concentration below 50 ppm for
purposes of energy recovery by
referencing the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements
in 40 CFR 266.40. subpart E. The RCRA
requirements have been revised and the
referenced requirements have been
moved from 40 CFR 266.40. subpart E
to 40 CFR 279.60, subpart G and 279.70,
subpart H (57 FR 41566, September 10.
1902). This technical amendment
replaces the references in § 761.20(e) to
reflect the current designations and
makes other minor language changes to
ensure continuance of TSCA coverage in
light of the recent RCRA amendments.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 23, 1993.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan B. Hazen, Director,
Environmental Assistance Division (TS-
799), Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, Environmental Protection
Agency, nn. ES43B. 401 M St.. SW.,
Washington. DC 20460. (202) 554-1404.
TDD: (202) 554-0551.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA
issued a final rule on the use of waste
oil which was published in the Federal
Register on June 27.1988 (53 FR 24211).
Section 761.20(e) of this rule authorized
the marketing and burning of used oil
with a PCB concentration of 2 ppm or
greater, but less than 50 ppm under
specified circumstances by referencing
the RCRA requirements at 40 CFR
266.40, subpart E. This provision must
now be updated to reflect the new
designations for used oil burners and
marketers appearing at 40 CFR 279.60
and 279.70. This rule amendment
amends §761.20(e) by replacing, where
appropriate, the previous 40 CFR part
266 designations with the current 40
CFR part 279 designations. Since the
Office of Solid Waste (OSW) has
restructured its regulation by identifying
the various entities of the used oil
marketing/burning universe (e.g.,
generator, transporter, transfer facility,
processor/re-refiner, marketer, burner),
the TSCA provision at § 761.20(e)(l)(ii)
was revised to ensure that the TSCA
provision continues to capture any
entity which markets used oil to other
used oil marketers. Because this rule
makes no changes ia the substantive
requirements of $ 761.20(e), EPA
believes that notice and an opportunity
for comment are unnecessary. The
effective date for this provision has been
set to conform to the effective date for
the RCRA requirements. EPA finds, for
good cause, that the rule should take
effect on that date, rather than being
delayed for 30 days because the rule
does not modify any substantive
requirements.
I. Public Record
A public record for the action has
been established under docket number
"OPPTS-66016." The public record is
available for inspection from 8 a.m. to
12 noon, and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The public record is located in
the TSCA Public Docket Room, room
G004, Northeast Mall, 401 M St., SW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
In accordance with the requirements
of section 19(a)(3) of TSCA. EPA is
issuing the following list of documents.
which constitutes the record for this
rulemaking. The record includes basic
information considered by the Agency
in developing this rule. A full list of
these materials is available for
inspection and copying in the TSCA
Public Docket Room.
1. USEPA. 57 FR 41566. September
10.1992. "Hazardous Waste
Management System; Identification and
Listing of Hazardous Waste; Recycled
Used Oil Management Standards; Final
Rule."
2. 40 CFR 279.10 and 279.11. A
technical correction related to these
provisions and entitled, "Hazardous
Waste Management System;
Identification and Listing of Hazardous
Waste; Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Final Rule Correction," will
.be published in the Federal Register
later this month. This notice will be
made a part of the rulemakjng record
and will be placed in the TSCA public
docket (OPPTS-66016).
n. Other Regulatory Requirement*
Paperwork Reduction Act
EPA has determined that this rule is
not subject to OMB review under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. The existing
information collection requirements are
not altered in any way.
List of Subjects ia 40 CFR Part 761
Environmental protection, Hazardous
substances, Labeling, Polychlorinated
biphenyls, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated. March 9. 1993.
Mark Greenwood,
Director. Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxic*.
Therefore. 40 CFR part 761 is
amended as follows:
PART 761 -{AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 761
continues to read as follows:
Authority: IS U.S.C 2603. 2607. 2611.
2614 and 2616.
2. By revising $761. 20(e)(l)(ii) to read
as follows:
1 761 JO ProMMJone.
(1) • • •
(ii) Marketers who market off-
specification used oil for energy
recovery only to other marketers who
have notified EPA of their used oil
management activities, and who have in
EPA identification number where an
identification number is required by 40
CFR 279.73. This would include
persons who market off-specification
used oil who an? subject to the
requirements at 40 CFR part 279 and the
notification requirements of 40 CFR
279.73.
$761.20
3. Section 761.20(e) is amended ««
follows:
a. In paragraph (e) introductory :e«i
by replacing the citation "40 CFR p«n
266. subpart E" with "40 CFR p«n : *"
subparts G and H."
b. In paragraph (e)(l)(iii) by r*pl«cj-^
the citations "40 CFR 266.4lf» «nd
"40 CFR 266.41(b)(2)(iii)(A). (Bl %rd
(C)" with "40 CFR 279.61(8)0) wid ."
and with "40CFR 279.23." rwp*.iiv«,,
each place the citations appatr
c. In paragraph (e)(3)(iiHA) by
replacing the citation "40 CFR p«/< -^
subpart E" with "40 CFR pan : *<»
subpart G."
d. In paragraph (e)(4) introd^. • :n,
text by replacing the citations < '•
-------
13436 Federal Register / Vol. 58, No. 54 / Tuesday. March 23, 1993 / Rule* and Regulation
266.43(b)(6)(i) and (ii)" and "40 CFR
266.44(e)" with "40 CFR 279.72(b),
279.74(a). (b) and (c). and 279.75." and
with "40 CFP 279.83 and 279.86."
respectively.
e. In paragraph (e)(4)(l) by replacing
the citations "40 CFR 266.4 3(b)(6)(i)"
and "40 CFR 266.43(b)(6)(ii)" with "40
CFR 279.72(b) and 279.74(b) and (c}."
and with "40 CFR 279.74(a) and (c) and
279.75," respectively.
f. In paragraph (e)(4)(ii) by replacing
the citation "40 CFR 266.44(e)" and the
reference to "paragraph (e)(3)(iii)" with
"40 CFR 279.65 and 279.66" and
"paragraph (e)(3)(ii)," respectively.
[FR Doc 93-6604 Piled 9-22-93; 8:45 ami
MUJWOCOOf ISM-W-F
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Part 302-11
[FTR Amendment 30]
RIN 3090-AE46
Federal Travel Regulation; Relocation
Income Tax (RIT) Allowance Paymanta
for Transfer* to, from, and between
polnta In Puerto Rico, the Northern
Mariana lalanda, or the U.S.
Poasesslona
AGENCY: Federal Supply Service. GSA.
ACTION; Final rule.
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the
Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) to
provide for payment of a relocation
income tax (RTF) allowance to
employees who transfer to, from, or
between points in Puerto Rico, the
Northern Mariana Islands, or the U.S.
possessions. This amendment is
intended to provide equitable treatment
to these transferees by allowing them to
receive a RIT allowance payment for
taxes incurred on moving expense
reimbursements similar to the RIT
allowance authorized for transfers
within the United State*.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is
effective January 1,1987, and applies to
Year 1 covered reimbursements made
on or after January 1,1987.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert A. Clausen, Transportation
Management Division (FBX),
Washington, DC 20406, telephone FTS
or commercial 703-305-5745.
SUPPLEMENTARY ^FORMATION: This rule
amends the FTR to allow payment of the
RTF allowance to employees who
transfer to, from, or between points in
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, or the U.S. possessions. The
rule also allows payment to employee*
in all situations where double taxation
occurs.
Puerto Rico RIT allowance
This amendment adjusts the RIT
allowance to allow payment for income
taxes incurred when an employee
relocates to or from a point, or between
points, in the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico. Under this modification, the
combined marginal tax rate (CMTR) it
computed without regard to the Federal
marginal tax rate. Therefore, the
adjustment to the CMTR for the Federal
income tax deduction of State and local
income taxes is not a factor in the
following CMTR formula to be used in
calculating the Puerto Rico RIT
allowance:
XoP+S+L
Where:
X » CMTR for Year 1 and Year 2
P a Puerto Rico tax rate for Year 1
S = State tax rate for Year 1, when
applicable
L a Local tax rate for Year 1
The Year 2 marginal tax rates for
Puerto Rico cannot be determined with
precision since the Federal Government
is not involved in developing Puerto
Rico's tax laws. The new CMTR
formula, therefore, will be used for both
Year 1 and Year 2. and the calculation
will not account for any differences that
may occur in the Puerto Rico marginal
tax rates between years.
The Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands and U.S. possessions
RIT allowance
This amendment also recognizes the
RIT allowance for employees who move
to or from a point, or between points, in
the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands or the U.S. possessions;
i.e.. Guam, American Samoa, and the
U.S. Virgin Islands. These jurisdictions
have each adopted a tax system that
"mirrors" the Federal tax system
(meaning that they impose tax in the
same manner and at the same rates as
the Federal Government). In all these
jurisdictions, either the Commonwealth/
possession or the US. allows a credit or
exclusion to prevent double taxation.
Thus, the income tax liability of a
Federal employee residing in one of
these jurisdictions is equivalent to that
of an employee residing in a State that
imposes no personal income tax.
Accordingly, the RJT allowance paid to
these employees will not incorporate
any component for the Commonwealth's
or the possession's income taxes. The
CMTR will be calculated, using the
formula for transfers within the United
States, based on the Federal marginal
tax rate, the State marginal tax rate
(when applicable), and the local
marginal tax rate, including any local
tax Incurred in the Commonwealth or
the possession, aa appropriate.
Double taxation by Stats*
This rule also amends the FTR to
consider in the RIT calculation all
situations where double taxation by
States occurs. Previously, the FTR
permitted consideration of double
taxation only when the employee was
subject to double taxation by two States
in the vidnity of the same official
station, either the old official station or
the new official station. This change Is
intended to allow consideration of
double taxation in all instaz
Including when both the old official
station and new official station claim
taxing jurisdiction over the Federal
employee. However, for double taxation
to exist, both States must claim taxing
jurisdiction, and neither may oflset for
income taxes paid to the other
jurisdiction. If either State allows an
offsetting adjustment for tax payments
to the other State, than double taxation
does not exist, and the agency shall use
the higher of the two State ""Tfl«"l tax
rates in computing the RIT allowance.
The General Services Administration
(GSA) has determined that this rule is
not a major rule for the purposes of
Executive Order 12291 of February 17,
1961. because it is not lixely to result in
an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more; a major increase in
costs to consumers or others; or
significant adverse effects. GSA has
based all administrative decisions
underlying this rule on adequate
information concerning the need for,
and consequences of, this rule; has
determined that the potential benefits to
society from this rule outweigh the
potential costs and has maximized the
net benefits; and has chosen the
alternative approach involving the least
net cost to society.
List of Subjects in 41 CFR Part 302-11
Government employees, Income taxes,
Relocation allowances and entitlements.
Transfers
For the reasons set out in the
preamble. 41 CFR part 302-11 is
amended to read as follows:
PART 302-11—RELOCATION INCOME
TAX (RIT) ALLOWANCE
1. The authority citation for part 302-
11 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C 5721-5734; 20 US C
905(a); E.O. 11609, 36 FR 13747, 3 CFR.
-------
RECYCLED USED OIL MANAGEMENT STANDARDS
September 10, 1992
(57 FR 41566)
General:
Topic:
Absorbents and Used Oil
Applicability of Part 279 to all used oils,
whether or not they exhibit a characteristic
Aggregation Points vs. Collection Centers
CHRCLA Liability Exemption for SSDs
ChKCLA Petroleum Exclusion
Compressor Oils and CFCs
Crude Oil/Natural Gas Pipelines
Decision not to List
Definition of Used Oil
DeMinimis Mixtures
Dust suppression
Financial Responsibility
Household DIY oil
Incineration
LDR Requirements
Metalworking oils
PCBs and Used Oil
Rebuttable Presumption
Recycling Presumption
Re-refining Distillation Bottoms/Asphalt
Solvent mixtures
SPCC requirements
State Authorization/ Effective Dates
Used Oil Sprayed on Coal
USTs
Page:
41581
41580
41587
41583-84/41605
41606
41580
41582
41576
41573-74
41583
41572/41602
41573
. 41584
41582
41605
41579
41583
41579
41578
41582
41581-82
41582
41604
41583
41582
Generators:
Accumulation Limit - none
Inspections
On-site storage
Release Response
Self-transport
Ships as generators/ Co- generators
Small Farmer Exemption
Tracking requirements
Transportation
Used oil on Ships only regulated upon
removal
41587
41587
41585-86
41586
41587
41585
41588
41587
41586
41605
-------
Transporters/Transfer Facilities:
Blending used oil to meet specification not
allowed
Closure requirements
Delivery/Shipping requirements
Exporting
Notification
Returnable Presumption
Recordkeeping
Release Response
Retrofitting tanks
Secondary containment
Storage at transfer facility
Transporter storing for more than 35 days =
"processor"
USTs at transfer facilities
35 day vs. 10 day storage limit
41589
41592
41590
41592
41589
41592
41592
41592
41590
41591
41590
41593
41591
41591
Processors:
Biennial Reporting
Closure
Contingency Plan/Emergency Procedures
Definition of processing
Definition of Re-refining
Labeling
Notification
Operating Record
Preparedness and Prevention
Rebuttable Presumption
Release Response
Specification Used oil Fuel
Storage
Tank Requirements
Tracking
USTs and SPCC plans
Waste Analysis
41598
41598
41594
41593
41593
41594
41594
41598
41594
41597
41596
, 41597
41594
41595
41598
41596
41596
-------
Burners:
Analysis
Applicability
Certification
Future regulations
Invoice vs. acceptance/delivery log
No closure requirements
Notification
Records/Reporting
Release Response
Restrictions
Space Heaters
Storage and labeling
41600
41599
41600
41601
41600
41601
41599-600
41600
41600
41599
41599
41600
Marketers:
Impossible to only be a marketer 41601
Blenders are processors 41602
-------
Thursday
September 10, 1992
Part III
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 260. et al.
Hazardous Waste Management System;
Identification and Usting of Hazardous
Waste; Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards; Final Rule
-------
41566
Federal Register J Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday. September 10, 199?- / R"tea and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 eFR Parts 260, 261, 266, 271 and
279
[FRL-4153-6]
R!M: 2050-AC17
Hazardous Waste Management
System; identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; B@cycS@d Used 05!
Management Standards
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTIOH: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Agency is promulgating a
final listing decision for used oils that
are recycled and is simultaneously
promulgating standards for the
management of used oil under RCRA
section 3014. EPA has made a final
listing decision for used oils that are
recycled based upon the technical
criteria provided in sections 1004 and
3001 of RCRA. EPA determined that
recycled used oil does not have to be
listed as a hazardous waste since the
used oil management standards issued
in this rulemaking are adequately
protective of human health and the
environment. These standards cover
used oil generators, transporters,
processors and re-refiners, burners, and
marketers. These standards are
promulgated under the authority of
section 3014 of RCRA and will be
codified in a new part 279 of chapter 40
of the Code of Federal Regulations.
When these management standards go
into effect, service station dealers who
collect used oil from do-it-yourself (DIY)
generators and who are in compliance
with the standards promulgated, may be
eligible for the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) section 114(c) liability
exemption. EPA is continuing to
evaluate the potential hazards
associated with management of used oil.
When this analysis is completed, the
Agency will publish Notice(s) of Data
Availability in the Federal Register over
the next several months, as necessary.
EPA will also, at that time, solicit
opinion from the public on what, if any,
additional steps may be necessary
regarding used oil management
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 8, 1993.
ADDRESSES: The regulatory docket for
this rulemaking is available for public
inspection at room 2427, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 from
9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except for Federal holidays. The docket
number is F-92-UO2F-FFFFF. The
public must make an appointment to
review docket materials by calling (202)
260-9327. The public may copy a
maximum of 100 pages from any
regulatory document at no cost.
Additional copies cost $.20 per page.
FOR FURTHER 8NFORMAT&ON CONTACT:
For general information contact the
RCRA Hotline, Office of Solid Waste,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC
20460; Telephone (800) 424-9346 (toll
free) or, in the Washington, DC,
metropolitan area at (703) 920-9810.
For information on specific aspects of
this rule, contact Ms. Rajani D, Joglekar,
telephone (202) 260-3516, or Ms. Eydie
Pines, telephone (202) 260-3509, U.S.
EPA, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC
20460.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's preamble are listed
in the following outline:
I. Authority
IL Background
A. Authorities and Regulations Covering
Used Oil Management
1. Statutory Authority
2. Regulatory Actions Related to Used Oil
B. Summary of May 20,1992 Federal
Register Notice (Final Listing Decision
for Used Oils Destined for Disposal)
C. Current Federal Regulations Governing
Disposal of Used Oil
III. Summary of Major Comments to 1985
Proposal and 1991 Supplemental Notice
A. Comments Received in Response to the
1985 Proposed Rulemaking
1. Comments on 1985 Proposed listing
Decision
2. Major Comments on 1985 Proposed
Management Standards for Recycled
Used Oil
B. Comments Received in Response to 1991
Supplemental Notice
1. Listing Used Oil
2. De Minimis Mixtures
3. Controlling Disposal of Used Oil
4. DIY-Generated Used Oil
5. Criteria for Recycling Presumption
ft Ban on Use as a Dust Suppressant
7. CERCLA Liability Issues
8. Storage
9. Secondary Containment for Tanks
10. Financial Responsibility
11. Permit-By-Rule
IV. Definition of Used Oil
V. Listing Determination for Recycled Used
Oil
A. General
B. Summary of EPA's Listing Determination
and Rationale for Recycled Used Oils
VI. Final Management Standards for
Recycled Used Oils
A. General Approach for Used Oil
Management
B. Recycling Presumption
C. Rebuttable Presumption of Mixing for
Used Oil
1. Metalworidng Oils
t. Compressor Oils from Refrigeration
Units Containing CFCs
D. Summary of New Part 279
2. Used Oil Generators
3. Standards for Used Oil Transporters
4. Standards for Used Oil Processing and
Re-Refining Facilities
5. Standards for Burners of Off-
Specification Used Oil Fuel
6. Standards for Used Oil Fuel Marketers
7. Standards for Disposal of Used Oils and
Use as a Dust Suppressant
E. Response to Major Comments
1. Listing Used Oil as a Hazardous Waste
2. Mixtures
3. Controls on Disposal
4. DIY-Generated Used Oils
5. Recycling Presumption Criteria
6. Ban on Road Oiling
7. CERCLA Liability
8. Storage
9. Secondary Containment
10. Financial Responsibility
11. Permit-By-Rule
12. Definition of Used Oil
VII. Effective Date
VIII. State Authorization
A. Applicability in Authorized States
' B. Administration
IX. Relationship of this Rule to Other
Programs
A. RCRA
B. MARPOL 73/78
C. Clean Water Act (CWA)
D. Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA)
E. Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
(HMTA)
F. Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA1
X. Regulatory Impact Analysis
XL Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
XII. Paperwork Reduction Act
I. Authority
This regulatory decision and the
regulations promulgated today are
issued under the authority of sections
1004,10Q6, 2002, 3001, 3014, and 7004 of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended by the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, and as amended by
the Used Oil Recycling Act, as amended,
42 U.S.C. 6901, 6905, 6912(a), 6921
through 6927, 6930, 6934, 6935, 6937
through 6939 and 6974.
II, Background
A Authorities and Regulations Covering
Used Oil Management
1. Statutory Authority
Section 3014 of RCRA requires EPA to
establish standards applicable to
recycled used oil that will protect public
health and the environment and, to the
extent possible within that context, not
discourage used oil recycling. Section
3014 was added to the RCRA statute by
the Used Oil Recycling Act (UORA) of
1980. The UORA required the Agency to
establish performance standards and
other requirements "as may be
-------
Federal Register /Vol., 57, No, 176 / Thursday,, September 10, 1992 /Rules and Regulations 41567
necessary to protect the public health
and the environment from hazards
associated with recycled oil" as long as
such regulations "do not discourage the
recovery or recycling of used oil."
The Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (HSWA)
reemphasized that the protection of
human health and the environment was
to be of primary concern ha the
regulation of hazardous waste. Specific
to used oil, HSWA slightly altered the
language of RCRA section 3014 to direct
the Administrator to promulgate
regulations as may be necessary to
protect human health and the
environment from hazards associated
with recycled oil. In developing such
regulations, the Administrator shall
conduct an analysis of the economic
impact of the regulations on the oil
recycling industry. The Administrator
shall ensure that such regulations do not
discourage the recovery or recycling of
used oil consistent with the protection
of human health and the environment.
(Emphasis added to highlight HSWA
language amending RCRA section
3014(a).)
EPA is therefore directed to
promulgate standards for the handling
and management of recycled oil. Section
1004 of RCRA, in defining the term
"recycled oil," includes used oil being
reused for any purpose, including used
oil being re-refined or being processed ,
into fuel. EPA believes that section 3014
also provides authority for establishing
management standards that specifically
include used oil being stored, collected
or otherwise managed prior to recycling.
2. Regulatory Actions Related to Used
Oil
On December 18,1978, EPA initially
proposed guidelines and regulations for
the management of hazardous wastes as
well as specific rules for the
identification and listing of hazardous
wastes under section 3001 of the
Resource Conservation and. Recovery
Act (RCRA) (43 FR 58946). At that time,
EPA proposed to list waste lubricating
oil and waste hydraulic and cutting oil.1
as hazardous wastes on the basis of
their toxicity. In addition, the Agency
proposed recycling regulations to
regulate (1) the incineration or burning
of used lubricating, hydraulic,
transformer, transmission, or cutting oil
that was hazardous and (2) the use of
waste oils in a manner that constituted
disposal.2
In the May 19,1980 regulations (45 FR
33084), EPA decided to defer
promulgation of the recycling
regulations for waste oils to consider
fully whether waste- and use-specific
standards may be implemented in lieu of
imposing the full set of Subtitle C
regulations on potentially recoverable
and valuable materials. At the same
time, EPA deferred the listing of waste
oil for disposal so that the entire waste
oil issue could be addressed at one time.
Under the May 19,1980 regulations,
however, any waste oil exhibiting one of
the characteristics of hazardous waste
(ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and
toxicity) that was disposed, or
accumulated, stored, or treated prior to
disposal, became regulated as a
hazardous waste subject to all
applicable Subtitle C regulations.
As explained above, HSWA made
protection of human health and the
environment the prominent concern in
the Agency's regulatory decisions for
used oil and required EPA to propose
whether to identify or list used
automobile and truck crankcase oil by
November 8,1985. HSWA also required
EPA to make a final determination as to
whether to identify or list any or all
used oils by November 8,1986. On
November 29,1985 (50 FR 49258), EPA
proposed to list all used oils as
hazardous waste, including petroleum-
derived and synthetic oils, based on the
presence of toxic constituents at levels
of concern from contamination during
use and adulteration after use. Also on
November 29,1985, the Agency
proposed management standards for
recycled used oil (50 FR 49212) and
issued final regulations, incorporated at
40 CFR part 266, subpart E, prohibiting
the burning of off-specification used oil
fuels 3 in non-industrial boilers and
furnaces (50 FR 49164). Marketers of
used oil fuel and industrial burners of
off-specification fuel are required to
notify EPA of their activities and to
comply with certain notice and
recordkeeping requirements. Used oils
that meet the fuel oil specification are
exempt from most of the 40 CFR part
266, subpart E regulations.
On March 10,1986 (51 FR 8206), the
Agency published a Supplemental
Notice requesting comments on
1 The term "waste oil" included both used and
unused oila that may no longer be .used for their
original, purpose.
* "Use in a manner constituting disposal" means
the placement of hazardous waste directly onto the
land in a manner constituting disposal or the use of
the solid waste to produce products that are applied
to or placed on the land or are otherwise contained
in products that are applied to or placed on the land
[40 CFR 261.2(c)(l)].
3 Used Oil that exceeds any of the following
specification levels is considered to be "off-
specification" used oil under 40 CFR 268.40(eJ:
Arsenic—5 ppm. Cadmium—2 ppm. Chromium—10
ppm. Lead—100 ppm. Flash Point-100 *F minimum.
Total Halogens—4,000 ppm.
additional aspects of the'proposed
listing of used oil as hazardous waste. In
particular, commenters to the November
29,1985, proposal suggested that EPA
consider a regulatory option of only
listing used oil as a hazardous waste
when disposed, while promulgating
special management standards for used
oil that is recycled.
On November 19,1986, EPA issued a
decision not to list as a hazardous waste
used oil that is recycled (51 FR 41900).
The Agency determined that used oil
being recycled should not be listed as a
hazardous waste under RCRA. The EPA
stated in the November 1986 decision
that the Agency intended to issue
recycled used oil management standards
and was conducting studies necessary
to determine what standards are
appropriate under § 3014 of RCRA and
to determine whether used oil being
disposed of should be listed as a RCRA
hazardous waste, or regulated under
other statutes. At that time, it was the
Agency's belief that the stigmatic effects
associated with a hazardous waste
listing might discourage the recycling of
used oil, thereby resulting in increased
disposal of used oil in uncontrolled
manners. EPA stated that several
residues, wastewaters, and sludges
associated with the recycling of used oil
may be evaluated to determine if a
hazardous waste listing was necessary,
even if used oil was not listed as a
hazardous waste. EPA also outlined a
plan that included making the
determination whether to list used oil
being disposed as hazardous waste and
promulgation of special management
standards for recycled oil.
EPA's decision not to list used oil as a
hazardous waste based on the potential
stigmatic effects was challenged by the
Hazardous Waste Treatment Council,
the Association of Petroleum Re-
refiners, and the Natural Resources
Defense Council. The petitioners
claimed that (1) the language of RCRA
indicated that in determining whether to
list used oil as a hazardous waste, EPA
may consider technical characteristics
of hazardous waste, but not the
"stigma" that a hazardous listing might
involve, and (2) that Congress intended
EPA to consider the effects of listing on
the recycled oil industry only after the
initial listing decision.
On October 7,1988, the Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
found that EPA acted contrary to law in
its determination not to list used oil
under RCRA section 3001 based on the
stigmatic effects. (See Hazardous Waste
Treatment Council \. EPA, 861 F.2d 270
(D.C. Cir. 1988) [HWTC I].) The court
ruled that EPA must determine whether
-------
41568 Federal Register. /--Vol. -57, No. i^i/;J^""(^,y,'.l,^fPtemt'er 10» 1992- /^Rulea and .Regulations
to list any used oils based on the
technical criteria for waste listings
specified in the statute.
After the 1988 court decision, EPA
began to re-evaluate its basis for making
a listing determination for used oil. EPA
reviewed the statute, the proposed rule,
and the many comments received on the
proposed rule, Those comments
indicated numerous concerns with the
proposed listing approach. One of the
most frequent concerns voiced by
Gommenters was related to the quality
and "representativeness" of the data
used by EPA to characterize used oils in
1985. Numerous commenters indicated
that "their oils" were not represented by
the data and, if they were represented,
those oils were characterized after being
mixed with other more contaminated
oils or with other hazardous wastes.
Many commenters submitted data
demonstrating that the used oils they
generate, particularly industrial used
oils, did not contain high levels of
toxicants of concern;
In addition, the Agency recognized
that much of the information in the 1985
used oil composition data was more
than five years old, as most of the
information, was collected prior to 1985.
Since the time of that data gathering
effort, used automotive oil composition
may have been affected by the phase-
down of lead in gasoline. The Agency
also recognized the need to collect
analytical data addressing specific
classes of used oils as collected and
stored at the point of generation (i.e., at
the generator's facility).
Finally, the promulgation of the
toxicity characteristic (TC) (55 FR 11798,
March 29,1990) is known to identify
certain used oils as hazardous waste.
Due to the possibility of changes in used
oil composition since the Agency's 1985
proposed listing decision and the new
TC, the Agency recognized that
additional data on used oil
characterization may be needed prior to
making a final hazardous waste listing
determination.
On September 23,1991, EPA published
a Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking for the identification and
listing of used oil and for management
standards for recycled used oil (58 FR
48000J. The 1991 Supplemental Notice
presented supplemental information
gathered by EPA and provided to EPA
by individuals commenting on previous
notices on the listing of used oil and
used oil management standards. As
discussed above, numerous commenters
on the 1985 proposal to list used oil as
hazardous contended that the broad
listing of all used oils unfairly subjects
them to stringent Subtitle C regulations
because their uped oils are not
hazardous. Based on those comments,
the Agency collected a variety of
additional information regarding various
types of used oil, their management, and
their potential health and environmental
effects when mismanaged. The 1991
Supplemental Notice presented this new
information to the public and requested
comment on the information, _
particularly if and how the information
suggests new concerns that EPA should
consider in deciding whether to finalize
all or part of its 1985 proposal to list
used oil as a hazardous waste.
In addition, the 1991 Supplemental
Notice expanded upon the November 29,
1985 (50 FR 49258) proposal to list used
oils as hazardous and the March 10,
1986 (51 FR 8206) Supplemental Notice
by discussing regulatory alternatives not
previously presented in the Federal
Register. Based on the public comments
received relative to these two notices,
the Agency investigated several
important aspects of used oil regulation.
The Supplemental Notice also contained
a request for comments on additional
issues related to the "mixture rule" (40
CFR 261.3(a)(2)(iii)), on test methods for
determining halogen levels in used oils,
and on new data on the composition of
used oil and used oil processing
residuals. For these aspects, the Agency
identified alternative approaches that
were not presented explicitly in the
earlier notices. Those new alternatives
were presented in the 1991
Supplemental Notice.
The 1991 Supplemental Notice also
discussed the Agency's proposal to
amend 40 CFR 261.32 by adding four
waste streams from the reprocessing
and re-refining of used oil to the list of
hazardous Wastes from specific sources.
The wastes from the reprocessing and
re-refining of used oil include process
residuals from the gravitational or
mechanical separation of solids, water,
and oil (K152); spent polishing media
used to finish used oil (K153); distillation
bottoms from used oil processing and re-
refining (K154); and treatment residues
from primary waste water treatment
(K155).
The 1991 Supplemental Notice also
included a description of some of the
management standards (in addition to or
in place of those proposed in 1985) that
EPA considered in promulgating today's
final rule.
On May 20,1992, EPA proposed a
Hazardous Waste Identification Rule
describing two alternative approaches
for hazardous waste Identification under
RCRA. The first proposed approach
would establish concentration based
exclusion criteria (CBEC) for listed
hazardous wastes, waste mixtures,
derivatives, and contaminated media.
The second approach an expanded
characteristic option (ECHO) would
establish ''characteristic" levels for
listed hazardous wastes, waste
mixtures, derivatives, and contaminated
media. (57 FR 21450). Depending upon
which approach the Agency finalizes,
the manner in which EPA regulates
mixtures of used oil and hazardous.
waste may change,
B. Summary of May 20,1992 Federal
Register Notice (Final Listing Decision
for Used Oils Destined for Disposal)
On May 20,1992, EPA published a;
final rule that addressed the listing of
used oils that are disposed, excluded
non-teme plated used,oil filters that
have been drained to remove used oil
from the definition of hazardous waste,
and deferred a final listing
determination on residuals from the •
processing and re-refining of used oil (57
FR 21524). Four separate actions were
taken and are discussed below.
First, the Agency promulgated a final
decision not to list used oils destined for
disposal. This decision was based
primarily upon the finding that all used
oils do not typically and frequently meet
the technical criteria for listing a waste-
as hazardous.' In making the final listing
determination-for used oil destined for
disposal, EPA also gave considerable
attention to the current federal
regulations governing the management
of used oils that are disposed. EPA
evaluated the technical criteria for
listing in light of the current regulatory
structure that controls the management
of used oils and concluded that any
plausible mismanagement of used oil
that is destined for disposal is
addressed by current requirements.
Existing regulations that Cover used oil
destined for disposal are discussed
briefly at the end of this section. In
addition, if a used oil that is destined for
disposal exhibits a characteristic, it is
regulated as a hazardous waste under
subtitle C.
Second, the Agency decided to defer a
decision on listing and management
standards for used oil that is recycled
(this decision is included in today's
rule).
Third, the Agency promulgated a final
exemption from the definition of
hazardous waste in 1.261.4-for certain
used oil filters. The filters that received
the exemption are non-terne^plated used
oil filters that have^een hot-drained to
remove used oil. (Teme is an alloy of tin
and lead.) Hot-drained means draining, i
used oil from a filter while the engine is
at operating temperature, when oil flows
easily. Based on data submitted to EPA,
non-terne-plated, hot-drained used oil
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41569
filters do not typically and frequently
exhibit the Toxitity Characteristic.
Fourth, the Agency announced its
deferral of a final decision on whether
or not to list residuals from the
processing and re-refining of used oil.
The Agency stated that it will continue
to evaluate the composition of used oil
recycling residues and the management
of these residues. The reason for
continued evaluation of residuals is that
recycling techniques and waste
management practices that evolved
during the past six years have resulted
in residual composition changes.
C. Current Federal Regulations
Governing Disposal of Used Oil
Currently, there are several regulatory
programs in place to control the storage
and transportation of used oil, to protect
against releases to the ground, ground
water, and surface waters, to protect
against improper disposal of used oils,
to prevent the burning of used oils with
high levels of toxic constituents in
certain units, and to control the
management of used oils containing
PCB's. Several of these programs have
been proposed and/or promulgated
since 1985, and some have been in place
since before 1985. The Agency has
decided that these current regulations
are protective,- but are not complete or
sufficient to protect human health and
the environment from potential
mismanagement of used oils that are
recycled. Therefore, in addition to the
existing regulations, used oil handlers
will have to comply with additional
management standards that EPA is
promulgating today, such as
recordkeeping and analysis
requirements, and a requirement for
containment consisting of impervious
floor and dikes/berms. The current
regulatory programs are described
below.
The storage of used oil in underground
tanks is controlled under subtitle'! of
RCRA (40 CFR part 280). These
regulations require that underground
tanks be properly maintained, operated,
protected from corrosion, and that any
spills are properly cleaned up. Other
existing storage tank standards are
found under the Clean Water Act Spill
Prevention Control and
Countermeasures (SPCC) requirements.
SPCC requirements regulate the storage
of materials, including used oil, in
aboveground and in underground tanks
under certain circumstances. The Clean
Water Act also requires reporting of
releases of oil into navigable waters if a
sheen appears on the water, if any
water quality standards are violated, or
if a sludge is deposited beneath the
surface of the water, The recently
enacted Oil Pollution Act revised the
SPCC requirements of the Clean Water
Act.
Regulations promulgated pursuant to
MARPQL 73/78, Annex I, act to control
shipboard management of used oil and
releases of used oil to navigable waters.
Bilge slops are a commonly generated
waste on-board ships that contain used
oil; MARPOL prevents this waste from
being discharged into the sea in an
unrestricted manner.
The transport of used oil is regulated
under the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Materials
Transportation Act (HMTA). Used oil
that meets the criteria for being
"combustible" or "flammable" is
- regulated under DOT requirements for
classification, packaging, marking,
labeling, shipping papers, placarding,
recordkeeping and reporting.
The burning of used oil for energy
recovery is subject to existing standards
under RCRA (40 CFR part 266, subpart
E). These standards include
requirements for marketers of used oil,
such as notification, analysis,
recordkeeping, and invoices for each
shipment. Off-specification used oil
must be burned in industrial boilers or
furnaces only. The "specification" levels
for used oil that will be burned for
energy recovery include levels for
metals, halogens, and flash point. These
existing standards promulgated in 1985
are recodified in part 279 today.
The manufacture, use, import, and
disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) in used oils are controlled under
the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA). TSCA controls the
manufacture, import, use, and disposal
of oils containing over 50 ppm PCBs. In
addition, TSCA requires reporting of
any spill of material containing 50 ppm
or greater PCBs, into sewers, drinking
water, surface water, grazing lands, or
vegetable gardens. The Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) requires reporting of any 1-
pound spill of PCBs into the
environment. Note that used oils
containing less than 50 ppm of PCBs are
covered under RCRA.
Used oils that are contaminated with
CERCLA hazardous substances [e,g.,
due to the presence of elevated levels of
lead) are subject to CERCLA release
reporting requirements. Therefore,
releases of used oil containing such
contaminants (e.g., lead) into the
environment in quantities greater than
the reportable quantity for the
contaminant must be reported to the
National Response Center. The current
RQs for CERCLA hazardous substances
are listed in 40 CFR 302.4. In addition,
under 40 CFR part 110, any discharge of
oil that violates applicable water quality
standards or causes a film or sheen on a
water surface must be reported to the
National Response Center.
As mentioned previously, used oil
handlers will have to comply with all
existing regulations (including any
applicable State and local regulations),
and in addition, the new management
standards for recycled oil promulgated
today. For the reasons discussed in
more detail below, EPA believes that
this network of regulations will be
sufficient to ensure protection of human
health and the environment.
HI. Summary of Major Comments to
1985 Proposal and 1991 Supplemental
Notice
A. Comments Received in Response to
the 1985 Proposed Rulemoking
1. Comments on 1985 Proposed Listing
Decision
On November 29,1985 (50 FR 49239),
EPA proposed to list all used oils as
hazardous waste, including petroleum-
derived and synthetic oils, based on the
presence of toxic constituents at levels
of concern as a result of contamination
during and adulteration after use. In
1985, the Agency also proposed special
management standards for used oils that
are recycled. Essentially, used oils that
are disposed would have been subject to
full subtitle C regulation, while recycled
used oils could be managed in
accordance with the proposed
management standards developed and
proposed under the authority of RCRA
§ 3014.
Many comments were received on the
various aspects of the proposed listing
of used oil, which are summarized as
follows. Most commenters opposed the
listing of used oil as a hazardous waste.
The reasons given included that EPA's
sampling was unrepresentative and
flawed (i.e., used oil samples were taken
from storage tanks at used oil facilities
rather than from the point of
generation), used oil is no more
hazardous than virgin oil, and the belief
that the levels of constituents EPA found
in used oils that were sampled and
analyzed do not present a threat to
human health. Some commenters
asserted that EPA's concern is not with
used oil itself but the mixing of used oil
with other constituents that may render
the used oil hazardous only because of
post-use adulteration. Therefore, instead
of listing all used oils, commenters
recommended that EPA should list used
oils as hazardous only if other
-------
41570 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rllies an
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 176 / Thursday* September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41571
halogens, there is no EPA-approved test
method for halogens. Some commenters
also objected to the proposed
requirement that facilities that manage
both used oil and other hazardous
wastes test their used oil for indicator
parameters for each hazardous waste
stream. Although many comments were
received concerning testing frequencies,
commenters generally did not agree on
any particular frequency or on whether
or not the Agency should impose a set
testing frequency.
EPA received many comments both
for and against the proposed
requirements that used oil recycling
facilities that are not in compliance with
the permit-by-rule provisions on the
effective date of the rule comply with
the interim-status provisions of 40 CFR
part 265, A few commenters pointed out
that corrective action for releases of
used oil to the environment was not
adequately addressed in the 1985
proposed rulemaking.
d. Dust Suppression. The commenteFS
were generally in favor of banning used
oil for dust suppression. One commenter
requested that EPA consider a case-by-
ease approval of used oil as a dust
suppressant provided the activity is
permitted and waste analysis is
conducted. A state agency
recommended that the dust suppression
ban be extended to refined oil and oil/
water mixtures.
B. Comments Received in Response to
1991 Supplemental Notice
1. Listing Used Oil
The Supplemental Notice of
September 23,1991 [56 FR 480411,
presented three options for identifying
used oil as a hazardous waste. Option
One was to list all used oils as proposed
on November 29,1985 [50 FR 49239},
based on the potential for adulteration
during use and environmental damage
when mismanaged. Option Two was to
list categories of used oil that were
found to be "typically and frequently"
hazardous because of the presence of
lead, PAHsr arsenic, cadmium,,
chromium, and benzene. "Typically and
frequently" was defined to mean that 50
percent or more of the samples in a used
oil category exceeded the levels of
concern. Under Option Three, the
Agency proposed not to list used oils as
hazardous, but rely on management
standards developed under section 3014
of RCRA to control mismanagement of
oil.
Commenters overwhelmingly
supported Option Three, not to list used1
ofl as a hazardous waste, but rely on
management standards. Many of these
commenters suggested1 that EPA should
encourage recycling through education,,
collection,, and management standards
instead of a hazardous waste listing.
Many commenters expressed concern
that listing used oil would have a
negative effect on the used oil recycling
system* These commenters stated that
due to excessive liability and disposal
costs associated with handling
hazardous wastes, they would be forced
out of business or out of the used oil
management system. They stated that
this would result in having fewer
collection centers resulting in decreased
acceptance of DIY-generated used oil,
and may lead to further
mismanagement. A few commenters
pointed out that their lease prohibits the
handling of hazardous materials or
wastes and the listing of used oil as a
hazardous waste would thus force them
out of business or require them to
negotiate a costly new lease.
Additionally, some commenteFS,
primarily service stations and oil
changers, are currently voluntarily'
accepting DIY-generated used oil. They
stated^ that listing; used oil as a
hazardous waste would1 lead to the
discontinuation of this service because
of the potential liability and the
increased cost of handling used oil.
Some conuraenteifs noted that DIY-
generated used oil presents the biggest
threat to human health and the
environment because it is often
disposed of improperly. Another view
point shared by many commenters was
that used oil is a resource that is
recyclable as lube offl feedstock or as a
fuel substitute, and EPA should not
designate a valuable commodity as
hazardous waste.
A few commenters stated that used oil
should not be Ms-ted because it is no
longer hazardous due to EPA's lead
phase-down program. In addition, EPA's
analyses of used oil were based on too
few samples and these were
unrepresentative of actual conditions.
Some commenters expressed a
reluctance to have EPA list used oil as a
hazardous waste, but urged EPA, if used
oil is to be listed, to list only those used
oils that are disposed and not list used
oils that are recycled.
A few commenters supported the
proposal to list all used oils as
hazardous waste. They stated that used
oil has been historically mismanaged
and presents a threat to human health
and! the environment. In addition, they
referenced the "California experience"
in support of listing. These commenters
said that when California listed used oil
as a hazardous waste, the resulting
recycling program within the state
increased the amount of used oil
entering the used oil management
system.
2. De Minimis Mixtures
EPA proposed' exempting wipers,
sorptive minerals, and oil filters that
have been drained of free-flawing used
oil from the definition of hazardous
waste, if used oil were listed as a
hazardous waste. EPA expressed its
belief that many of these materials may
not pose a threat to human health and
the environment because of the very
small quantities of used oil involved..
The Agency also proposed the "one-
drop" standard for determining whether
or not free-flowing used oil is present in
the mixtures.
The commenters were nearly
unanimous in support of EPA's proposal
to exclude wipers and sorptive minerals
contaminated with small amounts of
used oil from the proposed listing. A
number of commenteFS requested EPA
to expand the definition of sorptive
minerals beyond the current definition
of clay and daatomaceous earth to
include synthetic adsorbents and other
natural filter/absorbent media. A few
commenters requested clarification as to
the status of laundered clean wipers
that do not contain1 free flowing used oil.
A few eommenters requested a
clarification concerning recycling of
used oil mixtures with high Btn value
and instances where used oil cannot be
separated1 from the mixture for burning a
mixture as a used oil fuel,
3. Controlling Disposal of Used Oil
EPA believes that certain used oils
may require disposal because they can
not be recycled. In cases where the used
oil is not recyclable and the disposal of
the used oil is not controlled under the
current subtitle C regulations (e.g.,
because the used oil does not exhibit a
hazardous waste characteristic), EPA
wants to ensure that used oils are
disposed of in an environmentally safe
manner. EPA therefore requested
comment on the appropriateness of
developing guidelines for the disposal of
used oil and the appropriateness of a
total ban on the disposal of used oil.
Commenters supported EPA's
proposal to develop specific guidelines
for the disposal of nonhazardous oil
under § 1008 of RCRA. Some
commenters urged EPA not to impose a
total ban on the disposal of
nonhazardous oil. This is because some
materials [e.g., contaminated soil] can
not be disposed elsewhere in an
economically acceptable fashion. Some
commenters supported a total ban on
disposal of used oil mainly to ensure
protection of the ground water and as a
-------
41572 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 178 / Thursday. September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
method to promote recycling of all used
oils.
4. DIY-Generated Used Oil
RCRA does not provide the authority
to regulate household-generated waste
prior to collection (e.g., DIY-generated
oil and filters), nor does it give EPA the
authority to mandate collection
programs for DIY-generated used oil.
Over the past five years, EPA has
developed public informational
brochures to encourage DIY generators
to recycle their used oil. EPA may
develop more educational materials for
the public and the regulated community
on used oil recycling alternatives. EPA
therefore requested comments on how to
improve the recycling of DIY-generated
used oil
Many suggestions were received on
ways EPA could encourage the
acceptance and recycling of DIY-
generated used oil. A majority of
conunenters, however, said that listing
used oil as a hazardous waste would
discourage recycling of DIY-generated
used oil, primarily because many
facilities indicated that they would no
longer accept DIY-generated used oil
because of the liability associated with
collecting and handling hazardous
waste. A state government agency
stated that a primary reason service
stations are not accepting DIY-
generated used oil is the uncertainly
over the past few years of whether EPA
will list used oil as a hazardous waste
and thus, require generators that have
used oil on hand to pay for its disposal.
Commenters indicated that the primary
reason for the poor recycling rate of
DIY-generated used oil is because of the
lack of collection centers. Some major
syggesiions included the implementation
01 a curbside pickup program for DIY-
gsnerated used oil, requiring any entity
selling motor oil to coiled DiY-
geDerated used oil, ensuring that used
oil collection facilities be exempted froTn
CERCLA liability requiring retailers to
list nearby used oil collection centers,
s<::,d ;3sfaljIisL~1jiil of a deposit-refund
sys'fem.
5, Criteria for Rscyoing Presumption
EPA p???csed to establish a
^jbUinpnai; that ail used oils, ones
collected, would be recycled siid,
therefore, wonM-be subject to the
riropoi;-£d used oil recycling standards.
However, EPA is aware of certain
categories of used oils (eg., watery
tnoialworking oils, oily bilge water) thai
may not be recyclable. Mos! usad oils
can bs processed and treated ::o
manufacture either burner fusl, lube oi!
base stock, to feedstock for refining.
However, EPA gave consideration to
• providing an opportunity-for used oil
handlers to rebut the used oil recycling
presumption and avoid compliance with
the used oil recycling standards by
documenting that their used oil is not
recyclable in any manner. EPA
requested comments on the suggested
procedures for rebutting the recycling
presumption and appropriate
documentation.
The commenters were nearly
unanimous in their support of the
recycling presumption. However, the
comments were mixed concerning the
criteria for "recyclability" and the
appropriate documentation. One
commenter suggested that a one-time
certification on the recyclability of a
waste stream is adequate, assuming the
facility's waste management plan does
not change. Many of the commenters
were supportive of the criteria EPA
listed for determining recyclability,
which included BTU content, water
content, degree of emulsification, degree
of viscosity, and the availability of
economically and geographically
acceptable recyclers. However, two
commenters (refiners) stated that since
none of the five criteria were examples
of nonrecyclability and that all used oil
can be recycled, whether used oil is
actually recycled is strictly a matter of
cost. One commenter questioned
whether EPA had the authority to
assume that all used oil was recyclable
and, if not, to require certification and
documentation.
Commenters were generally in
agreement concerning the
documentation requirements for the
recycling presumption. There were only
a few specific cerements on the issue.
One commenter suggested that a
generator should not be allowed to
determine recyclability but this should
be the responsibility of a recycling
facility. Another commenter suggested
that documentation should be kept on-
sitc and should not have to be sent to
EPA.
6. Ban on Use as a Dust.Suppressant
On November 29, 1985 (59 PR 49239),
EPA proposed to ban the use of used oil
as a dust suppressant (road oiling). The
September 23,1991, Supplemental
Notice J56 FR 43041) staled that
i:egs"iko3 of vv'ieilier EPA lists used oils
as a hazardous waste, EPA was still
consideri.ig the ban'of all used oils used
fcr dust suppression. Specific comment
f> as requested cs how used oils could
be used for dust suppression in an
environmentally safe manner,
Most of the commenters supported the
ban on using any used oil for dust
suppression. Many of these commenters
stated that used oil should not be used
for road oiling given the potential
adverse impact to water resources due
to run-off. One commenter pointed out
that surfactant additives in motor oil are
generally anionic which prevents oil
from bonding strongly to most
negatively charged aggregate articles
resulting in massive run-off. All of the
state agencies commenting on this issue
supported a ban.
Some commenters suggested that EPA
should allow used oil to be used for dust
suppression if it meets certain criteria
such as not failing a characteristic test
or the specification criteria for used oil
fuel. Other commenters requested that
nonhazardous used oil be allowed for
road oiling. A few commenters urged the
allowance of water contaminated with
de minimus amounts of used oil to be
used for dust suppression. On a related
matter, some commenters wanted to
know whether use of used oil for insect
control or as a weed killer is allowed.
7. CERCLA Liability Issues
Section 114(c) of CERCLA contains
the service station dealer's exemption
from liability under the statute for used
oil. To be eligible for the exemption,
service stations are required to comply
with the section 3014 of RCRA used oil
management standards and accept DIY-
generated used oil. EPA requested
comment on how to ensure that small
quantity generators could be eligible for
this exclusion if they were conditionally
excluded from most of the regulatory
requirements similar to subtitle C.
The commenters were in agreement
that the service station exclusion
contained in section 114(c) of CERCLA
should be implemented. Many
comrnanters encouraged EPA to include
facilities thai collect DIY-generated used
oil (e.g., public facilities), regardless of
whether they are service stations, to
promote recycling of the DIY used oil
segment. A commenter requested that
EPA clarify that "quick oil change and
lubrication facilities" are in the
definition of "service station dealers"
and that "used oil destined for
recycling" should be included instead of
just "recycled" used oil. One commenter
requested that refiners and downstream
users be included in the definition of
service station to obtain the CERCLA
liability exemption.
Many commenters expressed support
for the elimination of generator category
distinction [i.e., small quantity
generators versus large quantity
generators). In addition to the reduction*
in confusion and handling requirements
for used oil, these commenters noted
that all generators could then benefit
from the CERCLA liability exemption.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. S7, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41573
8. Storage
EPA proposed different requirements
for storage for different segments of the
used oil industry to respond to the
potential risks associated with used oil
handling. EPA requested comment on
storage standards to address the
potential hazards associated with used
oil. EPA did not propose requirements
for underground tanks used to store
used oil, because the Agency believes
that the' current requirements" for USTs
in 40 CFR part 280 appear to be
adequate.
Most commenters supported EPA's
basic intent to establish minimum
technical standards for the storage of
used oil. A number of commenters
supported the requirement that all
generators should comply with minimal
technical standards and that there
should be no exclusion for small
quantity generators; however, some
opposed this approach and supported a
distinction between generators based on
the amount of used oil generated. The
majority of commenters requested that
the proposed requirement for daily
inspections should be reduced to
weekly, biweekly, or monthly. A number
of commenters were against the
proposed 50-foot buffer zone
requirement primarily because it would
be impossible for quick lube facilities to
implement this requirement due to the
limited size of their facility and it would
be inappropriate because of the low
flash point of motor oil. An alternative ;
that was suggested was for facilities to
comply with the NFPA's "Flammable
and Combustible Liquids Code" for
buffer zones. One commenter suggested
that satellite accumulation areas that
are exempt from the storage standards
be allowed. One commenter pointed out
that a definition and requirement for a
continuously fed tank is necessary.
9. Secondary Containment for Tanks
EPA requested comment on its
proposal to require Spill Prevention,
Control and Countermeasure (SPCCJ-
recommended secondary containment or
to require RCRA subtitle C secondary
containment requirements for
controlling releases and spills of used oil
from abovegrpund storage tanks at used
oil processing and re-refining facilities.
The SPCC options include berms, dikes,
or retaining walls along with an oil-
impervious floor designed to contain
used oil and avoid significant
contamination of soil and nearby
surface and ground water resources.
Most of the commenters agreed with
EPA's proposal to require SPCC-
recommended secondary containment
but were not supportive of also requiring
subtitle C secondary containment
requirements for aboveground storage
tanks. A few commenters noted that
requiring compliance with subtitle C
would not add a significant margin of
safety compared to the cost of upgrading
the tanks. Commenters argued that most
of the aboveground storage tanks are
already in compliance with SPCC and;
with few exceptions, these requirements
have been an acceptable vehicle for
protecting human health and the
environment. One commenter supported
the measure to require owners/
operators storing used oil in
aboyeground storage tanks to comply
with both SPCC and subtitle C
requirements. Their rationale was that
such .requirements address different
management issues and are not
unreasonably burdensome.
10. Financial Responsibility
In the 1985 proposed rule, used oil
recycling facilities were to be subject to
the subtitle C financial responsibility
requirements (50 FR 49256). Many
comments that were received on this
proposal suggested that such
requirements would have detrimental
effects on the used oil recycling market.
In the September 1991 Supplemental
Notice, EPA requested comment on
deferring the requirements.
The commenters were nearly evenly
divided oni EPA's proposal to defer the
financial responsibility requirements for
used oil recycling facilities. Those
commenters that supported the deferral
indicated that because recyclable used
oil has economic value, there is an
incentive to move as much oil as
possible. These commenters also agreed
with EPA's contention that requiring
financial responsibility would impact
the economic viability of used oil
recyclers.
Those commenters that did not
support EPA's proposal to defer the
financial responsibility requirements
questioned the practicality of requiring
recyclers to comply with the closure and
post-closure requirements while not
requiring the financial mechanisms to
ensure that these activities are done. A
few commenters noted that there are 63
used oil recycling sites listed on the
National Priorities List, which indicates
that financial responsibility
requirements, are necessary. A state
agency urged EPA to require some level
of financial responsibility because used
oil, when mismanaged, presents as much
risk to human health and the
environment as any other hazardous
waste.
11. Permit-By-Rule
In the 1985 proposed rule, EPA used
the authority under section 3014 of
RCRA to propose permitting
requirements for used oil recycling
facilities (50 FR 49225, 49257). RCRA
section 3014(d) provides that owners
and operators of used oil recycling
facilities are deemed to have a permit
for their recycling activities and
associated tank and container storage,
provided they comply with the used oil
management standards promulgated by
EPA. Thus EPA proposed that owners/
operators of used oil recycling facilities
would be eligible for a permit-by-rule
eligibility, including those undertaken
by facilities that recycle or store used oil
in surface impoundments and facilities
that manage other hazardous waste in
addition to used oil (co-management
facilities).
Most of the comments pertaining to
the permit-by-rule proposal were not
supportive of EPA's proposal based on
many concerns. A number of
commenters opposed EPA's proposal
that only those facilities that did not
manage 'other hazardous wastes should
be eligible. Their contention was that
section 3014 of RCRA did not expressly
state that co-management facilities were
ineligible. A few commenters were
against the permit-by-rale concept
altogether and favored a site-by-site
permitting approach. A few commenters
requested EPA to allow permit-by-niles
only for facilities that handled
nonhazardous oil and require those
facilities that handled hazardous oil to
comply with subtitle C. Some
commenters were in support of EPA' a
proposed permit-by-rule requirements.
IV. Definition of Used Oil
EPA's 1985 proposal to list used oil as
a hazardous waste included the
following proposed definition of used
oil:
"Used oil" means petroleum-derived or
synthetic oil including, but not limited to, oil
which is used aa a: (i) lubricant (engine,
turbine, or gear); (ii) hydraulic fluid (including
transmission fluid); (iii) metalworking fluid
(including cutting, grinding, machining,
rolling, stamping, quenching, and coating
oils); (iv) insulating fluid or coolant, and
which is contaminated through use or
subsequent management.
During the 1985 comment period,
many commenters criticized the
vagueness of the proposed definition.
One issue commenters raised was that it
was unclear from the definition what
constitutes "contamination." The use of
the phrase "but not limited to" also was
challenged. Commenters contended that
such a phrase could be in erpreted to
-------
41574 Federal Register / Vol 57, No. 178 / Thursday September 10, iggg / Ruies and Reealations
include varieties of oil such as food
grade oils within the definition of used
oil. Commenters suggested that EPA
specifically list in the definition the
types of oils they intended to regulate.
Anorther point that commenters
disputed about the definition of used oil
was use of the term "or subsequent
management." They pointed out that the
statutory definition of used oil specifies
contamination only "as a result of use,"
not via subsequent management. Used
oils that become adulterated after use
should be subject to management
standards that discourage this practice.
Commenters agreed that used ails
contaminated with hazardous wastes
should be subject to full subtitle C
requirements.
Many commenters questioned the
basis for including synthetic oils in the
definition of used oil. The statutory
definition of used oil does not explicitly
include synthetic oils; therefore,,
commenters asserted that used synthetic
oils should not be considered "used
oils." Several comments were received
regarding metalworking oils as well.
Commenters requested that copper and
aluminum wire drawing solutions be
excluded from the definition of used oil.
Copper drawing solution is an emulsion
of 1 to 2 percent oil in water. Aluminum
drawing solution is considered a neat oil
{i.e., 100 percent oil). However, one
commenter stated that aluminum
drawing solution is nonhazardous and
meets the EPA used oil fuel specification
test.
EPA carefully evaluated the
comments referring to synthetic oils,
including those comments where the
commenter submitted data. EPA has
concluded that synthetic oils that are
not petroleum-based (i.e., those
produced from coal or oil shale), those
that are petroleum-based but are water
soluble (e.g., concentrates of
metalworking oils/fluids), or those that
are polymer-type, are all used as
lubricants similar to petroleum-based
lubricants, oils, and laminating surface
agents. Upon use, synthetic oils become
contaminated with physical or chemical
impurities in a manner similar to
petroleum-based lubricants. This
contamination during (or as a result of]
use is what makes used oil toxic or
hazardous. Upon collection, these used
oils are not distinguishable from non-
synthetic used oils, except in the case of
segregated, water-based metalworking
oils/fluids. All used oils, in general, are
managed in similar manners (e.g.,
burned for energy recovery, re-refined to
produce lube oil feedstock, or
reconstituted as recycled products).
Therefore, EPA 'believes that all used
oils, including used synthetic oils,
should be regulated in a similar fashion
and, hence, EPA has decided to include
synthetic oils in the definition of used oil
as discussed below. For the large part,
the definition of used oil includes used
lubricants of all kinds that are used for a
purpose of lubrication and become
contaminated as a result of such use.
Today, EPA is promulgating a
regulatory definition for "used oil" at 40
CFR 260.10 as follows:
Used oil means any oil that has been
refined from crude oil, or any synthetic oil,
that has been used and as a result of such use
is contaminated by physical or chemical
impurities.
This regulator}' definition of used oil
is drawn from the statutory definition of
used oil found at section 1004(36) of
RCRA and is similar to the current
. definition of used oil found at 40 CFR
266.40(b). EPA believes that this
definition covers the majority of oils
used as lubricants, coolants (non-
contact heat transfer fluids), emulsions,
or for similar uses and are likely to get
contaminated through use. Therefore,
specific types of used oils are not
identified in the definition.
The definition includes all used oils
derived from crude oil, as well as used
synthetic oils that are contaminated by
physical (e.g., high water content) or
chemical (e.g., lead, halogens, or other
toxic or hazardous constituents)
impurities as a result of such use.
However, with today's rule. EPA is
interpreting the definition of used oil
contained in the statute to include used
synthetic oils, including those derived
from coal or shale or from a polymer
based starting materials. The Agency
explained its rationale for including
synthetic oils in the definition of used
oils in the preamble for the November
1985 proposed used oil listing (50 FR
49262). The Agency's position continues
to be that synthetic oils should be
included in the definition of used oil due
to the fact that these oils are generally
used for the same purposes as
petroleum-derived oils, are usually
mixed and managed in the same manner
after use, and present the same level of
hazard &s petroleum-based oils. In
addition, the Agency believes that
Congress could not envision how
prevalent synthetic oils would become
when it passed the UORA in 1980.
Congress surely would not have
intended a result where large amounts
of vehicle engine oils are not covered by
RCRA section 3014.
The'commenter-submitted data
concerning synthetic oils suggest that
properties of synthetic
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41575
processing and re-refining operations.
Distillation bottoms were among the
residuals that EPA proposed to list.
Following the 1991 Notice, EPA received
data from several commenters
indicating that distillation bottoms from
the processing and re-refining of used oil
do not fail the toxicity characteristic.
EPA has no other recent data on the
composition or toxicity of these
residuals. In addition, commenters have
indicated that the use of distillation
bottoms as ingredients in asphalt
materials is a very common practice.
Furthermore, distillation bottoms, when
used as asphalt extender materials, also
may be regulated under the Toxic
Substances Control Act, as applicable.
EPA believes, based on the Toxicity
Characteristic (TC) data provided by
commenters, that the distillation
bottoms from- re-refining of used oil do
not exhibit the characteristic of toxicity.
Therefore, the Agency has deferred a
listing decision for these residuals and
has provided a conditional exemption
from the hazardous waste regulations of
parts 262 through 266, 268, 270, and 124
and the part 279 standards for certain
residuals that are incorporated into
asphalt (40 CFR 279;10(e}(4)).
V. Listing Determination for Recycled
Used Oil
•A. General
Section 3001 of RCRA provides the
Agency with the general statutory
authority under RCRA for identification
and listing of hazardous wastes. In 1984,
HSWA amended section 3014 of RCRA
by specifically requiring EPA to exercise
its hazardous waste identification and
listing authorities and propose a listing
determination for used automobile and
truck crankcase oils and other used oils.
EPA's technical criteria for
determining whether or not a solid
waste should be listed as a hazardous
waste are codified at 40 CFR 261.11.
Section 261.11(a)(l) allows EPA to list a
solid waste as a hazardous waste if the
solid waste exhibits any of the
characteristics of hazardous waste.
Section 261.11(a)(3) directs that a waste
shall be listed as hazardous if it
contains any of the toxic constituents
listed in appendix VIII arid, after
considering the following factors, the
Administrator concludes that the waste
is capable of posing a substantial
present or potential hazard to human
health or the environment when
improperly treated, stored, transported,
disposed of, or otherwise managed. The
factors to be considered in making this
determination include toxicity, fate and
transport, mobility and persistence, and
the bioaccranulation potential of the
constituents in the waste, as well as
plausible mismanagement scenarios (40
CFR 261.11(a)(3)(vii)) arid other Federal
and state regulatory actions with
respect to the waste (40 CFR
In making a listing determination for
used oils destined for disposal, EPA
paid considerable attention to the
current Federal regulations governing
the disposal of non-hazardous and
hazardous wastes. EPA published a
final listing determination for used oils
destined for disposal on May 20, 1992
(57 FR 21524). EPA concluded that the
existing EPA regulations, especially the
toxicity characteristic, adequately
regulate the disposal of used oils that
exhibit a characteristic of hazardous
waste. Other EPA programs (e.g., the
recently promulgated municipal solid
waste landfill criteria, the stormwater
requirements, and TSCA regulations), as
well as other Federal and state
regulations, adequately control the
disposal of non-hazardous used oils that
do not exhibit a characteristic of
hazardous waste.
EPA has decided to use a similar
regulatory approach for recycled used
oils as the Agency used for used oils
that are disposed. The Agency proposed
in September 1991 that the listing of
used oil as a hazardous waste may not
be necessary if the Agency promulgates
used oil management standards that are
protective of human health and the
environment. Commenters who
responded to the September 1991 notice
overwhelmingly supported this
approach. EPA has decided to adopt this
approach and consider the technical
criteria for making a listing
determination, given a universe of used
oils that are managed in accordance
with a protective set of management
standards.
In making a listing determination for
recycled used oils, EPA evaluated the
technical criteria for listing a waste as
hazardous, the fate and plausible
mismanagement of used oils that are
recycled, and the impacts of the
management standards proposed in 1985
and 1991 and finalized today. EPA has
determined that used oils that are
recycled do not pose a substantial
present or potential hazard to human
health or the environment when the
used oils are managed properly from the
time they are generated until they are
recycled. As discussed in the next
section ^of this preamble, EPA believes
that used oil that is recycled and
handled in compliance with the used oil
management standards promulgated
today will not pose serious adverse risks
to human health and the environment.
Therefore, EPA is finalizing its decision
not to list used oils that are recycled as
hazardous waste. Integrally related to
this "no listing" decision for recycled
used oil, the Agency also is
promulgating management standards for
recycled used oils to assure protection
of human health and the environment
from potential damages due to the
mismanagement of recycled used oils.
B. Summary of EPA's Listing
Determination and Rationale for
Recycled Used Oils
As discussed below, the Agency has
determined that 'the major potential
risks associated with the
mismanagement of used oils during
recycling can be adequately controlled
through management standards
promulgated under the authorities of
RCRA section 3014. The used oil
management standards promulgated
today are designed to control the
accumulation, storage, transportation,
and general management of recycled
used oils. The management standards
promulgated today protect human health
and the environment from potential
mismanagement of recycled used oils
without imposing undue regulatory and
financial burdens upon the used oil
recycling system. The goal of today's
regulations is to ensure the recycling of
all used oils in a safe and protective
manner. These new Federal
management standards address the
major risks (discussed later) identified
by the Agency, associated with
management of used oil eliminating the
need for the Agency to list used oils as
hazardous waste per the listing criteria
provided in § 261.11(a}(3).
Today's decision not to list recycled
used oils is based on the adequacy of
both existing Federal regulations and
today's newly promulgated management
standards to address the potential
mismanagement of used oil, similar to
the basis 'for the May 20,1992 decision
concerning used oil destined for
disposal. Briefly, used oil
mismanagement and related risks are
controlled under other regulations and
statutes; in particular, the 40 CFR part
280 underground storage tank (USTJ
regulations, the 40 CFR part 112 spill
prevention, control and countermeasure'
(SPCC) program, the stormwater
regulations, and the lead phase-down
program. These regulations will be
supplemented by the used oil
management standards promulgated
today for recycled used oils. As
discussed in the preamble to the May 20,
1992 used oil regulation, the SPCC
program requires facilities to have a
contingency plan in place to ensure that
-------
41576 Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 176 / Thursday. September 10. 1992 / Ruies and Reguiations
oil spills are prevented, controlled via
containment measures, and responded
to when oil spills occur and reach
navigable waterways. The UST program
similarly focuses on control and
prevention of oil leaks from
underground petroleum storage tanks
including waste oil tanks. These two
programs are clearly related to the
management standards promulgated
today and cover the used oil universe.
The management standards
promulgated today specifically address
the following major risks that EPA has
identified with past practices in
managing recycled used oil. These are:
1. Improper storage. EPA notes that in the
past, used oil was both overaccumulated and
handled carelessly, resulting in a number of
release incidences, from used oil storage
units. These releases have been documented
at oif-site processors and re-refiners.8
Today's management standards have
stringent secondary containment and spill
cleanup provisions for used oil processors
and re-refiners. Also, storage of used oil in
unlined surface impoundments (unless only
de minimi's amounts of used oil are present)
is banned outright.
2. Road Oiling. EPA has documented
several cases of environmental degradation
that were caused by oiling roads with
adulterated used oil. Today's management
standards ban the use of used oil for road
oiling and dust suppression purposes.
However, States that currently allow used oil
to be used for road oiling, and/or those States
that want to set standards to control the use
of used oil as .a road oiling agency, may
petition EPA to allow road oiling in !he
individual States.
3. Adulteration with hazardous waste. In a
number of documented instances used oil has
been used either deliberately or inadvertently
as a carrier for the illegal disposal of
hazardous waste. The addition of hazardous
waste, or "adulteration," results in a more
toxic mixture that may be spilled, burned, or
even dumped. Today's management
standards address adulleration in four main
ways:
* The "rebuttable presumption" provision
of 40 CFR part 268, subpart E, which currently
applies to used oil burned for energy
recovery, has been expanded to cover afl
used oils, regardless of intended disposition;
* Used oil processing and re-refining
facilities have to develop specific sampling
and analytical plans to document that they
do not accept hazardous waste/used oil
mixtures;
• All used oil handlers must label their
tanks and containers used to store used oil
with the term "used oil," to assist employees
in identifying which units are used
exclusively for used oil storage and to avoid
inadvertent mixing with other wastes; and
* The existing invoice system in 40 CFR
8 Summary Descriptions of Sixty-Three "Used
Oil" Superfund'Sites, Final Draft. U.S. EPA, May
1992.
part 266, subpart E for used oil fuels has 'been
supplemented with a tracking system
consisting of acceptance and delivery
records. Tracking of used oil shipments
applies to all used oil transporters and
processing and re-refining facilities. The
tracking system will assist in identifying
accountability, should mixing be suspected.
Finally, EPA notes that two other
areas of potential risk are not addressed
by today's management standards, but
these risks already have been reduced
by in past agency actions. As noted
above, the Agency is postponing listing
determinations on used oil processing
residuals. Although cases of
environmental damages due to improper
management of residuals have been
documented, these cases involved
residuals from old, out-of-date processes
(i.e., acid clay re-refining). Data received
in response to the September 1991
Supplemental Notice indicate that
residuals from newer processes do not
exhibit the toxicity characteristic.
Residuals that are destined for disposal
are still subject to the hazardous waste
characteristics, and in 1990, EPA
promulgated the toxicity characteristic
rule, which replaced the extraction
procedure [EP) toxicity test. If used oil
residuals, including distillation bottoms
derived from used oil processing and re-
refining, are recycled as used oil fuels,
then the management of the residuals is
subject to the management standards
promulgated today. Distillation bottoms
that are recycled as feedstocks in the
production of asphalt materials are not
subject to the management standards
promulgated today. EPA will gather and
as&ess information on newer
technologies before reaching any further
decisions on the regulatory status of
residuals that are currently generated by
used oil re-refiners.
EPA is aware of concerns raised over
burning used oil as a fuel. The 1985 used
oil fuel specification, however, was
established to control the risks from
burning used oil, thus it represents the
Agency's best current Judgment as to the
level of control necessary to protect
human health and the environment
Thus, the burning of used oil in
compliance with the existing standards
is not a "plausible mismanagement
scenario" requiring the listing of
recycled used oil as a hazardous waste.
The concerns focus on :the current lead
specification of 100 ppm and whether
this threshold provides adequate
protection. RCRA restricts the burning
of off-specification used oil for energy
recovery to certain industrial facilities
(e.g., industrial furnaces and utility
burners) and space heaters. While
facilities that burn off^Bpecificatiori used
oil fuel are not required to control air
emissions under RCRA, some of these
facilities may be subject to Clean Air
Act controls. The Agency plans to study
these issues and, should regulatory
controls be deemed necessary, EPA may
take appropriate actions under RCRA or
other statutory authority.
As discussed above, these rules
address the major risks associated with
used oil recycling including improper
storage, road oiling, and adulteration
with hazardous waste. These standards
should prevent the kinds of
mismanagement that has occurred in the
past resulting in environmental damage.
EPA has concluded that the
management standards promulgated
today in combination with other existing
regulations provide adequate protection
of human health and the environment
and thus make it unnecessary to list
used oil as a hazardous waste. EPA
traditionally has based listing
determinations on the risks posed by
land-based management scenarios (e,g..
plausible land disposal
mismanagement). Today's usea oil
management standards'do address the
technical criteria for listing of waste as
hazardous under 40 CFR 261.11[a)[33.
EPA wishes to reemphasize that its
decision not to list recycled used oil as a
hazardous waste is based solely upon
its evaluation of the technical listing
criteria contained in 40 CFR Z61.11[ap).
In particular, EPA has not taken into
account the potential stigma associated
with classifying used oil as hazardous
waste raised by commenters on the 1985
and 1991 proposals. Some consideration
was given to the impacts of used oil
management standards on used oil
recycling in developing the standards, as
required by section 3014[aJ of RCRA.
Once the standards were developed,
however, EPA made today's listing
determination by evaluating the
resulting standards solely in terms of
whether they would address the risks
caused by plausible mismanagement of
recycled used oil. EPA notes that the
used oil standards address fee same
types of mismanagement, particularly
spilling and improper land disposal,
typically addressed by Subtitle C
controls. In addition, the osed oil
management standards will be enforced
under the same authorities {i.e., section
3008 'of RCRA) as are the hazardous
waste regulations. For all of the above
reasons, EPA determined that listing of
recycled used oil as a hazardous waste
is unnecessaiy.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41577
VI. Final Management Standards for
Recycled Used Oils
A. General Approach for Used OH
Management
On November 29,1985 (50 FR 49212),
EPA proposed a comprehensive set of
management standards for genera tors,
transporters and processing and re-
refining facilities that handle and
recycle used oil. The management
standards proposed in 1985 were very
similar to the management standards
promulgated for handlers of RCRA
hazardous wastes since the Agency also
proposed to list used oils as hazardous
wastes. EPA received substantial public
comment on the 1985 proposed
requirements. On September 23,1991 (56
FR 48000). EPA published a
Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking that discussed the Agency's
recent data collection activities for the
identification and listing of used oil and
discussed several options for used oil
management standards. The intent of
the management standards alternatives
identified and discussed in the 1991
Supplemental Notice was not to replace
or withdraw the 1985 proposed
standards but to set forth options to fa)
clarify or modify certain 1985 proposed
standards, (b) defer selected standards
(e.g., financial responsibility), and (c)
add new requirements (e.g.,
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for certain generators and
transporters). The Agency requested
and received a substantial number of
comments on the specific approaches
that the Agency was considering and
that were discussed in the 1991
Supplemental Notice.6
After reviewing and analyzing
comments in response to both the 1985
proposed rulemaking and the 1991
Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, the Agency is adopting an
approach for the management of used
oils, described below, .under which one
set of management standards (with
certain exemptions for used oil mixtures
that contain de minimis quantities of
used oil) will control the management of
used oils that are recycled. The
Agency's basis for setting these
standards includes documented release
and damage information, quantities of
used oil managed by each segment of
the used oil management system, the
adequacy of current management
practices, and the potential economic
0 EPA received more than 800 comments during
i the comment period for the September 1991
Supplemental Notice. EPA also received over 100
comments on the notice after the close of the
comment period.
impacts that could be imposed on the
regulated universe.
Based upon evidence provided by
documented damages at sites on the
National Priorities List (NPL) and by
updating the site-specific information
previously used to support alternative
management standards discussed in the
1991 Supplemental Notice, EPA has
concluded that storage practices at
facilities that handled used oil have
resulted in the vast majority of known
instances of used oil mismanagement.
EPA also confirmed this finding through
a review of enforcement cases prepared
by Regional enforcement officials to
identify environmental damages that
occurred at RCRA facilities managing
used oil in solid waste management
units. EPA has documented damage and
release information from both NPL sites
and RCRA-permitted facilities. Detailed
descriptions of the damages at 63 NPL
sites where used oil was managed are
presented in "Summary Descriptions of
Sixty-Three 'Used Oil' Superfund Sites."
A summary of used oil-related damages
at RCRA-permitted facilities where used
oil was managed is presented in
"Summary Descriptions of Used Oil-
Related Damages at RCRA-Permitted
Facilities." A copy of each of these
documents is in the docket for today's
rule.
The Agency has determined that it is
necessary to develop management
standards to address the major risks
discussed earlier associated with
management (and plausible
mismanagement scenarios) of used oils
within the used oil recycling system.
Primarily, the management standards
promulgated today focus heavily on
used oil processors and re-refiners and
include storage and release response
requirements, tracking and
recordkeeping requirements, and bans
on certain practices that have caused
problems (i.e., road oiling and the
storage of used oil in surface
impoundments not regulated under
subtitle C of RCRA). The management
standards cover all sectors of the used
oil universe and are codified in a new
part, part 279, of title 40 of the CFR.
Generally, EPA is establishing (1)
controls on the storage of used oil in
aboveground tanks and containers to
minimize potential releases from these
units; (2J tracking and recordkeeping
requirements for used oil transporters,
processors and re-refiners to provide a
level of confidence within the system
that used oils destined for recycling are
in fact recycled by authorized facilities;
and (3) standards for the cleanup of
releases to the environment during
storage and transit and for the safe
closure of storage units at processing
and re-refining facilities to mitigate
future releases and damages. The
Agency believes this approach will
address potential hazards to humao
health and the environment from the
management (including plausible
mismanagement scenarios), of all used
oils by used oil handlers.
EPA believes that, irrespective of
whether used oils exhibit a
-characteristic of hazardous waste, used
oils can pose some threat to human
health and the environment (e.g., used
oils can form a sheen on water and
make it non-potable). Therefore, it is
important that used oils are handled in a
safe manner from the point of generation
until recycling, reuse, or disposal.
As stated in the 1991 Supplemental
Notice of Proposed Rulemafcing and as
supported by most of the public
comments received by the Agency, the
Agency has decided to implement used
oil management standards using a two-
phased approach. The proposed phased
approach is designed first to develop
basic management standards to address
the potential risks associated with
management (including plausible
mismanagement) practices of used oil
recycling industry. Used oil
mismanagement scenarios include
storage, collection/shipping, and
processing or re-refining. At a later date,
as the Agency monitors the
effectiveness of regulatory approach and
receives more information, the Agency
may adopt additional measures as
necessary to address other potential
problems.
The management standards adopted
today are designed to address the
potential hazards associated with
improper storage and handling of used
oil by establishing minimal requirements
applicable to used oil generators,
transporters, used oil processors, and re-
refiners, and off-specification used oil
burners. These requirements are
selected from both the 1985 proposed
standards and the 1991 proposed
alternative management standards,
taking into account public comments, an
assessment of economic impacts on the
regulated community, an assessment of
how the management standards will
impact the market for recycled used oil,
and an assessment of the effectiveness
of today's regulations, combined with
other requirements, in controlling the
risks posed by the improper
management of used oil.
Today's management standards cover
all used oil handlers and requirements
including detection and clean up of used
oil releases associated with storage am
transportation, controls on storage,
-------
41578 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10. 1992 / Rules and Regulations
analytical requirements to assure that
used oils are not mixed with hazardous
wastes, recordkeeping requirements,
and the existing 40 CFR part 266,
subpart E standards for the rebuttable
presumption of mixing. Today's
requirements also include closure
standards for used oil processing and re-
refir.ing facilities. These requirements
also address hazards associated with
road oiling and disposal practices. The
Agency has previously evaluated
(disposal requirements for hazardous
and non-hazardous used oils under
RCRA to protect against potential
hazards from land disposal of used oil in
the context of the Agency's decision not
to list used oil destined for disposal (57
FR 21524, "Klay 20,1992).
After today's rule is implemented,
EPA intends to evaluate the protective
nature of this initial set of requirements
and the effects these standards have
had on the used oil recycling market.
prior to developing additional standards
or developing non-regulatory incentive
programs to promote and increase used
oil recycling. After such an evaluation,
EPA may impose additional
management standards at a later date.
EPA will weigh the increase in potential
environmental benefits against
economic impacts prior to developing
and imposing additional RCRA
requirements, as required by RCRA
section 3014.
As part of a comprehensive approach
to addressing the management of used
oil, EPA encourages the recycling of
DIY-generated used oils (e.g., household-
generated used oils). Currently, DIY-
generated used oils (approximately 193
million gallons annually) are not widely
recycled. In fact, DIY-generated used
oils are often improperly disposed. The
Agency does believe, however, .that
since 1985, the recycling rate lor DIY-
generated used oils has been increasing
as a result of public and private sector
efforts.7 EPA discussed several non-
regulatory approaches [i.e., economic
incentives) to encourage DIY used oil
recycling in the 1991 Supplemental
Notice. EPA received a significant
number of comments on these
approaches (summarized hi Section II of
this preamble). The comments generally
indicated that EPA should not go
forward with the development of
economic incentive programs at this
time, but allow private sector programs
arid state-initiated programs to address
7 A survey conducted by (he Convenient
Automotive Services institute, which was
undertaken earlier this year, indicates that half the
states have private sector-operated Dry used oil
collection programs. Also, more than 30% of the
states have public sector-operated DIY used oil
collection programs.
the issue of DIY used oil collection.
Since the 1991 Supplemental Notice was
published. EPA has initiated a study of
non-regulatory approaches for
promoting DIY used oil collection. If the
results indicate that incentives can
promote recycling, then the Agency may
address the establishment or use of
incentives for encouraging the recycling
of DIY-generated used oils later.
The management standards
promulgated today contain'basic, good
housekeeping standards for the
management of used oil. EPA
considered an alternative approach in
which no management standards would
be issued until the Agency had
developed a comprehensive, risk-based
management scheme for used oil, which
would address DIY-generated oil, used
oil fuels burned by industrial burners,
used oil transportation, and other used
oil recycling and re-refining activities.
Although this type of approach may
have the advantage of providing time for
EPA to collect more information on used
oil management practices and avoiding
piecemeal regulation of the industry,
factors in favor of the phased approach
include providing immediate protection
to human health and the environment by
addressing the primary sources of
hazards identified by EPA including,
improper storage, road oiiing, and
adulteration with hazardous waste. As
stated above, the 1991 proposed two-
phased approach provides the
opportunity for changing regulatory
provisions (if necessary) in Phase II,
based on feedback from the
implementation of Phase I. EPA believes
that the approach adopted today will
allow for adjustments as problems of
over- or under-regulation are identified
in the future.
8. Recycling Presumption
Various authorities are available to
the Agency to control the management
of used oils. RCRA section 3014 provides
EPA with the authority to regulate
generators, transporters, processing and
re-refining facilities, and burners that
handle recycled used oil or used oils
that are to be recycled, regardless of
whether or not the used oils are
identified as hazardous waste. Section
3014 of RCRA does not, however,
provide the Agency with regulatory
authority over used oils that are not
recycled As stated in the May 20,1992
rulemaking, the Agency believes that
other RCRA authorities and other EPA
and non-EPA regulations adequately
control the management of used oils that
are not recycled.
In the 1991 Supplemental Notice, EPA
proposed a presumption of recyclability
for all used oils. The presumption was .
based on industry data which suggested
that once used oil enters the recycling
system the majority of the used oil is
recycled by burning for energy recovery
or some other manner, such as refining.
Under the proposed presumption, the
Agency would have presumed that all
used oils would be recycled, unless a
used oil handler documented that the
used oil cannot be recycled. In the 1991
notice, EPA also proposed several
criteria used oil handlers could use to
rebut the recycling presumption. The
comments that EPA received in
response to the recycling presumption
were very supportive. Commenters
indicated that the recycling presumption
would ensure that used oils remained in
the used oil recycling system. However,
many commenters also indicated that
the criteria that the Agency proposed for
rebutting the presumption are not
necessary, since they argued that all
used oils can be recycled and the
selection of a recycling method depends
on the physical characteristics of the
used oil (e.g., water content, level of
contamination) and the corresponding
cost of recycling the used oil.
After considering the public
comments supporting the recycling
presumption, and the difficulties
associated with promulgating and
enforcing the proposed "recyclability
criteria," the Agency has decided that
specific criteria to rebut the presumption
are not necessary. The Agency agrees
with the commenters that the physical
characteristic of the used oil and the
used oil recycling market will dictate the
conditions for recycling of used oil.
However, the Agency has retained the
recycling presumption because the
presumption simplifies the used oil
management system by ensuring that
generators and others may comply with
one set of standards, the part 279
standards promulgated today,
regardless of whether the used oil
exhibits a hazardous characteristic and
regardless of whether the used oil will
ultimately be recycled or disposed. In
other words, the generator (or any other
person who handles the oil prior to the
person who decides to dispose of the
oil) need not decide whether the used oil
eventually will be recycled or disposed
and thus need not tailor its management
of the oil based upon that decision (and,
if destined for disposal, whether the
used oil is hazardous). Rather, the part
279 standards apply to all used oils until
a person disposes of the used oil, or
sends it for disposal.
The recycling presumption will not
apply once the .generator or other pprpon
disposes or sends the used oil for
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41579
disposal. Today's rule does not impose
any recordkeeping requirements on such
persons to demonstrate that the oil is
destined for disposal. Rather, they must
continue to comply with existing
requirements for used oil disposal as
listed in part 279, subpart I. The used oil
disposal must be done in compliance
with all applicable regulations (i.e., the
generator must determine whether the
used oil exhibits any characteristic and,
if so, must manage it as a hazardous
waste). If used oil is recycled, however,
no characteristic determination is
required, but all parties handling the
used oil must comply with the part 279
management standards.
For used oil processing and re-refining
residuals, a hazardous waste
determination will be necessary when
the residuals are managed in a manner
other than recycling for energy recovery
or when re-refining distillation bottoms
are used as a feed material for asphalt
products (see discussion in Section IV of
this preamble).
C. Rebuttable Presumption of Mixing for
Used Oil
The rebuttable presumption currently
codified at 40 CFR 266.40(c) provides
that used oil containing more than 1,000
ppm of total halogens is presumed to be
mixed with chlorinated hazardous waste
listed in 40 CFR part 261, subpart D,
Persons may rebut the presumption by
demonstrating that the used oil'has not
been mixed with hazardous waste. EPA
does not presume mixing has occurred if
the used oil does not contain significant
concentrations of chlorinated hazardous
constituents listed in appendix VIII of
part 261.
In 1985, EPA promulgated the used oil
fuel specification. EPA set the
specification limit for total halogens at
4,000 ppm. EPA set this specification
limit for total halogens based upon
emission standards modelling results.
EPA also promulgated the rebuttable
presumption of mixing in 1985. The
rebuttable presumption limit for halogen
content was set at 1,000 ppm, based
upon probable mixing scenarios. The
Agency believes (due to enforcement
experience) that used oils exhibiting a
total halogen level greater than 1,000
ppm have most likely been mixed with
chlorinated hazardous wastes.
The Agency wants to discourage all
mixing of used oils and hazardous
wastes. However, EPA understands that
some used oils (e.g., metalworking oils
with chlorinated additives) may exceed
the 1,000 ppm total halogen limit without
Caving been mixed with hazardous
vaste. In these cases, the generator can
Tebut the presumption of mixing by
documenting the source of the halogens
and the used oil is subject to the part 279
management standards and is not
subject to the subtitle C management
system. However, even if the
presumption of mixing is rebutted, if the
total halogen level in the used oil
exceeds 4,000 ppm, the used oil will not
meet the used oil specification limit for
total halogens. Therefore, if the used oil
is to be burned for energy recovery, and
the used oil will have to undergo further
processing to meet the used oil fuel
specification (to lower the total halogen
level) or the used oil must be burned as
off-specification used oil fuel (in which
case the used oil fuel handlers must be
in compliance with the requirements of
part 279, subpart G). In cases where the
used oil generator cannot rebut the
presumption of mixing, the used oil
generator must manage the mixture of
used oil and hazardous waste as a
hazardous waste (in compliance with all
applicable Subtitle C management
requirements).
In the 1991 Supplemental Notice, EPA
proposed to apply the rebuttable
presumption for used oil fuels to all used
oils. Cpmmenters favored extending the
applicability of the rebuttable
presumption for used oil fuels to all used
oils that are recycled in any manner.
EPA has decided to expand the
presumption to cover all used oils (with
two exceptions, discussed below) and
has amended 40 CFR 261.3 to make the
provision applicable to all used oils.
Under this presumption, used oils
containing more than 1000 ppm total
halogens are presumed to have been
mixed with a halogenated hazardous
waste and therefore must be managed
as hazardous waste. Used oil handlers
may rebut this presumption by
demonstrating that the used oil does not
contain hazardous waste. EPA is
recommending the use of SW-846
method 8010 in rebutting the
presumption of mixing.
In today's rule, EPA is removing the
current requirements of 40 CFR part 286,
subpart E and recodifying these
requirements in the new part 279, as
explained later in this preamble. In the
case of the rebuttable presumption, EPA
is reinstating the rebuttable presumption
as part of the definition of hazardous
waste at 40 CFR 261.3. The Agency is
amending the definition of hazardous
waste in this manner to clarify that the
rebuttable presumption will now apply
to all used oils and that all used oils that
contain greater than 1,000 ppm halogens
must be managed as a hazardous waste,
unless the presumption can be rebutted.
EPA solicited comments on the
possible elimination ol a distinction
between a 1,000 ppm halogen limit for
rebuttable presumption of mixing and
the 4,000 ppm level for total halogens in
specification fuel. EPA received
favorable comments from ths public.
EPA, however, has decided not to
address this issue in today's rulemaking.
The management standards established
today cover basic management practices
and establish 1,000 ppm level for the
rebuttable presumption of mixing for all
used oils. The 4,000 ppm total halogen
limit for specification fuel remains
unchanged for now.
Today, EPA is amending the
rebuttable presumption of mixing to
conditionally exempt two types of used
oils from the requirement to document
the rebuttal. EPA is providing a
conditional exemption for both used
metalworking oils containing
chlorinated paraffins and used
compressor oils containing CFCs.
1. Metalworking oils
EPA is providing a conditional
exemption from the rebuttable
presumption of mixing for used
metalworking oils/fluids containing
chlorinated paraffins, on the condition
that these oils/fluids are processed
through a tolling agreement to reclaim
the metalworking oils/fluids. Many
metalworking oils/fluids contain greater
than 1,000 ppm total halogens, not
because they are mixed with chlorinated
hazardous wastes, but due to the
presence of chlorinated paraffins in the
oils/fluids. Today's amendment to the
rebuttable presumption is partially a
clarification, because used
metalworking oils that are not mixed
with hazardous waste (but do contain
greater than 1,000 ppm halogens) could
have been the subject of a successful
rebuttal. This exemption will relieve
generators of such oils/fluids of the
burden and responsibility of
documenting the source of the halogens
when the generator has entered into a
tolling agreement to have metalworking
oils/fluids recycled. Generators, as well
as other handlers, of metalworking
fluids/oils who have not entered into a
tolling agreement to provide for the
recycling of the oils/fluids remain
subject to the rebuttable presumption
and will have to continue to document
that the oils/fluids are not mixed with
chlorinated hazardous wastes. The
Agency is providing and codifying this
amendment for generators and
processors/re-refiners with tolling
agreements because the Agency
believes that such private arrangements
restrict the handling of the oils/fluids
and provide for a mutual interest in
preventing any potential contamination
of the oils/fluids to assure that the oils/
fluids can be recycled (i.e., adding
-------
September -10. 1992 / Rujes j^ Regulations
solvents to rnetalworking oils would
reduce the value of the used oil as a
metalworking oil—adding solvents may
not reduce the value of the used oil if it
is used as a fuel, but it is possible that it
may be deemed as a mixture of used oil
and hazardous waste if significant
quantities of FOCI and F002-halcgenated
constituents are detected).
2, Compressor Oils From Refrigeration
Units Containing CFCs
EPA also is amending the rebuttable
presumption to exempt CFC-
contaminated used oils generated and
removed from refrigeration units and air
conditioning equipment, on the
condition that these used oils are not
mixed with other wastes, that the used
oils containing CFCs are subjected to
CFC recycling and/or reclamation for
further use, and that these used oils are
not mixed with used oils from other
sources. The remaining used oil must be
recycled appropriately in compliance
with today's standards. The presence of
CFCs in compressor oils removed from
refrigerant units will cause the use oils
to exhibit a halogen level greater than
1,000 ppm, even after the majority of the
CFCs are removed and/or recycled. This
exemption, like the exemption provided
for metalworking oils, will relieve
generators of used compressor oils of
the burden and responsibility of
documenting the source of the halogens.
Generators and other handlers of CFC-
coniaminated compressor oils must keep
the used oils that are contaminated with
CFCs separate from other used oils that
are not exempt from the rebuttable
presumption, since other used oils may
be mixed with chlorinated hazardous
wastes. It is important to note that
although the rebuttable presumption
does not apply to used compressor oils
containing CFCs or used metalworking
oils, these used oils remain subject to
appropriate part 279 standards. For
example, used oils must contain less
than 4,000 ppm total halogens to be
considered specification used oil fuels,
Used compressor oils containing
residual levels of CFCs after the CFC
recycling/reclamation and used
metalworking oils are subject to the
specification limits for used oil fuels if
these oils are destined for burning. EPA
wants to discourage the burning of used
oils with significantly elevated levels of
halogens in space heaters or non-
industrial furnaces or boilers. Pending
further study, the Agency may restrict
the on-site burning of metalworking and
CFC-contaminated used oils sometime
in the future. All burning of used oil
containing high levels of halogens must
occur in compliance with the RCRA
regulations established for the burning
of hazardous waste or used oil as
applicable.
D, Summary of New Part 279
As mentioned above, today's action
promulgates management standards for
recycled used oil to meet the legislative
mandate of the Used Oil Recycling Act
of 1980. These standards are a
combination of the 1985-proposed
management standards and the.
alternative management standards
proposed in the 1991 Supplemental
TABLE VI.1.—USED OIL
[General standards]
Notice. The detailed discussion
concerning applicable requirements is
provided under individual categories of
used oil handlers; Tables VL1 to VL7
give specific regulatoiy citations for the
individual management standards
contained in today's rule.
1. Applicability
a. General. As indicated in the 1991
Supplemental Notice, the used oil
management standards promulgated in
today's rule will be codified in a new
part 279 of Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. The regulations in
part 279 apply to all used oils, regardless
of whether or not they exhibit a
hazardous waste characteristic. The
management standards promulgated
today apply to household-generated and
do-it-yourself (DIY)-generated used oils
only when these used oils are collected
and aggregated. Such used oils may be
collected and aggregated at individual
privately-owned or company-owned
service stations with DIY oil collection
programs, auto centers or other state or
local government-approved, community-
based used oil collection centers.
Today's requirements cover all used
oil handlers and all types of used oils.
Table VI.l summarizes the general
standards. EPA believes that all used
oils, once generated, must be stored
properly and must enter the used oil
recycling system. In addition, as
discussed below, EPA presumes that all
used oils are recyclable either as a fuel
or a feedstock.
Requirement
Recycling presumption ,
Mixtures of used oil with hazardous wacte .
Rebuttable presumption for used oil ...
Exceptions from rebuttabie presumption for CFC and mel-
aivvorking oils.
(Mixtures of used oil with non-hazardous waste
Mixtures of used oil with products
Materials derived from used oil
Conditional exemption — wastewater
Used oil introduced into crude oil or natural gas pipelines
Used oil on vessels
PCB contaminated used oils
Used oil specification
Surface Impoundment/waste pile prohibition except for
units operated under Part 264/265 requirements.
Prohibition on use as a dust suppressant
Prohibition on burning in other than certain units
New or existing
Existing . .
Existing
New
Existing .
New
New
New
New
New
New
New
New
Existing ,, ..
Regulatory citation
a 279 1 0{a)
§ 279 1 0(b)
§ 279 10(b)(1)(ii) and § 261 3(a)(2)(v)
§279 10(b)(1)(ii) (A) and (B) afld §261.3(a)<2)jv) (A) and
(B).
§ 279 10(c)
§ 279 10(d)
§ 279 1 0(e)
§ 279 1 0(f)
6 27Q 1 0fart
§ 279 1 0(e)(3) § 279 1 0(h) and § 279 20{a|(2)
§ 279 1 0(i)
§ 279 1 2(a)
§ 279 1 2(b)
278 1 2(c)
b. Recycling presumption. The
management standards in part 279 apply
to all used oils that can be recycled.
EPA presumes that all used oils are
recyclable and, therefore, all used oik
must be managed in accordance with
the management standards promulgated
today. In the event a used oil handler
disposes used oil on site or sends for
disposal, the handler must comply with
the applicable regulations (e.g.,
determine whether the used oil exhibits
any characteristic of hazardous waste
and if it does, must manage the used oil
as a hazardous waste). This provision is
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 178 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41581
codified today as subpart I of part 279.
See section VI. B. for additional
discussion.
The commenters to the 1991
Supplemental Proposal -vverwhelmingly
favored implementation of the recycling
presumption. However, many
commenters stated that the criteria
provided for rebutting the recycling
presumption (e&. water content, BTU
value) would be difficult to comply with,
and therefore EPA should not develop
such criteria. In addition, commenters
stated that all used oils are recyclable
and the extent of recycling depends on
the cost to generators. For example, if
the used oil is actually a mixture of oil
and water, then the cost of recycling the
mixture would be higher than recycling
used oil that is straight out of engines or
from metalworking operations. Upon
further evaluation of comments, the
feasibility of applying these criteria for a
rebuttal, and the analytical requirements
accompanying the proposed criteria, the
Agency decided against finalizing the
specific criteria for rebutting the
presumption of recycling. The Agency
believes that recycling is a more viable
alternative than disposing of used oil as
a characteristic waste. Therefore, used
oil handlers will react to market
conditions, thus selecting recycling over
disposal The Agency therefore has
decided to rely on the decision to
dispose used oil as a de facto criterion
for rebuttal of the recycling presumption
promulgated today.
c. Mixtures. The following section
discusses management of mixtures of
used oil and used oil-contaminated
wastes. Used oils mixed with other solid
wastes or with other materials (eg.,
virgin fuel oil] are regulated as used oil
under the part 279 standards.
/. Mixtures of used ail and hazardous
waste. Used oils that are mixed with
listed hazardous wastes are subject to
regulation as hazardous waste under 40
CFR parts 262 through 286. 268,270, and
124. Used oils that are mixed with
characteristic hazardous wastes may be
managed as used oils under part 279 if
the resultant mixture does not exhibit a
characteristic. In addition, used oils that
exhibit a hazardous waste characteristic
(e.g, ignitability or toxicity} by their own
nature and are not mixed with a
hazardous waste may be handled in
accordance with today's part 279 used
oil management standards and are
exempt from {i.e., not subject to)
additional Subtitle C requirements,, if
they are recycled.8
Mixtures of used oil and hazardous
wastes generated by conditionally
exempt small quantity generators
regulated under 40 CFR 261.5 are subject
to regulation as used oil. The hazardous
waste from a conditionally exempt
generator when mixed with used oil
generated by this entity, may cause the
used oil to exceed the halogen limit
under the rebuttable presumption of
mixing. This mixing has been
permissible since 1985 under 40 CFR
260.40fd)(2) when used oil mixed with
hazardous waste generated by a small
quantity hazardous waste generator is
burned for energy recovery. The existing
requirement is recodified at 40 CFR
279.10(b)(3) today.
ii. Mixtures of used oil and other solid
wastes. EPA encourages the separation
of used oils from used oil/solid waste
mixtures and from used oil-
contaminated materials prior to
management of the mixture. Used oils
separated from mixtures containing
other solid wastes should be recycled in
accordance with the standards
promulgated today. Used oils that have
been separated from mixtures with other
materials or solid wastes are subject to
the management standards of part 279.
For example, used oils recovered from
oil filters, industrial wipers and other
absorbent materials, and used oils
recovered from scrap metals are all
subject to the part 279 used oil
management standards when they are
recycled. Commenters were in favor of
requiring proper management of wipers
and sorptive materials contaminated
with used oil, as long as the used oil has
been removed and no free-flowing oil
remains associated with the solid waste
mixture.
In the September 1991 Supplemental
Notice, EPA proposed a one drop test
for determining when there is no free-
flowing used oil remaining in a mixture.
The Agency has decided against using
the one drop test, because EPA is unable
to address the question of how to
determine when one drop is formulated.
Instead, the Agency decided to apply a
free-flowing concept to mixtures of used
oil and other solid wastes. The used oil
from such mixtures, when subjected to
mechanical pressure devices such as
cloth wringers/squeezers or gravity
draining, can easily be removed so that
no free-flowing oil remains associated
with the other solid waste(s). Therefore,
EPA has decided to apply the concept of
no free-flowing oil, rather than a one
drop test. EPA encourages the handlers
8 The Agency is currently evaluating several
options to change the hazardous waste
Identification program [see 57 FR 21450; May 20,
1992). Depending upon which option(a) the Agency
promulgates for hazardous waste identification, the
mixture rule at 8 281.3 may be altered or abolished.
Hence, the regulation of used oils that are mixed
with hazardous wastes may change.
of used oil and other solid wastes to
remove used oil to the extent possible
such that there is no visible sign of free-
flowing oil in the remaining solid waste.
The storage and handling of the
mixtures prior to the separation of the
used oil must be in compliance with the
management standards for recycled
used oil promulgated today. If any used
oil that is removed from a mixture
cannot be recycled, the generator of the
used oil must manage the used oil in
accordance with the disposal
requirements of part 279, subpart I.
Materials from which used oils have
been removed must be managed safely
and in accordance with all applicable
RCRA regulations upon removal of used
oil.
Hi. Mixture ofignitable solvents and
used oil. In the 1991 Supplemental
Notice, EPA requested comments on
whether the Agency should allow
burning of mixtures of used oil and
characteristic waste (i.e., waste
exhibiting characteristics of ignitability)
such as mineral spirits as a used oil fuel.
The commenters stated that the burning
of such mixtures can be performed in
compliance with the used oil fuel
specification requirements. The
commenters also pointed out that
mineral spirits, petroleum distillates are
used in place of halogenated solvents as
cleaning agents, degreasing fluids or
part-cleaning solvents in automotive
and vehicle maintenance industry and
metalworking operations. The mineral
spirits, petroleum distillates are then
mixed with used oil to eliminate the
characteristic of ignitability and then
sent off-site for recycling as a used oil
fuel. Based on the available data, the
Agency has concluded that the mixing to
manage ignitable solvents appears to be
acceptable, provided the characteristic
of ignitability of the ignitable solvents is
removed.
EPA believes that if the solvents are
hazardous only because of ignitability,
and are not listed in part 261, subpart D,
and do not exhibit the toxicity
characteristic, then mixing the solvents
hi with used oil should not affect the
chemical constituents or other
properties of used oil. The solvents in
question (i.e., mineral spirits) are
petroleum fractions, are typically used
by the same businesses that generate
used oil, and are managed in a manner
similar to used oil, i.e., burning for
energy recovery or distillation to recover
the solvent As such, efficient and sound
management can include mixing with
used oil by used oil generators, and
management by used oil processors and
re-refiners. If the mixture exhibits the
characteristic of ignitability, however,
-------
41582 JP'edgral^^L^MLLZil:!.^',,^0!.^76' '^ Thtlib6d'Ay'J''September lof^y /- Rule-8 - arfa-Regulation's
this can mean that the mixing has
changed the nature of hazards involved
in managing the used oil, and this
mixture should remain subject to
hazardous waste controls.
d. Used oil fuels. Since the final used
oil burning and blending rule was
published on November 29,1985, used
oils burned for energy recovery have
been regulated under 40 CFR part 266,
subpart E. Today's rule removes subpart
E from part 266 and incorporates (with
minor modifications) the existing
management standards for used oil
marketers and burners (including the
used oil fuel specification) into part 279.
Used oil burned for energy recovery is
subject to regulation under subpart G of
part 279, unless the used oil is mixed
with hazardous waste. Mixtures of used
oil and hazardous waste that are burned
as fuel for energy recovery in an
industrial boiler or furnace will continue
to be subject to 40 CFR part 266, subpart
H, the standards for hazardous waste
burned in boilers and industrial
furnaces.9
(Note: Used oils that are identified as
hazardous wastes may be burned for
energy recovery in compliance with part
279 instead of 40 CFR part 266, subpart
H, provided the used oil fuel is
hazardous solely because it exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste by its
own nature or was mixed with
hazardous waste generated by a
conditionally exempt small quantity
generator regulated under 40 CFR 261.5.)
e. SPCC Program. Today's rule
regulates the storage of used oils in
aboveground tanks and containers.
Used oils stored in underground storage
tanks remain subject to the standards of
40 CFR part 280. Under section 311 of
the Clean Water Act, EPA has
promulgated regulations for the
prevention of oil spills into navigable
waterways. These rules are known as
the.Spill Prevention Control and
Counter-measure (SPCC) regulations and
are codified at 40 CFR part 112. The
SPCC requirements apply to non-
transportation-related facilities located
in the proximity of navigable waters;
they cover facilities with underground
storage capacity over 42,000 gallons,
aboveground storage capacity greater
than 1,320 gallons, or single tank
capacity of 660 gallons. The SPCC
definition of oil is very broad and covers
all petroleum and oil product-storing
facilities handling waste oil, fuel oil and
"oil refuse;" therefore, persons and
facilities storing used oil may already be
subject to the SPCC regulations. The
used oil facilities covered'under the
SPCC regulations will continue to be
subject to those requirements
independent of the used oil storage
requirements promulgated today for the
used oil industry participants.
The SPCC regulations are designed to
address prevention of oil spills and the
associated contamination or threat of
contamination of surface water.
However,, the regulations do not
specifically address the mitigation of
discharges that contaminate soil and/or
ground water without posing a threat of
contamination of surface waters. In
addition, the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Contingency
Plan (NCP) at 40 CFR part 300 requires
removal of oil forming a sheen on
surface water but does not require
cleanup of oil-contaminated areas that
do not pose a threat of contamination of
surface waters. EPA believes that
approximately 50 percent of the used oil
generator universe, most of the used oil
transporters and processors and re-
refiners, and more than half of the off-
specification used oil burners are likely
to be covered under the SPCC program.
EPA also believes that less than 10
percent of the used oil industry
participants are excluded from the SPCC
program because they are not located in
the vicinity of navigable waterways.10
When today's used oil management
standards become effective, the
aboveground used oil storage and
processing tanks and containers located
at used oil transfer facilities owned or
operated by used oil collectors/
transporters, used oil processing and re-
refining facilities, and off-specification
used oil burner sites will be subjected to
the RCRA section 3014 requirements.
These used oil handlers also will be
subject to the applicable SPCC
regulations in 40 CFR part 112.
f. Storage in Underground Tanks.
Used oil handlers who store used oil in
underground storage'tanks (USTs) L1
6 Used oil thai Is mixed with hazardous wastes
and is incinerated (i.e.), burning does not include
energy recovery) must be incinerated in units that
are in compliance with subpart O of 49 CFR parts
264/265. Any used oil that is incinerated in units
regulated under parts 264/265, subpart O, must be
managed In accordance with all applicable part 279
requirements prior to its incineration.
10 See the background document pertaining to
how the costs and benefits of today's rule were
derived for a further explanation of how many
facilities are not subject to the SPCC requirements.
The background document is available in the docket
for today's rule,
" In 40 CFR 280.12, underground storage tank Is
defined as any one or combination of tanks that is
used to contain an accumulation of regulated
substances, and the volume of which (including the
volume of underground pipes connected thereto) is
ten percent of more beneath the surface of the
ground.
must comply with the standards in 40
CFR part 280. The technical standards
for USTs, including USTs that are used
to store used oils, were promulgated
after the 1985 proposed used oil
management standards. The Agency
stated in the preamble to the UST final
rale (53 FR 37112) that used oil, when
stored in underground tanks, presents
risks similar to other petroleum products
stored in USTs. As a result, EPA
determined that owners and operators
of used oil USTs must comply with the
standards promulgated for petroleum
USTs.
g. Conditional Exemptions
i. Distillation Bottoms from Re-
refining of Used Oil. As proposed in
1985, EPA is promulgating an exemption
from the part 279 standards for
distillation bottoms derived from used
oil re-refining processes on the condition
that the distillation bottoms are used as
ingredients in asphalt paving and
roofing materials. Commenters have
indicated that the use of distillation
bottoms to make asphalt paving
materials is a common practice.
Commenter-submitted data also indicate
that distillation bottoms from re-refining
processes do not exhibit the toxicity
characteristic, and the Agency has no
data to refute this claim. Therefore, EPA
sees no reason to prohibit or restrict the
use of re-refining distillation bottoms in
the production of asphalt materials and
is therefore excluding used oil residuals
used in this manner from the definition
of hazardous waste.
ii. Inserting of used oil in crude oil or
natural gas pipelines. Several
commenters, in response to the 1985
proposed management standards,
requested that EPA exempt upstream
crude oil operations from the used oil
management standards. These
commenters believed that the practice of
returning used oil to the refinery through
the crude oil pipeline affords a high
level of protection to human health and
the environment, and additional
requirements are unnecessary. Some
commenters suggested that natural gas
processing plants who may introduce
used oil in the natural gas process
stream should be exempted as well.
In response to these comments, EPA
agrees that once introduced to a pipeline
at crude oil or natural gas processing
facilities, the possibility of releases to
the environment is not greater for used
oil than for crude oil and, therefore, is
providing an exemption from the
management standards for used oils that
are placed directly into a crude oil
pipeline. Similar exemption is provided
to the owners/operators of natural gas
-------
Federal Register /,V0L 57.,No, 376 / Thursday,-September. 10, 1992 /; Rules and Regulations 41583
processing plants may choose to
introduce used oil generated on site into
a natural gas pipeline. The exemption
applies to such used oils after the used
oils are placed into the pipeline. Prior to
being placed into a crude oil pipeline,
the used oils are subject to all
applicable used oil management
standards promulgated today as part of
part 279, including all used oil storage
requirements, because at that point, the
used oil could be released through leaks
or spills, as could any other used oil.
Hi. Used oil/diesel fuel mixtures.
Some used oil generators blend the used
oils they generate from the diesel-
powered vehicles they own or operate
with diesel fuel for use in these vehicles.
As EPA explained in the 1985 proposed
rule (50 FR 49220), this blending should
result in fuel that is very low in toxic
contaminants. EPA also explained in
1985 that mixing of used oils with diesel
fuel is often recommended by diesel
engine manufacturers. In addition, data
available to EPA suggest that used
diesel engine crankcase oils are quite
low in contaminants as generated. Since
diesel fuel is itself typically low in toxic
metals, a dilution ratio that assures a
high concentration of diesel fuel to used
diesel crankcase oils would seem to
ensure the resultant blended fuel will
meet the used oil fuel specification. EPA
also believes that such blending is not
done on a very frequent basis and the
resultant blended fuel is kept on site for
use in the generator's own vehicles.
Therefore, EPA is exempting this
activity from the processing and re-
refining facility standards of part 279 for
generators who engage in this practice
on-site and use the resultant fuel only in
their own vehicles. Such generators are,
however, still subject to the generator
standards of subpart C of part 279, prior
to mixing the used oils with diesel fuel,
and the resulting fuel must be managed
in accordance with the used oil fuel
specification regulations.
iv. deminimis wastewater mixtures.
As proposed in 1985, the Agency has
decided to exempt wastewaters
contaminated with de minimi's
quantities of used oil from the part 279
requirements. These wastewaters are
covered under the Clean Water Act
regulations. The majority of commentera
supported such an exemption. EPA is
today finalizing the definition for de
minimi's quantities of used oil that was
proposed in 1985: "small spills, leaks, or
drippings from pumps, machinery, pipes,
and cither similar equipment during
normal operations or when small
amounts of oil are lost to the
wastewater treatment system during
washing or draining operations." As
discussed above, used oils recovered
from wastewaters, however, will be
subjected to the part 279 used oil
management standards and must be
managed accordingly. In addition, if
such wastewaters are discharged to a
surface water, the wastewater must
meet all applicable NPDES limits
promulgated under section 402 of the
Clean Water Act. Wastewaters
discharged to POTWs must meet the
applicable pretreatment standards
established pursuant to section 307(b) of
the Clean Water Act.
v. PCB-contaminoted used oils. Used
oils that are contaminated with PCBs
and regulated under 40 CFR part 761 are
not subject to the used oil management
standards promulgated today as 40 CFR
part 279. The Agency believes that the
current requirements in part 761 for
PCB-contaminated wastes adequately
control the management and disposal of
used oils containing PCBs»
vi. Used Oils sprayed onto coal When
used oils are sprayed onto coal to
suppress dust during the transport of
coal, the used oil/coal mixture destined
for energy recovery is considered a used
oil fuel and is regulated under part 279
subpart G. However, used oils that
remain in containers (including railroad
tank cars and trucks) after the removal
of the coal must be managed in
accordance with all applicable part 279
standards.
h. CERCLA Liability Exemption and
Its Applicability to Service Station
Dealers. Service Station Dealers (SSDs),
as defined by section 101(37) of
CERCLA, will become eligible for the
exemption from CERCLA liability for
recycled oil as a result of today's rule,
provided that they meet the
requirements of section 114(c) of
CERCLA. The exemption is limited to
generator liability under section
107(a)(3.) of CERCLA and transporter
liability under section 107(a)(4); it does
not cover owner and operator liability
under section 107(a)(l) and (2). The
exemption applies to liability for
injunctive relief under section 106(a) and
for cost recovery under section 107. In
order to qualify for the exemption, an
SSD must meet the following
requirement of sections 114(c) and
101(37): (1) The SSD must be in
compliance with the used oil
management standards that EPA is
promulgating today, discussed in
sections VI.D.2 and VI.D.3, respectively,
of the preamble; (2) the used oil must not
be mixed with any other hazardous
substance; and (3) the SSD must accept
"do-it-yourself generated used oil for
recycling. Further, the exemption applies
only to "recycled oil" as defined in
section 1004(37) of RCRA.
The used oil management standards,
in particular, include corrective action
requirements for used oil releases after
the effective date of the rule (i.e.,
response to used oil releases). The SSD
must comply with these and with other
applicable requirements, i.e., the part
280 standards for underground storage
tanks, and part 112 standards for
aboveground containers and tanks, as
appropriate. In addition, the SSD
complying with the corrective action
requirements for underground storage
tanks used for used oil storage will
become eligible for the exemption. The
exemption is not available for the SSD's
own facility.
SSDs becomes eligible to assert the
exemption on the effective date of the
used oil regulations under section 3014
of RCRA that include, among other
provisions, a requirement to conduct
corrective action to respond to any
releases of recycled oil under subtitle C
or subtitle I of such Act. (See CERCLA
section 114(c)(4).)12 Today's rules
provide for corrective action by cross-
referencing subtitle I for releases from
underground tanks and the part 112
regulations for aboveground SPCC
tanks. For containers and other
abdveground tanks, today's rule
establishes new requirements for
responding to releases under RCRA,
section 3014, a subtitle C authority. In
non-authorized States, the rules become
effective (insert date 6 months from
publication). In authorized States, the
rules will not become'effective until the
State adopts rules under its own
authorities. Prior to State adoption, an
SSD may be eligible for the exemption if
it can demonstrate compliance with
EPA's regulations. In both authorized
and non-authorized states, after the
rules take effect, EPA would generally
not pursue an enforcement action
against SSD for which the exemption
potentially applies unless it has reason
to believe that the SSD is not complying
with the section 3014 regulations, or fails
to meet any other conditions of CERCLA
section 114(c) and 101(37). EPA will
determine whether a CERCLA
enforcement action is appropriate on a
case-by-case basis. EPA's
determination, of course, is not binding
on other persons, including states, that
might bring an action under CERCLA. In
such cases, the SSD may have to show
12 The Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of I960 (Superfund)
(Pub. L. 96-510). as amended by The Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act of-1986 (Pub.
L. 98-499), December 1986, p. 71.
-------
43,584
176 '
September 1& X«92>:/<:.Ru]RaranduRegutai,Uon3
that it has complied with the used oil
management standards and met the
other conditions of section H4(c) and
101(37) through record or other means.
As mentioned above, EPA has
determined today that SSDs must follow
existing regulations promulgated under
Subtitle I of RCRA to respond to
releases of recycled oil from
underground storage tanks [USTsj, SSDs
and other owners of underground tanks
had to begin complying with these
regulations in 1988. The exemption for
SSDs, however, could not take effect
until EPA determined that compliance
with these regulations would satisfy
section 114(c) of CERCLA. In authorized
states, the states themselves must adopt
regulations governing underground
tanks. While EPA encourages the states
to rely on the subtitle ! rules, the states
may adopt more stringent requirements.
Hence, EPA believes that the standards
for underground tanks do not "take
effect" for the purpose of the section
114(c) exemption in an authorized state
until that state adopts used oil
management standards under its own
authorities.
Finally, section 101(37)(C) of CERCLA
provides that the President shall
promulgate regulations further defining
"service station dealer" pertaining to the
"significant" percentage of gross
revenues from motor vehicle fueling,
servicing including lube and tune up, or
repairing activities provided to the
public on a commercial basis. The
legislative history states, "To prevent
the creation and use of 'service station
dealerships' as a front for hazardous
waste management firms or commercial
generators of hazardous substances that
want the benefit of this exemption from
liability, a significant percentage of the
business' gross revenue must be derived
from the fueling, repairing, or servicing
of motor vehicles. Business operations,
such as iarge retail establishments or
car and truck dealerships that have a
legitimate, commercial automotive
service component, are intended to be
covered by this definition. However, a
retail establishment that does not derive
revenue from fueling, repairing, or
servicing motor vehicles does not
qualify under this definition. To the
extent establishments that do not
qualify under this definition produce
large quantities of used oil, they are
TABLE VI.2.—USED OIL
[Generator standards]
industrial generators and are to be
treated like other generators."13
2. Standards for Used Oil Generators
a. Applicability. The standards for
used oil generators have been
promulgated as subpart C of part 279.
Table VI.2 lists applicable requirements
and provides regulatory citations. These
standards apply to used oil generators
as defined in subpart B of part 279. A
used oil generator is any person, by site,
whose act or process produces used oil'
or whose act first causes used oil to
become subject to regulations. For
example, generators include all persons
and businesses who produce used oil
through commercial or industrial ,
operations and vehicle services,
including government agencies, and/or
persons and businesses who collect
used oil from households and "do-it-
yourself oil changers. Household "do-
it-yourselfer" used oil generators or
private individuals who generate used
oil through the maintenance of their
personal vehicles are not subject to the
used oil generators standards.
13 H. Rep. No, 99-962, 99th Cong., 2nd Sess. (1986),
a! 226.
Requirement
Used oil on vessels ,
Mixtures of used oil and diesel fuel
Farmers ...
Generators who perform other management activities
Hazardous waste mixing
Type of storage units
Good condition above ground tanks and containers
Labelling of tanks and containers
Response to used oil releases from above ground storage units
On-site burning in space heaters
Off-site shipment
SPCC requirements, including spill prevention and control
UST requirements, including corrective action and financial responsi-
bility.
Accumulation limit
Inspection requirements
Closure
Collection Centers:
Do-it-yourselfer collection centers
Used oil collection centers
Used oil aggregation points
New or existing
New .. . .
New . .. .,
New ' .
New
New
Existing (applicable independently) ..
Existing (applicable independently)
NA
NA
NA
New
New
New
Regulatory citation
§ 279.20(a)(2).
§ 279.20(a)(3).
§ 279.20(a)(4).
§ 279.20(b).
§ 279 21
§ 279.22(a).
§ 279.22(b).
§ 279 22(c),
§ 279 22(d)
§ 279 23
§ 279 24
40 CFR part 112.
40 CFR part 280.
§ 279 30
§ 279 31
§ 279 32
The Agency has decided to regulate
all used oil generators under one set of
minimum management standards.
Today's rule does not exempt any class
of generators based upon a generation
rate. In the September 1991
Supplemental Notice, FPA proposed to
eliminate the regulatory distinction
between small quantity and large
quantity used oil generators (the Agency
had proposed such a distinction in the
November 198S proposed rulemaking).
Tfae majority of commenters who
responded to the September 1991
Supplemental Notice on this issue
supported the proposed elimination of
the regulatory distinction for generators.
In the 1991 Supplemental Notice,
while proposing to cover all used oil
generators under the RCRA section 3014
management standards, EPA discussed
the advantages of such an approach to
the regulated community, regulating
agencies, and do-it-yourself used oil
generators. The major advantages that
EPA envisions are as follows. Such an
-------
Federal Register / VoL 57. No. 176 /Thursday September 10. 1992 / Rules and Regulations^ 41585
approach minimizes complexity by
placing all used oil generators under
uniform regulatory requirements; it
eliminates the need for measuring
quantities of used oils collected and
stored each month; it eliminates the
concerns that generators could be
bumped into a more stringent regulatory
category if the collect DIY-generated
used oils; and above all, it allows for a
system whereby all used oil is collected,
recycled, and managed in an
environmentally sound manner, thus
reducing hazards to human health and
the environment. Another major
advantage, as discussed earlier in
section V.D.l.h., is that approximately
30,000 used oil generators who meet the
CERCLA section 114(c) "service station"
definition qualify for the liability
exemption if they accept DIY-generated
used oil and comply with the used oil
management standards, including
corrective action (i.e., used oil spill
response and clean up requirements).
EPA decided against providing a small
quantity generator exemption for the
following reasons:
• The generator standards established
today are basic and minimal good
housekeeping practices that include
maintaining all tanks and containers in good
condition, labeling tanks and containers, and
cleaning up spills and releases of used oil.
They are snbstantially less than those
proposed in 1985 and 1991.
• Large generators who use tanks that
exceed the capacity limits and other
prerequisites established under the SPCC and
UST programs are subject to the containment
and corrective action requirements in those
programs. These programs provide additional
protection necessary at used oil generator
sites appropriately beyond the basic
standards contained in today's rule.
• The collection of DIY-generated used oil
would be discouraged due to the inherent
concern for generators of being bumped into
a higher category (e.g., if an exemption was
set at 100 kg/mo, generators would be
unwilling to accept DIY-generated used oils
because of the concern that the additional
quantities of used oil would require them to
comply with the management standards).
• Generators may have to keep records of
used oil generation activities to demonstrate
that they qualify from an exemption. It is
probable that some generators may dump
used oil to show that they only generate a
quantity of used oil that is less than the
quantity limit for defining a small quantity
used oil generator.
• An extensive education and outreach
program would be necessary tit explain the
interface between the used oil generator
exemption and the CERCLA liability
exemption.
• Existing mismanagement practices at
certain generator sites would continue,
resulting in ongoing risks to human health
and the environment.
• As discussed in Section X of this
preamble, the costs of compliance are
relatively small on a per facility basis, even
though total costs to generators may be 39 to
66 percent of the total costs to the regulated
community.
b. Used oil generated on ships. In the
case of used oils generated by ships or
vessels (as defined in 40 CFR 260.10),
these used oils are not subject to the
used oil management standards until the
used oils are transported ashore. When
used oils are removed from a ship or
vessel and taken ashore, the owner or
operator of the ship or vessel and the
person or persons removing or accepting
the used oil from the vessel are co-
generators of the used oil and both
parties are responsible for managing the
used oil in accordance with the used oil
generator standards in subpart C of part
279. The co-generators may decide
which party will fulfill the requirements
of subpart C. Bilge water that contains
used oil but does not contain listed
hazardous waste when brought ashore
must be managed in compliance with
the generator standards in today's rule
prior to subjecting it to separation steps
that use oil/water separators. Bilge
water containing listed hazardous waste
is subject to RCRA subtitle C
regulations once brought ashore. EPA
believes that large quantities of bilge
water are not generally stored for an
extended period but are processed soon
after their arrival on the shore. After
separation the used oil portion of the
bilge water must be maintained in
compliance with the used oil generator
standards. The remaining wastewater
separated from bilge water must be
managed in accordance with the
applicable RCRA regulations and any
discharged is subject to applicable
Clean Water Act regulations. (See
§§ 279.10(e)(3) and 279.20(a)(2).)
c. Management of Materials
Contaminated with Used Oil. As
discussed above, used oil that is mixed
with a hazardous waste must be
managed as a hazardous waste in
accordance with all applicable RCRA
requirements. Persons who generate
mixtures of used oil and other materials
or solid wastes (e.g., used oil filters,
rags, sorptive minerals, sorbent
materials, scrap metals) are subject to
part 279. Used oil removed from
mixtures must be managed in
accordance with the requirements of
part 279 and either sent off-site for
recycling or reused on-site. If the used
oil removed from the mixture cannot be
recycled, the generator must comply
with the requirements of subpart I of
part 279 for disposal of the used oil.
Mixture of used oil and solid waste (e.g.,
natural or synthetic sorbent materials)
from which used oil can not be
separated when burned for energy
recovery is subject to used oil
specification fuel requirements.
After separating used oils from other
materials or solid wastes, the remaining
material or solid waste must be
managed in accordance with any and all
applicable RCRA requirements. The
generator must determine whether or
not the materials that previously
contained used oil exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste (with
the exception of non-terne-plated used
oil filters; see 57 FR 21534), and if so,
manage them in accordance with
existing RCRA controls. If the material
does not exhibit a hazardous
characteristic (and is not mixed with a
listed hazardous waste) then the
material can be managed as a solid
waste.
d. On-Site Management of Used OH.
As discussed above, generators who
blend used oil with diesel fuel for use in
their own vehicles need not manage the
used oil/diesel fuel mixture in
accordance with the generator
requirements of part 279. EPA believes
that used oil/diesel fuel mixtures should
be stored properly to ensure against
possible spills, fire, and explosion
hazards. Prior to mixing with diesel fuel,
these used oils are subject to the part
279 generator standards. Generators
may use such a mixture in their own
vehicles.
Used oil generators who dispose of
used oil on-site must test the used oil or
apply their knowledge to determine
whether or not the used oil exhibits a
hazardous waste characteristic. If the
used oil exhibits a characteristic of
hazardous waste, the used oil must be
disposed in accordance with all
applicable RCRA requirements. When
disposing used oil that cannot be
recycled, the generator must comply
with subpart I of part 279, relating to
proper management and disposal of
used oils. Used oil generators processing
used oil on site are subject to standards
for used oil processors/re-refiners
promulgated today.
e. On-Site Storage. Used oil
generators are required to store used oil
in tanks or containers and must
maintain all tanks and containers in
good operating condition. In maintaining
all tanks and containers in good
condition, generators must ensure that
all tanks and containers are free of any
visible spills or leaks, as well as
structural damage or deterioration,
Generators storing used oil in
aboveground tanks and containers must
clearly label all tanks and containers
with the term "used oil." Generators
who store used oil in underground tanks
must label all fill pipes with the words
-------
"used oil." The labeling requirements
are meant to assist generator employees
in identifying ail tanks and containers
used to store used oil and to avoid
unintentional mixing. In the 1985
proposed rale, EPA solicited comment
on a requirement to label all used oil
tanks and containers with the words
"recycled oil." Commenters
overwhelmingly responded that such a
term would be confusing because tanks
and containers are used to store used,oil
before it is recycled. Therefore, the
majority of commenters favored labeling
used oil storage units with the words
"used oil."
Used.oil generators who are covered
under the Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) program will
continue to be subject to the
requirements of 40 CFR part 112.
Similarly, generators storing used oil in
underground storage tanks (whether or
not the used oil exhibits any
characteristics of hazardous waste)
must comply with the standards in 40
CFR part 280, which are independently
applicable and enforceable. As
discussed in the Supplemental Proposal.
technical standards for underground
storage tanks (USTs) have been
promulgated since publication of the
1985 proposed rule. The Agency stated
in the preamble to the UST final rule {53
FR 37112; September 23, 1988) that EPA
believes that used oil, when stored in
underground tanks, presents risks
similar to other petroleum products
stored in USTs. As a result, EPA
determined that owners or operators of
used oil USTs (including used oil
generators) must comply with the tank
upgrading, operation and maintenance,
corrosion protection, corrective action,
closure, and financial responsibility
requirements promulgated under part
280 for other petroleum product USTs
The Agency believes that the Subtitle I
standards are sufficient to protect
human health and the environment from
potential releases of used oil from USTs.
In addition, commenters to the 1991
Supplemental Notice felt that subjecting
underground storage of used oil to
standards beyond those in part 280 was
unnecessarily burdensome and
" duplicative.
Storage of used oil in lagoons, pits, or
surface impoundments is prohibited,
unless the generator is storing only
wastewaters containing de minimi's
quantities of used oil, or unless the unit
is in full compliance with 40 CFR part
264/265, subpart K. The Agency believes
that such units do not provide adequate
protection of human health and the
environment against potential releases
and damages. In fact, the Agency has
documented numerous cases of
environmental damage from the storage
of used oil in these units (see
Environmental Damage from Used Oil
Mismanagement, Final Draft Report,
U.S. EPA, August 30, 1991, which is.
available in the docket for today's rule).
f. Response to Releases. Whenever a
release occurs to the environment from
the aboveground storage tanks and
containers, a used oil generator must
respond in a timely manner by taking
the following steps: (1} Stop the release,
(2) contain the released used oil, (3)
clean up and properly manage released
used oil and materials used for cleaning
up/containing the release, and (4)
remove the tank or container from
service, repair, or replace the tank or
container before returning it to service.
This above requirement applies only
when there is a release to the
environment. Under this rule, this would
not include releases within contained
areas such as concrete floors or
impervious containment areas, unless
the releases go beyond the contained
areas. EPA believes thai used oil spills
or leaks occurring at generator facilities
in an area with a concrete floor inside a
building (e.g., in service bays,
maintenance garages, metalworking and
fabricating locations) are cleaned up
upon discovery as a genera! operating
practice using appropriate sorbent
materials before the used oil reaches the
environment. Such clean up operations
prevent the potential contamination of
unprotected soils in the vicinity of the
storage and work areas. The facility
owners or operators must make sure
that adequate quantities of sorbent
materials are available on site all the
time and is used to contain spills or
leaks occurring during the normal
activities.
The response to release provision
does not require clean up of past
releases to the environment which
occurred prior to the effective date of
the used oil program within an
authorized state in which a used oil
facility is located. Releases of used oil
from underground storage tanks are
subject to the requirements of 40 CFR
part 280, subpart F independently as
applicable.
In addition to the provisions listed
above for releases of used oil from
aboveground tanks and containers, and
in addition to the corrective action
requirements for releases from USTs
provided in 40 CFR part 280, subpart F,
used oil generators are required, under
CERCLA section 103, to report a release
of hazardous substances to the
environment when the release is equal
to or in excess of the reportable quantity
(RQ) for the particular substance. Used
oils that" are contaminated with
CERCLA hazardous substances (e.g.,
due to the presence of elevated levels of
lead) contain CERCLA hazardous
substances. Therefore, releases of such
contaminants (e.g., lead;) into the
environment in quantities greater than
the reportable quantity must be reported,,
to the National Response Center. The
current RQs for contaminants are listed
in 40 CFR 302.4. In addition, under 40
CFR part 110, any discharge of oil that
violates applicable water quality
standards or causes a film or sheen on a
water surface must be reported to the
National Response Center.
g. Off-site transport. Used oil
generators are required to ensure mat
all shipments of used oil in quantities
greater than 55 gallons are-transported
off-site only by transporters who have
an EPA identification number. Used oil
generators may transport, in their own
vehicles, up to 55 gallons of used oil,
that is either generated on-site or
collected from D!Y used oil generators,
to a DIY used oil collection center, used
oil collection center, or aggregation
point (e.g., one that is licensed or
recognized by a state or municipal
government to manage used oil or solid
waste). A used oil generator is not
required to obtain an EPA identification
number for this off-site transportation
activity, A generator may also self-
transport up to 55 gallons of used oil, in
the generators's own vehicle, to an
aggregation point owned by the used oil
generator without obtaining an EPA
identification number. EPA selected 55
gallons as a cut off quantity because
tha4 is the size of one drum. Also, the
Agency feels that any quantity of used
oil less than 55 gallons cannot be
economically collected and transported
by a used oil transporter.
The DIY used oil collection centers,
used oil collection centers, and
aggregation points referred to above are
recognized by EPA as separate and
legitimate entities in the used oil
management system. Definitions of
these terms are provided in § 279.1 and
all three types of facilities fall within the
definition of used oil generator. A used
oil collection center is any site or facility
registered/licensed/permitted/
recognized by a state/county/municipal
government to collect used oil from
regulated generators prior to its pickup
by a used oil transporter with an
identification number for offsite
recycling. EPA believes that these ^
facilities handle small quantities of used
oil on an occasional basis and local
government would monitor their
operations and make sure that these
-------
Federal Rejristet
17& r/-T3«ifSdaw, ^September* 10,, *99£? / fRtrl^s a^,Regalatfe>ns -415&7
sitea are opeEading.per the local-
governmerit specified guidelines. Such
used oil collection centera must use used
oil transporter with. EPA identification
number when sending; Used oil, for offsite
recycling,
Used oil collection centers may accept
used ails from DIY generators as well as
regulatedi used oil generators (in
quantities, less than or equal to, 55
gallons per shipment)* EPA believes that
used oil qua.nti.ties of less than 55
gallons (i.&, content less than a 55-
gallon dram/container) are unlikely to
be accepted by the used oil collectors/
transporters for offsite shipment
A used oil collection center accepting
-only do-ii-yoursell generated used oil for
recycling also must comply with the
generator standards of part 279,, subpart
GL These DIY collection centers may or
may nat be recognized by the State or
county/local authorities to accept DIY
oil. DIY collection centera are centers
that are not authorized to accept used
oil from regulated generators. They, are
generally operated by voluntary
organizations or local authorities as
convenient "drop off" places for
consumers to bring in their crankease oil
for recycling or proper disposal, similar
to other household generated hazardous
waste £e.g,r paint thinners, d'egreasing
fluids, over cleaners, insect killers).
These establishments may be temporary
by nature (e.g., parking lots, school's,
government office buildings)'. DIY
collection centers that are operated to,
encourage DIY recycling are not
equipped' to handle or collect large
quantities of used oil brought, in for a
drop-off by non-DTY generators. These
centers, have few drums/containers to
collect small quantities of used oil!
stored in a milk iug or oil can/bottle,,
that are brought in for recycling by
individual households. An example of a
DIY used oil collection center is a site
run. by a state or municipal1 ^program
established to collect used oil from,
commercial and household generators,
such as Project ROSE in Alabama.
Unlike used oil transfer facilities,. DIY
collection^ centers handle small
quantities of used1 oil1 generated by
DIYers on an occasional basis and after
collection send the DIY used oil for off-
site management.
A used oil aggregation point is any
site or facility/ where an individual
generator aggregates and/or stores
shipments of used ail generated at any
of several generation site* owned by the
same generator. Aggregation points- also
may accept DIY-generated used oil. The
major distinction between collection
centers and aggregation points is that
aggregation points and the generation
sites, from which they collect used oil
are uader common ownership. EPA
view* aggregation pointa of used oil
generator*, DIY coilectiiOH centers,, and
used oil collection centers as. similar to
on-site facilities of used oil genera tors,
and,, therefore, ia subjecting; them to. the,
generator standards ia sBbpaii C of part
279.
EPA. believes that it ia necessary to
allow used oil generators; to self-
transport small quantities oft used oil fe-
off-site collection centos or aggregation
points to encourage, generators, of small
quantities of used oil, and generators
who, have several generation points, hut
generate very small qioantities of used
oil' at one or a few of the: generator's
sites, to recycle thek used oils. EPA
believes; that used oil aggregation points
are convenient drop-off point for
satellite generator sites operated under
the common ownerships. Used oil
management at these aggregation points
must be in compliance with the used oil
generators standards and used oil musl
be send for offsite recycling using a used
oil transporter with an EPA
identification- number.
If generators of small quantities of
used1 oil were required to offer these1
small quantities of used oil to a used oil
transporter with an EPA ID number, the
cost of employing the transporter may
discourage the generator from recycling
the used oil1. In addition,, some used oil
transporters may only accept shipments
of used oil above a certain quantity.
Therefore, by providing this self-
transporting provision, EPA believes
that generators who generate small
quantities' of used oil in any one
calendar month will be discouraged'
from storing used oil on-site for long
periods of time, or from disposing of the
used oil In addition,, EPA believes that
the risk of spills from transporting such
small amounts, of used oil'is relatively
low, thus, specific tracking of such
shipments is unnecessary to protect
human health and the environment.
h. Accumulation limit. Although EPA
proposed, both, in 1985 and in 1991, to,
restrict the accumulation of used1 oils
stored by used oil generators, today's
rule does not contain an accumulation
limit for such used oil storage. EPA has
decided not to impose an accumulation
limit on. generator storage since some
amount of used oil is almost always
stored at generator sites. Also, since
used oil ia a marketable commodity,
there is an incentive for generators to
send used oil off-site for recycling rather
than storing it on-site for prolonged
periods., EPA beiiev/es that used oil ia
not stored at the generator sites for a
prolonged period since long-term storage
requires purchasing of additional
storage units for increasing storage
capacity. This may result in additional
costs to businesses, or it may require.
that they comply with other federal or
state regulations OF local ordinance
requirements'.
i'. Tracking requirements. In the 1991
Supplemental Notice, EPA proposed
three options for the tracking: of used oil
from generators to used oil recycling
facilities {e.g.-,, processors, re-refiners,.
burners} to ensure that al shipments of
used oil reached recydeEs; of used ait
Cbmmenters favored tke concept of
tracking shipments of used oil Since the
1991 Notice^ EPA has re-evaluated the;
proposed' tracking requirements; and1 the
public comments, EPA also: considered
the costs associated with the tracking
options, for generators and the
associated paperwork burden, fa
addition, EPA re-evaluated the
recordkeeping: requirements for used oil-
generators' and a-ssessedi the information
maintained by generators to normal1
operating records. Based OH these
analyses, EPA has determined' that. -
information1 maintained by used oil
transporters will- provide sufficient-
records of used oil transport setrvMea
without burdening used1 oil generator
with additional tracking requirements.
Information collected when- accepting
used oil shipments, suefr as quantities
and type of used oil collected, the name
and location of used oil generators, and
analytical data for the rebuttable
presumption1, would be maintained by
the used oil collectors/transporters as
part of the recordkeeping, requirements
finalized today. Using this information
maintained by used oil transporters, the
Agency can track a used oil generator, if
needed1. Therefore, the Agency has.
eliminated the proposed tracking
requirements for used oil1 generators.
EPA believes that used oil generators
maintain used oil collection and
shipment record's as, standard business
information.
j. Inspection requirements, In the 1985 •
and' 1991 proposals,, EPA proposed daily
inspection requirements for used oil
generators to assure the discovery of
used oil spills and releases at used oil
generator facilities. Cominenters
opposed the proposed daily inspection
requirements. Most of these eommenters
claimed that-when-generators are
loading/transferring used oils, they
cheek for leaks and spills and' take
appropriate' action at that time to clean
up the released oil' and' contaminated
materials. Transferring operations do
not occur daily at generator sitas., SPCC,
inspection and clean up requirements
will be applicable independently.
-------
41388
/ 'Thursday;1i
k. Closure Requirements. In the 1985
and 1991 proposals, EPA considered
deferring closure requirements for used
oil generators, based on the lack of risk
data supporting the need for closure
requirements at generator sites, Since
1991, while reviewing the available
Superfund site information and RCRA
enforcement case data, the Agency has
not located any damage information
specific to generator sites. This leads the
Agency to believe that damages at used
oil generator sites are' not a substantial
concern (Le., have not resulted in
environmental damage of a significant
magnitude that it has resulted in the site
being identified as the NPL sitej.
Therefore, the Agency believes that
closure requirements for used oil
generator sites are unnecessary at this
time, hence EPA is deferring such
requirements.
1. Exemption for Small Fanners. In
response to comments expressing
concern over the expansion of RCRA
requirements to small farmers
generating used oils from heavy farming
equipment, machinery, and vehicles,
EPA is providing an exemption from the
generator standards for small farming
operations that generate on an average
25 gallons or less of used oil per month
in a calendar year, EPA is providing this
exemption to these generators because. -
EPA believes that most of these
generators, especially family farms, are
similar to households, whose solid
waste management is unregulated under
RCRA. Family-run and other small farms
are similar to households in a number of
ways: TheJ* tend to have about the same
number of vehicles owned for personal
use; they tend to service and maintain
their family-owned vehicles and heavy
farming equipment on-site; and, indeed,
small farms typically have residences
en-site which generate used oil and
other exempt household wastes, Also,
unlike small industrial generators who
usually are located within close
proximity to'used oil collection centers
or who can easily arrange for used oils
to enter the used oil recycling system via
a used oil transporter, many family
farms and other small farming
operations are not readily accessible to-
collection centers. They may be using
used oil on site in space heaters for
heating purposes during the winter
months and hence, do not accumulate
more than 25 gallons of oil per month on
average which can be provided to used
oil transporters for recycling, Therefore,
EPA believes that small farms who
generate on an average 25 gallons or
less per month of used oil in a calendar
year should be exempted from
regulation, as are households.
' EPA has set the generation limit for
the small farmer exemption at, on an
average, 25 gallons or less of used oil
per month in a calendar year to exempt
only small farms that may have special
difficulties in locating a used oil
recycling center or in otherwise
recycling the used oils they generate.
The 25 gallon cutoff is roughly
equivalent to the more general SQG
exemption for used oil generators the
Agency had considered in the 1985 and
1991 proposals and the 100 kg/month
exemption for the conditionally exempt
small quantity generators of hazardous
waste. EPA believes that small farms
will have few pieces of equipment and
thus generate only small amounts of
used.oil. Of the approximately two
million farms in the U.S., over 99 percen*
would be exempt under this provision.
Finally, since small farms pose similar
problems for the used oil management
system as DIY from households, EPA
believes it may be more appropriate to
consider non-regulatory alternatives to
encourage the collection of used oils
from small farms, rather than the
management siandards'promulgated
today.
EPA's intention in providing this
exemption is not to exempt large
farming operations or businesses from
today's standards. EPA believes that
large farming operations do not face the
same difficulties in recycling the used oil
they generate and these operations are
better able to provide the used oils they
generate to the used oil recycling
system. The Agency is aware of current
activities undertaken by brokers who
are involved in collecting used oil
TABLE VI.3.—USED OIL
[Transporter and transfer facility standards]
generated by large-farming operations
and business. .
EPA encourages small farmers, as
well as household used oil generators, tc
recycle their used oil, and when
available, to participate in community
collection programs of used oil
collection facilities by cooperatives,
brokers, etc; As is the case with used
oils collected from households, used oil
that is collected from these farms at
used oil collection centers and D1Y-
collection centers is subject to the part
279 standards when collected and
accumulated at these collection centers.
Any use of used oil that can be,
construed as application to land [e.g.
weed killing, spraying on plants) that is
performed by exempt farming
operations (or others) is discouraged
since EPA is concerned with long term
impacts of land application of used oil
on the environment. Also, exempted
farmers may be subject to state
regulations that may limit such
practices.
3. Standards for Used Oil Transporters
a. Applicability, A used oil collector/
transporter is any person or business
who collects used oil from more than
one generator or transporter or a
generator who transports shipments of
more than 55 gallons of used oil and . -
transports the used oil off-site to aiiothei
party or establishment for recycling,
disposal, or continued transport. Used
oil generators who transport shipments
of used oil in their own vehicles, in
quantities of 55 gallons or Jess (Le., a
drum/container holding this quantity) to
used oil collection centers or
aggregation points14 are not within the
definition of a used oil transporter.
Household do-it-yourselfers who
transport used oil to generators,
collection centers, or aggregation points
also are not included in the definition of
a used oil transporter. Table VI.3 lists
requirements for used oil transpbrters
and provides the regulatory citations,
14 Used oil collection centers ana aggregation
points are defined in Subpart A of Part 279.
Requirement
Gwaral requirement*
Transporters who perform other management activities
Restriction on processing used oil
Nomication and EPA identification number
Used Oil deliveries
DOT requirements ... .
New or existing
Mew
New
New
M@w
Existing (applicable indeoendently) •"•"
Regulatory citation
§ 279.40(a) through U,
§ 279.40(d).
§,279.41.
§279.42.
§ 279.43(8).
§ 279.43(b).
-------
Federal RSfeibter I ¥61. *C7rNo:rit76 / Thursday,'September" 10. 1992 ?/ .Ktdeb and itegttlatibtfS ,41589
TABLE VI.3.—USED OIL—Continued
[Transporter and transfer facility standards]
Requirement
Jsed oil discharges......
Rebuttabte presumption for used oil
Exceptions from rebuttable presumption for CFC and metal-
working oils.
Record retention for rebuttable presumption
Recordkeeping;..;
Storage limit '.
Type of storage units
Good condition above ground tanks and containers
Secondary containment for containers and existing and new
above ground tanks.
Labelling of containers and tanks
Response to releases
Tracking— acceptance, deliveries, export, and recordkeeping
Tracking — exports :
Management of residues
SPCC requirements, including spill prevention and control
LIST requirements, including corrective action and financial
responsibility.
Inspections
Closure
New or existing
New
Existing for transporters managing used oil fuel' new for others ..
New
New
New
New.
New
New ......
New
New
Existing for transporters who are marketers {invoices); new for
others.
New ,
New
Existing (applicable independently)
None
Regulatory citation
§ 279.43(c).
§ 279.44(a), (b), and (c).
§ 279.44
-------
41590
Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 176 / Thursday, September 10. 1992 / Rules and Regulations^
at each transfer facility. Upon receipt of
a completed notification form, EPA will
provide the transporter with a unique
12-digit identification number, which is
required to transport used oil.
Transporters who have previously
notified the Agency of their hazardous
waste activities (or notified EPA under
the 40 CFR part 266, subpart E used oil
fuel regulations) and received an EPA
identification number need not renotify.
d. Delivery of Used Oil Shipments. A
used oil transporter is required to ensnre
that a shipment of used oil reaches an
"authorized" used oil processing or re-
refining facility, a used oil burning
facility, or another used oil transporter.
Entities deemed to be authorized are
used oil processing and re-refining
facilities subject to part 279, subpart F;
used oil burning facilities in compliance
with part 279, subpart G; hazardous
waste management facilities with a
permit or interim status; part 258
disposal facilities; or another used oil
transporter who has an EPA
identification number.
A transporter who markets used oil
fuels must comply with the used oil
marketer requirements of 40 CFR part
279, subpart H. In the event a
transporter undertakes this activity, the
transporter must comply with the
recordkeeping (invoicing) requirements
of § 279.74,
e. Shipping requirements.
Transporters and collectors are required
by existing U.S. Department of
Transportation regulations to meet
certain standards if the used oil is a
hazardous material, including all
applicable packaging, labeling, and
placarding requirements in 49 CFR parts
173,178, and 179. In addition, under
today's rule, used oil transporters and
collectors must clean up any used oil
discharge that occurs during
transportation or take such action as
may be required or approved by
Federal, state, or local officials so that
the used oil discharge no longer presents
a hazard to human health or the
environment. The Agency believes that
these provisions are necessary to reduce
the potential impacts of used oil that
could be released into the environment,
f. Used oil storage at transfer
facilities. A used oil transfer facility is
defined in 40 CFR 279.1 as "any
transportation related facility l5
including loading docks, parking areas,
storage areas, and other similar areas
where shipments of used oil are held
during the normal course of
transportation for a period longer than
16 For facilities subject to the SPCC regulation,
the term "transportation-related" is defined in
Appendix 1 of 40 CFR pert 312,
24 hours but not exceeding 35 days." A
transfer facility is regarded as a site for
the temporary storage of used oil that is
picked up from one or more original
generators and is on its way (1) to a
processing or re-refining facility for
further processing to produce used oil
fuel, non-fuel recycled oil products, or
lube oil feedstock; (2) to be reintroduced
into refinery operations; or (3) to be
burned as a used oil fuel. Storage of
used oil at a transfer facility for a period
exceeding 35 days will cause the
transfer facility to become subject to the
standards for used oil processors and re-
refiners in subpart F of part 279.
The requirements established today
cover all used oil transfer facilities
owned/operated by used oil
transporters regardless of their location
and regardless of the size of any single
tank at the facility or the total storage
capacity of the facility. The SPCC (40
CFR part 112) and UST (40 CFR part 280)
requirements are independently
applicable to such facilities.
EPA believes that some regulatory
controls are necessary to ensure proper
management of used oils at used oil
transfer facilities. Improper management
at these facilities could allow for the
release of used oil to the environment,
cause spills during transfer and loading/
unloading operations, or result in the
inadvertent adulteration of used oil with
hazardous waste while in storage or in
transit. To prevent such mishaps, EPA is
adopting "good housekeeping"
standards for transfer facilities to ensure
that units (containers and tanks) used to
accumulate and/or store used oil are
kept in good condition and to minimize
potential releases of used oil to the
environment
Storage of used oil at a transfer
facility must occur only in containers
and aboveground or underground tanks.
EPA believes that storage of used oil in
units other than containers or tanks
(e.g., surface impoundments or lagoons)
at transfer facilities does not occur since
transfer facilities are typically
temporary storage areas where used oil
is stored for periods of very short
duration. Furthermore, as discussed
elsewhere in today's notice, EPA
believes that storage of used oil in
surface impoundment is generally a poor
practice. Thus, EPA believes it is
appropriate not to allow it at transfer
facilities. EPA believes that transfer
facilities are not likely to hold used oil
in surface impoundments but in case,
such use occurs only surface
impoundments that are in compliance
with parts 264/265 requirements can be
used for used oil storage. Today's rule
prohibits the use of an unlined surface
impoundment for used oil storage.
All aboveground tanks *B and
containers at transfer facilities must be
kept in good condition (i.e., no visible
signs of deterioration or leaks) and
containers must be in compliance with
all applicable DOT regulations.
Aboveground tanks and containers and
all fill pipes for underground used oil
storage tanks must be clearly labeled
with the words "used oil" to minimize
accidental mixing. In addition, the
storage areas around aboveground tanks
and under the storage containers must
be equipped with oil-impervious floors
and secondary containment structures
(dikes and berms or retaining walls)1
capable of containing all potential spills
and releases of used oil until the
discovery and cleanup of spills and
releases.17 The floor under existing
storage tanks must cover the entire area
within the dike, berm or retaining wall
except areas where portions of existing
tanks meet -the ground. EPA has
determined that it is not necessary to
require retrofitting of the floors of the
existing tanks that are in good
condition; it is not necessary to removt
tanks temporarily to install an
impervious floor directly beneath an
aboveground tank that is in good
condition. Any releases from the walls
of existing tanks will be captured within
the containment area and will be
removed, while releases to the area
outside of the containment area must be
cleaned as required by today's release
response requirements. EPA believes
that used oil releases from tank overfills,
spills, and loading/unloading activities
are more likely than from the bottom of
a tank or due to the loss of structural
integrity of a tank.
However, the floor surrounding the
area where the tank meets the ground
must be impervious to oil. When
installing new aboveground tanks,
replacing damaged or deteriorated
tanks, or reinstalling unfit tanks after
restoring the structural integrity, an
impervious floor under the aboveground
tanks must be installed. This
requirement is applicable to the
aboveground tanks that are existing
when the states adopt the part 279 used
oil management standards and when the
state rule containing the Federal used oil
management standards takes effect The
16 Aboveground tank i« defined in § 279.1 as a
tank used to store or process used oil that is not an
underground Tank as defined in part 280.
1 * For further discussion of the basis for the
secondary containment requirement and the
materials suitable; for constructing impervious floors
and dikes, berms, or retaining walls, see section
VI.E.5. of today's preamble.
-------
Federal Register
57,^^,0, 176 /Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations "41591
impervious floor under new storage
tanks must cover the entire area within
the containment structure. The effective
date is the same as that discussed for
existing tanks;
In the 1985 proposed rule and in the
1991 Supplemental Notice, EPA
proposed secondary containment
requirements for used oil storage tanks
that are similar to the secondary
containment provisions of 40 CFR part
264, subpart J. The Agency received a
substantial number of public comments
that disagreed with EPA's proposed
secondary containment requirements.
Most commenters disagreed with the
proposed secondary containment
provisions on the basis that the cost of
full secondary containment for tanks
and containers would be prohibitive for
most used oil generators and
transporters. The secondary
containment requirements promulgated
today for aboveground tanks and
containers are substantially less
burdensome, both technically and
financially. Although these requirements
will still impose some costs upon used
oil transporters, the Agency believes
that some level of secondary
containment is necessary at transfer
facilities to protect human health and
the environment from potential used oil
spills and releases. In fact, as
documented by the Agency in the
background documents supporting this
final rule, past storage practices at used
oil management facilities, including
transfer facilities, have resulted in
releases of used oil to the environment
and, in some cases, substantial damages
to human health and the environment.18
EPA believes that the secondary
containment requirements established
today adequately protect against used
oil releases to ground water and the
existing SPCC requirements provide
protection against spills reaching
navigable waters. EPA has determined
that secondary containment
requirements similar to those in 40 CFR
parts 264/265, subpart f are not
necessary since the requirements
promulgated today will effectively
contain any spilled or released used oil
within the containment structures. Also,
the requirement that the entire
containment structure be made of a
material impervious to used oil will
prevent the migration of used oil to soils,
surface waters, :and ground water.
Although the secondary containment
requirements promulgated today are
somewhat_less burdensome than those
required under 40 CFR parts 264/265,
subpart J, any used oil transfer facility
that is currently in compliance with the
subpart J requirements (e.g., the facility
has double-walled tanks with double-
walled or otherwise contained pipes)
will be deemed in compliance with the
secondary containment requirements
promulgated today. EPA does want to
clarify that all aboveground tanks or
containers must be within a secondary
containment structure that is impervious
to used oil and capable of preventing the
migration of used oil spills or releases to
the environment.
An April 29,1992, memorandum from
EPA's Assistant Administrator for Solid
Waste and Emergency Response 19
addresses aboveground storage tank
technologies that may be used to
provide secondary containment at
SPCC-regulated facilities. The
memorandum states that alternative
aboveground storage tank systems that
have capacities generally less than
12,000 gallons may provide protection of
navigable waters substantially
equivalent to that provided by the
secondary containment systems listed in
40 CFR 112.79(c) of the SPCC regulation.
An example of an alternative
aboveground storage tank system that
generally would provide substantially
equivalent protection of navigable
waters is a shop-fabricated double
walled tank installed and operated with
overfill prevention measures that
include an overfill alarm, an automatic
flow restrictor or flow shut-off, and
constant monitoring of all product
transfers including used oil. Used oil
tanks meeting with the secondary
containment equivalency discussed in
the memorandum of April 29,1992, are
considered to be in compliance with the
secondary containment requirements for
aboveground tanks established in
today's rule.
g. Storage Limit. Commenters to the
1985 proposed rule felt that the proposed
10-day limit on storage at transfer
facilities was too short a period of time
to accumulate and consolidate sufficient
amounts of used oil for cost effective
transportation. The Agency agrees with
the Commenters. In 1991, EPA proposed
an alternative time limit [e.g., 35 days)
as a limit specifying the length of time of
which used oil must be delivered to the
final destination (e.g., processors, re-
refiners, or burners). Based on the
favorable comments, EPA believes that
'*See "Sumnrary Descriptions of Sixty-Three
'Used Oil' Superfund Sites" and "Summary
.Descriptions of Used Oil-Related Damages at
RCRA-Permitted Facilities."
19 See memorandum from Don R. Clay, Assistant
Administrator, to EPA Regional Directors regarding
"Use of Alternative Secondary Containment
Measures at Facilities Regulated under the Oil
Pollution Prevention Regulation (40 CFR part 112),"
April 29,1992.
at transfer facilities, used oil storage in
normal course of operation typically
occurs for less than 35 days. The
Agency, therefore, has decided to allow
used oil storage for no more than 35
days at transfer facilities. A transfer
facility at which used oil is stored for
more than 35 days must comply with the
requirements finalized today for
processing/re-refining facilities
established under the 40 CFR part 279,
subpart F. Also, EPA notes that the 35-
day storage limit applies to the in-use
storage tanks at transfer facilities and
does not apply to the abandoned
aboveground storage tanks used to store
used oil, or to such tanks taken out of
service. The requirements for the
abandoned storage tanks are those
currently in effect. For example, the
owners/operators of transfer facilities
must evaluate residues left in
aboveground tanks taken out of service
to make a hazardous waste
determination (i.e., whether the residaes
exhibit characteristics of toxicity,
ignitability, corrosivity, or reactivity). If
an abovegrotind tank at a transfer
facility contains a hazardous waste, the
tank will be managed in accordance
with existing RCRA controls, including
subpart J standards for tank closure.
Finally, the Agency concluded that a-
storage limit of 35 days at transfer .
facilities is protective of human health
and the environment when applied in
conjunction with the secondary
containment requirements for
aboveground storage containers and"
tanks promulgated today. EPA believes
that storage at transfer facilities will be
for a short duration when used oil-is in
transit between generators to
processors, re-refiners, fuel oil dealers,
and transfer facilities before reaching
the ultimate recycler or burners. Any
spills and leaks occurring during storage
must be contained within the
containment area, discovered, and
cleaned up in a timely manner. If EPA,
in the future, determines a need for a
closure standard for transfer facilities to
ensure that used oil contamination at a
facility prior to the facility closing must
be addressed then the Agency may take
such a step.
Underground storage tanks [i.e., those
with more than 10% of the surface area
of the' tank(s) and associated pipes
underground) used to store used oil at
used oil transfer facilities remain subject
to the requirements of 40 CFR part 280,
independently. Also, many facilities
remain subject to the. Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasure
requirements of part 112 of 40 CFR,
independently.
-------
41592 Federal Register / Vol 57. No. 176 / Thursday, September 10. 1992 ,/Rules and Regulations
h. Response to releases. Any spill or
release of used oil from aboveground
storage units {tanks and containers] at a
used oil transfer facility must be
stopped, contained, and cleaned up
upon detection. Spilled used oils must
be cleaned up and properly managed. If
necessary, the unit must be removed
from service, the contents removed, and
the unit repaired prior to returning it to
service. These requirements do not
apply to past releases that have
occurred at transfer facilities prior to the
effective date of the used oil program
within an authorized state in which a
used oil facility is located. This
requirement applies only when there is a
release to the environment. Under this
rule, this would not include releases
within contained areas such as concrete
floors or impervious containment areas,
unless the releases go beyond the
contained areas.
In the case of a release of used oil
from an underground storage tank, the
owner or operator of the used oil
transfer facility must comply with the
requirements of 40 CFR part 280,
subparts E and F.
In addition to the provisions listed
above for releases of used oil, and in
addition to the corrective action
requirements for releases from USTs
provided in 40 CFR part 280, subpart F,
used oil transporters are required, under
CERCLA section 103, to report a release
of hazardous substances to the
environment when the release is equal
to or in excess of the reportable quantity
(RQ) for the particular substance. Used
oils that are contaminated with
CERCLA hazardous substances (e.g.,
due to the presence of elevated levels of
lead) are subject to CERCLA release
reporting requirements. Therefore,
releases of such contaminants into the
environment in quantities greater than
the reportable quantity must be reported
to the National Response Center. The
current RQs for CERCLA hazardous
substances are listed in 40 CFR 302.4. In
addition, under 40 CFR part 110, any
discharge of oil that violates applicable
water quality standards or causes a film
or sheen on a water surface must be
reported to the National Response
Center.
i. Rebuttable Presumption. Since the
rebuttable presumption now will apply
to all used oils, EPA is requiring used oil
transporters to determine the total
halogen content as used oil shipments
prior to accepting the shipments for
transport. EPA believes that the
majority of used oil transporters are
already complying with this requirement
to ensure that used oil has not been
mixed with halogenated solvents, since
the majority of used oil that is currently
recycled is used as fuel for energy
recovery and is therefore subject to 40
CFR part 266, subpart E, recodified
today as 40 CFR part 279, subpart G.
If the halogen level exceeds 1,000
ppm, the used oil is presumed to be
mixed with a halogenated hazardous
waste, and must be managed as a
hazardous waste, unless the transporter
rebuts the presumption as described
above. The transporter may accept such
shipments of used oil as a hazardous
waste transporter, but if the original
generator of the hazardous waste cannot
be identified, the transporter may have
to assume hazardous waste generator
responsibilities and comply with both
the generator standards of 40 CFR part
262 as well as the hazardous waste
transporter requirements of 40 CFR part
263.
j. Recordkeeping, Transporters are
required to maintain records {for at least
three years} documenting the
acceptance and delivery of each used oil
shipment. For the purposes of complying
with the recordkeeping requirements in
today's rule, used oil transporters need
only enter the required information or
documentation for each used oil
shipment into a collection or operating
log.
Used oil transporters must keep
records for each used oil shipment
accepted for transport from an original
used oil generator or another transporter
and maintain copies of each record for a
period of at least three years. Records
for each shipment accepted by
transporters must include: (1) The date;
(2) the name, address, and EPA
identification number (if applicable) of
the party who provided the used oil for
shipment; (3) the quantity and type of
used oil accepted; and (4) the dated
signature of the party offering the
shipment.
Used oil collectors and transporters
must also keep and maintain for at least
three years records of each shipment of
used oil that is delivered to another
transporter, used oil burner, fuel
marketer, or used oil processor/re-
refiner. Records for each delivery must
include: (1) The date; (2) the name, EPA
identification number, and address of
the receiving facility or transporter; (3)
the quantity of used oil delivered; and
(4) the dated signature of a
representative of the receiving facility.
EPA believes that these recordkeeping
requirements are necessary to monitor
the flow of used oil within the used oil
management system and to discourage
any adulteration of used oil by any used
oil handler, by providing a paper trail
documenting all parties who handled the
used oil. EPA believes that the
rebuttable presumption, as well as the
requirement that used oil collectors and
transporters keep records, will provide
sufficient incentive to discourage
adulteration of used oils. Past practices
of used oil collectors and transporters
storing mixtures of used oil and
hazardous waste have resulted in
damages to the environment. Further
discussion of such damages is provided
in the background documents that
accompany this rule.
It is EPA's understanding that most of
the recordkeeping requirements
established in today's rule are already
being done as normal business and
accounting practices by used oil
transporters. As noted in the
background information for the
Regulatory Impact Analysis of today's
rule, a used oil industry representative
indicated that such records are
maintained and the practice of keeping
such records is not uncommon. The
recordkeeping requirements
promulgated today for used oil
transporters are very similar to those
proposed in the 1991 Supplemental
Notice.
k. Exports of used oil. If a used oil
transporter provides used oil for export.
or exports used oil from the United
States, the transporter must maintain a
record of the name and address of the
receiving facility, the quantity of used
oil exported to a foreign country, and
the date the used oil is exported from
the United States.
1. Closure. In 1985, EPA proposed
closure requirements for used oil
transfer facilities. Commenters opposec
these requirements due to the fact that
the requirements are overly
burdensome. Since the secondary
containment requirements promulgated
today should mitigate the migration of
almost all releases of used oil to the
environment, and since today's
requirements require used oil spills and
releases to be cleaned up upon
detection, EPA has decided that closure
requirements for aboveground storage
areas are not necessary and therefore,
the Agency is not promulgating closure
requirements for used oil transfer
facilities with aboveground storage
units. EPA also notes that the majority
of damages from improper storage of
used oil have occurred at recycling
facilities, rather than transfer facilities,
which suggests differential standards
are appropriate. (Note: Used oil
transporters that store used oils in
underground storage tanks are required
under the Subtitle I standards to close
all units used to store used oil prior to
closing or abandoning the facility.)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thur$day, September 10, 1992 /Rules and Regulations ' 41593
m. Other applicable provisions. In
addition to the requirements provided in
subpart E, used oil transporters who
recycle used oil either by blending,
processing or re-refining, must comply
with the requirements of subpart F.
Used oil transporters who burn used oil
on-site must comply with the
requirements of subpart G of part 279, as
well as the provisions of subpart E. If a
used oil transporter markets used oil
fuels, the transporter must comply with
the requirements for used oil fuel
marketers in subpart H of part 279. Used
oil transporters who either dispose of
used oil or use used oil as a road oiling
agent must comply with subpart 1 of part
279.
In the 1991 Supplemental Notice the
Agency proposed inspection, facility
preparedness, and corrective action
provisions. EPA has decided against
such requirements because (a) the SPCG
program-based inspection,
preparedness, and emergency response
provisions, (b) response to releases
provision for transfer facilities, and (c)
limits on the storage period are
adequately protective against potential
environmental damages associated with
used oil storage. A used oil transporter
who stores used oil for greater than 35
days is considered to be a used oil
processor and must comply with the
standards for used oil processing and re-
refiners.
4. Standards for Used Oil Processing
and Re-refining Facilities
As discussed in section VI.A of this
preamble, the past used oil management
practices at used oil processing facilities
has resulted in environmental damage.
This is evident from the identification of
approximately 25 sites on the National
Priority List where used oil was
identified as one of the major
constituent of concern. Similarly, EPA
has discovered environmental damage
associated with used oil management at
RCRA facilities managing used oil in
solid waste management units. Of the
used oil facilities that the Agency has
studied, 16 facilities has used oil spills;
15 facilities had leaking tanks and/or
containers; 32 facilities recycled and
disposed of used oil and wastes in
surface impoundments and pits; 5.
facilities placed used oil recycling
sludges in waste piles directly on the
ground; and one facility land-farmed
used oil recycling sludges. Virtually all
the surface impoundments or pits at
these facilities were unlined. These
instances lead EPA to believe that used
oil processing/re-refim'ng facilities pose
the biggest problems due to used oil
mismanagement, justifying the toughest
controls (e.g. preparedness, secondary
containment, closure, analysis plan, and
tracking) established today.
a. Applicability. A used oil processing
or re-refining facility is defined in
§ 279.1 as "a facility that processes used
oil." Used oil processing means
chemical or physical operations
designed to produce from used oil, or to
make used oil more amenable for the
production of, fuel oils, lubricants, or
other used oil-derived product.
Processing includes, but is not limited to:
Blending used oil with virgin petroleum
products, blending used oils to meet the
fuel specification, filtration, simple
distillation, chemical or physical
separation and re-refining. Used oil re-
refining may include settling, filtering,
catalytic conversion, fractional/vacuum
distillation, hydrotreating, or polishing.
The products of used oil processing or
re-refining are likely to include
specification fuel, reconstituted
lubricating oils/fluids, distillate fuel,
lube feedstock, asphaltic bottoms, and
other non-fuel oil-derived product.
In addition to the requirements of part
279 subparts C and E, used oil
generators and collectors/transporters
are subject to all applicable processor
and re-refiner requirements, if they
process/re-refine used oil on-site. Used
oil processing and re-refining facilities
that also bum used oil fuel on-site for
energy recovery must comply with the
provisions in subpart G of part 279,
except burning that occurs incidental to
processing at used oil processing and re-
refining facilities in compliance with
§ 279.50{b)(3)(ii). Table VI.4 lists
requirements and provides the
regulatory citations.
TABLE VI.4.—STANDARDS FOR USED OIL PROCESSORS AND RE-REFINERS
Requirement
Processors who perform other manaaement activities . .
Notification and EPA identification number ,
Contingency plan and emergency procedures -.
Rebuttabie presumption for used oil .
Exceptions from rebuttable presumption for CFC and metal-
working oils.
Type of management units..... , . ,.
Good condition above ground tanks and containers ..
Secondary containment for containers and existing and new
above ground tanks.
Labelling of containers and tanks
Response to releases
Closure for containers and above ground tanks
Analysis plan
Indicator parameters
Tracking — acceptance deliveries, and recordkeeping
Operating record. f. ......
Off-site shipment
Management of residues
SPCC requirements including spilfl prevention and control
UST requirements including corrective action and financial
responsibility.
New or existing
New
Existing for processors/re-refiners who are marketers; new for -
others.
New
Existing lor processors/re-refiners managing used oil fuefi
New . , . ....
New
New . . . .
New
New
New
New ... ...
New
N.A
Existing for processors/re-refiners who are marketers (invoices)'
new for others.
New '
New
New
New
Existing (applicable independently) . ,
Existing (applicable independently) . .
N.A ,
Regulatory citation "
§ 279.50(a).
§279.51.
§ 279 52(a)
§ 279.52(b).
§ 279.53 (a), (b), and (c)
§ 279 53(0) (1) and (2)
§ 279.54(3).
§ 279 54(b).
§ 279 54 (c) (d) and (a)
§ 279 54(1)
§ 279 54(g)
§ 279 54(h)
§ 279 55
None
§ 279 56
§ 279 57(a)
8 279 57(bl
§ 279 58
§ 279 59
40 CFR Part 112
40 CFR Part 280
None
-------
41594 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
b. Notification Requirements. An
owner or operator of a used oil
processing/re-refining facility must
notify the appropriate EPA Regional
Administrator using EPA Form 8700-12.
stating the location and general
description of used oil management
activities. In lieu of using the EPA Form
8700-12, owners and operators may
notify the EPA Regional Administrator
of their location and general description
of used oil management activities in a
letter. Upon receipt of this form, EPA
will issue an EPA identification number
to the facility. Owner/opera tors who
have previously notified the Agency of
their hazardous waste management or
used oil activities and received an ID
number need not renotify.
In addition to notifying EPA of any
recycling activities and receiving an
EPA identification number, an owner or
operator of a used oil processing or re-
refining facility that receives used oil
from foreign sources must comply with
all applicable RCRA requirements for
the importation of solid and hazardous
wastes.
c. Preparedness and Prevention.
Owners or operators of used oil
processing and re-refining facilities must
operate and maintain the facility in a
manner that will minimize the
possibility of any fire, explosion, or
unplanned sudden or non-sudden
release. The existing Federal (e.g.,
SPCC), state, and local (e.g., fire
ordinances) preparedness and
prevention requirements are specific to
certain aspects of facility operation. The
existing RCRA requirements for
preparedness and prevention, by
contrast, pertain to the toxic or
hazardous nature of the material or
waste. The Agency, therefore, believes
that RCRA requirements are necessary
to ensure that used oil processing and
re-refining facilities are maintained and
operated to prevent possible fires,
explosions, or releases of used oil to the
environment. EPA believes that the
preparedness and prevention
requirements promulgated today are
merely incremental to those currently in
place and the existing compliance
procedures can easily be expanded to
comply with these additional
requirements. Section 279.52(a) requires
owners and operators to comply with
the requirements for preparedness and
prevention similar to those established
for hazardous waste management
facilities in 40 CFR part 265, subpart C.
These requirements include
maintenance and operation of the
facility, required equipment, testing and
maintenance of the equipment, access to
communication or alarm system,
required aisle space, and arrangements
with local authorities.
The 1985 proposal required
preparedness and prevention measures
as part of the Permit-by-nile
requirements for recycling facilities. The
proposed requirements were the same
as those established for hazardous
waste management facilities. EPA
believes that the majority of processing
and re-refining facilities have
preparedness and prevention measures
in place as a part of good business and
operational practices, therefore the
Agency does not think such
requirements will be overly burdensome
(see background document on cost
analysis that is in the docket for today's
rule). In addition, local fire regulations,
state regulations, and the Occupational
Safety and Health Act require some
level of preparedness and prevention
measures.
d. Contingency Plan and Emergency
Procedures. Section 279.52(b) requires
owners or operators of used oil
processing and re-refining facilities to
prepare a contingency plan designed to
minimize hazards in case of a sudden or
non-sudden release, fire, explosion, or
similar emergency. The variable
composition of used oil (e.g., the
possibility of very low flash point oil)
makes this more of a concern than for
other types of oil facilities. The
requirements for contingency plans and
emergency procedures were taken from
40 CFR part 265, subpart D, because of
the similarity to hazardous waste
facility operations. These requirements
include purpose and implementation of
the contingency plan, content of the
contingency plan, copies of the
contingency plan, amending the
contingency plan, emergency
coordinator, and emergency procedures.
EPA believes that the majority of
processing and re-refining facilities have
contingency plan and emergency
procedures in place as a part of good
business and operational procedures.
Therefore, EPA believes that such
requirements are not overly
burdensome. In addition, local fire
regulations, state regulations, and the
Occupational Safety and Health Act
require development of contingency
plans and emergency procedures.
e. Storage Requirements. Owners and
operators of used oil processing and re-
refining facilities must store all used oils
either in tanks or containers, and all
tanks and containers must be
maintained in good condition (i.e., no
visible signs of leaks or structural
damage or deterioration). Based on the
comments received in 1985 and 1991,
EPA believes that the practice of storing
used oil in lagoons, ponds, pits or
surface impoundments is not common
and, in addition, that such storage is
Inherently unsafe and poses an undue
risk to human health and the
environment. Both in 1985 and 1991, EPA
proposed to ban the use of lagoons,
ponds, pits, or surface impoundments for
used oil treatment or storage due to the
unreasonable risks posed to human
health and the environment. Many
commenters concurred with EPA on this
point. Therefore, today's rule prohibits
the storage of used oil in any surface
impoundment, pond, pit, lagoon or
similar land-based unit, unless the unit
is kept in full compliance with the
requirements in subpart K of part 264/
265 or unless the unit contains only
wastewaters with de minimis quantities
of used oil as specified in 40 CFR
279.1Q(f).
In 1991 Supplemental Notice, EPA
proposed inspection requirements for a
discovery of used oil release or spill.
Today, EPA is not finalizing the
proposed inspection requirement
because the preparedness requirement
established today for used oil
processing/re-refining facilities and the
inspection provision of the SPCC
program include inspection for used oil
releases to the environment or oil spills,
respectively.
The requirements established today
cover all used oil processors/re-refiners,
regardless of their location and
regardless of the size of any single tank
the facility or,the total storage capacity
of the facility. The SPCC and UST
requirements are independently
applicable to processing or re-refining
facilities.
The owner or operator of a used oil
processing or re-refining facility must
label all aboveground tanks and
containers used to store used oil and all
fill pipes used to transfer used oil to
underground storage tanks with the
words "used oil." EPA is requiring
owners and operators to clearly label
storage units used to store oil to prevent
accidental mixing by ensuring that only
used oil is placed in tanks reserved for
the storage of used oil.
Owners and operators of used oil
processing and re-refining, facilities who
store used oil in containers or
aboveground tajiks as defined in § 279.1
must equip the storage area surrounding
the tanks or containers with a floor
made from materiai(s) that is impervious
to used oil. Owners and operators must
also equip the storage area with
secondary containment structures
(dikes, berms, and/or retaining walls)
that are made of a material(s) that is
impervious to used oil and capable of
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No.. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41595
containing all potential spills and
releases of used oil from the tanks or
containers until the facility owner or
operator can take measures to clean up
the released used oil. The floor under
existing storage tanks must cover the
entire area within the containment
structure, except where existing tanks
meet the ground. EPA believes that
requiring owner/operators with existing
tanks to retrofit the containment
structure would be financially
burdensome and that there is little
opportunity for contamination to occur
under the small area where the tank
touches the ground. For new tanks, the
floor must cover the entire area within
the containment structure.
In 1985, EPA reserved several sections
of the proposed rule for the soon-to-be
promulgated secondary containment
requirements for hazardous waste
storage tanks. Many commenters
disagreed with EPA's proposal to
require used oil recycling facilities to
comply with the hazardous waste tank
secondary containment provisions. In
the 1991 Supplemental Notice, EPA
stated that secondary containment
standards similar to those required by
: the SPCC program may be adequately
protective of human health and the
environment and may be less
burdensome to. used oil processing and
re-refining facilities.'In the 1991
Supplemental Notice, the Agency
specifically discussed the provisions for
maintaining berms, dikes, or retaining
.walls around existing abovegrqund
storage tanks. The Supplemental Notice
included a diagram depicting a
secondary containment structure that
the Agency was considering requiring.
The Agency believes that a secondary
containment structure constructed
around the entire storage area will
provide adequate protection to the
environment against spills and releases
of used oil that may occur during used
oil storage. Many commenters agreed
with the Agency's assessment thai this
type of secondary containment is
adequate for used oil storage areas.
Some commenters urged the Agency to
include secondary containment.
requirements in Phase I management
standards, suggesting1 that storage-
related spills and releases should be
controlled.
Upon evaluation of the comments, and
a further consideration of past storage
practices at used oil processing and re-
refining facilities that have either.
become Superfund sites or have had
RCRA enforcement actions taken
against them, EPA has concluded that
Ihere is a need to control releases of
used oil during storage at processing
and re-refining facilities. In fact, as
documented by the Agency in the
background documents supporting this
Final rule, past storage practices at used
oil management facilities have resulted
in releases of used oil to the
environment, and in some cases,
substantial damages to human health
and the environment.20
Of the used oil facilities that the
Agency has studied, 16 facilities had
used oil spills; 15 facilities had leaking
tanks and/or containers; 32 facilities
recycled and disposed of used oil and
wastes in surface impoundments and
pits; 5 facilities placed used oil recycling
sludges in waste piles directly on the
ground; and 1 facility land-farmed used
oil recycling sludges. Virtually all the
surface impoundments or pits at these
facilities were unlined.
Of the facilities that had spills, two
were disposing solely used oil/oil
recycling wastes, one was a storage
facility only, and the remaining 13 were
used oil processing and re-refining
facilities. Of the facilities that had
leaking tanks, two facilities were used
oil storage facilities, one was a used oil
disposal facility, and the remaining 12
were used oil recyclers. Of the facilities
that disposed of used oil and wastes
after recycling used oil in surface
impoundments, 3 were also generators, 4
were solely disposal facilities, 1 was a
storage facility, and the remaining 24
were processing and re-refining
facilities. All five facilities that stored
used oil recycling sludges in waste piles
were processing and re-refining
facilities. The facility that land-farmed
used oil recycling sludges was a used oil
recycling facih'ty.
EPA has concluded that the
containment of used oil releases is
necessary, since contamination of soil,
ground water, or surface water
resources with used oil could reduce
water quality and make water non-
potable or could cause significant
ecological harm. EPA believes that used
oil handling and storage-related releases
at used oil processing and re-refining
facilities can be effectively controlled by
the use of floors and containment
structures made from an oil-impervious
material.
As discussed above, the storage areas
around aboveground tanks and under
storage containers must be equipped
with oil-impervious floors and
secondary containment structures (dikes
and berms or retaining walls) capable of
containing all potential spills and
releases of used oil until the discovery
and clean-up of released used oil.21 The
floor under existing storage tanks must
cover the entire area within the dike,
berm or retaining wall, except areas
where portions of existing tanks meet
the ground. This requirement is
applicable to the aboveground tanks
that are existing when the states adopt
the part 279 used oil management
standards and the state rule containing
the Federal used oil management
standards takes effect. The impervious
floor under new storage tanks must
cover the entire area within the
containment structure. The effective
date is the same as that discussed for
existing tanks.
EPA believes that the secondary
containment requirements established
today adequately protect against used
oil releases to ground water and th'e
existing SPCC requirements provide
protection against spills reaching
navigable waters. EPA has determined
that secondary containment
requirements similar to those in 40 CFR
parts 264/265, subpart J are not
necessary since the requirements
promulgated today will effectively ;
contain any spilled or released used oil
within the containment structures. Also,
the requirement that the entire
containment structure be made of a
material impervious to used oil will
prevent the migration of used oil to soils,
surface waters, and ground water.
Although the secondary'Containment
requirements promulgated today are
somewhat less burdensome than those
required under 40 CFR parts 264/265
subpart J, any used oil processing'/re-
refining facility that is currently in
compliance with the subpart J
requirements (e.g., the facility has
double-walled tanks with double-walled
or otherwise contained pipes) will be
deemed in compliance with the
secondary containment requirements
promulgated today, and therefore need
not install a new secondary containment
system at the facility. EPA does want to
clarify that all aboveground tanks and
containers must be within a secondary
containment structure that is impervious
to used oil, and capable of preventing
the migration of used oil spills or
releases to the environment.
An April 29,1992, memorandum from
EPA's Assistant Administrator for Solid
Waste and Emergency Response
(discussed above) addresses.
20 See "Summary Descriptions of Sixty-Three
'Used Oil'Superfund Sites." and "Summary
Descriptions of Used Oil-Related Damages at
RCRA-Permitted Facilities."
21 For further discussion of the basis for the
secondary containment requirement and the
materials suitable for constructing impervious floor
and dikes, berms. or retaining walls, see section
V1.E.5. of today's preamble.
-------
41596 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 178 / Thursday. September 10. 1992 / Rules and Regulations
.-_ -_—.—-^..^...i.^.u.mMiM^jiii^miiMjiiiajMKmBiaaBM
eboveground storage tank technologies
that may be used to provide secondary
containment at SPCC-regulated
facilities. The memorandum states that
alternative aboveground storage tank
systems that have capacities generally
less than 12,000 gallons may provide
protection of navigable waters
substantially equivalent to that provided
by the secondary containment systems
listed in 40 CFR 112.79(c) oi the SPCC
regulation. An example of an alternative
aboveground storage tank system that
generally would provide substantially
equivalent protection of navigabie
waters is a shop-fabricated doubled
walled tank installed and operated with
overfill prevention measures that
include an overfill alarm, an automatic
flow restrictor or flow shut-off, and
constant monitoring of all product
transfers including used oil. Used oil
tanks meeting with the, secondary
containment equivalency discussed in
the memorandum of April 29,1992, are
considered to be in compliance with the
secondary containment requirements for
aboveground tanks established in
today's rule.
In the 1991 Supplemental Notice, EPA
requested comment on the types of
material that could be used to construct
oil-impervious structures including
berms, dikes, retaining walls, and floors,
EPA did not receive any comments
specific to the request. Since publication
of the 1991 Notice, the Agency has
studied the permeability of some
commonly used construction materials
such as cement, clay, asphalt, plastic,
and steel. EPA concluded that the
selection of a suitable material for
construction depends upon the size of
the storage units and the site
characteristics. As stated in the cost
analysis section of this preamble, most
of these materials are currently used for
the purpose of containing releases under
other regulatory programs. EPA believes
that any of these materials can
adequately prevent releases of used oil
to the environment from storage units
that are properly operated and
maintained at used oil processing and
re-refining facilities, therefore, the
Agency feels there is no need to specify
the type of oil-impervious construction
material that must be used at all
facilities. For the cost analysis that
accompanies today's rule, EPA used a
secondary containment scenario that
includes a 3-inch asphalt floor with an
annual application of sealant. EPA
believes that a floor of Ms type is
adequate to contain used oil releases
since there should be minimal or no
vehicular traffic around the storage
tanks or within the bermed, diked, or
walled area. When installing new tanks,
however, facility owner/operator will
have to take into considerations the size
of the tank that the floor will be resting
upon. Depending on the size of the
floor's thickness, and the type of floor
installed, the appropriate construction
material may change.
f. Applicable UST and SPCC
requirements for used oil storage tanks.
If used oil is stored in underground
tanks, the owner or operator of a used
oil recycling facility must comply with
the requirements of 40 CFR part 280,
including the corrective action and
closure requirements of part 280
subparts F and G. An underground
storage tank used for storage of used oil
that meets the underground storage tank
definition under 40 CFR 280.12 must
comply with part 260 requirements. As
discussed in the 1991 Supplemental
Notice, technical standards for
underground storage tanks (USTs) have
been promulgated since publication of
the 1985 proposed rule. The Agency
stated in the preamble to the UST final
rule (53 FR 37112; September 23,1988)
that EPA believes tht used oil, when
stored in underground tanks, presents
risks similar to other petroleum products
stored in USTs. As a result, EPA
determined that used oil USTs must
comply with the tank upgrading,
operation and maintenance, corrosion
protection, corrective action, closure,
and financial responsibility
requirements promulgated under part
280 for other petroleum product USTs.
The Agency believes that the subtitle I
standards are sufficient to protect
human health and the environment from
potential releases of used oil from USTs.
In addition to all of the storage
requirements discussed above, used oil
processing and re-refining facilities that
meet the applicability criteria for the
SPCC standards contained in 40 CFR
part 112 also must comply with all
applicable SPCC requirements, including
maintaining containment and
diversionary structures to control
releases of oil from aboveground storage
tanks.
g. Response to releases. Upon
detection of any release or spill within
the secondary containment area from
transfer operations or from aboveground
storage units (tanks and containers),
owners or operators must take steps to
stop and contain the release, to remove
all released used oil from the
containment area, and repair or replace
the damaged tank or container. Release
used oil must be removed from the area
and must be managed [i.e.. treated,
recycled, disposed) in accordance with
the requirements of this part and any
other applicable parts of this chapter. In
addition, whenever there is a
catastrophic release or spill of used oil
and used oil migrates beyond the
containment structure and reaches the
environment, corrective measures must
be taken to adequately protect human
health and the environment from
potential damages. This requirement
does not apply to past releases of used
oil that occurred prior to the effective
date of the used oil program within an
authorized state in which the facility is
located. This above requirement applied
only when there is a release to the
environment. Under this rule, this would
not include releases within contained
areas such as concrete floors or
impervious containment areas, unless
the releases go beyond the contained
areas.
In addition to the provisions listed
above for releases of used oil and, in
addition to the corrective action
requirements for releases from USTs
provided in 40 CFR part 280, subpart F,
owners of used oil processing and re-
refining facilities are required, under
CERCLA section 103, to report a release
of hazardous substances to'the
environment when the release is equal
to or in excess of the reportable quantity
(RQ) for the particular substance. Used
oils that are contaminated with
CERCLA hazardous substances [e.g.,
due to the presence of elevated levels of
lead) are subject to CERCLA release
reporting requirements. Therefore,
releases of used oil containing such^
contaminants into the environment in
quantities greater than the reportable
quantity must be reported to the
National Response Center. The current
RQs for CERCLA hazardous substances
are listed in 40 CFR 302.4. In addition,
under 40 CFR part 110, any discharge of
oil that violates applicable water quality
standards or clauses a film or sheen on
a water surface must be reported to the
National Response Center.
h. Analysis Plan. The owner or
operator of a used oil processing or re-
refining must establish analytical
procedures to ensure a thorough
knowledge of the contents of any used
oil handled at the facility. These
procedures are to be established through
a written analysis plan describing the
procedures to be used to comply with
the analysis requirements, as required
by § 279.55. Each facility must prepare
an analysis plan which a facility will
follow when performing sampling and
analysis, keeping records, and when
complying with the analytical
requirements for documenting the used
oil fuel specification.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41597
For the analyses described below, the
owner or operator must specify in the
facility's analysis plan the frequency of
sampling and analysis. The owner or
operator must perform sampling and
analysis on a schedule that is adequate
-to meet all applicable requirements and
assures that all used oils managed at the
facility are handled safely and in
compliance with all applicable used oi!
and Subtitle C regulations.
L RebuttabJe presumption and
halogen determination. An owner or
operator of a used oil processor/re-
refiner facility must ensure that any
used oil handled (i.e., received from a
used oil generator or a collector/
transporter) at the facility is not mixed
with hazardous wastes. Procedures
should be established within the
facility's written analysis plan (required
in | 279.55) and the results of each
procedure documented as part of the
facility operating record, to demonstrate
that the owner or operator will assure
against such mixing and comply with
the halogen determination requirements
of § 279.53. The analysis plan should
specify how, or with what methods, the
owner or operator will analyze used oil
to assure that the used oil is not mixed
with hazardous wastes. As discussed
above, EPA presumes that any used oil
containing more than 1,000 ppm
halogens has been mixed with
chlorinated hazardous wastes. To rebut
this presumption, the owner or operator
must be able to document (or provide a
copy of documentation from prior used
oil handlers) at any time that the used
oil was not mixed with hazardous waste
(e.g., by demonstrating that the presence
of 1,000 ppra or more of total halogens is
from some other source). The Agency
believes that a facility-prepared
analysis plan will identify at what time
during the chain of custody, the facility
owner/operator will "rebut the
presumption of mixing. In addition, EPA
believes that an analysis plan will also
indicate a procedure for handling a
shipment of the adulterated used oil if
received by an used oil processor/re-
refiner facility especially when the given
facility is not a co-management facility
(i.e., permitted to manage hazardous
waste). A facility may rebut the
presumption of mixing when accepting
used oil for processing, re-refining, or
blending; upon producing a specification
fuel; prior to marketing it as off-
- specification fuel; or both when
accepting used oil and shipping recycled
products [e,g.t burner fuel, lube
feedstock, or reclaimed lubricants) to
the end users.
Under § 279.53, analyzing for total
halogens is required t& determine
whether used oil has been mixed with
chlorinated (halogenated) listed
hazardous wastes. If the total halogen
content exceeds 1,000 ppm, it is
presumed that mixing has occurred per
the rebuttable presumption codified
today as § 261.3(a)(2)(v).
As discussed above, the rebuttable
presumption does not apply'to: (1) Used
metalworking oils/fluids containing
chlorinated paraffins on the condition
that these used oil/fluids are recycled
under a tolling arrangement to produce
reclaimed metalworking oils/fluids; or
(2) used compressor oils removed from
refrigeration units and that are
contaminated with chlorinated
fluorocarbons (CFCs), on the condition
that these used oils are destined for
reclamation of the CFCs at an off-site
CFC reclamation facility. The exemption
applies to these two types of oils that
are not mixed with used oil from other
sources or other halogenated hazardous
wastes.
EPA is concerned about the burning of
used oils containing high levels of
halogens in uncontrolled burners. Both
metalworking oils and used compressor
oils that contain a high level of
halogenated constituents (>4,000 ppm)
can not be burped safely in uncontrolled
boilers and furnaces. If such used oils
are to be burned for energy recovery,
they must be burned at facilities that are
in compliance with subpart G of part 279
or, if the used oil has been mixed with
hazardous waste, with subpart H of part
266.
ii. Specification used oil fuel Owners
or operators who claim an exemption
from regulation under 40 CFR 279.11 for
specification used oil fuel must analyze
for the specification used oil fuel
parameters [i:e., arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, lead, total halogens, and
flash point) and provide documentation
of testing and sampling methods used
and the frequency of sampling in the
facility's analysis plan. If an owner or
operator of a used oil processor/re-
refiner facility markets specification
used oil fuel, the owner or operator must
document that the used oil meets the
specification levels in the facility
operating record, and must cross
reference documentation that the used
oil meets the specification to the burner
or marketer.
Hi. Indicator parameters. In 1985, EPA
proposed that all owners and operators
of used oil processing and re-refining
facilities that also manage hazardous
wastes at the same facility, test their
used oils for the presence of indicator
parameters. Indicator parameters are
those constituents that were commonly
present in the hazardous wastes
handled at the facility, but not
commonly found in used oils.
The majority of commenters who
commented on the proposed analytical
requirements stated that there is no
need for the proposed indicator
parameter testing at co-management
facilities. The commenters responding to
the indicator parameter testing
requirement argued that co-management
facilities are hazardous waste facilities
operating under interim status or a full
permit. Commenters stated that
intentional mixing of used oils and
hazardous wastes does not occur at co-
management facilities due to the fact
that mixing would reduce the
marketability and recyclability of the
used oil. Upon consideration of the
public comments, the Agency has
decided not to finalize the proposed
requirements for indicator parameter
testing.
For the analyses described above, the
owner or operator of a used oil recycling
facility must specify in the facility's
analysis plan the frequency of sampling
and analysis. The owner or operator
must perform sampling and analysis on
a schedule that is adequate to meet all
applicable requirements and assures
that all used oils managed at the facility
are handled safely and in compliance
with all applicable used oil management
standards.
In the 1985 proposed management
standards, EPA requested comment on
the need to specify a specific schedule
for sampling and analysis at the
processing and re-refining facilities.
Although EPA received several
comments on the subject, the
commenters did not agree either on the
need to set a specific schedule or what
the schedule should be, if EPA specified
a schedule. It is apparent from the
public comments received on the subject
that it is probably not possible to
develop a testing frequency schedule
that would be appropriate for all types
and sizes of used oil processing and re-
refining facilities and take into account
the many facility-specific variables that
affect sampling and analysis
frequencies. Therefore, under today's
rule, EPA is not providing a specific
schedule, but is requiring owners or
operators of used oil processing and re-
refining facilities to establish a tailored
sampling and analysis schedule that will
be appropriate for their particular
facility and that meets the intent of the
sampling and analysis requirements.
This schedule must be documented in
the facility's analysis plan.
Records of all analyses conducted at
the facility to comply with the sampling
and analysis requirements must be
-------
41598 Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 176 / Thursday, September 10. 1992 / Rules and Regulations
maintained at the facility in the facility's
operating record for a period of three
years, as specified in § 279.57faj.
i. Tracking of Used Oil. Commenters
favored the 1991-proposed tracking
requirements for used oil processors/re-
refiners. EPA believes that these
facilities are the ultimate decision
makers for the fate of used oil.
Therefore, the Agency is finalizing the
majority of tracking requirements
proposed in 1S91 which include keeping
the records of each used oi! shipment
accepted for management and the
records of each shipment of used oil
delivered to the end-users. The
requirements are specified in § 279.56.
Furthermore, these records may take the
form of a log, invoice, manifest, bill of
lading, or other shipping documents.
These records will provide the
information necessary for preparing
biennial reports for the facilities' used
oil activities required in § 279.57 (b)
discussed below.
j. Operating Record, Owners and
operators of used oil processing and re-
refining facilities are required to
maintain operating records included in
§ 279.57(a) of today's rule, until closure
of the facility. The records include used
oil analyses performed in accordance
with the analysis plan required under
§ 279.55 and summary reports detailing
all incidences that require
implementation of the contingency plan
specified at § 279.52(b).
k. Reporting requirements. Owners
and operators of used oil processing and
re-refining facilities are required to
report to EPA or an authorized state
agency in a letter, on a biennial basis,
the following information: (I) The
facility's EPA identification number,
name and address; (2) the calendar year
covered by the report; and (3) the
quantities of each type of used oil
accepted for recycling and the manner
in which used oil is recycled at the site
(if the facility recycles used oil in more
than one manner, the quantities of used
oil recycled should be reported for each
recycling method {e.g., burning,
processing)).
Reports documenting the information
listed above must be submitted to EPA,
or the authorized state agency, by
March 1 of each even numbered year
and cover used oil recycling activities
conducted during the previous year.
Reports need only be in the form of a
letter or spreadsheet and no formal
reporting form will be developed.
The information identified above is
similar to that listed on the Hazardous
Waste Biennial Report Form (No. 8700-
13B). The information requests were
designed in this manner to assist owners
and operators of used oil processor and
re-refiner facilities in preparing the used
oil biennial report. Many owners and
operators are familiar with the
hazardous waste biennial reporting
form.
Commenters supported the biennial
reporting requirements proposed for
used oil recyclers in the 1991
Supplemental Notice. As noted in the
Supplemental Notice, EPA believes that
the information provided by the used oil
processing and re-refining facilities will
help the Agency when developing Phase
II management standards that may
include incentives for encouraging DIY-
generated used oil recycling and/or
more stringent management standards
for a particular form of recycling (e.g.,
used oil burning). EPA also believes that
the information collected from
processors and re-refiners will allow the
Agency to monitor the flow and
disposition of used oil and to allow the
Agency to assess the relative amounts
of used oil that are recycled in different
manners.
The reporting requirements
promulgated today will apply only to
used oil processors and re-refiners and
not to used oil burners or to transporters
who directly market used oil fuels. The
Agency believes that the information
that is required of processors and re-
refiners will indicate quantities of
specification fuel and off-specification
fuel produced. In case the Agency wants
more specific information on burning
activities, EPA may obtain additional
information through a survey or by
reviewing shipping records maintained
by burners and used oil transporters.
1. Closure. Owners and operators must
ensure that the units and areas used to-
store and recycle used oil are closed to
the extent necessary to protect human
health and the environment and in a
manner that controls, minimizes, or
eliminates post-closure escape of used
oil and used oil residues to the ground,
atmosphere, and water. At the time of
closure, owners and operators who store
used oil in aboveground tanks must
empty the tanks, remove or
decontaminate residues from the tank
system, remove and decontaminate
containment system components,
contaminated media, and any structures
and equipment contaminated with used
oil released after the effective date of
today's rule. Contaminated media,
components, structures and equipment,
and any used oil removed from the site
must be managed as a hazardous waste,
if the media, waste, or material meets
the definition of hazardous waste, per 40
CFR 261.3(dJ.
If the facility owner or operator
cannot successfully remove and
decontaminate all contaminated media
at the facility, then the owner or
operator must close the tank systemfs)
and perform closure and post-closure
care in accordance with the
requirements of 40 CFR 265.310 that
apply to landfills. EPA deferred the
financial responsibility requirement for
used oil processors and re-refiners in -the
1985 proposal and 1991 supplemental
notice. EPA believes that the closure
steps necessary under today's rule can
be implemented without the financial
responsibility requirements for facility
closure established under subpart H of
Part 264/265. The closure requirement
promulgated today only requires unit
closure and removal of contaminated
media in the immediate vicinity of the
used oil storage/processing unit. EPA.
believes these costs are not likely to be
excessive and can be borne by owners/
operators without the need for financial
assurance that is necessary for RCRA
subtitle C hazardous waste treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities. In
addition, the Agency believes that many
used oil processors/re-refiners would as
a business practice routinely set aside
funds for complying with the business
insurance requirements. (See Cost and
Economics Impact of 1992 Used Oil
Management Standards, August 1992,
available in the docket accompanying
this rule.)
Owners and operators who store used
oil in underground storage tanks must -
comply with the closure requirements of
40 CFR part 280, subpart G.
Owners and operators who store used
oil in containers must remove all
containers from the site at the time of
closure. The owner or operator must
also remove and decontaminate all
residues, contaminated containment
system components, contaminated soilo,
and any structures and equipment
contaminated with used oil and manage
them as hazardous waste, if the media,
waste, or material meets the definition
of hazardous waste, per 40 CFR 261.3(d)
or 261.4(b).
Based on information gathered from
documentation of Superfund sites where
used oil was identified as one of the
major constituents of concern managed
at the site, EPA is convinced that
closure requirements for tanks and
containers and for the area at existing
facilities are important. EPA believes
that the secondary.containment
requirements for containers and tanks
established today will minimize the
need for extensive closure in the future
since the potential for a release of used
oil to migrate into the environment will
be reduced. The requirements of today's
rule should ensure against damages that
could, result at abandoned sites by: [a)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41599
controlling (containing) used oil spills or
releases that may occur during the
operation of used oil processing and re-
refining facilities and (b) requiring the
removal of contaminated soils in the
vicinity of or beneath the aboveground
used oil storage and processing units at
closure.
m. Other applicable requirements. In
addition to complying with the
requirements of subpart F, owners and
operators of used oil processing and re-
refining facilities who also transport
used oil off-site must comply with the
requirements for used oil transporters in
subpart E. Owners and operators of
used oil processing and re-refining
facilities who market used oil fuels must
comply with the requirements of subpart
H; owners and operators who burn used
oil fuels must comply with the
requirements of subpart G. Disposal of
used oil must he-performed in
compliance with the requirements
specified in part 279, sabpart I.
Similarly, management of used oil
processing and re-refining residuals
must be performed in compliance with
the existing RCRA requirements. In
addition, used oil generators who
recycle used oil on-site in a manner
other than burning for energy recovery
must comply with the standards
promulgated today for used oil
processors and re-refiners.
5. Standards for Burners of Off-
Specification Used Oil Fuel
a. Applicability. 40 CFR part 279,
subpart G applies to owners and
operators of facilities where off-
specification used oil fuel is burned for
energy recovery in any boiler or
industrial furnace and hazardous waste
incinerator subject to regulation under
40 CFR part 264 or 265, subpart O. The
requirements are shown in Table VI.5.
The requirements of 40 CFR part 279,
subpart G are applicable to: (1) Owners
and operators of facilities that burn used
oil fuel for energy recovery where the
fuel does not meet the specification
levels for the constituents listed m
§ 279.11 (previously 40 CFR 266.41); (2)
transporters or marketers who bum
used oil fuels that do not meet the
specification for used oil fuels (used oil
transporters are also subject to 40 CFR
part 279, subpart E and marketers are
also-subject to 40 CFR part 279 subpart
H); and (3) used oil processing and re-
refining facilities that also burn off-
specification used oil fuels (used oil
processing and re-refining facilities also
are subject fo 40 CFR part 279, subpart
F). Used oil fuel, or used oil sent off-site
to be burned for energy recovery,
includes any fuel produced from used oil
through processing, blending, or other
treatment. The requirements of subpart
G are merely the existing requirements
of the former part 266, subpart E, with
minor modifications. EPA summarizes
these requirements below.
TABLE VI.5.—STANDARDS FOR BURNERS
OF OFF-SPECIFICATION USED OIL
Requirement
Burners who
perform other
management
activities.
Restrictions on
burning.
Notification and
EPA
identification
number.
Rebuttable
presumption for
used oil.
Exceptions from
rebuttable
presumption for
CFC and
metalworking
oils.
Record retention
for rebuttable
presumption.
Type of storage
units.
Condition of tanks
and containers.
Secondary
containment for
containers and
existing and new
above ground
tanks.
Labelling of
containers and
tanks:
Responses to
releases.
Tracking —
acceptance and
recordkeeplng.
Certification
Management of
residues,
SPCC
requirements,
including spill
prevention and
control.
UST requirements,
including
corrective action
and financial
responsibility.
Inspections ...
Closure
New or
Existing
New
Existing
Existing
Existing
New
New
New
New
New
New
New
Existing
Existing
New
Existing
(applica-
ble
independ-
ently).
Existing
(applica-
ble
independ-
ently).
N.A :
HA
Regulatory
citation
§ 279 60(b)
§ 279 61
§ 279 62
§ 279 63(a) (b)
and (c)
§ 279 63(c)(1 )
and (2)
' § 279.63
-------
41600 Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 176 / Tharsday. September 10. 1992' -/ -Rules and Regulations
Burners who only bum specification
used oil fuels; (2) burners of
specification used oil fuel who receive
the fuel from used oil marketers, who
have notified EPA of their used oil
management activities and who have
provided appropriate information
concerning specification fuel claims; or
(3) generators who burn used oil that is
generated on site only in used oil-fired
space heaters.
e. Certification, Before a burner may
accept the first shipment of off-
specification used oil fuel from a
marketer, the burner must provide a
one-time written notice certifying that
the burner has notified EPA stating the
location and general description of the
burner's used oil management activities
and that the burner will burn used oil
only in an industrial furnace or boiler
identified in 40 CFR 279.61{a).
f. Storage Requirements, Owners or
operators of facilities that burn used oil
for energy recovery must store all used
oils either in tanks or containers. All
aboveground tanks and containers must
be maintained in good condition [i.e., no
visible signs of leaks or structural
damage). EPA believes thai the practice
of storing used oil in unlined lagoons,
ponds, pits or surface impoundments is
not very common and it is inherently
unsafe and poses an undue risk to
human health and the environment.23
Therefore, today's rule requires that all
used oi!s be stored in aboveground
tanks or containers or in underground
storage tanks.
The owner or operator of a facility
that bums used oil must label all -
aboveground tanks and containers used
to store used oil and all fill pipes used to
transfer used oil to underground storage
tanks with the words "used oil." EPA is
requiring owners and operators to
clearly label storage units used to store
used oil to assure against accidental
mixing and ensure that only used oil is
placed in tanks reserved for the storage
of used oil.
Owners or operators of facilities that
burn off-specification used oil and who
store used oil in aboveground tanks or
containers must equip, the storage area
surrounding the existing tanks or storage
area holding containers with a floor and
secondary containment structures
(dikes, berms, or retaining walls) that
are made of a material that is
impervious to oil and that are capable of
containing all potential spills and
releases of used oil to soil, surface
water, and ground water from the tanks
or containers until the facility owner or
operator can take measures to clean up
the release. The floor under existing
storage tanks must cover the entire area
within the containment structure, except
where existing tank portions meet the
ground. For new tanks, the floor must
cover the entire area within the
containment structure (for additional
discussion, see section Vl.S.f of this
preamble).
EPA is requiring secondary
containment for aboveground storage
areas because the Agency has
documented that past storage practices
at used oil management facilities has
resulted in releases of used oil to the
environment. In the background
documents supporting this final rule,
EPA has documented damages that have
occurred as a result of past storage
practices at used oil management
facilities.24
If used oil is stored in underground
tanks, the owner or operator of a used
oil burner facility must comply with the
UST requirements of 40 CFR part 280. In
addition, burner facilities that meet the
applicability criteria for the SPCC
standards in 40 CFR part 112 must
comply with those provisions as well.
g. Response to releases. Owners and
operators of used oil burning facilities
who store used oil in aboveground tanks
and containers must comply with the
same release response requirements as
those promulgated for used oil
processing and re-refining facilities.
Whenever there is a release or spill of
used oil to the environment, the owner
or operator must remove released used
oil and contaminated media from the
area, including used oils held in the
containment area. Released used oils
and contaminated media removed from
the area must be managed (i.e., treated,
recycled, disposed) in accordance with
the requirements of this^part and any
other applicable parts of this chapter.
These requirements do not apply to past
releases that occurred at the facility
prior to the effective date of the used oil
program within an authorized state in
which the facility ia located. This above
requirement applies only when there is a
release to the environment. Under this
rule, this would not include releases
within contained areas such as concrete
floors or impervious containment area,
unless the releases go beyond the
contained area.
23 Any and all storage in of used oil in surface
impoundments or other land-based units is strictly
prohibited unless the owner or operator of the unit
operates the unil in full compliance with 40 CFR
part 2M/265, subpart K.
a* See "Summary Descriptions of Sixty-Three
'Used Oil' Superfund Sites." and "Summary
Descriptions of Used Oil-Related Damages al
RCKA-Permitted Facilities." Both of these
documents are available in the docket for today's
rule.
In addition to the provisions listed
above for releases of used oil and, in
addition to the corrective action
requirements for releases from USTs
provided in 40 CFR part 280, subpart F,
used oil burners of off-specification fuel
are required, under CERCLA Section
103, to report a release of hazardous
substances to the environment when the
release is equal to or in excess of the
reportable quantity (RQ) for the
particular substance. Used oils that are
contaminated with CERCLA hazardous
substances (e.g., due to the presence of
elevated levels of lead) are subject to
these CERCLA release reporting
requirements. Therefore, releases of
used oil containing such contamination
into the environment in quantities
greater than the reportable quantity
must be reported to the National
Response Center. The current RQs for
CERCLA hazardous substances are
listed in 40 CFR 302.4. In addition, under
40 CFR part 110, any discharge of oil
that violates applicable water quality
standards or causes a film or sheen on a
water surface must be reported to the
National Response Center.
h. Used oil fuel analysis (halogens). A
used oil burner must ensure that any
used oil fuel handled at the burner's
facility is not mixed with hazardous '
wastes. EPA will continue to presume
(per § 261.3(a)(2)(v), previously § 266.40)
that any used oil containing more than
1,000 ppm halogens has been mixed with
chlorinated hazardous wastes. To rebut
this presumption, the owner or operator
must be able to document that the used
oil fuel was not mixed with hazardous
waste (e.g., by demonstrating that the
presence of 1,000 ppm or more of total
halogens is from some other source),
Note: Used oil fuel processors or
marketers may conduct analyses to document
that the used oil contains less than IGOG'pprn
halogens. Used oil burners may use this
information in making their own
determination and in rebutting the
presumption of mixing.
i. Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements. A burner who receives
an invoice from-a used oil marketer
under the requirements of Subpart H
must maintain a copy of each invoice for
" at least three years. Documentation of
any used oil fuel analyses also must be
maintained for at least three years. A
burner must maintain a copy of each
certification sent to a marketer for at
least three years from the date the
burner received the last shipment of off-
specification used oil fuel from that
marketer. A burner may use an
acceptance/delivery log in lieu of an .
invoice.
-------
Federal Register / VoL 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41601
No reporting requirements are being
promulgated for used oil burners of off-
specification fuel. EPA believes that the
Agency wiH be able to obtain burner-
specific information by inspecting
invoices kept by burners and the
acceptance/delivery logs kept by
collectors/transporters, processors, and
re-refiners.
j. Possible future regulations for used
oil burners. EPA received several
comments suggesting that EPA revise
the used oil fuel specification levels,
particularly for lead. Such comments are
beyond the scope of today's rule, since
EPA did not propose any changes and
EPA does not address these comments
here. None the less, as noted in the 1991
Supplemental Proposal, EPA intends to
conduct additional studies of used oil
burning activities to address public
concerns regarding potential lead
emissions from used oil burners. After
such studies are complete, EPA may
either develop emissions standards for
used oil burners or may revise the
current specification limits for used oil
fuels, if analysis suggests that additional
controls are necessary to protect human
health and environment.
EPA believes that the phase-down of
lead in gasoline over the past 6 to 8
years may have resulted in a significant
reduction of lead levels in used oils
generated from gasoline-powered
engines. The Agency's pre-1986 data
show that used automotive engine oils
that were sampled from storage tanks at
processing and re-refining facilities
averaged around 1,200 ppm lead. On the
other hand, the Agency's data that were
collected in 1988 and 1989 and the data
submitted by the commenters in
response,to the 1991 Supplemental
Proposal suggest that used oils from
gasoline-powered engines that were
sampled from storage tanks averaged
approximately 80 ppm lead. These data
suggest that the Lead Phase-down
Program may have had a significant
effect on reducing the lead in gasoline.
Based on these data, EPA believes that
a significant amount of used oil does not
fail the used oil fuel specification limit
for lead. However, if the Agency
determines that the specification limit
for lead should be lowered, greater
quantities of used oil may then exceed
the specification requirements,
k. Closure Requirements. In the 1985
and 1991 proposals, EPA considered
deferring closure requirements for used
oil burners, based on the lack of risk
data supporting the need for closure
requirements at these sites. Since 1991,
while reviewing the available Superfund
site information and RCRA enforcement
case data, the Agency has not located
substantive damage information specific
to burners. This leads the Agency to
believe that environmental damages at
used oil burner sites doe's not appear to
be a substantial concern [i.e., have not
resulted in environmental damage of a
significant magnitude that it has resulted
in the site being identified as the NPL
site). Therefore, the Agency believes
that closure requirements for used oil
burners are unnecessary at this time,
hence, EPA is deferring such
requirements.
6. Standards for Used Oil Fuel
Marketers
On November 29,1985, EPA
promulgated notification, analysis, and
recordkeeping requirements for
marketers of used oil fuels as part of the
used oil final Phase I burning regulations
(40 CFR 266.43). Today EPA is
consolidating all of the regulations
related to recycled used oil into one part
of the CFR to alleviate confusion on the
part of the regulated community and to
provide consistency in the regulations.
Therefore, the used oil fuel marketer
requirements previously codified as 40
CFR 266.43 will now be codified as 40
CFR part 279, subpart H (Standards for
Used Oil Fuel Marketers). EPA is
changing the designated codification of
the used oil fuel marketer requirements
and reordering the appearance of these
requirements without modification.
Table VI.6 summarizes the requirements
established for the used oil fuel
marketers.
TABLE VI.6.—STANDARDS FOR MARKETERS OF USED OIL FUEL
Requirement
Prohibitions .
On-specification used oi£-analysf& . ..
Notification and EPA identification number «
Tracking— on-specification fuel...™.. „.„... , .
Recordkeeping „ .,
Certification, „ *.„ „
New or existing
Existing (invoices) . «... .« .'..
Existing r ,
Existing . . .... ..-
Existing
Regulatory citation
§ 279.71
§ 279.72.
§ 279 73,
§ 279 74(a)
§ 279.74(b).
1 279.74(e)
§ 279 75
The used oil fuel marketer
requirements are applicable to all used
oil handlers that market used oil fuels.
Fuel marketing is an activity that may
be undertaken by used oil generators,
transporters, processors, re-refiners, and
used oil burners. Used oil handlers may
certify that they are marketing off-
specification used oil fuel or first claim
that the used oil fuel they are marketing
to non-industrial boilers and furnaces
meets the specification limits
established for used oil fuel. Under
today's regulation, no party in the used
oil industry can be simply a marketer.
EPA believes that marketing is an
activity that a used oil handler
undertakes when selling used oils as a
fuel. An entity that ia selling off-
specification used oil fuel can either be
a generator or a transporter or in some
cases a processor or re-refiner.
Similarly, an entity selling specification
used oil fuel may be a generator,
transporter, processor, re-refiner, or a
fuel oil dealer. A decision to market
used oil as an off-specification fuel is
solely an economic decision depending
on the costs associated with marketing
used oil as on-specification fuel (i.e.,
used oil fuel meeting the specification
limits). Jn the former case, used oil is
shipped, as generated or consolidated
without any processing, to an industrial
boiler or furnace. In the later case,
however, used oil is blended or
processed to produce on-specification
used oil fuel and is analyzed to
document the claim that it meets the
specification limits. Therefore, the
marketing requirements of 40 CFR part
279, subpart H, in addition to all other
applicable provisions of part 279, apply
to all used oil marketers.
Under today's definition of marketers,
it is logically impossible for a facility to
be only a marketer of used oil fuel. EPA
believes that a marketer of used oil fuel
must either have generated,
transported/stored at a transfer facility.
and/or processed the used oil before
marketing the used oil fuel. EPA
received comments stating that persons
who blend used oils from other sources
should be regulated only as marketers.
EPA disagrees EPA believes that any
person who blends different used oils
-------
41602 Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 176 / Thursday.' S'eptember.-.10.y--199a.-^rRgte9 l-stfd: Regulations
should be treated as processor {recycler)
under today's rales. The blending and
fuel production processes, and the
associated storage of oils and fuels,
have posed environmental risks as
documented-in the information available
for the fuel oil marketers identified as
NPL si'tes and from the RCRA
enforcement actions being pursued by
the Agency. Thus, EPA believes ii is
appropriate to regulate those who blend
used oils to produce fuels under the
processor/re-refiner standards
established today. However, those
facilities who consolidate shipments of
used oil before sending the consolidated
oil for recycling are classified as
transfer facilities and are subject to the
transporter standards.
7. Standards for Disposal of Used Oil
and Use as a Dust Suppressant
a. Disposal of Used Oil. As explained
above, EPA believes that most used oils
are recyclable. Since there are cases
where particular types or batches of
used oil are not recyclable, EPA
understands the need to provide for the
safe and proper disposal of used oils in
these limited circumstances. EPA is
today promulgating disposal standards
for non-recyclable used oils under 40
CFR part 279, subpart I-given in Table
VI.7.
TABLE VI.7.—STANDARDS FOR USE AS A
DUST SUPPRESSANT AND DISPOSAL OF
USED OIL
Requirement
Disposal
Use as a dust suppressant ..
Hem 01
existing
New
New
Regulatory
citation
§ 279.81
§ 279.82
On May 20,1992 {57 FR 21524), EPA
promulgated a listing determination for
used oils that are disposed. EPA
determined that it was not necessary to
list these used oils because those used
oils that present an undue risk to human
health and the environment typically
and frequently fail the toxicity
characteristic leaching procedure. Since
such used oils are identified as a RCRA
hazardous waste, EPA saw no need to
list any used oils as hazardous waste
when they are disposed.
Used oils that are identified as
hazardous wastes and are not
recyclable must be handled and
disposed of as hazardous wastes in
accordance with all applicable subtitle
C regulations. Used oils that are
hazardous wastes because they exhibit
one or more characteristics of hazardous
waste and are destined for disposal
must be accompanied by a hazardous
waste manifest when shipped off-site
and must be transported to a permitted
or interim status subtitle C disposal
facility. In addition, all wastes that-fail
the extraction procedure toxicity (EP)
test are currently prohibited from land
disposal under 40 CFR part 268.- -
Used oils that are not mixed with
listed hazardous wastes and do not
exhibit a characteristic may be disposed
of in an industrial solid waste landfill or
a municipal solid waste landfill. Used
oils that are disposed in municipal solid
waste landfills after October 9,1993,
must be managed in accordance with
the requirements of 40 CFR part 258. In
addition, all nonhazardous used oils that
cannot be recycled must be disposed of
in accordance with all applicable
Federal and State solid waste
regulations.
b. Use as a Dust Suppressant. In the
1985 proposed used oil management
standards, EPA proposed to list all used
oils as hazardous waste. Since the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments banned the use of all
hazardous wastes (those that are either
listed or exhibit a hazardous waste
characteristic other than ignitabilityj as
dest suppressants, the proposed listing
of used oils had the effect of banning the
use of any used oil as a dust
suppressant. Used oils are banned from
use as dust suppressants under the
statute only when mixed with a listed
hazardous waste or when they exhibit
the Toxicity Characteristic.
Although the Agency has determined
that used oils need not be listed as
hazardous wastes, EPA still believes
that used oils should not be used for
road oiling or as dust suppressants due
to the tendency for used oils to contain
hazardous wastes or be contaminated
with hazardous or toxic constituents.
There was overwhelming support from
commenters for a ban on the use of used
oil for road application and dust
suppression. Direct application of used
. oil to the land allows for direct exposure
of used oils and all potential
contaminants to the environment.
Therefore, in today's final rule, EPA is
banning the use of all used oils for road
or land application.
EPA recognizes that some states have
established road oil control programs, A
recent survey of states, however,
showed that road oiling is not widely
practiced, even in states that have such
programs. Today's role provides for
states who wish to continue to allow
road oiling under programs designed to
control such activities to petition EPA to
exempt their state from the national
ban. This petition would usually be part
of the state authorization package, but it
may be a separate petition [i.e., from an
-unauthorized state). The petition should,
show how':the state will prevent the
- road application'of used oil that is -
mixed with-hazardous waste or that
exhibits the toxicity characteristic. The.
petition should generally .demonstrate -
how the state will, minimize •" , •
environmental impacts of rdacVoiling.
E. Response to Major Comments
1. Listing Used Oil as a Hazardous
Waste
Commenters overwhelmingly
supported the,option not to list used oils
as hazardous waste but to rely on
management standards to-control
potential mismanagement of used oils.
In fact, commenters toihe 1991
Supplemental Notice overwhelmingly
supported listing Option Threei no,
listing of used oils and reliance on
management standards to control
mismanagement of used oils. EPA has
concluded that existing EPA -regulations,
and particularly the Toxicity" •
Characteristic, adequately control the-
disposal of used oils that are hazardous
wastes. The new-Federal criteriaior
municipal solid waste landfills in part
258, as well as the stbrmwater
regulations and TSCA'requiremehts,
adequately regulate the disposal of
nonhazardous used oils.
Based on public comments and the
recycling presumption, discussed in the
1991 Supplemental Notice; EPA has
determined that ii'sed oils that are
recycled do not pose a substantial
present or potential threat io human
health and the environment when thej
are managed in accordance with the
-standards promulgated today from the
lime they are generated until they' are
recycled in addition to the existing
requirements under other statutes or ,.
regulatory programs. In making a no-list
determination, EPA considered the
technical criteria for listing in 40 CFH
261.11, the fate and-possible
mismanagement of recycled used oils,
and the impact of the management
standards proposed in 1985 and 1991 on
the recycling of used oils, and as
discussed above, EPA has concluded
that the management standards issued .
today control those problems that have
occurred in used oil recycling.
Therefore, listing used oil is not
necessary to ensure adequate .
protection.
2. Mixtures
Commenters were nearly unauuuuus-'
in support, of EPA's proposal to- exclude
wipers and other materials
contaminated'with-used oil from the,
proposed listing. Based on public
-------
Federal Register / VoL 57. No. 176 / Thursday. September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41603
comments and commenter-submitted
data, the Agency has decided not to list
any used oils as hazardous wastes.
Therefore, mixtures of used oils and
other materials are not automatically
hazardous wastes via the mixture rule.
Mixtures of used oils and listed
hazardous wastes will he regulated as
hazardous wastes, whether they are
recycled or not Mixtures of used oil and
characteristic hazardous waste that
exhibit a hazardous waste characteristic
also must be managed as a hazardous
waste, whether they are recycled or not.
However, mixtures of nonhazardous
materials and used oils that exhibit a
characteristic by their own nature (/.e.,
the used oil is characteristically
hazardous prior to mixing) or mixtures
of used oil and characteristic hazarddus
waste that do not exhibit a
characteristic are subject to the
standards in part 279 if they are being
recycled. Of course, if such a mixture
cannot be recycled and the mixture
exhibits a characteristic, it must be
disposed in accordance with all
applicable subtitle C regulations.
Mixtures of used oil and other
materials generally will be regulated
under part 279. However, as discussed
above, EPA has exempted wastewaters
contaminated with very small amounts
of used oil, since such mixtures are not
likely to pose a significant hazard. If
mixtures of used oil and sorbent
materials from which used oil can not be
separated, however, are burned for
energy recovery, the Agency believes
that such recycling is acceptable. In
addition, it is subjected to the existing
used oil specification fuel requirements
that are in effect since 1985 and
recodified in part 279 today.
3. Controls on Disposal
Commenters supported EPA's
proposal to develop guidelines for the
disposal of non-hazardous used oil. The
standards being promulgated today as
part 279 apply to all used oils that are
being recycled. Based upon the
representations of commenters that
most used oil is recyclable and is indeed
recycled once it is collected, EPA has
adopted a "recycling presumption,"
which means that the Agency presumes
that all used oils will be recycled. A
used oil handler who has used oils that
cannot be recycled must dispose of the
used oil properly. Hazardous used oils
must be disposed in subtitle C facilities
and new Federal Criteria for municipal
solid waste landfills under part 258,
which go into effect in October, 1993,
will control nonhazardous used oils that
are disposed. For these reasons, EPA .
believes that establishing guidelines for
the disposal of used oils is unnecessary.
4. DIY-Generated Used Oils
Nearly all the commenters said that
listing used oil as a hazardous waste
would discourage the recycling of DIY-
generated used oil. As discussed above,
EPA is not listing any used oils as
hazardous wastes. As a result, the major
disincentive cited by commenters for
used oil generators to continue
accepting used oil from DIY generators
has been removed. Nonetheless, in the
September 1991 Supplemental Proposal,
EPA put forth several non-regulatory
incentive options for encouraging
increased collection and recycling of
DIY-generated used oils. EPA has not
evaluated all of these incentive
programs to date but will continue to
assess the need for DIY incentives, and
development of a non-regulatory scheme
for DIY used oils may be part of a future
used oil package.
5. Recycling Presumption Criteria
As discussed in VT.B of this preamble
almost all commenters supported the
concept of the recycling presumption,
but few supported establishment of
formal criteria of "nonrecyclability."
Commenters were concerned that the
criteria for rebutting the recycling
presumption (e.g., water content, BTU
value, or .any other measure) are not a
meaningful measure of recyclability,
since basically any used oil can be
recycled and the degree of treatment
prior to recycling is a function of the
cost to the used oil generator. EPA has
determined that it is not practical to set
such criteria. Therefore, EPA is not
establishing formal criteria on which to
base a determination of
nonrecyclability. Rather, a used oil
handler who is not recycling used oils
under part 279 must dispose of the used
oil in compliance with applicable
regulations: In other words, the used oil
handler then must determine whether
the used oil exhibits any characteristic
of hazardous waste and manage the
used oil accordingly.
6. Ban on Road Oiling
Commenters agreed that used oil's are
currently not widely used for road oiling
and dust suppression. In fact, 41 out of
50 states prohibit the use of used oil for
these purposes. The Agency is aware,
however, that the other states allow this
practice under certain permitting
conditions and at least One commenter
favored allowing road oiling under
specified conditions. Today's final rule
is promulgated pursuant to pre-HSWA
authority, specifically, the Used Oil
Recycling Act of 1980. Due to this fact, a
Federal ban on road oiling will be
effective only in unauthorized states on
the effective date of this rule. The ban
will not be effective in authorized states
until the state modifies its program oy
adopting the ban provision and EPA
approves the modification. Under the
provisions being promulgated today, a
state may submit a waiver to EPA to
allow road oiling in that state in
accordance with state laws and
regulations.
7, CERCLA Liability
Most comments received in response
to the 1991 Notice supported
implementationt)f the liability
exemption in CERCLA auction 114[c). In
addition, many commenters ravored
elimination of a small quantity generator
category in the part 279 standards. EPA
is not establishing any used oil
generator cut-off based on generation
rate. All used oil generators are subject
to uniform standards in part 279. As a
result, no change is necessary to trigger
the applicability of the exemption from
liability in CERCLA section 114(c). Any
used oil generator who meets the
statutory definition of a "service station
dealer" is eligible for the liability
exemption.
8. Storage
Most commenters agreed that
minimum technical requirements [e.g.,
tanks and containers kept in good
condition, clean up of spills associated
with used oil storage) are necessary for
the storage of used oil under part 279,
The regulations promulgated today
require that used oil be stored in tanks
and containers that are maintained in
good condition, with no visible leaks or
signs of deterioration. These minimum
standards provide a certain level of
control against leaks and releases from
storage units. Additional controls, such
as secondary containment for storage
areas provide further assurance against
migration of used oil and prevention
against the contamination of soil,
surface water, and ground water. EPA
believes that at used oil facilities the use
of continuously fed tanks for
aboveground storage is limited and
when such tanks are being used the
owner/operator would install proper
shut off valves and other controls to
ensure that flow of matei ial between the
tanks is restricted in case of a tank
rupture or other accidental releases.
9. Secondary Containment
Due to commenter's concerns
regarding the technical and financial
burden associated with the 40 CFR parts
264/265, subpart J secondary
containment requirements, the Agency
is not requiring full secondary
-------
41604
Federal Register-/'VoL 57..--No.-47.9 i/-1..Th-u^dayi,,.,Septem.bef,;:lQt .1992 /'Rales a ad Regulations ;
containment, such as double-walled
tanks, for used oil storage. Used oil
transporters, processing and re-refining
facilities, and burner facilities must
instead equip their tanks and containers
with secondary containment consisting
of dikes, berms, or retaining walls and a
floor. All components of the
containment system must be sufficiently
impervious to oil to prevent any used oil
released to the containment system from
migrating out to the soil, ground water,
or surface waters. EPA believes that tbe
requirements promulgated today are less
burdensome than the sapart J
requirements, yet they are sufficiently
protective of human health and the
environment. Although, subpart J
standards are not required by today's
rule, such requirements, such as a
double-walled tank, however, would be
sufficient for compliance with today's
requirements.
10. Financial Responsibility
In the September 1991 Supplemental
Notice, EPA proposed to defer the
establishment of financial responsibility
requirements for the clean up and
closure of used oil generator sites and
used oil facilities where used oil is
stored in aboveground tanks and
containers. Based on coranienters9
concerns regarding the costs and
availability of financial assurance
mechanisms, the Agency is not requiring
used oil handlers to demonstrate •
financial responsibility for releases of
used oil, except as provided under 40
CFR part 280 for underground storage
tanks. EPA agrees with the commenters
that a formal financial responsibility
requirement similar to that in parts 264/
265 is overly burdensome for the
majority of used oil handlers. In
addition, such a requirement should not
be necessary because used oil generally
is not stored for long periods of time due
to its recyclability and marketability as
a commodity. Thus, there is little
likelihood of catastrophic spills that
might require expensive clean up
activities. EPA determined that financial
responsibility requirements established
in subpart H of part 264/265 is not
necessary since unit closure requirement
rather than a facility closure
requirement is imposed today. The
facilities managing used oil in land-
based units, however, must be closed
like RCRA subtitle C landfills, if the
used oil contained in the units subject to
closure exhibits characteristic of
toxicity.
11. Permit-By-Rule
The majority of commenters believed
that the permit-by-rule mechanism was
unnecessary for implementation and
enforcement of the used oil management
system under part 279. EPA agrees with
the commenters and has not established
any permit-by-rule requirements for ,
used oil facilities, The Agency believes
that the recordkeeping requirements in
part 279 will provide sufficient
information for enforcement of the used
oil management standards. The Agency
decided against the permit-by-rale
requirement because the requirements in
today's rale are basic management
practices that are largely self-
implementing and do not require
additional permit consideration of site-
specific conditions.
12. Definition of Used Oil
In 1985 and in 1991, EPA proposed a,
definition of used oil that followed the
statutory definition of used oil, but
included used synthetic oils within the
definition. Several commenters
contended that synthetic oils should not
be included because they are not in the
statutory definition. The definition of
used oil promulgated today, as the
definition proposed in 1985 and 1991, is
very similar to the existing definition in
40 CFR 266.40{b) and the statutory
definition in section 1004[36) of RCRA,
The only change is the inclusion of
synthetic oils within the definition,
including those derived from coal or
shale. As discussed in the 1985
preamble, EPA believes that synthetic
oils should be included in the definition
of used oil due to the fact that these oils
generally are used for the same
purposes as petroleum-derived oils, are
mixed and managed in the same manner
after use, and present the same level of , ~
hazard as petroleum-based oils.
VII. Effective Data
Under RCRA section 3010(b),
hazardous waste regulations are
generally to become" effective six
months after final rule promulgation.
EPA believes that the policy reasons for
allowing facilities six months'to come
into compliance with new RCRA
hazardous waste rules also apply to
today's used oil management standards.
Therefore, today's final rule for the used
oil listing decision and used oil
management standards will become
effective on March 8,1993. However, as
explained below, in most states the rule
will take effect in two to three years, as
states adopt the new requirements.
VIII. State Authorization
A. Applicability in Authorized States
Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA
may authorize qualified states to
administer and enforce the RCRA
program for hazardous wastes within
the State. (See, 40 CFR part 271 for the
standards arid requirements for
authorization.) Section 3006(h) of RCRA
• allows EPA' to authorize .state used oil
management programs in the same
manner as state hazardous waste
programs, even if EPA does not Identify,
or list used oil as a hazardous waste, in
addition, EPA retains enforcement
authority under sections 3008, 7003, and
• 3013 of RCRA following authorization of
State used oil programs, although
authorized States have primary
enforcement authority. Sections
3008(d)(4), (d)(5), and (d)(7) of RCRA
further clarify that EPA-may assess •
criminal penalties for violations of used
oil standards even if it does not identify
used -oil as a hazardous waste. •
For rules written under RCRA
provisions that predate the Hazardous
and Solid Waste-Amendments of 1984
("HSWA"). States with final
authorization administer their
hazardous waste programs entirely in
lieu of EPA's federal program. The
Federal requirements no longer apply in
the authorized State. -When new, more
stringent Federal requirements are
promulgated or enacted, the State must
develop equivalent authorities within
the timeframe s'et oat'in the part 271
regulations. The new Federal
requirements, however, do not take
effect in an authorized State until the
State adopts the requirements as a State
law. EPA may not enforce them until it
approves the State requirements as a''
revision to the authorized State
program.
The Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 revised this system
for requirements and prohibitions.
imposed under provisions added to- the
statute by the 1984 Amendments. New
HSWA rules take effect in authorized
States at the "same time that'they, take
effect in nonauthorized States/EPA is
directed to carry out the HSWA
requirements in authorized States until
the State is granted authorization-to do
so. While States must still revise State
law to impose HSWA requirements to
achieve or retain RCRA authorization,
the Federal rules apply until they do so,
Today's rales are generally more
stringent than the preexisting Federal
rules, which exempted recycled used
oils from regulation as hazardous
wastes, but provided management
standards only for the burning of. pff-
specification used oils. (See, former 40
CFR part 266, subpart E.) Thus, states
will be required to revise their programs
to address today's rules. Moreover, the
requirements for burning off-
specification used oil promulgated today
are more extensive than the preexisting
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57v No;178 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations -11605
rules. EPA consequently expects that all
States that adopted rules to-reflect the
existing requirements will need to revise
their rules to be equivalent to the new
"off-spec" standards.
Today's rules, however, are
promulgated under section 3014(a) of
RCRA, a provision that predates the
1984 amendments. The rules will take
effect in states that do not have final
authorization six months from the date
that this rule is published in the Federal
Register. In authorized states, the rules
will not be applicable until a State
revises its program to adopt equivalent
requirements under State law.
40 CFR 271.21(e)(2) requires States
that have final authorization to modify
their programs to reflect Federal
program changes and to submit their
modifications to EPA for approval The
deadline by which the State must
modify its program to reflect today's
rules is July 1,1994, if a statutory change
is not needed, or JulyJU 1995, if a
statutory change is necessary. These
deadlines may be extended in certain
cases under 40 CFR 271.21(e)(3). Once
EPA approves the State's submission,
the State requirements become federally
enfqrceable subtitle C requirements.
Unauthorized States that submit their
final applications for initial
authorization less than 12 months after
the effective date of this rule are not
required to include standards equivalent
to these in their applications. Such
states, however, must modify their
programs to reflect today's rules under
the schedule described above. States
that submit final applications for initial
authorization more than 12 months after
the effective date of this rule must
include standards equivalent to these
rules in their applications. 40 CFR 271.3
sets out the requirements a state must
meet when submitting a final
application for initial authorization. '
States with authorized RCRA
programs already may have
requirements similar to those in today's
rule. These States may continue to
enforce and administer their standards
as a matter of State law. Such State
rules, however, have not been assessed
against the Federal rales promulgated
today to determine whether they meet
the statutory and regulatory
requirements for authorization. Thus,
such State rules cannot be considered
part of the Federal RCRA program. EPA
may not enforce them at this time.
B. Administration
As discussed in section VI.D. of the
preamble, a used oil handler (e.g.,
transporter, processor/re-refiner, burner
of off-specification rule, and marketer)
who has not notified the EPA of the used
oil management activity (e.g, used oil
transporting, used oil processing and re-
refining, fuel oil marketing, and burning
of used oil as off-specifigation fuel) must
notify the Agency of used oil activities
and obtain an EPA identification
number. The used oil generators are not
subjected to the notification or EPA
identification number requirement.
Since 1985, the existing used oil
marketers and burners of off-
specification fuel have notified and have
obtained the EPA identification
numbers.
Used oil handlers who would be new
to used oil recycling business must
notify of their activity under regulations
established to implement section 3010 of
RCRA.28 That is, in the unauthorized
states, a used oil handler who has not
previously notified of the used oil
management activities must obtain an
EPA notification form from EPA and
submit the form (or a letter) 90 days
from publication of these rules. In
authorized states, the notification
deadline will be established under state
law (which must be no later than 90.
days from effective date of state's used
oil rulers). The used oil handlers will
obtain notification forms from state and
submit forms (or letters) with state.
Those used oil generators who intend
to become eligible for an exemption
from the third-party liability under the
CERCLA section 114(c) are required to
use the used oil transporters with EPA
identification number for sending used
oil for offsite recycling. In authorized
states, such generators must make sure
that the used oil transporter they intend
to use has notified the Agency and has
an EPA identification number.
IX. Relationship of This Mule to Other
Programs
A, RCRA
Land-Disposal Restrictions
HSWA mandated that' the Agency
promulgate land disposal prohibition
determinations under a specific
schedule for wastes identified and listed
prior to the enactment of HSWA (RCRA
sections 3004(d), 3004(e), and 3004(g)(4),
42 U.S.C, 6924 (d), (e) and (g)(4). If the '
Agency failed to promulgate land
disposal restrictions by the dates
specified in section 3004(g)(4), the
wastes were absolutely prohibited from
land disposal after May 8,1990 (or in
85 The regulations established today regulate
used oil under the authority of section 3014(a) of
RCRA. Since EPA.is not listing or identifying
recycled used oil as a hazardous waste under
today's rule, section 3010 of RCRA technically does
not apply. EPA is, however, incorporating the 3010
notification requirements into its used oil
management standards.
some cases November 8,1986, or July 8,
1987). HSWA also requires the Agency
to make a land disposal prohibition
determination for any hazardous waste
that is newly identified or listed in 40
CFR part 261 after November 8,1984,
within six months of the date the new
listing is promulgated (RCRA section
3004(g)(4), 42 U.S.C. 8924(g)(4). However,
the statute does not provide for
automatic restriction or prohibition of
the land disposal of such wastes if EPA
fails to meet this deadline.
Since used oils that are recycled are
exempt from subtitle C regulation under
§ 261.8(a)(4), used oils that are recycled
are not subject to the land disposal l
restrictions requirements of 40 CFR part
268. In effect, today's part 279 standards
are crafted to restrict the land disposal
of used oils and, therefore, the used oil
management standards further the goals
of the LDR program. Used oils that are
disposed and exhibit a hazardous
characteristic or ere mixed with a listed
hazardous waste remain subject to all
applicable subtitle C requirements,
including the land disposal restrictions
requirements of 40 CFR part 268.
Wastes, including used oils that are
destined for disposal, that exhibit the
TC are considered newly identified ,
wastes and are not yet covered by the
LDR, unless also EP Toxic (see the Third
Land Disposal Restrictions Rule, June 1,
1990, 55 FR 22520). EPA published an
Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking for the land disposal
restriction of TC wastes (56 FR 55160,
October 24,1991) and continues to
evaluate the treatability and capacity
analyses for these wastes. The Agency
is currently developing a final rule to
address this issue.
B. MARPOL 73/78
The International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships
(1973), as modified by the 1978 Protocol
addressing the same topic, is known as
MARPOL 73/78. This is an international
agreement that focuses on preventing
ship-generated ocean pollution.
Annexes I-V of MAKPOL 73/78 address
ocean pollution from oil, noxious liquid
substances {i.e., bulk liquid chemicals),
harmful substances, sewage, and
garbage, respectively.
Concerning today's rale, the Agency
believes that used oil and hazardous
waste management requirements apply
to used oil generated upon ships only
upon removal of the oily waste from the
ship. Therefore, used oil on-board is not
subject to RCRA requirements, and
MARPOL requirements applicable to on-
board oil wastes (hazardous and non-
-------
41606 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 /'Riles arid Regulations
hazardous) wiF not conflict with the
part 279 requirements.
The Agency has determined that the
ship owner/opera tor, the owner of the
used oil, and the person removing the
used oil from the ship can all be
considered "generators" of the used oil
for purposes of 40 CFR 260.10. Any of
these parties could perform any or all of
the duties of the generator,
C. Clean Water Act (CWA)
The Clean Water Act authorizes EPA
to control the discharge of pollutants
into navigable waters. Section 311(b)(5)
of the Act establishes reporting
requirements for the release of
hazardous substances and oils into
navigable waters, which include
wetlands. Concerning used oil, releases
of oil to navigable waters that (1) cause
a sheen to appear on the surface, (2)
violate applicable water quality
standards, or (3) cause a sludge or
emulsion to be deposited beneath the
surface of the water or adjoining
shorelines is reportable.
The Clean Water Act and recently
enacted Oil Pollution Act authorize EPA
to regulate activities that may harm
navigable waters. As part of this
mandate, EPA has established the Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure
(SPCC) program, which is designed to
protect surface water from oil
contamination. Each facility subject to
the requirements is required to prepare
and maintain an SPCC plan, which
includes provisions for appropriate
containment or diversionary structures
to prevent discharged oil from reaching
navigable waters. Concerning today's
rale, used oil handlers must comply with
all applicable SPCC requirements
contained in 40 CFR part 112. EPA has,
however, built the part 279 requirements
upon the existing SPCC rales to
minimize disruptions to existing
regulatory programs.
D. Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA)
Section 104 of CERCLA authorizes the
federal government to respond to any
release or substantial threat of a release
into the environment of any hazardous
substance and any release or threatened
release of a pollutant or contaminant
that may present an imminent and
substantial danger to public health.
Section 101(14) defines the term
"hazardous substance" and section
101(33) defines "pollutant or
contaminant." Both of these definitions
expressly exclude "petroleum, including
crude oil or any fraction thereof unless
a petroleum waste has been specifically
listed under RCRA or other
environmental statutes. The Agency has
interpreted the petroleum exclusion to
Include crude oil and fractions of crude
oil, including hazardous substances that
are indigenous in petroleum substances.
However, hazardous substances that are
added to petroleum or that increase in
concentration solely as a result of
contamination of the petroleum are not
part of the petroleum and thus are not
excluded.26 Therefore, used oil that
contains a hazardous substance due to
contamination is subject to CERCLA
reporting, response, and liability
provisions.
R Hazardous Materials Transportation
Act (HMTA)
The U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) regulates the
transportation of hazardous materials 27
in commerce (49 CFR parts 171 to 179).
The regulations address: (a) Interstate
transportation of hazardous materials
by motor vehicle, rail car, aircraft and
vessel and (b) intrastate transportation
of certain hazardous materials
(hazardous wastes, hazardous
substances, and flammable cryogenic
liquids in portable tanks and cargo
tanks) by motor vehicle. Used oil may
be flammable or combustible under
DOT classifications. In addition, used
oil that exhibits a characteristic of
hazardous waste and is destined for
disposal is classified as a hazardous
material due to the requirement that
hazardous used oils being disposed must
be accompanied by a hazardous waste
manifest.
Used oil generators (shippers) have to
comply with any and all applicable DOT
regulations for identification and
classification, packaging, marking,
labeling, and manifesting of used oil that
is destined for disposal. Transporters
(carriers) will have to comply with any
and all applicable DOT regulations for
placarding, manifesting, recordkeeping,
reporting, and incident response for
such used oils.
F. Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
TSCA authorizes EPA to control the
manufacture, import, use and disposal of
chemical substances. Section 6(e) of
TSCA mandates EPA to control the
manufacture, import, use, and disposal
of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). A
primary use of PCBs, a viscous oil, was
as an insulating material for electrical
equipment (dielectric). PCBs were
almost always mixed with mineral oil,
20 Memorandum from Francis Blake, EPA's
General Counsel, concerning the CERCLA
petroleum exclusion, July 31,1987,
23 Any material identified or classified as a
hazardous waste under RCRA is classified a
hazardous material under DOT (49 CFR 171.3).
silicone, or other oily materials. Because
of the potential hazards posed by the
uncontrolled use and disposal of PCBs,
EPA has established a comprehensive
program to control PCBs from cradle to
grave.
TSCA regulations control the use of
PCBs used for dust suppression. 40 CFR
761.20(d) prohibits the use of "waste oil"
that contains any detectable
concentration of PCBs as a sealant,
coating, or dust control agent.
Concerning today's rule, used oil used
for dust suppression must meet the
requirements of both RCRA and TSCA.
A release of 1 pound of PCBs into the
environment must be reported
immediately to the National Response
Center in accordance with section 103(c)
of CERCLA. However, TSCA regulations
require that any spill of material
containing 50 ppm or greater PCBs into
sewers, drinking water, surface water,
grazing lands, or vegetable gardens must
be reported. Concerning today's rule, if
the used oil contains PCBs, the most
stringent, applicable reporting
requirement must be followed,,
X. Regulatory Impact Analysis
Today's final rule combines a decision
not to list recycled used oil with a set of
tailored management standards for
recycled used oil Under section 3014 of
RCRA applicable to used oil .generators
and subsequent handlers. This section
of the preamble summarizes the cost
and economic impact screening analysis
of the 1992 used oil management
standards.
Executive Order 12291 (46 FR13193J
requires that a regulatory agency
determine whether a new regulation will
be "major" and, if so, that a Regulatory
Impact Analysis (RIA) be conducted.
Three criteria are used to define a major
rule: (1) That the rule has an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million or
more, (2) that the rule creates a major
increase in costs or prices, or (3) that the
rule has significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or the ability of
US based enterprises to compete with
foreign-based enterprises in domestic or
export markets, The Environmental
Protection Agency believes that the 1992
Used Oil Management Standards do
not comprise a major rule; and therefore
a complete RIA is not required. The
results of this cost screening analysis
support this conclusion. A further
discussion of the cost screening analysis
is available in the regulatory docket for
today's rule in a report titled, "Cost and
Economic Impact of 1992 Used Oil
Management Standards," August 4,
1992,
-------
Federal Register 7, Vol. ,57rNb<, 176 •.-•/ Thursday^ September 10, 1992 A Rules and Regulations 41607
Based on the preliminary cost
screening analysis for the options
presented in the September
Supplemental Notice, public comments
received, and subsequent analysis in
response to comments, the Agency
estimates that these management
.standards will most likely impose
nationwide annualized compliance costs
of less than $10 million per year, within
a range of between $4 and $11 million.
Costs of this magnitude are not expected
to result in measurable changes in
recycled used oil flows, either for on-site
uses or within the commercial recycling
sectors. With possible localized
exceptions, the Agency does not expect
the standards to result in a substantial
number of business failures among used
oil recycling companies or to affect
employment, prices, or international
trade in any measurable degree.
Although the Agency has not been
able to adequately quantify the benefits
to the environment or to human health
of these management standards, due to
the lack of comprehensive data on the
frequency and extent of used oil
.releases to the environment, EPA
believes that today's decisions will
result in two principal types of benefits.
First, by requiring specific secondary
containment measures for used oil
storage and other tankage at all major
used oil handling.facilities, the Agency
is providing an additional safeguard
against any substantial environmental'
release of used oil to the soil, to ground
waters, or to surface waters at points
where releases would be most likely to
occur.
The Agency does not expect today's
decisions by themselves to substantially
expand used oil recycling. However, it is
a relatively low cost insurance policy
against the environmental
mismanagement of used oil resources
within the commercial recycling sectors.
Implementation of section 3014
management standards limits CERCLA
liability for those automobile servicing
facilities that accept do-it-yourselfer
(DIY) used oil for recycling and thus
encourages expansion of collection
locations. Thus, today's rule is
consistent with the could provide a
necessary complement to a wide variety
of possible future private sector, State,
or federal government initiatives to
encourage increased recycling of
household and other do-it-yourselfer
used oil not presently being adequately
managed and which is generally not
effectively controlled by traditional
regulatory approaches.
The remainder of this section of the
preamble briefly describes the major
options for management standards
considered by the Agency in reaching
today's decision, summarizes estimated
compliance cost, and reviews expected
impacts,
A. Regulatory Options Considered
EPA has considered a wide range of
management standards options over the
years, ranging from a listing of used oil
as a hazardous waste under virtually
full subtitle C standards for generators
and handlers to various tailored options
under section 3014(a) of BCRA. A
summ'ary of the approximate compliance
costs for several of these alternatives is
presented in Table X.I.
TABLE X-1.—HISTORICAL COMPARISON
OF COMPLIANCE COSTS OF OPTIONS
•CONSIDERED FOR USED GIL MANAGE-
MENT STANDARDS
[Millions of 1991 dollars per year]
listing recycled used oil as hazardous
waste without tailored 3014 standards
(1985 proposal option updated to
1991) '
Section 3014 management options (1985
proposal updated to 1991)2
1991 supplemental notice3
1992 final rule....i
$500
$204
$2-25
$4-11
1 Option assumed burning as used oil fuel under
part 266, subpart E, rather than as hazardous waste
under subparts D and H. Costs are updated to 1991
from the 1985 RIA to allow for inflation and certain
intervening regulatory changes such as the under-
ground storage tanfc (UST) rule. However, costs to
this historical proposal do not include estimates for
corrective action for prior releases or cost implica-
tions of the mixture and derived from rules. Costs
are not revised to address comments on the 1985
proposed rule.
2 Costs updated from the 1985 RIA to allow for
inflation, but not to respond to comments.
3 Costs are as presented in table X.D.1. (56 FR
48071, September 23, 1991). They are not revised
to address comments. However, see subsection A.2
below for discussion of other cost estimaies.
1. Listing Recycled Used Oil Without
Tailored Standards
Listing recycled used oil, without
issuing special section 3014
Management Standards or otherwise
exempting recycled used oil from
subtitle C regulations, would have
subjected recycled used oil generators,
handlers, and users to the full spectrum
of hazardous waste management
standards. These would include
recordkeeping and manifesting of all
shipments, storage requirements
including secondary containment,
facility closure and financial assurance,
and additional burning restrictions. In
the extreme it would also impose facility
corrective action for prior releases,
although this was not covered in the
1985 RIA or in the present update.
Since this was not presented as an
explicit option in the September 1991
Supplemental Notice, the Agency did
not present compliance cost estimates
for Full subtitle C management of
recycled oil in the 1991 Cost and Impact
Screening Analysis. However, a similar
Full subtitle C management scenario
was presented as Alternative 1 in the
Regulatory Impact Analysis (November,
1985) accompanying the 1985 used oil
proposed rulemaking. The Agency has
subsequently revised and updated the
1985 estimate for this regulatory
alternative to account for intervening
changes in certain subtitle C
requirements, recycle market changes
and general cost inflation. We found
that, even assuming retention of the
present part 266 subpart E used oil
burning requirements (in place of the
part 266, subparts D and H hazardous
waste burning standards for boilers and
furnaces), the incremental annual cost of
subtitle C management for recycled used
oil would still cost about $500 million
per year, or about $0.53 per gallon of oil
recycled. This does not include
consideration of additional possibly
substantial costs for prior release
corrective action or for implications of
the mixing and derived-from rules.
The Agency has long recognized that
used oil management standards drawn
too stringently could be,
counterproductive: that by imposing too
high a cost on,acceptable forms of
recycling, the regulations could actually
encourage increased dumping and other
environmentally undesirable practices
by generators, commercial haulers, and
others.
Although incremental management
costs of $0.53 per gallon for recycling
would still be substantially less than
alternative subtitle C disposal options
for most generators, costs in this range
would also provide a strong incentive to
avoid regulation altogether by engaging
in illegal dumping and improper land
disposal and burning activity. The
Agency notes that virtually all used oil
fuel is currently sold for little more than
and in some instances less than 53 cents
per gallon: Imposing regulatory
requirements which cost this amount
would virtually eliminate recycling
incentives within most of the
commercial recycling sector.
2. Tailored Standards Under Section
3014
More appropriate to today's final rule,
the Agency has also considered a wide
range of tailored standards under
section 3014(a) of RCRA. The estimated
annual cost in the RIA for the 1985
proposal was $167 million ($204 million
updated to 1991). The 1985 proposal
closely paralleled subtitle C Standards
in many respects.
-------
41608 Federal Register / Vol. 57. No. 176 / '
Rules and Regalations
The September 1991 Supplemental
Notice provided additional options
which were substantially less costly
than earlier proposals, but which still
covered all sectors and a wide range of
permitting, testing, spill prevention and
cleanup, storage, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements.
The nationwide annual costs
estimated for the 1991 Supplemental
Proposal ranged from $25 million per
year (with no small quantity generator
exemption) to about $2 million per year
with an extensive SQG exemption.
Various commenters criticized the
1991 estimates as being too low. In a few
instances it was argued that EPA's unit
costs for specific activities or services
were too low. Another criticism was
that the Agency has overestimated the
degree to which various standards were
already being met, either through normal
business practices at establishments
(e.g., generator recordkeeping regarding
used ail sales transactions] or due to the
pre-existence of other federal. State or
local regulatory requirements (e.g.,
OSHA workplace regulations, SPCC
spill prevention and storage
requirements, or local fire ordinances).
The Agency has reviewed its
estimating assumptions in detail. While,
in the main, most of the assumptions
and resulting cost estimates in the
September 1991 costs analysis are
reasonable given the limited available
data the Agency was able to gather, we
agree that many of the estimates are
subject to substantial uncertainties and
should be interpreted accordingly. In
addition, severs! possible management
standard elements were not included in
the cost screening, either due to
oversight or to the premise of the Notice
that certain elements might be
considered subsequently in a Phase II
proposal. Examples of additional
management standard options and
annual costs that could have been
added in a more extensive analysis
include the following:
• Subtitle C secondary containment
for used oil collection and processor
tankage—$8 million.
• Closure and financial responsibility
for processors and rerefmers—$2
million.
« Mandatory testing of all incoming
and outgoing shipments of used oil—•
$15-20 million.
Though not costed in detail,, with
these and other possible design features,
especially more extensive requirements
on the nation's nearly 700,000
commercial, industrial, and large farms
used oil generators (though not
necessarily included explicitly in the
September Notice), the national cost
estimates for used oil regulation in the
1991 Proposal could well have exceeded
$100 million per year. On the other hand,
several of the options discussed,
especially combinations involving small
quantity or other generator exemptions
and only selective controls on other
sectors, would have suggested costs on
the order of $10 million or less.
Based on 750 million gallons per year
of used oil entering the commercial used
oil recycling system, national
management standards costing $100 to
$200 million per year would translate
roughly into an average of 13 to 26 cents
per gallon of oil recycled'. As stated
above, this additional cost (which EPA
estimates to equal or comprise a
significant fraction of the price of
products derived from used oil) would
have dramatically reduced used oil
recycling and may have led to increased
uncontrolled disposal.
B. Final Rule Compliance Costs
As described in section VI of this
preamble, today's rulemaking pertains
only to land based management
standards for recycled used oil under
section 3014(a) of RCRA. It does not
impose hazardous waste listing or
further regulation of used oil processing
or rerefining residuals, which continue
to be subject to testing for toxieity
characteristics under existing
regulations prior to disposal.
1. Nationwide Annual Costs
Table X.2 summarizes the nationwide
annual compliance costs for today's
rale, by affected sector and for each
substantive requirement. Total
estimated costs range between'
approximately $4.1 to $11.0 million per
year, with a best estimate of about $7.5
million. The major portion of the total
falls on the generating sector ($2.7 to
$5.9 million, mostly for future spiB
cleanups of environmental releases) and
on the used oil processing sector($L3 to
$4.8 million, primarily for biennial
reporting, secondary containment of
tank storage areas, additional
operational recor-dkeepirag, and new
closure requirements).
TABLE X-2.—NATIONWIDE ANNUAL COMPLIANCE COSTS FOR t992 USED OIL MANAGEMENT STANDARDS
[In thousands of dollars!
Requirement
Storage:
Label tanks and drums ~ _
Drums and tanks in "good" condition ....
Secondary containment
Reporting, planning, recordkeeping:
Identification numbers
Biennial report. —
Analysis plan _ .. ._. .
Contingency plan. ..... ^.
Shipment and delivery records ^
Operating record ._
Closure _ „
Response to environmental releases
Totals
Generators
502
61 99
2 183-5 261
2 746-5863
Independent
collectors
2
1*1
15-179
•j
5
y* Hfl7
Burners (oft-
specl
3
TT
tt-t38
14-144
Processors/
reraffners/fuet
oik dealers
4-5
O
59-364
t*\
1 18-1 55
ff-T2
86-416
435-590
613-2938
3-4
t 327-4 784
Totals
511-512
61-99
85-1'281
•)
• 118-1i55
9-12
86-1<16
435-590
613-2938
2 T91-5 270
4,110-110975
re uiremerrt 8S
sub'ect to the rea.uirement. t»" no incremental cost Is incurred, white a blank space indicates the facility type is not subject to the
For several of the line item
requirements, a wide range of estimated
costs is presented, reflecting substantial
uncertainty regarding the extent of
existing baseline compliance with the
newly imposed standards. As noted in
the preamble to the September 1991
Supplemental Notice, many existing
federal, State, and local government
regulations already directly regulate or
impinge upon many of the same
practices addressed by today's1 rates.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday. September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41609
For, example, at least 7 States regulate
used oils as hazardous wastes in
varying degrees, and both the federal oil
spill prevention and control and counter
measures program (SPCC) and OSHA
regulations relate to preparedness and
prevention as well as cleanup of spilled
Vils including used oils.
In particular, it is notable that SPCC
regulations cover all of the 90 percent or
more of all major used oil handling
facilities (collectors, processors, fuel oil
dealers, and burners) that are located
near surface waters. Although the
presence of these other regulations has
in some instances allowed the Agency
to forgo new regulatory requirements, in
other cases, lack of data or definitive
standards contributes to considerable
uncertainty regarding the adequacy of
existing standards or extent of
compliance. For some additional used
oil requirements contained in today's
rule, such as spill cleanup for non-SPCC
generators or closure soil remediation at
processing facilities, EPA does not have
sufficiently comprehensive information
on the frequency or extent of necessary
compliance actions to estimate potential
costs more precisely.
2. Individual Facility Costs
Costs at the individual facility level
can vary widely, depending on baseline
compliance assumptions and differing
sector requirements in today's
management standards. In general, the
lowest unit costs will be experienced by
generators, since they face the fewest
and (usually) the least costly new
requirements. The vast majority of
generators will face no incremental
costs other than tank or container
labeling.
Compliance costs at the individual
facility level are presented in Table X.3
for commercial used oil handlers and
burners of off-specification used oil fuel.
Within the commercial management
sectors, the lowest facility-level costs
will be born by smaller independent
collectors and industrial boiler and
furnace burners of off-specification fuel.
Burners that only burn specification fuel
experience no new requirements and are
not considered within the scope of
affected facilities in this analysis. For
independent collectors and affected
burners, the higher cost facilities are
those requiring upgraded secondary
containment, including both secondary
release containment berms and
impervious pavement in storage areas.
Independent collectors may also incur
environmental release costs fpr releases
outside of secondary containment areas.
Such facilities may or may not currently
be in compliance with baseline SPCC
and OSHA regulations. Facilities in
these sectors with adequate preexisting
secondary containment (50 to 90 percent
of facilities according to EPA's costing
assumptions) will otherwise face
negligible new cost requirements.
TABLE X-3.—ANNUAL FACILITY-LEVEL
COMPLIANCE COSTS: COMMERCIAL
USED OIL HANDLERS AND BURNERS
3, Cost Per Gallon of Used Oil
The total annual costs of these section
3014 management standards ($4.1 to
$11.0 million per year), averaged across
the nation's total annual recycling rate
of about 900 million gallons per year,
approximates 0.5 to 1.2 cents per gallon
of recycled oil. Focusing only on the 775
million gallons per year flowing through
the commercial recycling system, the
total nationwide compliance cost of $1.3
to $4.8 million for the recycling sectors
would translate into an average cost to
commercial recyclers of about 0.2 to 0.6
cents per gallon by EPA's estimates.
Table X.4 summarizes the Agency's
cost per gallon estimates in more detail
for affected facilities in the commercial
handling and burning sectors. The
highest cost per gallon figures are at the
small processor and fuel oil dealer-
blender facilities, with costs at the most
affected of these facilities possibly
ranging as high as 2.2 cents per gallon.
These high relative costs are explained
primarily by the relatively low volume
of used oil handled and the relatively
high fixed costs of secondary
containment and closure requiring soil
cleanup,
TABLE X-4.—NATIONAL AVERAGE AND IN-
DIVIDUAL FACILITY-LEVEL COMPLIANCE
COST-PER-GALLON: COMMERCIAL USED
OIL HANDLERS AND BURNERS
Facility type
Independent collector
Minor processors
Major processors . ., .
Re-refiners ,
Fuel oil dealers:
Low estimate
High estimate
Total handlers:
Low estimate
High estimate
Burners
Total
num-
ber of
facili-
ties '
383
70
112
4
25
100
594
669
1.155
Cost range for
affected facilities
(dollars per year)
$6-41,976
4,280-22,389
6.989-44,155
9,246-64,671
4,280-22,389
4,260-22,389
6-64,671
6-64,671
2-335
1 The number of facilities affected by individual
requirements varies by requirement, from zero cost
(unaffected) up to all facilities affected.
The most substantial unit costs will be
born by facilities in the processing
sectors (including processors, rerefiners.
and fuel oil dealers that blend off-
specification fuel). All facilities in this
sector will face additional record
keeping,, reporting, and contingency
planning as well as new tank closure
requirements. In addition, the cost
estimates assume that some fraction will
require upgraded secondary
containment, Closure soil treatment, and
release response costs to meet today's
standards.
Facility type
Independent
collector.....
Minor
processors.
Major
processors .
Rerefiners
Fuel oil
dealers:
Low
esti-
mate
High
esti-
mate
Total
handlers:
Low
esti-
mate
High
esti-
mate
Burners
Total
num-
ber of
facili-
ties
383
70
112
4
25
100
594
669
1,155
Facility cost
per gallon
(cents)
0.00-0.66
0.43-2.24
0.14-0.88
0.05-0.32
0.43-2.24
0.43-2.24
0.00-2.24
0.00-2.24
0.00-0.22
National
average
cost per
gallon
(cents)
0.02-0.16
0.46-1.20
0.16-0.50
0.05-0.16
'0.17-0.45
!0.69-1.82
0.16-0.20
0.48-0.58
'0.00-0.03
1 Includes both on-spec and off-spec oil, for a
otal of 66 million gallons for fuel oil dealers and
55.1 million gallons for burners. If considered sepa-
rately, off-spec oil will be a fraction of tfiis total,
which would make the cost-per-gallon higher.
In contrast, larger processors and
F33T£ifir(opc O17OT1 frlii^co TArHli aimlljaf imfiro
stringent requirements, would
experience substantially lower per
gallon compliance costs, due to the
conomies of scale inherent in their
arger oil volumes and the nature of the
major compliance activities. Among the
arger facilities in the processing and
rerefiner groups, even the worst case
situations would still face per gallon
costs of less than one cent per gallon of.
oil. Most facilities would see costs less
than a half-cent per gallon, and a
substantial fraction would be under a
quarter-cent.
- 'Final Rule Impacts
1. Effects on Used Oil Flows
Costs for generators are primarily
Fixed costs or spill clean-up costs which
may correlate only weakly with the
volume of .used oil handled.. Therefore,
SPA does not expect generator
compliance costs to influence
acceptance of household Do-It-Yourself
'DIY) used oil or to adversely change the
relative costs of recycling compared
-------
41610 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday,^September^ 10,^ 1992 / Rules and Regulations
with dumping or disposal. Thus, used oil
flows to recycling should not be
negatively affected by these rules, and
recycling flows could be positively
affected due to reduced spills and spill
losses and the CERCLA exemptions for
service stations.
Costs for the commercial recycling
sectors (including collectors, processors,
rerefiners, and fuel oil dealers) total $1.3
to 4.8 million per year. If substantial
enough, these costs should have affected
recycle flows, either by causing a loss of
collector/processor facilities or by being
shifted back onto generators and
providing a disincentive to recycle.
However, set against 775 million gallon
per year entering the commercial recycle
flows, these total compliance costs
average only 0.2 to 0.6 cents per gallon.
These costs are not large enough to
substantially affect generator decisions
concerning recycling, even if all these
costs were passed back to the generator
in pickup charges. In the worst case, a
few small processors could face unit
costs as high as 2.2 cents per gallon if
they have to install secondary
containment and also face soil removal
treatment closure costs. This does not
suggest major repercussions for recycle
flows, but could involve some small
processing facility dislocations.
Burners face new compliance costs for
storage of used oil derived fuel under
today's rulemaking only if they burn off-
specification fuel and are not already in
compliance due to prior SPCC or OSHA
requirements. Numbers of such burners
are not known with any accuracy,
although about 1200 in total have
notified EPA as off-specification burners
since 1985. Affected burners have three
options:
(1) Incur the costs and either absorb them
or pass them back to fuel marketers in
negotiated lower prices. The total maximum
cost here for the maximally affected burner is
0.2 cents per gallon. It is questionable
whether this is a decision-changing level.
(2) Substitute fuel—either virgin fuel oil,
currently at a higher cost of up to 15 percent,
or specification used oil fuel from another
used oil fuel dealer.
(3) Negotiate with the present used oil fuel
supplier to pre-blend (with other used oil or
virgin fuel) to meet the specification.
Basically the same analysis and
options apply to fuel oil dealers that
blend off-specification fuel as for
burners, EPA's current estimate is that
less than 25 percent of marketed used
oil-derived fuel is routed through
dealers. The fractions of total used oil
fuel that is currently off-specification
fuel is thought to be low, based on
recent communications with used oil
processing industry representatives and
EPA's own sampling of unprocessed
used oil. Based on the low compliance
cost per gallon, flows in this sector will
not be significantly affected one way or
another.
2. Effects on Used Oil Management
Structure
In general, the structure of the
recycling industry could be somewhat
influenced by today's rule. If anything,
there will be a tendency for some small
processors that do not now have
adequate secondary containment to
become less competitive (2.2 cents
gallon maximum competitive
disadvantage). These would generally
be the same facilities with prior releases
to the environment that would have to
be cleaned up at closure (with soil
treatment) and they may opt to close.
Already-marginal operations with poor
credit might not survive this
requirement.
There may also be some tendency for
rerefiners to be advantaged with respect
to other processors because- of lower
cost/gallon compliance costs. The main
factors influencing this judgment are:
1_ Rerefiners are newer and are arguably
(according to their comments) already in
compliance with all or most of today's
requirements.
2. Rerefiners are large and have economies
of scale relative to smaller processors in
terms of compliance cost per gallon.
3, Rerefiners are less affected by fuel
market (burner) effects, because they
typically produce only a small fraction of
output as fuel and the rerefined fuel product
is typically unregulated specification fuel.
In summary, the Agency*expects- no
effects on generators. Generators
ultimately pay the total costs (either
directly or indirectly, via shifting) but
these total costs spread over hundreds
of thousands of generators will not
measurably affect generator day-to-day
decisions.
3. Effects on Human Health and the
Environment
Since the Agency believes that recycle
flows will not be obstructed or seriously
altered by this rule, the Agency expects
no negative effects on human health or
the environment due to compliance
costs. Do-It-Yourself oil recycling will
not be decreased and may in fact be
increased by the CERCLA exemption for
service stations.
The four major effects of today's rule
making would generally be positive, but
of unknown magnitude. These include:
1. Increased spill cleanup and reduced
environmental releases for generators.
2. Better secondary containment and future
spill cleanup for larger handlers.
3, Closure requirements that provide for
cleanup of prior tankage area releases at
processor/handler facilities.
4. More comprehensive tracking at the
collector level, due to expansion of
notification and recordkeeping for all
collectors and not just those who currently
market directly to burners.
4. Relationship to. Future Agency
Actions Regarding Financial Incentives
or Other Actions
Today's management standards are
designed to protect human health and
environmental risk from ground
pathway damages with minimum effect
on existing used oil recycling flows and
markets. As such they provide minimum
interference with used oil markets and
thus are inherently neutral with respect
to future incentive programs. Since the
Agency believes they do not measurably
redirect flows, today's rules do not
preempt or compete with objectives, or
goals of incentives currently under study
to improve recycling. Basically today's
rules provide uniform standards to be
met by used oil handlers in terms of
storage and tracking. They do not
compete with, preclude, or bias future
Agency or other initiatives to expand
recycling nor are the costs of today's
rules large enough to affect the
efficiency of such future programs.
The Agency believes that today's
management standards are compatible
with any future program designed? to
increase (or redirectj recycling since
they do not in themselves introduce any
arbitrary or unnecessary imbalances
between or among recycling
technologies or end-used usecroil-
derived product markets.
XI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFAJ
of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-345), requires Federal
agencies to consider "small entities"
throughout the regulatory process.
Section 603 of the RFA requires an
mitral screening analysis to be
performed to determine whether a
substantial number of small entities will
be significantly affected by the
regulation. If so, regulatory alternatives.
which eliminate or mitigate the impacts
must be considered.
Based on employment or sales* the
vast majority of all used oil generators,
collectors and processors are small
businesses; blenders, of virgin and used
oil fuel» re-refiners, and burners are lesa
likely to be small businesses. Overall,
the economic analysis indicates, that
impacts are not significant for over 99
percent of the generators and for all of
the other facility types affected, with the
possible exception of some minor
processors and some fuel oil dealers
that currently blend used oil fuel with
virgin oil foeL Only a small fraction of
-------
Federal v~XJn»«* Vot 57. No. 176 '/Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
41611
the farm section (about 2.5 percent),
including only large commercial farms,
will- be subject to today's rule as a result
of the small farm generator exemption.
A very small fraction (less than 0.2
percent) of small business used oil
generators may face incremental costs
of approximately $1,300 per year to
cleanup a 250 gallon spill. This annual
cost would only be incremental if the
facility would not have cleaned up this
spill without these new requirements to
address release to the environment. We
believe this is not an unreasonable cost
burden for a very small fraction of small
businesses, especially given the
potential environmental damage of a
spill of this size. Approximately 90
percent of generators would incur cost
of less than $1 per year for labels for
-tanks and drums.
For the remaining sectors, only some
minor processors and some fuel
blenders/fuel oil dealers would incur
significant costs. Approximately 30
percent of minor processors in the high-
cost scenario would face incremental
compliance costs of 2.2 cents per gallon.
This cost increase may be sufficient to
put the facility at a competitive
disadvantage with -other used oil
processors. These minor processors
might not be able to pass these costs
back to customers since other firms that
had already invested in these measures
would incur lower costs. If the facility
were already a marginal operation with
poor credit, it might be forced to close..
Similarly, some small business fuel oil
dealers that blend used oil fuel with
virgin oil fuel might incur cost as high as
2.2 cents per gallon of used oil. Since the
used oil is blended with virgin fuel, the
cost impact per gallon of final product
would be substantially less |only 0.2 .
cents per gallon of finished product
assuming a typical blending rate of 10
percent used oil). Furthermore, these
blenders may have other, low cost
option for avoiding compliance costs
such as refusing to accept off-
specification oil from used oil suppliers,
or simply discontinuing blending used
oil at all.
In general, although a large population
ofsmall businesses will be subject to
various provisions of this rule, only an
extremely small fraction of these :
businesses will incur substantial costs.
Therefore the Agency certifies that the
final rule will not have significant
economic impacts on substantial
numbers of small businesses or entities.
XII. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this final rule have been
submitted for approval to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. When approved, or if not
approved by the effective date of this
rule, EPA will publish a technical
amendment to that effect in the Federal
Register. An information Collection
Request document has been prepared by
EPA [ICR No. 1286.03] and a copy may
be obtained from Sandy Farmer,
Information Policy Branch, EPA, 401 M
Street, SW.
Public reporting burden for this
collection of information varies by
sector. The public reporting burden for
used oil transporters averages from 18 to
27 minutes annually per respondent. For
used oil processing arid re-refining
facilities, the reporting burden averages
from 48 minutes to 25 hours annually per
respondent, and for burners of off-
specification fuel, the reporting burden
averages as 9 minutes annually per
respondent. The type of information
required includes, time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding the burden
estimate or any other'aspect of this
collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden, to
Chief, Information Policy Branch, PM-
223, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401, M Street, SW., Washington,
DC, 20460; and to the Office of
Management and Budget, Washington,
DC, 20503, marked "Attention: Desk
Officer for EPA."
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 260
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Hazardous waste.
40 CFR Part 261
Hazardous waste, Recycling,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
40 CFR Part 266
Energy, Hazardous waste/Petroleum,
Recycling, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
40 CFR Part 271 •-
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Hazardous materials
transportation, Hazardous waste,
Indians-lands, Intergovernmental
relations, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Water
pollution control, Water supply,
40 CFR Part 279
Petroleum,-Recycling,1 Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Used oil.
Dated: August 11,1992.
William K. Eeilly,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 40 CFR chapter I is amended
as follows:
PART 260—HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: GENERAL
1. The authority citation for part 260
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921-
6927, 6930, 6934, 6935, 6937, 6938, 6939, and
6974.
2, Section 260.10 is amended by
adding a definition for "Used Oil", in
alphabetical order to redd as follows:
§ 260.10 Definitions.
* * * * *
Used oil means any oil that has been
refined from crude oil, or any.synthetic
oil, that has been used and as a result of
such use in contaminated by physical or
chemical impurities.
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
3; The authority citation for part 261
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921,
6922, and 693a
4. Section 261.3(a){2) is amended by
adding paragraph (v) to read as follows^
§ 261.9 Definition of Hazardous Waste.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(v) Rebuttable presumption for used
oil. Used oil containing more than 1000
ppm total halogens is presumed to be a
hazardous waste because it has been
mixed with halogenated hazardous
waste listed in subpart D of part 261 of
this chapter. Persons may rebut this
presumption by demonstrating that the
used Oil does not contain hazardous
waste (for example, by using an
analytical method from SW-646, Third
Edition, to show'that the used oil does
not contain significant concentrations of
halogenated hazardous constituents
listed in appendix VIII of part 261 of this
chapter). EPA Publication SW-846,
Third Edition, is available for the cost of
$110.00 from the Government Printing
Office, Superintendent of Documents,
PO Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-
7954. 202-783-3238 (document number
955-001-00000-1).
(A) The rebuttable presumption does
not apply to metalworking bils/fluids
containing chlorinated paraffins, if they
are processed, through a tolling
agreement, to reclaim metalworking
-------
41612 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rulea and RcgAtiona
oils/fluids. The presumption does apply
to metalworking oils/fluids if such oils/
fluids are recycled in any other manner,
or disposed.
[B] The rebuttable presumption does
not apply to used oils contaminated
with chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
removed from refrigeration units where
the CFCs are destined for reclamation.
The rebuttable presumption does apply
to used oils contaminated with CFCs
that have been mixed with used oil from
sources other than refrigeration units.
§ 261.5 [Amended]
5. Section 26I.5(j} is amended by
revising "subpart E of part 266" to read
"subpart G of part 279".
§ 261.6 [Amended]
6. Section 261.6 is amended by
removing paragraph (a)(2)(iii), and
redesignating paragraphs (a){2) (ivj and
(v) as paragraphs (a)(2) (iii} and (iv).
7. Section 261.6 is amended by
removing paragraph (a){3) (Hi), and
redesignating paragraphs (a) (3) (iv)
through (a)(3){viii) as paragraphs
(apKiii) through [a)(3j(vii].
8. Section 261.6 is amended by adding
paragraph (a) (4) to read as follows:
§ 261.6 Requirements for recyclable
material*.
(a) * * *
(4) Used oil that is recycled and is
also a hazardous waste solely because it
exhibits a hazardous characteristic is
not subject to the requirements of parts
260 through 268 of this chapter, but is
regulated under part 279 of this chapter.
Used oil that is recycled includes any
used oil which is reused, following its
original uae, for any purpose (including
the purpose for which the oil was
originally used). Such term includes, but
is not limited to, oil which is re-refined,
reclaimed, burned for energy recovery,
or reprocessed.
PART 266—STANDARDS FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF SPECIFIC
HAZARDOUS WASTES AND SPECIFIC
TYPES OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
9. The authority citation for part 266
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sees. 1006, 2002(a], 3004, and
3014 of tfie Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976, as amended (42 U-S.C.
6905, 6912(a), 6924. and 6934).
Subpart E—[Removed]
10. Subpart E of part 266 is removed
and reserved.
11. Section 266.100 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(l) to read as
follows:
§266.100 Applicability.
***-**
(b) * * *
(1} Used oil burned for energy
recovery that is also a hazardous waste
solely because it exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste
identified in subpart C of part 261 of this
chapter. Such used oil is subject to
regulation under part 279 of this chapter;
PART 271—REQUIREMENTS FOR
AUTHORIZATION OF STATE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAMS
12. The authority citation for part 271
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), and 6926.
Subpart A—Requirements for Final
Authorization
13. Section 271.1(a) is amended by
revising paragraph fa) to read as
follows:
§ 271.1 Purpose and Scope.
(a) This subpart specifies the
procedures EPA will follow in.
approving, revising^ and withdrawing
approval of State programs: and the
requirements State programs must meet
to be approved by the Administrator
under sections 3006{b], (f) and fbj of
RCRA.
*****
14. Subpart A of part 271 is amended
by adding § 271.26 to read as follows:
§271.26 Requirements for used olt
management
The State shall have standards for
used oil management which are
equivalent to 40 CFR part 279. These
Standards shall include:
(a) Standards for used oil generators
which are equivalent to those under
subpart C of part 279 of this chapter;
(b) Standards for used oil collection
centers and aggregation points which
are equivalent to those under suhpart D
of part 279 of this chapter;
(c) Standards for used oil transporters
and transfer facilities which, are
equivalent to those under subpart E of
part 279 of this chapter;
(d) Standards for used oil processors
and re-refiners which are equivalent to
those under subpart F of part 279 of this
chapter;
(e) Standards for used oil burners who
burn off-specification used oil for energy
recovery which are equivalent to those
under subpart G of part 279 of this
chapter;
(f) Standards for used oil fuel
marketers which are equivalent to those
ander subpart H of part 279 of this/
chapter; and
(g) Standards for use as a dust
suppressant and disposal of used oil
which are equivalent* to those under
subpart I of part 27S of this chapter. A
State may petition (e.g.. a« part of ft*
authorization petition submitted to EPA
under § 271.5 EPA to allow the use of
used oil (that is not mixed with
hazardous waste and does not exhibit a
characteristic other than fgnitabiMty} as
a dust suppressant. The State nmst
show that it has a program- in place- to
prevent the use of used oil/hazardous
waste mixtures or used oil exhibiting a
characteristic other than fgnitabtlity as a
dust suppressant. In addition, such
programs must minimize the impacts-of
use as a dust suppressant on the
environment
15. Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended by adding-part
279 to read as fbitows:
PART 279—STANDARDS FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF USED OIL
Subpart A—Definitions
Sec.
228.1 Definitions.
Subpart B—Applicability
279.10 Applicability.
279.11 Used oil specifications.
279.12 Prohibitions.
Subpart C—Standard* tor Used OH
Generators
279.20 AppBcsbitttJs.
279-21 Hazardous waste mixing.
279.22 Used oil storage.
279.23 On-site burning in space heaters.
279.24 Off-site shipments.
Subpart D—Standards for Used Olt
Collection Center* and Aggregation Points
279.3O Do-tt-yetirseiferused oil collection
centers.
279.31 Used oil collection centers.
279.32 Used ail a^regatsrpoints owned by
the generator.
Subpart E—Standards for Used Olt
Transporter and Transfer Facilities
279.40 Applicability.
279.41 Restrictions on transporters who are
not atsa processor* orre-reflners.
279.42 Notification.
279r43 Used oil transportation^
279.44 Rebuttable presumption for used oil.
279.45 Used oil storage at transfer facilities.
279.46 Tracking.
2T&.47 Management of residues..
Subpart F—Standards for Used Oil
Processors and Re-Refiners
279.50 Applicability.
279.51 Notification.
279.52 General facility standards.
279.53 Rebuttable presumption for used oil.
-------
Federal Register /Vol. 57, No, 17& / THursdayv September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41613
279.54 Used oil management.
279.55 Analysis plan.
279.56 Tracking.
279.57 Operating record and reporting.
279.58 Off-site shipments of used oil.
279.59 Management of residues
Subpart G—Standards for Used Oil Burners
Who Burn Off-Specification Used Oil for
Energy Recovery
279.60 Applicability.
279.61 Restriction on burning.
279.62 Notification.
279.63 Rebuttable presumption for used oil.
279.64 Used oil storage.
279.65 Tracking.
279.66 Notices.
279.67 Management of residues.
Subpart H—Standards for Used Oil F«§S
Marketers
279.70 Applicability.
279.71 Prohibitions.
279.72 On-specification used oil fuel.
279.73 Notification.
279.74 Tracking.
279.75 Notices.
Subpart I—Standards for Use as a Dust
Suppressant and Disposal of Used OH
279.30 Applicability.
279.81 Disposal.
279.82 Use as a dust suppressant,
Authority. Sections 1006,20Q2(a), 3001
through 3007, 3010, 3014, and 7004 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, as amended {42 U.S.C.
6905, 6912(a), 6921 through 6927, 6930, 6934,
and 6974]; and Sections 101(37) and 114{c) of
CERCLA (42 U.S.C. 9601(37) and 9614[c)).
Subpart A—Definitions
§ 279.1 Definitions.
Terms that are defined in § § 260.10,
261.1, and 280.12 of this chapter have the
same meanings when used in this part
Aboveground tank means a tank used
to store or process used oil that is not an
underground storage _tank as defined in
§ 280,12 of this chapter.
Container means any portable device
in which a material is stored,
transported, treated, disposed of, or
otherwise handled.
Do-it-yourselfer used oil collection
center means any site or facility that'
accepts/aggregates and stores used oil
collected only from household do-it-
yourselfers,
Existing tank means a tank that is
used for the storage or processing of
used oil and that is in operation, or for
which installation has commenced on or
prior to the effective date of the
authorized used oil program for the
State in which the tank is located.
Installation will be considered to have
commenced if the owner or operator has
obtained all federal, state, and local
approvals or permits necessary to begin
installation of the tank and if either (!)
A continuous on-site installation
program has begun, or
(2) The owner or Operator has entered
into contractual obligations—which
cannot be canceled or modified without
substantial loss—for installation of the
tank to be completed within a
reasonable time.
Household "do-it-yourselfer" used oil
means oil that is derived from
households, such as used oil generated
by individuals who generate used oil
through the maintenance of their
personal vehicles.
Household "do-it-yourselfer" used oil
genera tor means an individual who
generates household "do-it-yourselfer"
used oil,
New tank means a tank that will be
used to store or process used oil and for
which installation has commenced after
the effective date of the authorized used
oil program for the State in which the
tank is located.
Processing means chemical or
physical operations designed to produce
from used oil, or to make used oil more
amenable for production of, fuel oils.
lubricants, or other used oil-derived
product. Processing includes, but is not
limited to: blending used oil with virgin
petroleum products, blending used oils
to meet the fuel specification, filtration,
simple distillation, chemical or physical
separation and re-refining.
Re-refining distillation bottoms means
the heavy fraction produced by vacuum
distillation of filtered and dehydrated
used oiL The composition of still
bottoms varies with column operation
and feedstock.
Tank means any stationary device,
designed to contain an accumulation of
used oil which is constructed primarily
of non-earthen materials, (e.g., wood,
concrete, steel, plastic) which provides
structural support.
Used oil means any oil that has been
refined from crude oil, or any synthetic
oil, that has been used and as a result of
such use if contaminated by physical or
chemical impurities.
Used oil aggregation point means any
site or facility that accepts, aggregates,
and/or stores used oil collected only
from other used oil generation sites
owned or operated by the owner or
operator of the aggregation point, from
which used oil is transported to the
aggregation point in shipments of no
more than 55 gallons. Used oil
aggregation points may also accept used
oil from household do-it-yourselfers.
Used oil burner means a facility
where used oil not meeting the
specification requirements in § 279.11 is
burned for energy recovery in devices
identified in § 279.61(a).
Used oil collection center means any
site or facility that is registered/
licensed/permitted/recognized by a
state/county/municipal government to
manage used oil and accepts/aggregates
and stores used oil collected from used
oil generators regulated under subpart C
of this part who bring used oil to the
collection center in shipments of no
more than 55 gallons under the
provisions of § 279.24. Used oil
collection centers may also accept used
oil from household do-it-yourselfers.
Used oil fuel marketer means any
person who conducts either of the
following activities:
(1) Directs a shipment of off-
specification used oil from their facility
to a used oil burner; or
(2) First claims that used oil that is to
be burned for energy recovery meets the
used oil fuel specifications set forth in
§ 279.11 of this part.
Used oil generator means any person,
by site, whose act or process produces
used oil or whose act first causes used
oil to become subject to regulation.
Used oil processor/re-refiner means a
facility that processes used oil.
Used oil transfer facility means any
transportation related facility including
loading docks, parking areas, storage
areas, and other areas where shipments
of used oil are held for more than 24
hours during the normal course of
transportation and not longer than 35
days. Transfer facilities that store used
oil for more than 35 days are subject to
regulation under subpart F of this part.
Used oil transporter means any
person who transports used oil, any
person who collects used oil from more
than one generator and transports the
collected oil, and owners and operators
of used oil transfer facilities. Used oil
transporters may consolidate or
aggregate loads of used oil for purposes
of transportation but, with the following
exception, may not process used oil.
Transporters may conduct incidental
processing operations that occur in the
normal course of used oil transportation
(e.g., settling and water separation), but
that are not designed to produce (or
make more amenable for production of)
used oil derived products or used oil
fuel.
Subpart B—Applicability
§ 279.10 Applicability.
This section identifies those materials
which are subject to regulation as used
oil under this part. This section also
identifies some materials that are not
subject to regulation as used oil under
this part, and indicates whether these
materials may be subject to regulation
as hazardous waste under parts 260
through 266, 268, 270, and 124 of this
chapter.
-------
41614 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
(a) Used oil. EPA presumes that used
oil is to be recycled unless a used oil
handler disposes of used oil, or sends
used oil for disposal. Except as provided
in § 279.11, the regulations of this part
apply to used oil, and to materials
identified in this section as being subject
to regulation as used oil, whether or not
the used oil or material exhibits any
characteristics of hazardous waste
identified in subpart C of part 261 of this
chapter.
(b) Mixtures of used oil and
hazardous waste—(1) Listed hazardous
waste, (i) Mixtures of used oil and
hazardous waste that is listed in sabpart
D of part 261 of this chapter are subject
to regulation as hazardous waste under
parts 260 through 266, 268, 270, and 124
of this chapter, rather than as used oil
under this part.
(ii) Rebattable presumption for used
oil. Used oil containing more than 1,000
ppm total halogens is presumed to be a
hazardous waste because it has been
mixed with halogenated hazardous
waste listed in subpart D of part 281 of
this chapter. Persons may rebut this
presumption by demonstrating that the
used oil does not contain hazardous
waste (for example, by using an
analytical method from SW-848, Edition
III, to show that the used oil does not
contain significant concentrations of
halogenated hazardous constituents
listed in appendix VIII of part 261 of this
chapter). EPA Publication SW-846,
Third Edition, is available for the cost of
$110.00 from the Government Printing
Office, Superintendent of Documents,
P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-
7954, (202) 783-3238 (document number
955-001-00000-1).
(A) The rebuttable presumption does
not apply to metalworking oils/fluids
containing chlorinated paraffins, if they
are processed, through a toiling
arrangement as described in § 279.24(c),
to reclaim metalworking oils/fluids. The
presumption does apply to
metalworking oils/fluids if such oils/
fluids are recycled in any other manner,
or disposed.
(B) The rebuttable presumption does
not apply to used oils contaminated
with chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
removed from refrigeration units where
the CFCs are destined for reclamation.
The rebuttable presumption does apply
to used oils contaminated with CFCs
that have been mixed with used oil from
sources other than refrigeration units.
(2) Characteristic hazardous waste,
Mixtures of used oil and hazardous
waste that exhibits a hazardous waste
characteristic identified in subpart C of
part 261 of this chapter are subject to:
(i) Except as provided in paragraph
(b)(2)(iii) of this section, regulation as
hazardous waste under parts 260
through 266, 268, 270, and 124 of this
chapter rather than as used oil under
this part, if the resultant mixture
exhibits any characteristics of
hazardous waste identified in subpart C
of part 261 of this chapter; or
(ii) Regulation as used oil under this
part, if the resultant mixture does not
exhibit any characteristics of hazardous
waste identified under subpart C of part
261 of this chapter.
(iii) Regulation as used oil under this
part, if the mixture is of used oil and a
waste which is hazardous solely
because if exhibits the characteristic of
ignitability and is not listed in subpart D
of part 261 of this chapter (e.g., mineral
spirits), provided that the mixture does
not exhibit the characteristic of
ignitability under § 261.21 of this
chapter.
(3) Conditionally exempt small
quantity generator hazardous waste.
Mixtures of used oil and conditionally
exempt small quantity generator
hazardous waste regulated under § 261.5
of this chapter are subject- to regulation
as used oil under this part.
(c) Mixtures of used oil with non-
hazardous solid wastes. Mixtures of
used oil and non-hazardous solid waste
are subject to regulation as used oil
under this part.
(d) Mixtures of used oil with products.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph
(d)(2) of this section, mixtures of used oil
and fuels or other products are subject
to regulation as used oil under this part.
(2) Mixtures of used oil and diesel fuel
mixed on-site by the generator of the
used oil for use in the generator's own
vehicles are not subject to this part once
the used oil and diesel fuel have been
mixed. Prior to mixing, the used oil is
subject to the requirements of subpart C
of this part.
(e) Materials derived from used oil.
(1) Materials that are reclaimed from
used oil that are used beneficially and
are not burned for energy recovery or
used in a manner constituting disposal
(e.g., re-refined lubricants) are:
(i) Not used oil and thus are not
subject to this part, and
(ii) Not solid wastes and are thus not
subject to the hazardous waste
regulations of parts 260 through 266, 268,
270, and 124 of this chapter as provided
in § 261.3(c)(2](i) of this chapter.
(2) Materials produced from used oil
that are burned for energy recovery (e.g.,
used oil fuels) are subject to regulation
as used oil under this part.
(3) Except as provided in paragraph
(e)(4) of this section, materials derived
from used oil that are disposed of or
used in a manner constituting disposal
are:
(i) Not used oil and thus are not
subject to this Part, and
(ii) Are solid wastes and thus are
subject to the hazardous waste
regulations of parts 260 through 266, 268,
270, arid 124 of this chapter if the
materials are identified as hazardous
waste.
(4) Re-refining distillation bottoms
that are used as feedstock to
manufacture asphalt products are:
(i) Not subject to this part at this time
ami
(ii) Not subject to the hazardous
waste regulations of parts 260 through
266, 288, 270, and 124 of this chapter at
this time.
(f) Wastewater. Wastewater, the
discharge of which is subject to
regulation under either section 402 or
section 307(b) of the Clean -Water Act
(including wastewaters at facilities
which have eliminated the discharge of
wastewater), contaminated with de
minimis quantities of used oil are not
subject to the requirements of this part.
For purposes of this paragraph, "de
minimi's" quantities of used oils are
defined as small spills, leaks, or
drippings from pumps, machinery, pipes,
and other similar equipment during
normal operations or small amounts of
oil lost to the wastewater treatment
system during washing or draining
operations. This exception will not
apply if the used oil is discarded as a
result of abnormal manufacturing
operations resulting in substantial-leaks,
spills, or other releases, or to used oil
recovered from wastewaters.
(g) Used oil introduced into crude oil
or natural gas pipelines. Used oil that is
placed directly into a crude oil or
natural gas pipeline is subject to the
management standards of this part only
prior to the point of introduction to the
pipeline. Once the used oil is introduced
to the pipeline, the material is exempt
from the requirements of this part.
(h) Used oil on vessels. Used oil
produced on vessels from normal
shipboard operations is not subject to
this part until it is transported ashore.
(i) PCB contaminated used oil. PCB-
containing used oil regulated under part
761 of this chapter is exempt from
regulation under this part.
§ 279.111 Used oil specifications.
Used oil burned for energy recovery,
and any fuel produced from used oil by
processing, blending, or other treatment
is subject to regulation under this part
unless it is shown not to exceed any of
the allowable levels of the constituents
and properties in the specification
shown in Table 1. Once used oil that is
to be burned for energy recovery has
-------
Federal Register / VoL '57, No. 176 / Thursday. September JO, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41615
been shown not to exceed any
specification and the person making that
showing complies with §§ 279.72, 279.73,
and 279.74(b), the used oil is no longer
subject to this part
TABLE 1—USED OIL NOT EXCEEDING ANY
SPECIFICATION LEVEL Is NOT SUBJECT
TO THIS PART WHEN BURNED FOR EN-
ERGY RECOVERY l
Constituent/ property
Arsenic _ ...
Cadmium . '
Chromium „ _
Lead
Flash point...
Total halogens
Allowable level
5 ppm maximum.
TO ppm maximum
100 °F minimum
4 000 ppm maximum.2
1 The specification does not apply to mixtures of
used oil and hazardous waste that continue to be
regulated as hazardous waste (see § 279.10(b)).
*Used oil containing more than 1,000 ppm total
halogens is presumed to be a hazardous waste
under the rebuttable presumption provided under
§ 279.10(b)(1). Such .used oil is subject to subpart H
of part 266 of this chapter rather than this part when
burned for energy recovery unless the presumption
of mixing can be successfully rebutted.
§279.12 Prohibitions/
(a) Surface impoundment prohibition.
Used oil shall not be managed in surface
impoundments or waste piles unless the
units are subject to regulation under
parts 264 or 265 of this chapter.
(b) Use as a dust suppressant. The use
of used oil as a dust suppressant is
prohibited, except when such activity
takes place in one of the states listed in
§ 279.82(c).
(c) Burning in particular units. Off-
specification used oil fuel may be
burned for energy recovery in only the
following devices:
(1) Industrial furnaces identified in
§ 260.10 of this chapter;
{2} Boilers, as defined in § 260.10 of
this chapter, that are identified as
follows:
(i) Industrial boilers located on the
site of a facility engaged in a
manufacturing process where
substances are transformed into new
products, including the component parts
of products, by mechanical or chemical
processes;
(ii) Utility boilers used to produce
electric power, steam, heated or cooled
air, or other gases or fluids for sale; or -
(ill) Used oil-fired space heaters
provided that the burner meets the
provisions of § 279,23.
Subpart C—Standards for Used OH
Generators
§279.20 Applicability.
(a) general. Except as provided in
paragraphs (a){l) through (a)(4) of this
section, this subpart applies to all used
oil generators. A used oil generator is
any person, by site, whose act or
process produces used oil or whose act
first causes used oil to become subject
to regulation.
(1) Household "do-it-yourselfer" used
oil generators. Household "do-it-
yourselfer" used oil generators are not
subject to regulation under this part.
(2) Vessels. Vessels at sea or at port
are not subject to this subpart. For
purposes of this subpart, used oil
produced on vessels from normal
shipboard operations is considered to be
generated at the time it is transported
ashore. The owner or operator of the
vessel and the person(s) removing or
accepting used oil from the vessel are
co-generators of the used oil and are
both responsible for managing the waste
in compliance with this subpart once the
used oil is transported ashore. The co-
genenerators may decide among them
which party will fulfill the requirements
of this subpart.
(3) Diesel fuel. Mixtures of used oil
and diesel fuel mixed by the generator
of the used oil for use in the generator's
own vehicles are not subject to this part
once the used oil and diesel fuel have
been mixed. Prior to mixing, the used oil
fuel is subject to the requirements of this
subpart.
(4) Farmers. Farmers who generate an
average of 25 gallons per month or less
of used oil from vehicles or machinery
used on the farm in a calendar year are
not subject to the requirements of this
part.
{b) Other applicable provisions. Used
oil generators who conduct the following
activities are subject to the requirements
of other applicable provisions of this
part as indicated in paragraphs (b)(l)
through (5) of this section:
(1) Generators who transport used oil.
except under the self-transport
provisions of § 279.24 (a) and (b), must
also comply with subpart E of this part.
(2) Generators who process or re-
refine used oil must also comply with
subpart F of this part
[3] Generators who bum off-
specification used oil for energy
recovery, except under the on-site space
heater provisions of § 279.23, must also
comply with subpart G of this part.
(4) Generators who direct shipments
of off-specification used oil from their
facility to a used oil burner or first claim
that used oil that is to be burned for
energy recovery meets the used oil fuel
specifications set forth in § 279.11 must
also comply with subpart H of this part.
(5) Generators who dispose of used
oil, including the use of used oil as &
dust suppressant, must also comply with
subpart I of this part.
§ 279.21 Hazardous waste mixing.
(a) Generators shall not mix
hazardous waste with used oil except as
provided in § 279.10(b)(23 (ii) and (iii).
(b) The rebuttable presumption for
used oil of § 279,10(b){l)(ii) applies to
used oil managed by generators. Under
the rebutta"ble presumption for used oil
of § 279.10{b)(l)(ii), used oil containing
greater than 1,000 ppm total halogens is
presumed to be a hazardous waste and
thus must be managed as hazardous
waste and not as used oil unless the
presumption is rebutted. However, the
rebuttable presumption does not apply
to certain metalworking oils/fluids and
certain used oils removed from
refrigeration units.
§279.22 Used oil storage.
As specified in § 279.10(f),
wastewaters containing "de minimis"
quantities of used oil are not subject to
the requirements of this part including
the prohibition on storage in units other
than tanks Or containers. Used oil
generators are subject to all applicable
Spill Prevention, Control and
Countermeasures (40 CFR-part 112} in
addition to the requirements of this
Subpart. Used oil generators are also
subject to the Underground Storage
Tank (40 CFR part 280) standards for
used oil stored in underground tanks
whether or not the used oil exhibits any
characteristics of hazardous waste, in
addition to the requirements of this
subpart.
(a) Storage units. Used oil generators
shall not store used oil in units other
than tanks, containers, or units subject
to regulation under parts 264 or 265 of
this chapter.
(b) Condition of units. Containers and
aboveground tanks used to store used
oil at generator facilities must be:
(1) In good condition (no severe
rusting, apparent structural defects or
deterioration); and
(2) Not leaking {no visible leaks),
(c) Labels. (!) Containers and
aboveground tanks used to store used
oil at generator facilities must be
labeled or marked clearly with the
words "Used Oil."
(2) Fill pipes used to transfer used oil
into underground storage tanks at
generator facilities must be labeled or
marked clearly with the words "Used
Oil."
(d) Response to releases. Upon
detection of a release of used oil to the
environment not subject to the
requirements of part 280, subpart F of
this chapter which has occurred after
the effective date of the authorized used
oil program for the State in which the
-------
41616 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10. 1992 / Rules and Regulations
release is located, a generator must
perform the following cleanup steps:
(1) Stop the release;
(2) Contain the released used oil;
(3) Clean up and manage properly the
released used oil and other materials;
and
(4) If necessary to prevent future
releases, repair or replace any leaking
used oil storage containers or tanks
prior to returning them to service.
§ 279.23 Or»-site burning !n space heaters..
(a) Generators may bum used oil in
used oil-fired space heaters provided
that:
(1) The heater burns only used oil that
the owner or operator generates or used
oil received from household do-it-
yourself used oil generators;
(2) The heater is designed to have a
maximum capacity of not more than 0.5
million Btu per hour; and
(3) The combustion gases from the
heater are vented to the ambient air.
{b) (Reserved)
§ 279.24 Off-site shipments.
Except as provided in paragraphs (a)
through (c) of this section, generators
must ensure that their used oil is
transported only by transporters who
have obtained EPA identification
numbers.
(a) Self-transportation of small
amounts to approved collection centers.
Generators may transport, without an
EPA identification number, used oil that
is generated at the generator's site and
used oil collected from household do-it-
yourselfers to a used oil collection
center provided that:
(1) The generator transports the used
oil in a vehicle owned by the generator
or owned by an employee of the
generator;
(2] The generator transports no more
than 55 gallons of used oil at any time;
and
(3) The generator transports the used
oil to a used oil collection center that is
registered, licensed, permitted, or
recognized by a state/county/municipal
government to manage used oil.
(b) Self-transportation of small
amounts to aggregation points owned by
the generator. Generators may
transport, without an EPA identification
number, used oil that is generated at the
generator's site to an aggregation point
provided that:
(1) The generator transports the used
oil in a vehicle owned by the generator
or owned by an employee of the
generator;
(2) The generator transports no more
than 55 gallons of used oil at any time;
and
(3) The generator transports the used
oil to an aggregation point that is owned
and/or operated by the same generator.
(c) Tolling arrangements. Used oil
generators may arrange for used oil to
be transported by a transporter without
an EPA identification number if the used
oil is reclaimed under a contractual
agreement pursuant to which reclaimed
oil is returned by the processor/re-
refiner to the generator for use as a
lubricant, catting oil, or coolant. The
contract (known as a "tolling
arrangement") must indicate:
(1) The type of used oil and the
frequency of shipments;
(2) That the vehicle used to transport
the used oil to the processing/re-refining
facility and to deliver recycled used oil
back to the generator is owned and
operated by the used oil proeessor/re-
refiner; and
(3) That reclaimed oil will be returned
to the generator.
Subpart 0—Standards for Used Oil
CoiSection Centers and Aggregation
Points
§ 279.30 Do-it-yourselfer used oil
collection centers.
(a) Applicability, This section applies
to owners or operators of all do-it-
yourselfer (DIY) used oil collection
centers. A DIY used oil collection center
is any. site or facility that accepts/
aggregates and stores used oil collected
only from household do-it-yourselfers.
(b) DIY used oil collection center
requirements. Owners or operators of all
DIY used oil collection centers must
comply with the generator standards in
subpart C of this part.
§ 279.31 Used oil coffectton centers,
(a) Applicability. This section applies
to owners or operators of used oil
collection centers. A used oil collection
center is any site or facility that
accepts/aggregates and stores used oil
collected from used oil generators
regulated under subpart C of this part
who bring used oil to the collection
center in shipments of no more than 55
gallons under the provisions of
§ 279.24(a), Used oil collection centers-
may also accept used oil from household
do-it-yourselfers.
(b) Used oil collection center
requirements. Owners or operators of all
used oil collection centers must:
(1) Comply with the generator
standards in subpart C of this part; and
(2) Be registered/licensed/permitted/
recognized by a state/county/municipal
government to manage used oil.
§ 279.32 Used oil aggregation points
owned fay the generator.
(a) Applicability. This section applies
to owners or operators of all used oil
aggregation points. A used oil
aggregation point is any site or facility
that accepts, aggregates, and/or stores
used oil collected only from other used
oil generation sites owned or operated
by the owner or operator of the
aggregation point, from which used oil is
transported to the aggregation point in
shipments of no more than 55 gallons
under the provisions of § 279.24{b). Used
oil aggregation points may also accept
used oil from household do-it-
yourselfers.
(b) Used oil aggregation point
requirements. Owners or operators of all
used oil aggregation points must cornply
with the generator standards in subpart
C of this part.
Subpart E—Standards for Used Oil
Transporter and Transfer Facilities
§279.49 Applicability.
(a) General. Except as provided in
paragraphs (a)(l) through (a)(4) of this
section, this subpa-rt applies to,all used
oil transporters. Used oil transporters
are persons who transport used oil,
persons who collect used oil from more
than one generator and transport the
collected oil, and owners and operators
of used oil transfer facilities.
(!) This subpart does not apply to on-
site transportation.
(2) This subpart does not apply to
generators who transport shipments of
used oil totalling 55 gallons or less from
the generator to a used oil collection
center as specified in § 279.24(a).
(3) This subpart does not apply to
generators who transport shipments of
used oil totalling 55 gallons or less from
the generator to a used oil aggregation
point owned or operated by the same
generator as specified in § 279.24{b).
(4) This subpart does not apply to
transportation of used oil generated by
household do-it-yourselfers from the
initial generator to a regulated used oil
generator, collection center, aggregation
point, processor/re-refiner, or burner
subject to the requirements of this part.
Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(l).
through'(a)(3) of this section, this
subpart does, however, apply to
transportation of collected household
do-it-yourselfer used oil from regulated
used oil generators, collection centers,
aggregation points, or other facilities
where household do-it-yourselfer used
oil is collected.
(b) Imports and exports. Transporters
who import used oil from abroad or
export used oil outside of the United
-------
Federal Register / Vo|. $7, No. 3.76 / Thursday. September 10. 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41617
States are subject to the requirements of
this subpart from the time the used oil
enters and until the time it exits the
"United States.
(c) Trucks used to transport
hazardous waste. Unless trucks
previously used to transport hazardous
waste are emptied as described in
§ 261.7 of this chapter prior to
transporting used oil, the used oil is
considered to have been mixed with the
hazardous waste and must be managed
as hazardous waste unless, under the
provisions of § 279:iO(b), the hazardous
waste/used oil mixture is determined
not to be hazardous waste.
(d) Other applicable provisions. Used
oil transporters who conduct the
following activities are also subject to
other applicable provisions of this part
as indicated in paragraphs (d)(l) through
(5) of this section;
(1) Transporters who generate used oil
must alsoxomply with subpart C of this
parti
(2) Transporters who process or re-
refine used oil, except as provided in
§ 279.41, must also comply with subpart
F of thfs part;
(3) Transporters who burn off-
specification rased oil for energy
recovery must also comply with subpart
G of this part;
(4) Transporters who direct shipments
of off-specification used oil from their
facility to a used oil burner or first claim
that used oil that is to be burned for
energy recovery meets the used oil fuel
specifications set forth in § 279,11 must
also comply with subpart H of this
partuel Marketers of this part; and
{Sj Transporters who dispose of used
oil. including the use of used oil as a
dust suppressant, must also comply with
subpart I of this part.
§ 279.41 Restrictions on transporters who
are not also processors or re-refiners.
(a) Used oil transporters may
consolidate or aggregate loads of used
oil for purposes of transportation.
However, except as provided in
paragraph (b) of this section, used oil
transporters may not process used oil
unless they also comply with the
requirements for processors/re-refiners
in subpart F of this part.
fl)J Transporters may conduct
incidental processing operations that
occur in the normal course of used oil
transportation {e^, settling and water
separation), but that are not designed to
produce for make more amenable for
production of) used oil derived products
unless they also comply with the
processor/re-refiner requirements in
subpart F of this part.
§279.42 Notification.
(aj Identification numbers. Used oil
transporters who have not previously
complied with the notification
requirements of RCRA section 3010 must
comply with these requirements and
obtain an EPA identification number,
(b) Mechanics of notification. A used
oil transporter who has not received an
EPA identification number may obtain
one by notifying the Regional
Administrator of their used oil activity
by submitting either:
(1) A completed EPA Form 8700-12
(To obtain EPA Form 8700-12 call
RCRA/Superfund Hotline at 1-800-424-
9346 or 703-920-8810); or
(2) A letter requesting an EPA
identification number.
Call RCRA/Superfund Hotline to
determine where to send a letter
requesting an EPA identification
numbe*. The letter should include the
following information:
(i) Transporter company name;
(iij Owner of the transporter company;
(iii) Mailing address for the
transporter;
(iv) Name and telephone number for
the transporter point of contact;
(v) Type of transport activity (i.e,,
transport only, transport and transfer
facility, transfer facility only);
(vi) Location of all transfer facilities at
which used oil is stored;
(vii) Name and telephone number for
a contact at each transfer facility.
§ 279.43 Used oil transportation.
(a) Deliveries. A used oil transporter
must deliver all used oil received to:
(1) Another used oil transporter,
provided that the transporter has
obtained an EPA identification number;
(2) A used oil processing/re-refming
facility who has obtained an EPA
identification number;
(3) An off-specification used oil burner
facility who has obtained an EPA
identification number; or
(4) An on-specification used oil burner
facility.
(b) Shipping. Used oil transporters
must .comply with all applicable
packaging, labeling, and placarding
requirements of the U.S, Department of
Transportation under 49 CFR parts 173,
178 and 179. Used oil that meets the
definition of combustible liquid (flash
point below 200 T but at or greater than
100 °F) or flammable liquid (flash point
below 100 °F) is subject to Department
of Transportation Hazardous Materials
Regulations at 49 CFR Parts 100 through
177.
(c) Used oil discharges. (1} In the
event of a discharge of used oil during
transportation, the transporter must take
appropriate immediate action to protect
human health and the environment (e.g..
notify local authorities, dike the
discharge area).
(2) If a discharge of used oil occurs
during transportation and an official
(State or local government or a Federal
Agency) acting within the scope of
official responsibilities determines feat
immediate removal of the used oil is
necessary to protect human health or
the environment, that official may
authorize the removal of the used oil by
transporters who do not have EPA
identification numbers.
(3) An air, rail, highway, or water
transporter who has discharged used oil
must:
(i) Give notice, if required by 49 CFR
171.15 to the National Response Center
(800-124-8802 or 202-426-2675); and
(ii) Report in writing as required by 49
CFR 171.16 to the Director, Office of
Hazardous Materials Regulations,
Materials Transportation Bureau,
Department of Transportation,
Washington, DC 20590.
(4) A water transporter who has
discharged used oil must give notice as
required by 33 CFR 153.203.
(Sj A transporter must clean up any
used oil discharged that occurs dming
transportation or take such action as
may be required or approved by federal.
state, or local officials so that the used
oil discharge no longer presents a
hazard to human health or the
environment.
§ 279.44 Returnable presumption tor used
oil.
(a) To ensure that used oil is not a
hazardous waste under the rebuttable
presumption of 1279.10fb)(l)(ii), the
used oil transporter must determine
whether the total halogen content of
used oil being .transporter or stored at a
transfer facility is above or below 1,000
ppm.
(b) The transporter must make this
determination by:
(1} Testing the used oil; or
(2) Applying knowledge of the halogen
content of the used oil in light of the
materials or processes used.
(c) If the used oil contains greater than
or equal to 1,000 ppm total halogens, it is
presumed to be a hazardous waste
because it has been mixed with
halogenated hazardous waste listed in
subpart D of part 281 of this chapter.
The owner or operator may rebut the
presumption by demonstrating that the
used oil does not contain hazardous
waste (for example, by using an
analytical method from SW-846, Edition
III, to show that the used oil does not
contain significant concentrations of
halogenated hazardous constituents
-------
41618' Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 178 / -Thursday, - September 10, 1992-/"Rules and Regulations--
listed in Appendix VIII of part 261 of
this chapter). EPA Publication SW-848,
Third Edition, is available for the cost of
$110.00 from the Government Printing
Office, Superintendent of Documents,
PO Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-
7954. (202) 783-3233 {document number
955-001-00000-1).
[1) The rebuttable presumption does
not apply to metalworking oils/fluids
containing chlorinated paraffins, if they
are processed, through a tolling
arrangement as described in § 279.24(c),
to reclaim metalworking oils/fluids. The
presumption does apply to
metalworking oils/fluids if such oils/
fluids are recycled in any, other manner,
or disposed.
(2) The rebuttable presumption does
not apply to used oils contaminated
with chlorofluorocarbons {CFCsj
removed from refrigeration units if the
CFC are destined for reclamation. The
rebuttable presumption does apply to
used oils contaminated with CFCs that
have been mixed with used oil from
sources other than refrigeration units,
(d) Record retention, Records of
analyses conducted or information used
to comply with paragraphs (a), (b), and
(c) of this section must be maintained by
the transporter for at least 3 years.
§ 279.45 Used oil storage at transfer
As specified in § 279.10(0.
wastewaters containing "de minimis"
quantities of used oil are not subject to
the requirements of this part, including
the prohibition on storage in units other
than tanks or containers. Used oil
transporters are subject to all applicable
Spill Prevention, Control and
Countermeasures (40 CFR part 112) in
addition to the requirements of this
subpart. Used oil generators are also
subject to the Underground Storage
Tank {40 CFR part 280) standards for
used oil stored in underground tanks
whether or not the used oil exhibits any
characteristics of hazardous waste, in
addition to the requirements of this
subpart.
(a) Applicability. This section applies
to used oil transfer facilities. Used oil
transfer facilities are transportation
related facilities including loading
docks, parking areas, storage areas, and
other areas where shipments of used oil
are held for more than 24 hours during
the normal course of transportation and
not longer than 35 days. Transfer
facilities that store used oil for more
than 35 days are subject to regulation
under subpart F of this chapter.
(b) Storage units. Owners or operators
of used oil transfer facilities may not
store used oil in units other than tanks.
containers, or units subject to regulation
under parts 264 or 265 of this chapter.
(c) Condition of units. Containers and
aboveground tanks used to store used
oil at transfer facilities must be:
(1) In good condition (no severe
rusting, apparent structural defects or
deterioration); and
(2) Not leaking (no visible leaks).
|d) Secondary containment for
containers. Containers used to store
used oil at transfer facilities must be
equipped with a secondary containment
system.
(1) The secondary containment system
must consist of, at a minimum:
(i) Dikes, berms or retaining walls;
and
(ii) A floor. The floor must cover the
entire area within the dikes, berms, or
retaining walls.
(2) The entire containment system,
including wails and floors, must be
sufficiently impervious to used oil to
prevent any used oil released into the
containment system from migrating out
of the system to the soil, groundwater,
or surface water.
(e) Secondary containment for
existing aboveground tanks. Existing
aboveground tanks used to store used
oil at transfer facilities rnust be
equipped with a secondary containment
system.
(1) The secondary containment system
must consist of, at a minimum:
(i) Dikes, berms or retaining walls;
and
(ii) A floor. The floor must cover the
entire area within the dike, berrn, or
retaining wall except areas where
existing portions of the tank meet the
ground; or
(in) An equivalent secondary
containment system.
(2) The entire containment system,
including walls and floors, must be
sufficiently impervious to used oil to
prevent any used oil released into the
containment system from migrating out
of the system to the soil, groundwater,
or surface water.
(f) Secondary containment for new
aboveground tanks. New aboveground
tanks used to store used oil at transfer
facilities must be equipped with a
secondary containment system.
(1) The secondary containment system
must consist of, at a minimum:
(i) Dikes, berms or retaining walls;
and
(ii) A floor. The floor must cover the
entire area within the dike, berm, or
retaining wall; or
(iii) An equivalent secondary
containment system.
(2) The entire containment system,
including walls and floors, must be
sufficiently impervious to used oil to
prevent any'used oil released into the
containment system from migrating out
of the system to the soil, groundwater,
or surface water.
(g) Labels. (1) Containers and
aboveground tanks used to "store used
oil at transfer facilities must be labeled
or marked clearly with the words "Used
Oil."
(2) Fill pipes used to transfer used oil
into underground storage tanks at
transfer facilities must be labeled or
marked clearly with the words "Used
Oil."
(h) Response to releases. Upon
detection of a release of used oil to the
environment not subject to the
requirements of part 280-subparf F
which has occurred after the effective
date of the authorized used oil program
for the State in which the release is
located, the owner/operator of a
transfer facility must perform the
following cleanup steps:
(1) Stop the release;
(2) Contain the release used oil;
(3) Clean up and manage properly the
released used oil and other materials;
(4) If necessary, repair or replace any
leaking used oil storage containers or
tanks prior to returning them to service.
§ 279.46 Tracking.
(a) Acceptance. Used oil transporters
must keep a record of each used oil
shipment accepted for transport.
Records for each shipment must include:
(1) The name and address of the
generator, transporter, or processor/re-
refiner who provided the used oil for
transport;
(2) The EPA identification number fif
applicable) of the generator, transporter,
or processor/re-refiner who provided
the used oil for trdtesport;
(3) The quantity of used oil accepted;
(4) The date of acceptance; and
(5) The signature, dated upon receipt
of the used oil, of a representative of the
generator, transporter, or processor/re- •
refiner who provided the used oil' for
transport.
(b) Deliveries. Used oil transporters
must keep a record of each shipment of
used oil that is delivered to another used
oil transporter, or to a used oil burner,
processor/re-refiner, or disposal facility.
Records of each delivery must include;
(1) The name and address of the
receiving facility or transporter;
(2) The EPA identification number of
the receiving facility or transporter;
(3) The quantity of used oil delivered;
(4) The date of delivery;
(5) The signature, dated upon receipt"
of the used oil, of a representative of the
receiving facility or transporter.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 1Q, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41619
(c) Exports of used oil. Used oil
transporters must maintain the records
described in paragraphs (b)(l) through
(b)(4) of this section for each shipment
of used oil exported to any foreign
country.
(d) Record retention. The records
described in paragraphs (a), (b), and (c]
of this section must be maintained for at
least three years.
§ 279.47 Management of residues.
Transporters who generate residues
from the storage or transport of used oil
must manage the residues as specified
in § 279.10(e).
Subpart F—Standards for Used Oil
Processors and Re-Refiners
§279.50 Applicability.
(a) The requirements of this subpart
apply to owners and operators of
facilities that process used oil.
Processing means chemical or physical
operations designed to produce from
used oil, or to make used oil more
amenable for production of, fuel oils,
lubricants, or other used oil-derived
products. Processing includes, but is not
limited to: blending used oil with virgin
petroleum products, blending used oils
to meet the fuel specification, filtration,
simple distillation, chemical or physical
separation and re-refining. The
requirements of this subpart do not
apply to:
(1) Transporters that conduct
incidental processing operations that
occur during the normal course of
transportation as provided in § 279.41;
or
(2) Burners that conduct incidental
processing operations that occur during
the normal course of used oil
management prior to burning as
provided in § 279,61(b).
(b) Other applicable provisions. Used
oil processors/re-refiners who conduct
the following activities are also subject
to the requirements of other applicable
provisions of this part as indicated in
paragraphs (b)(l) through (b)(5) of this
section.
(1) Processors/re-refiners who
generate used oil must also comply with
subpart C of this part;
(2) Processors/re-refiners who
transport used oil must also comply with
subpart E of this part;
(3) Except as provided in paragraphs
(b){3)(i) and (b](3;p) of this section,
processors/re-refiners who burn off-
specification used oil for energy
recovery must also'comply with subpart
G of this part. Erocessor/re-refiners
burning used oil for energy recovery
under the following conditions are not
subject to subpart G of this part:
(i) The used oil is burned in an on-site
space heater that meets the
requirements of § 279.23; or
(ii) The used oil is burned for purposes
of processing used oil, which is
considered burning incidentally to used
oil processing;
(4) Processors/re-refiners who direct
shipments of off-specification used oil
from their facility to a used oil burner or
first claim that used oil that is to be
burned for energy recovery meets the
used oil fuel specifications set forth in
§ 279.11 must also comply with subpart
H of this part; and
(5) Processors/re-refiners who dispose
of used oil, including the use of used oil
as a dust suppressant, also must comply
with subpart I of this part.
§ 279.51 Notification.
(a) Identification numbers. Used oil
processors and re-refiners who have not
previously complied with the
notification requirements of RCRA
section 3010 must comply with these
requirements and obtain an EPA
identification number.
(b) Mechanics of notification. A used
oil processor or re-refiner who has not
received an EPA identification number
may obtain one by notifying the
Regional Administrator of their used oil
activity by submitting either:
(1) A completed EPA Form 8700-12
(To obtain EPA Form 8700-12 call
RCRA/Superfund Hotline at 1-800-424-
9346 or 703-920-9810); or
(2) A letter requesting an EPA
identification number.
Call RCRA/Superfund Hotline to
determine where to send a letter
requesting an EPA identification
number. The letter should include the
following information:
(i) Processor or re-refiner company
name;
(iij Owner of the processor or re-
refiner company;
(iii) Mailing address for the processor
or re-refiner;
(iv) Name and telephone number for
the processor or re-refiner point of
contact;
(v) Type of used oil activity (i.e.,
process only, process and re-refine);
(vi) Location of the processor or re-
refiner facility.
§ 279.52 General facility standards.
(a] Preparedness and prevention.
Owners and operators of used oil
processors and re-refiners facilities must
comply With the following requirements:
(1) Maintenance and operation of
facility. Facilities must be maintained
and operated to minimize the possibility
of a fire, explosion, or any unplanned
sudden or non-sudden release of used
oil to air, soil or surface water which
could threaten human health or the
environment.
(2) Required equipment. All facilities
must be equipped with the following,
unless none of the hazards posed by
used oil handled at the facility could
require a particular kind of equipment
specified in paragraphs (a)(2Mi) through
(iv) of this section:
(i) An internal communications or
alarm system capable of providing
immediate emergency instruction (voice
or signal) to facility personnel;
(ii) A device, such as a telephone
(immediately available at the scene of
operations) or a hand-held two-way
radio, capable of summoning emergency
assistance from local police
departments, fire departments, or State
or local emergency response teams;
(iii) Portable fire extinguishers, fire
control equipment (including special
extinguishing equipment, such as that
using foam, inert gas, or dry chemicals),
spill control equipment and
decontamination equipment; and
(iv) Water at adequate volume and
pressure to supply water hose streams,
or foam producing equipment, or
automatic sprinklers, or water spray
systems.
(3) Testing and maintenance of
equipment. All facility communications
or alarm systems, fire protection
equipment, spill control equipment, and
decontamination equipment, where
required, must be tested and maintained
as necessary to assure its proper
operation in time of emergency.
(4) Access to communications or
alarm system, (i) Whenever used oil is
being poured, mixed, spread, or
otherwise handled, all personnel
involved in the operation must have
immediate access to an internal alarm
or emergency communication device,
either directly or through visual or voice
contact with another employee, unless
such a device is not required in
paragraph (a](2) of this section.
(ii) If there is ever just one employee
on the premises while the facility is
operating, the employee must have
immediate access to a device, such as a
telephone (immediately available at the
scene of operation) or a hand-held two-
way radio, capable of summoning
external emergency assistance, unless
such a device is not required in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section,
(5) Required aisle space. The owner
or operator must maintain aisle space to
allow the unobstructed movement of
personnel, fire protection equipment.
spill control equipment and
decontamination equipment to any area
of facility operation in an emergency,
-------
41620
Federal Register / Vol: 57. No. ,176 / Thursday; September 10, -,199%, /'. Rates and Regulations
unless aisle space is not needed for any
of these purposes.
(6) Arrangements with local
authorities, (i) The owner or operator
must attempt to make the following
arrangements, as appropriate for the
type of used oil handled at the facility
and the potential need for the services
of these organizations:
(A) Arrangements to familiarize
police, fire departments, and emergency
response teams with the layout of the
facility, properties of used oil handled at
the facility and associated hazards,
places where facility personnel would
normally be working, entrances to roads
inside the facility, and possible
evacuation routes;
(B) Where more than one police and
fire department might respond to an
emergency, agreements designating
primary emergency authority to a
specific police and a specific fire
department, and agreements with any
others to provide support to the primary
emergency authority;
(C) Agreements with State emergency
response teams, emergency response
contractors, and equipment suppliers;
and
(D) Arrangements to familiarize local
hospitals with the properties of used oil
handled at the -facility and the types of
injuries or illnesses which could result
from fires, explosions, or releases at the
facility.
(ii) Where State or local authorities
decline to enter into such arrangements,
the owner or operator must document
the refusal in the operating record.
(b) Contingency plan and emergency
procedures. Owners and operators of
used oil processors and re-refiners
facilities must comply with the following
requirements:
{1} Purpose and implementation of
contingency plan, (i) Each owner or
operator must have a contingency plan
for the facility. The contingency plan
must be designed to minimize hazards to
human health or the environment from
fires, explosions, or any unplanned
sudden or non-sudden release of used
oil to air, soil, or surface water.
(ii) The provisions of the plan must be
carried out immediately whenever there
is a fire, explosion, or release or used oil
which could threaten human health or
the environment.
. (2) Content of contingency plan, (i)
The contingency plan must describe the
actions facility personnel must take to
comply with paragraphs (b) (1) and (6)
of this section in response to fires,
explosions, or any unplanned sudden or
non-sudden release of used oil to air,
soil, or surface water at the facility.
(ii) If the owner or operator has
already prepared a Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countennneasiires (SPCC)
Plan in accordance with part 112 of this
chapter, or part 1510 of chapter V of this
title, or some other emergency or
contingency plan, the owner of operator
need only amend that plan to
incorporate used oil management
provisions that are sufficient to comply
with the requirements of this part. •
(iii) The plan must describe
arrangements agreed to by local police
departments, fire departments,
hospitals, contractors, and State and
local emergency response teams to
coordinate emergency services, pursuant
to paragraph (a)(6) of this section.
pv) The plan must list names,
addresses, and phone numbers (office
and home) of all persons qualified to act
as emergency coordinator (see
paragraph (b)(5) of this section), and this
list must be kept up to date. Where more
than one person is listed, one must be
named as primary emergency
coordinator and others must be listed in
the order in which they will assume
responsibility as alternates.
(v) The plan must include a list of all
emergency equipment at the facility
(such as fire extinguishing systems, spill
control equipment, communications and
alarm systems (internal and external),
and decontamination equipment), where
this equipment is required. This list must
be kept up to date. In addition, the plan
must include the location and a physical
description of each item on the list, and
a brief outline of its capabilities.
(vi) The plan must include an
evacuation plan for facility personnel
where there is a possibility that .
evacuation could be necessary. This
plan must describe signal(s) to be used
to begin evacuation, evacuation routes,
and alternate evacuation routes (in
cases where the primary routes could be
blocked by releases of used oil or fires).
(3) Copies of contingency plan. A copy
of the contingency plan and all revisions
to the plan must be:
(i) Maintained at the facility; and
(ii) Submitted to all local police
departments, fire departments,
hospitals, and State and local
emergency response teams that may be
called upon to provide emergency
services.
(4) Amendment of contingency plan.
The contingency plan must be reviewed,
and immediately amended, if riecessary,
whenever:
(i) Applicable regulations are revised;
(ii) The plan fails in an emergency;
(iii) The facility changes—in its
design, construction, operation,
maintenance, or other circumstances—
in a way that materially increases the
potential for fires, explosions, or
releases of used oil, or changes the
response necessary in an emergencv;
(iv) The list of emergency
coordinators changes; or
(v) The list of emergency equipment
changes.
(5) Emergency coordinator. At all
times, there must be, at least one
employee either on the facility premises
or on call (i.e., available to respond to
an emergency by reaching the facility
within a short period of time)'with the
responsibility for coordinating all
emergency response measures. This
emergency coordinator must be
thoroughly familiar with all aspects of
the facility's contingency plan, all
operations and activities at the facility,
the location and characteristic of used
oil handled, the location of all records
within the facility, and facility layout. In
addition, this person must have the
authority to commit the resources
needed to carry'out the contingency
plan.
Guidance: The emergency
coordinator's responsibilities are more
fully spelled out in paragraph (b)(6) of
this section. Applicable responsibilities
for the emergency coordinator vary,
depending on .factors such as type and
variety of used oil handled by the
facility, and type and complexity of the
facility.
(6) Emergency procedures, (i)
Whenever there is an imminent or
actual emergency situation, the
emergency coordinator (or the designee
when the emergency coordinator is on
call) must immediately:
(A) Activate internal facility alarms or
communication systems, where
applicable, to notify all facility
personnel; and
(B) Notify appropriate State or local
agencies with designated response roles
if their help is needed.
(ii) Whenever there is a release, fire,
or explosion, the emergency coordinator
must immediately identify the character,
exact source, amount, and a real extent
of any released materials. He may do
this by observation or review of facility
records of manifests and, if necessary,
by chemical analysts.
(iii) Concurrently, the emergency
coordinator must assess possible
hazards to human health or the
environment that may result from the
release, fire, or explosion. This
assessment must consider both direct
and indirect effects of the release, fire,
or explosion (e.g., the effects of any
toxic, irritating, or asphyxiating gases
that are generated, or the effects of any
hazardous surface water run-offs from
water of chemical agents used to control
fire and heat-induced explosions).
-------
/'Voisr. Mo. If76""'I fhufsdky,'Septfeniber 10, i9te/'Kules;and Regulations 41621
(iv)lf the emergency coordinator
determines that the facility has had a
release, fire, or explosion which could
threaten human health, or the
environment, outside the facility, he
must report his findings as follows:
(A) If his assessment indicated that
evacuation of local areas may be
advisable, he must immediately notify
appropriate local authorities. He must
be Available to help appropriate officials
decide whether local areas should be
evacuated; and
(B) He must immediately notify either
the government official designated as
the on-scene coordinator for the
geographical area (in the applicable
regional contingency plan under part
1510 of this title), or the National
Response Center (using their 24-hour toll
free number 800/424-8802). The report
must include:
(1) Name and telephone number of
reporter;
(2) Name and address of facility;
(3) Time and type of incident (e.g.,
release, fire);
(4) Name and quantity of material(s)
involved, to the extent known;
[5] The extent of injuries, if any; and
(8) The possible hazards to human
health, or the environment, outside the
facility,
(v) During an emergency, the
-emergency coordinator must take all
reasonable measures necessary to
ensure that fires, explosions, and
releases do not occur, recur, or spread to
other used oil or hazardous waste at the
facility. These measures must include,
where applicable, stopping processes
and operation, collecting and containing
released used oil, and removing or
isolating containers.
(vi) !f the facility stops operation in
response to a fire, explosion, or release,
the emergency coordinator must monitor
for leaks, pressure buildup, gas
generation, or ruptures in valves, pipes,
or other equipment, wherever this is
appropriate.
(vii) Immediately after an emergency,
•the emergency coordinator must provide
for recycling, storing, or disposing of
recovered used oil, contaminated soil or
surface water, or any other material that
results from a -release, fire,- or explosion
at the facility.
(viii) The emergency coordinator must
ensure that, in the affected area(s) of the
facility:
. (A) No waste or used oil that may be
incompatible with the released material
is recycled, treated, stored, or disposed
of until cleanup procedures are
completed; and
(B) All emergency equipment listed in
the contingency plan is cleaned and fit
for its intended use before operations
are resumed.
(C) The owner or operator must notify
the Regional Administrator, and
appropriate State and local authorities
that the facility is in compliance with
paragraph (h) of this section before
operations are resumed in the affected
area(s) of the facility.
(ix) The owner or operator must note
in the operating record the time, date
and details of any incident that requires
implementing the contingency plan.
Within 15 days after the incident, he
must submit a written report on the
incident to the Regional Administrator,
The report must include:
(A) Name, address, and telephone
number of the owner or operator;
(B) Name, address, and telephone
number of the facility;
(C) Date, time, and type of incident
(e.g., fire, explosion);
(D) Name and quantity of material(s)
involved;
(E) The extent of injuries, if any;
(F) An assessment of actual or
potential hazards to human health or the
environment, where this is applicable;
(G) Estimated quantity and
disposition of recovered material that
resulted from the incident.
§ 279.53 RebytSabSe presumption for used
OIL
(a) To ensure that used oil managed at
a processing/re-refining facility is not
hazardous waste under the rebuttable
presumption of § 279.10(b)(l){ii), the
owner or operator of a used oil
processing/re-refining facility must
determine whether the total halogen
content of used oil managed at the
facility is above or below 1,000 ppm.
(b) The owner or operator must make
this determination by:
(1) Testing the used oil; or
(2) Applying knowledge of the halogen
content of the used oil in light of the
materials or processes used.
(e) If the used oil contains greater than
or equal to 1,000 ppm total halogens, it is
presumed to be a hazardous waste
because it has been mixed with
halogenated hazardous waste listed in
subpart D of part 261 of this chapter.
The owner or operator may rebut the
presumption by demonstrating that (he
used oil does not contain hazardous
waste {for example, by using an
analytical method from SW-848, Edition
III, to show that the used oil does not
contain significant concentrations of
halogenated hazardous constituents -
listed in appendix VIII of part 281 of this
chapter). EPA Publication SW-846,
Third Edition, is available for the cost of
$110.00 from the Government Printing
Office, Superintendent of Documents,
P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh PA 15250-
7954, (202) 783-3238 (document number
955-001-00000-1).
(1) The rebuttable presumption does
not apply to metalworking oils/fluids
containing chlorinated paraffins, if they
are processed, through a tolling
agreement, to reclaim metalworking
oils/fluids. The presumption does apply
to metalworking oils/fluids if such oils/
fluids are recycled in any other manner,
or disposed.
(2) The rebuttable presumption does
not apply to used oils contaminated
with chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
removed from refrigeration units where
the CFCs are destined for reclamation.
The rebuttable presumption does apply
to used oils contaminated with CFCs
that have been mixed with used oil from
sources other than refrigeration units.
§ 279.54 Used oil management.
As specified in § 279.10(f),
wastewaters containing "de minimis"
quantities of used oil are not subject to
the requirements of this part, including
the prohibition On storage in units other
than tanks or containers. Used oil"
processor/re-refiners are subject to all
applicable Spill Prevention, Control and
Counlermeasures (40 CFR part 112) in
addition to the requirements of this
subpart Used oil generators are also
subject to the Underground Storage
Tank (40 CFR part 280) standards for
used oil stored in underground tanks
whether or not the used oil exhibits any
characteristics of hazardous waste, in
addition to the requirements of this
subpart,
(a) Management units. Used oil
processors/re-refiners may not store or
process used oil in units other than
tanks, containers, or units subject to
regulation under part 264 or 285 of this
chapter,
(b') Condition of units. Containers and
aboveground tanks used to store or
process used oil at processing and re-
refining facilities must be:
(1) In good condition (no severe
rusting, apparent structural defects or
deterioraties?); and
(2j Not leaking (no visible leaks),
(c) Secondary containment for
containers. Containers used to store or
process used oil at processing and re-
refining facilities must be equipped with1
a secondary containment system.
(1) The secondary containment system
must consist of, at & minimum;
(i) Dikes, berms or retaining walls;
and
(ii) A- floor. The Door must cover the
entire area within the dike, berni, or
retaining wall.
-------
41622 Federal Register /Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
(2) The entire containment system,
including walls and floor, mast be
sufficiently impervious to used oil to
prevent any used oil released into the
containment system from migrating out
of the system to the soil, groundwater,
or surface water.
(d) Secondary containment for
existing aboveground tanks. Existing
aboveground tanks used to store or
process used oil at processing and re-
refining facilities must be equipped with
a secondary containment system.
(!) The secondary containment system
must consist of, at a minimum;
(i) Dikes, berms or retaining walls;
and
(ii) A flaor. The floor must cover the
entire area within the dike, berm, or
retaining wall except areas where
existing portions of the tank meet the
ground; or
(hi] An equivalent secondary
containment system.
(2] The entire containment system,
including walls and floor, must be
sufficiently impervious to used oil So
prevent any used oil released into the
containment system from migrating out
of the system to the soil, groundwater,
or surface water.
(e) Secondary containment for new
aboveground tanks. New aboveground
tanks used to store or process used oil at
processing and re-refining facilities must
be equipped with a secondary
containment system.
(1) The secondary containment system
must consist of, at a minimum:
(i) Dikes, berms or retaining walls;
and
(ii) A floor. The floor must cover the
entire area within the dike, berm, or
retaining wall; or
(iii} An equivalent secondary
containment system.
(2) The entire containment system,
including walls and floor, must be
sufficiently impervious to used oil to
prevent any used oil released into the
containment system from migrating out
of the system to the soil, groundwater,
or surface water.
(f) Labels. (1) Containers and
aboveground tanks used to store or
process used oil at processing and re-
refining facilities must be labeled or
marked clearly with the words "Used
Oil."
(2) Fill pipes used to transfer used oil
into underground storage tanks at
processing and re-refming facilities must
be labeled or marked clearly with the
words "Used Oil."
(gj Response to releases. Upon
detection of a release of used oil to the
environment not subject to the
requirements of part 280, subpart'F of
this chapter which has occurred after
the effective date of the authorized used
oil program for the State in which the
release is located, an owner/operator
must perform the following cleanup
steps:
(1} Stop the release;
(2) Contain the released used oil;
(3) Clean up and mange properly the
released used oil an-d other materials;
and
(4) If necessary, repair or replace any
leaking used oil storage containers or
tanks prior to returning them to service.
(h) Closure.—(1) Aboveground tanks.
Owners and operators who store or
process used oil in aboveground tanks
must comply with the following
requirements:
(i) At closure of a tank system, the
owner or operator must remove or
decontaminate used oil residues in
tanks, contaminated containment
system components, contaminated soils,
and structures and equipment
contaminated with used oil, and manage
them as hazardous waste, unless the
materials are not hazardous waste
under this chapter.
{ii) If the owner or operator
demonstrates that not all contaminated
soils can be practicably removed or
decontaminated as required in
paragraph (h)(l)(i) of this section, then
the owner or operator must close the
tank system and perform post-closure
care in accordance with the closure and
post-closure care requirements that
apply to hazardous waste landfills
(§ 265.310 of this chapter).
(2) Containers. Owners and operators
who store used oil in containers must
comply with the following requirements:
(i) At closure, containers holding used
oils or residues of used oil must be
removed from the site;
(ii) The owner or operator must
remove or decontaminate used oil
residues, contaminated containment
system components, contaminated soils,
and "structures and equipment
contaminated with used oil, and manage
them as hazardous waste, unless the
materials are not hazardous waste
under part 261 of this chapter.
§ 279.55 Anaiysis plan.
Owners or operators of used oil
processing and re-refining facilities must
develop and follow a written analysis
plan describing the procedures that will
be used to comply with the analysis
requirements of § 279.53 and, if
applicable, § 279.72. The owner or
operator must keep the plan at the
facility.
(a) Rebuttable presumption for used '
oil in § 279.53. At at minimum, the plan
must specify the following:
(1) Whether sample analyses or
knowledge of the halogen content of the
used oil will be used to make this
determination.
(2) If sample analyses are used to
make this determination:
(i) The sampling method used to
obtain representative samples to be
analyzed. A representative sample may
be obtained using either:
(A) One of the sampling methods in
appendix I of part 261 of this chapter; or
(B) A method shown to be equivalent
under §§ 260.20 and 260.21 of this
chapter,
(ii) The frequency of sampling to be
performed, and whether the analysis
will be performed on-site or off-site; and
(iii) The methods used to analyze used
oil for the parameters specified in
§ 279.53; and
(3) The type of information that will
be used to determine the halogen
content of the used oil.
(b) On-specification used oil fuel in
§279.72. At a minimum, the plan must
specify the following if § 279.72 is
applicable:
(1) Whether sample analyses or other
information will be used to make this
determination;
(2) If sample analyses are used to
make this determination:
(i) The sampling method used to
obtain representative samples to be
analyzed. A representative sample may
be obtained using either
(A) One of the sampling methods in
appendix I of part 261 of this chapter; or
(B) A method shown to be equivalent
under | 260.20 and 260.21 of this chapter;
(ii) Whether used oil will be sampled
and analyzed prior to or after any
processing/re-refining;
(iii) The frequency of sampling to be
performed, and whether the analysis
will be performed on-site or off-site; and
(iv) The methods used to analyze used
oil for the parameters specified in
§ 279,72; and
(3) The type of information that will
be used to make the on-specification
used oil fuel determination.
§ 279.56 Tracking.
(a) Acceptance. Used oil processors/
re-refiners must keep a record of each
used oil shipment accepted for
processing/re-refining. These records
may take the form of a log, invoice,
manifest, bill of lading or other shipping
documents. Records for each shipment
must include the following information:
(1) The name and address of the
transporter who delivered the used oil to,
the processor/re-refiner;
(2) The name and address of the
generator or processor/re-refining from
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / THursday, September 10, 1992 /Rules and Regulations 41623
whom the used oil was sent for
processing/re-refinkig;
(3) The EPA identification number of
the transporter who delivered the used
oil to the processor/re-refmer;
(4) The EPA identification number (if
applicable) of the generator or
processor/re-refiner from whom the
used oil was sent for processing/re-
refining;
(5) The quantity of used oil accepted;
and
(6) The date of acceptance.
(b) Delivery. Used oil processor/re-
refiners must keep a record of each
shipment of used oil that is shipped to a
used oil burner, processor/ re-refiner, or
disposal facility. These records may
take the form of a log, invoice, manifest,
bill of lading or other shipping
documents. Records for each shipment
must include the following information:
(i) The name and address of the
transporter who delivers the used oil to
the burner, processor/re-refiner or
disposal facility;
(2) The name and address of the
burner, processor/re-refiner or disposal
facility who will receive the used oil;
,.(3J The EPA identification number of
the transporter who delivers the used oil
to the burner, processor/re-refiner or
disposal facility;
(4) The EPA identification number of
the burner, processor/re-refiner, or
disposal facility who will receive the
used oil;
(5) The quantity of used oil shipped;
and
(6) The date of shipment.
(c) Record retention. The records
described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of
this section must be maintained for at
least three years,
§ 279.57 Operating record and reporting.
[a) Operating record. (1) The owner or
operator must keep a written operating
record at the facility.
(2) The following information must be
recorded, as it becomes available, and
maintained in the operating record until
closure of the facility;
(i) Records and results of used oil
analyses performed as described in the
analysis plan required under § 279.55;
and
(ii) Summary reports and details of all
incidents that require implementation of
the contingency plan an specified in
§ 279.52(b).
(b) Reporting. A used oil processor/re-
refiner must report to the Regional
Administrator, in the form of a letter, on
a biennial basis (by March 1 of each
even numbered year), the following
information concerning used oil
activities during the previous calendar
year;
(i) The EPA identification number,
name, and address of the processor/re-
refiner;
(2) The calendar year covered by the
report; and
(3) The quantities of used oil accepted
for processing/re-refining and the
manner in which the used oil is
processed/re-refined, including the
specific processes employed.
§ 279.56 Off-site shipments of used oil.
Used oil processors/re-refiners who
initiate shipments of used oil off-site
must ship the used oil using a used oil
transporter who has obtained an EPA
identification number.
§ 279.59 Management of residues.
Owners and operators who generate
residues from the storage, processing, or
re-fining of used oil must manage the
residues as specified in § 279.10(e).
Subpart G—Standards for Used Oil
Burners Who Burn Off-Specification
Used Oil for Energy Recovery
§279.60 Appiicabiiity.
(a) General. The requirements of this
subpart apply to used oil burners except
as specified in paragraphs (a)(l) and
(a)(2) of this section. A used oil burner is
a facility where used oil not meeting the
specification requirements in § 279.11 is
burned for energy recovery in devices
identified in § 279.61(a). Facilities
burning used oil for energy recovery
under the following conditions are not
subject to this Subpart:
(1) The used oil is burned by the
generator in an on-site space heater
under the provisions of § 279.23; or
(2) The used oil is burned by a
processor/re-refiner for purposes of
processing used oil, which is considered
burning incidentally to used oil
processing.
(b) Other applicable provisions. Used
oil burners who conduct the following
activities are also subject to the
requirements of other applicable
provisions of this part as indicated
below.
(1) Burners who generate used oil
must also comply this subpart C of this
part;
(2) Burners who transport used oil
must also comply with subpart E of this
part:
(3) Except as provided in § 279.61(b),
burners who process or re-refine used
oil must also comply with subpart F of
this part;
(4) Burners who direct shipments of
off-specification used oil from their
facility to a used oil burner or first claim
that used oil that is to be burned for
energy recovery meets the used oil fuel
specifications set forth in § 279.11 must
also comply with subpart H of this part;
and
(5) Burners who dispose of used oil,
including the use of used oil as a dust
suppressant, must comply with subpart I
of this part.
(c) Specification fuel. This subpart
does not apply to persons burning used -
oil that meets the used oil fuel
specification of § 279.11, provided that
the burner complies with the
requirements of subpart H of this part.
§ 279.61 Restrictions on burning.
(a) Off-specification used oil fuel may
be burned for energy recovery in only
the following devices:
(1) Industrial furnaces identified in
§ 260.10 of this chapter;
(2) Boilers, as defined in § 260.10 of
this chapter, that are identified as
follows:
(i) Industrial boilers located on the_
site of a facility engaged in a
manufacturing process where
substances are transformed into new
products, including the component parts
of products, by mechanical or chemical
processes;
(ii) Utility boilers used to produce
electric power, steam, heated or cooled
air, or other gases or fluids for sale; or
(iii) Used oil-fired space heaters
provided that the burner meets the
provisions of § 279.23; or
(3) Hazardous waste incinerators
subject to regulation under subpart O of
parts 264 or 265 of this chapter.
(b)(l) With the following exception,
used oil burners may not process used
oil unless they also comply with the
requirements of subpart F of this part.
(2) Used oil burners may aggregate
off-specification used oil with virgin oil
oi> on-specification used oil for purposes
of burning, but may not aggregate for
purposes of producing on-specification
used oil.
§ 279.62 Notification
(a) Identification numbers. Used oil
burners who have not previously
complied with the notification
requirements of RCRA section 3010 must
comply with these requirements and
obtain an EPA identification number.
(b) Mechanics of notification. A used
oil burner who has not received an EPA
identification number may obtain one by
notifying the Regional Administrator of
Jtheir used oil activity by submitting
either:
(1) A completed EPA Form 8700-12
[To obtain EPA Form 8700-12 call
RCRA/Superfund Hotline at 1-800-424-
9346 or 703-920-9810): or
-------
41624
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday-ii^Ptember[|10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
(2) A letter requesting an EPA
identification number. Call the RCRA/
Superfund Hotline to determine where
to send a letter requesting an EPA
identification number. The letter should
include the following information:
(i) Burner company name;
(ii) Owner of the burner company;
(hi) Mailing address for the burner;
(iv) Name and telephone number for
the burner point of contact;
(v) Type of used oil activity; and
(vi) Location of the burner facility.
§ 279.63 RebiiKsbSe presumption for used
oil.
(a) To ensure that used oil managed at
a used oil burner facility is not
hazardous waste under the rebuttable
presumption of § 279.10(b)(l)(ii), a used
oil burner must determine whether the
total halogen content of used oil
managed at the facility is above or
below 1,000 ppm.
(b) The used oi! burner must
determine if the used oil contains above
or below 1,000 ppm total halogens by:
(1) Testing the used oil;
(2) Applying knowledge of the halogen
content of the used oil in light of the
materials or processes used; or
(3) If the used oil has been received
from a processor/refiner subject to
regulation under subpart F of this part,
using information provided by the
processor/re-refiner.
(c) If the used oil contains greater than
or equal to 1,000 ppm total halogens, it is
presumed to be a hazardous waste/
because it has been mixed with
halogenated hazardous waste listed in
subpart D of part 261 of this chapter.
The owner or operator may rebut the
presumption by demonstrating that the
used oil does not contain hazardous
waste (for example, by using an
analytical method from SW-846, Edition
III, to show that the used oil does not
contain significant concentrations of
halogenated hazardous constituents
listed in appendix VIII of part 261 of this
chapter). EPA Publication SW-848,
Third Edition, is available for the cost of
$110.00 from the Government Printing
Office, Superintendent of Documents,
PO Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-
7954. 202-783-3238 (document number
955-001-00000-1).
(1) The rebuttabie presumption does
not apply to metalworking oils/fluids
containing chlorinated paraffins, if they
are processed, through a tolling
arrangement as described in § 279.24(c),
to reclaim metalworking oils/fluids. The
presumption does apply to
metalworking oils/fluids if such oils/
fluids are recycled in any other manner,
or disposed.
(2) The rebuttable presumption does
not apply to used oils contaminated
with chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)
removed from refrigeration units where
the CFCs are destined far reclamation.
The rebuttable presumption does apply
to used oils contaminated with CFCs
that have been mixed with used oil from
sources other than refrigeration units.
(d) Record retention. Records of
analyses conducted or information used
to comply with paragraphs (a), (b), and
(c) of this section must be maintained by
the burner for at least 3 years.
§ 279.64 Used oil storage.
As specified in § 279.10(f),
wastewaters containing "de minimis"
quantities of used oil are not subject to
the requirements of this Part, including
the prohibition on storage in units other
than tanks or containers. Used oil
burners are subject to all applicable
Spill Prevention, Control and
Countermeasures (40 CFR part 112) in
addition to the requirements of this
subpart. Used oil generators are also
subject to the Underground Storage
Tank (40 CFR part 280) standards for
used oil stored in underground tanks
whether or not the used oil exhibits any
characteristics of hazardous waste, in
addition to the requirements of this
subpart.
(a) Storage units. Used oil burners
may not store used oil in units other
than tanks, containers, or units subject
to regulation under parts 264 or 265 of
this chapter.
(b) Condition of units. Containers and
aboveground tanks used to store oil at
burner facilities must be:
(1) In good condition (no severe
rusting, apparent structural defects or
deterioration); and
(2) Not leaking (no visible leaks).
(c) Secondary containment for
containers. Containers used to store
used oil at 'burner facilities must be
equipped with a secondary containment
system.
(1) The secondary containment system
must consist of, at a minimum:
(i) Dikes, berms or retaining walls;
and
(ii) A floor. The floor must cover the
entire area within the dike, berm, or
retaining wall.
(2) The entire containment system,
including walls and floor, must be
sufficiently impervious to used oil to
prevent any used oil released into the
containment system from migrating out
of the system to the soil, groundwater,
or surface water.
(d) Secondary containment for
existing aboveground tanks. Existing
aboveground tanks used to store used
oil at burner facilities must be equipped
with a secondary containment system.
(1) The secondary containment system
must consist of, at a minimum:
(i) Dikes, berms or retaining walls;
and
(ii) A floor. The floor must cover the
entire area within the dike, berm, or
retaining wall except areas where
existing portions of the tank meet the
ground; or
(iii) An equivalent secondary
containment system.
(2) The entire containment system,
including walls and floor, must be
sufficiently impervious to used oil to
prevent any used oil released into the
containment system from migrating out
of the system to the soil, groundwater,
or surface water.
(e) Secondary containment for
existing aboveground tanks. New
aboveground tanks used to store used
oil at burner facilities must be equipped
with a secondary containment system.
(1) The secondary containment system
must consist of, at a minimum:
(i) Dikes, berms or retaining walls;
and
(ii) A floor. The floor must cover the
entire area within the dike, berm, or
retaining wall; or
(iii) An equivalent secondary
containment system.
(2) The entire containment system,
including walls and floor, must be
sufficiently impervious to used oil to
prevent any used oil released into the
containment system from migrating out
of the system to the soil, groundwater,
or surface water.
(f) Labels. (1) Containers and
aboveground tanks used to store used
oil at burner facilities must be labeled or
marked clearly with the words "Used
Oil."
(2) Fill pipes used to transfer used oi!
into underground storage tanks at
burner facilities must be labeled or
marked clearly with the words "Used
Oil."
(g) Response to releases. Upon
detection of a release of used oil to the
environment not subject to the
requirements of part 280 subpart F
which has occurred after the effective
date of the authorized used oil program
for the State in which the release is
located, a burner must perform the
following cleanup steps:
(1) Stop the release;
(2) Contain the released used oil;
(3) Clean up and manage properly the
released used oil and other materials;.
and
(4) If necessary, repair or replace any
leaking used oil storage containers or
tanks prior to returning them to service.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10. 1992 / Rules and Regulations 41625
§ 279.65 Tracking.
.. (a) Acceptance. Used oil burners must
keep a record of each used oil shipment
accepted for burning. These records may
take the form of a log, invoice, manifest,
bill of lading, or other shipping
documents. Records for each shipment
must include the following information:
(1) The name and address of the
transporter who delivered the used oil to
the burner;
(2) The name and address of the
generator or processor/re-refiner from
whom the used oil was sent to the
burner;
(3] The EPA identification number of
the transporter who delivered the used
oil to the burner;
(4) The EPA identification number (if
applicable) of the generator or
processor/re-refiner from whom the
used oil was sent to the burner;
(5) The quantity of used oil accepted;
and
(6) The date of acceptance,
(b) Record retention. The records
described in paragraph (a) of this
section must be maintained for at least
three years.
§ 279.66 Notices.
(a) Certification. Before a burner
accepts the first shipment of off-
specification used oil fuel from a
generator, transporter, or processor/re-
refiner, the burner must provide to the
generator, transporter, or processor/re-
refiner a one-time written and signed
notice certifying that:
(1) The burner has notified EPA
stating the location and genera!
description of his used oil management
activities; and
(2) The burner will burn the used oil
only in an industrial furnace or boiler
identified in § 279.61(a).
(b) Certification retention. The
certification described in paragraph (a)
of this section must be maintained for
three years from the date the burner last
receives shipment of off-specification
used oil from that generator, transporter.
or processor/re:refiner.
§ 279.67 Management of residues.
Burners who generate residues from
the storage or- burning of used oil must
manage the residues as specified in
§279.10[e).
Subpart H-Standards for Used Oil Fuel
Marketers
§279.70 Applicability.
^a) Any person who conducts either of
the following activities is subject to the
requirements of this section:
(1) Directs a shipment of-off-
- specification used oil from their facility
to a used oil burner; or
(2) First claims that used oil that is to
be burned for energy recovery meets the
used oil fuel specifications set forth in
§ 279.11.
(b) The following persons are not
marketers subject to this subpart:
(1) Used oil generators, and
transporters who transport used oil
received only from generators, unless
the generator or transporter directs a
shipment of off-specification used oil
from their facility to a used d}l burner.
However, processors/re-refiners who
bum some used oil fuel for purposes of
processing are considered to be burning
incidentally to processing. Thus,
generators and transporters who direct
shipments of off-specification used oil to
processor/re-refiners who incidently
bum used oil are not marketers subject
to this Subpart;
(2) Persons who direct shipments of
on-specification used oil and who are
not the first person to claim the oil
meets the used oil fuel specifications of
§ 279.11.
(cj Any person subject to the
requirements of this Subpart must also
comply with one of the following:
(1) Subpart C of this part—Standards
for Used Oil Generators;
(2) Subpart E of this part—Standards
for Used Oil Transporters and Transfer
Facilities;
(3) Subpart F of this part—Standards
for Used Oil Processors and Re-refiners;
or
(4) Subpart G of this part—Standards
for Used Oil Burners who Burn Off-
Specification Used Oil for Energy
Recovery.
§ 279.71 Prohibitions.
A used oil fuel marketer may initiate a
shipment of off-specification used oil
only to a used oil burner who:
(a) Has an EPA identification number;
and
(b) Bums the used oil in an industrial
furnace or boiler identified in
§ 279,61(a).
§ 279.72 On-speci/ication used oil ffuel,
(a) Analysis of used oil fuel. A
generator, transporter, processor/re-
refiner, or burner may determine that
used oil that is to be burned for energy
recovery meets the fuel specifications of
§ 279.11 by performing analyses or
obtaining copies of analyses or other
information documenting that the used
oil fuel meets the specifications. Such
used oil that is to be burned for energy
recovery is not subject to further
regulation under this part
(b) Record retention. A generator,
transporter, processor/re-refiner, or
burner who first claims that used oil that
is to be burned for energy recovery
meets the specifications for used oil fuel
under § 279.11, must keep copies of
analyses of the used oil (or other
information used to make the
determination] for three years.
§ 279.73 Notification.
(a) A used oil fuel marketer subject to
the requirements of this section who has
not previously complied with the
notification requirements of RCRA
Section 3010 must comply with these
requirements and obtain an EPA
identification number.
(b) A marketer who has not received
an EPA identification number may
obtain one by notifying the Regional
Administrator of their used oil activity
by submitting either:
(1) A completed EPA Form 8700-12; or
(2) A letter requesting an EPA
identification number. The letter should
include the following information:
(i) Marketer company name;
pij Owner of the marketer;
(iii) Mailing address for the marketer;
(iv) Name and telephone number for
the marketer point of contact; and
(v) Type of used oil activity (i.e.,
generator directing shipments of off-
specification used oil to a burner].
§ 279.74 Tracking.
(a) Off-specification used oil delivery.
Any used oil generator who directs a
shipfnent of off-specification used oil to
a burner must keep a record of each
shipment of used oil to a used oil burner.
These records may take the form of a
log, invoice, manifest, bill of lading or
other shipping documents. Records for
each shipment must include the
following information:
(1) The name and address of the
transporter who ,delivers the used oil to
the burner;
(2) The name and address of the
burner who will receive the used oil;
(3) The EPA identification number of
the transporter who delivers the used oil
to the burner;
(4) The EPA identification number of
the burner;
(5) The quantity of used oil shipped;
and
(6) The date of shipment.
{b) On-specification used oil delivery.
A generator, transporter, processor/re-
refiner, or burner who first claims that
used oil that is to be burned for energy
recovery meets the fuel specifications
under § 279.11 must keep a record of
each shipment of used oil to an on-
specification used oil burner. Records
for each shipment must include the
following information:
(1) The name and address of the
facility receiving the shipment;
-------
41626 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
(2) The quantity of used oil fuel
delivered;
(3) The date of shipment or delivery;
and
(4) A cross-reference to the record of
used oil analysis or other information
used to make the determination that the
oil meets the specification as required
under § 279.72(a).
(c) Record retention. The records
described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of
this section must be maintained for at
least three years.
§279.75 Notices.
(a) Certification. Before a used oil
generator, transporter, or processor/re-
refiner directs the first shipment of off-
specification used oil fuel to a burner, he
must obtain a one-time written and
signed notice from the burner certifying
that:
(1) The burner has notified EPA
stating the location and general
description of used oil management
activities; and
(2) The burner will burn the off-
specification used oil only in an
industrial furnace or boiler identified in
§ 279.61 (a).
(b) Certification retention. The
certification described in paragraph (a)
of this section must be maintained for
three years from the date the last
shipment of off-specification used oil is
shipped to the burner.
Subpart I—Standards for Use as a
Dust Suppressant and Disposal of
Used Oil
§279.80 Applicability.
The requirements of this subpart
apply to all used oils that cannot be
recycled and are therefore being
disposed.
§ 279.81 Disposal.
(a) Disposal of hazardous used oils.
Used oils that are identified as a
hazardous waste and cannot be
recycled in accordance with this part
must be managed in accordance with
the hazardous waste management
requirements of parts 260 through 266,
268, 270 and 124 of this chapter.
(b) Disposal of nonhazardous used
oils. Used oils that are not hazardous
wastes and cannot be recycled under
this part must be disposed in
accordance with the requirements of
parts 257 and 258 of this chapter.
§ 279.82 Use as a dust suppressant
(a) The use of used oil as a dust
suppressant is prohibited, except when
such activity takes place in one of the
states listed in paragraph (c) of this
section.
(b] A State may petition (e.g., as part
of its authorization petition submitted to
EPA under § 271.5 of this chapter or by i
separate submission) EPA to allow the
use of used oil (that is not mixed with
hazardous waste and does not exhibit a
characteristic other than ignitability) as
a dust suppressant. The State must
show that it has a program in place to
prevent the use of used oil/hazardous
waste mixtures or used oil exhibiting a
characteristic other than ignitability as a
dust suppressant. In addition, such
programs must minimize the impacts of
use as a dust suppressant on the
environment.
(c) List of States. [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 92-20085 Filed 9-9-92; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6580-50-M
-------
Wednesday
May 20, 1992
Part ill
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 261
Hazardous Waste Management System;
General; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Used Oil; Rule
-------
21524 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[FRL-530-Z-92-006; 4118-4]
Hazardous Waste Management
System; General; Identification and
Listing of Hazardous Waste; Used Oil
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is today promulgating a
final listing decision for used oils based
upon the technical criteria provided in
the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) sections 1004 and
3001 and in 40 CFR 261.11 (a)(l) and
(a)(3). EPA has decided not to list used
oils destined for disposal as hazardous
waste based on the finding that all used
oils do not typically and frequently meet
the technical criteria for listing a waste
as hazardous waste. This rule, therefore,
preserves the status quo for used oil
destined for disposal. EPA today is
promulgating a modification to the
current exclusions from the definition of
hazardous waste in 40 CFR 261.4 to
provide an exemption for certain types
of used oil filters. The Agency today is
also providing public notice of the EPA's
deferral on a decision whether or not to
list residuals from the reprocessing and
re-refining of used oil at this time.
The Agency is not taking final action,
at this time, on a listing determination
and/or management standards for used
oils that are recycled as proposed in
1985 and 1991. The Agency will, in the
near future, make a final decision on
listing of used oil destined for recycling
and appropriate management standards
for used oil handlers under the authority
of RCRA section 3014. If EPA
promulgates additional management
standards, service station dealers may
be eligible to qualify for the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act [CERCLA) section 114(c) liability
exemption. The Agency also may
propose standards controlling the
burning of used oil in boilers and
furnaces at a later date.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 19, 1992.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this
rulemaking and regulatory decision is
available for public inspection at room
2427, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20460 from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except for Federal
holidays. The docket number is F-91-
UOLF-FFFFF. The public must make an
appointment to review docket materials
by calling (202) 260-9327. The public
may copy a maximum of 100 pages from
any regulatory document at no cost.
Additional copies cost $.20 per page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For general information contact the
RCRA Hotline, Office of Solid Waste,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC
20460; Telephone (800) 424-9346 (toll
free) or, in the Washington, DC,
metropolitan area telephone (703) 920-
9810.
For information on specific aspects of
this rulemaking and regulatory decision,
contact Ms. Rajni D. Joglekar (202) 260-
3516 or Ms. Eydie Pines (202) 260-3509,
U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
contents of today's notice are listed in
the following outline:
I. Authority
II. Background
A. Regulation as a Hazardous Waste
B. Used Oil Recycling Act (UORA)
C. Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments (HSWA)
D. November 19, 1986, Decision Not to List
Used Oil
E. Recent Agency Activities
F. September 1991 Supplemental Notice
G. Development of Comprehensive Market-
Based Used Oil Recycling Program
III. Summary of Comments Relating to Final
Rule
A. Listing Used Oil: Summary of Major
1985 & 1991 Comments
B. Oil Filters: Summary of Major 1985 &
1991 Comments
IV. Final Listing Determination
A. General
B. No List Determination for Used Oil
Destined for Disposal
1. Toxicity of Used Oil
2. Regulations Governing the Plausible
Mismanagement of Used Oil Destined for
Disposal
a. Overview of RCRA Subtitle C
regulations applicable to used oil
destined for disposal
b. Applicability of RCRA Subtitle I
regulations to used oil destined for
disposal
c. Applicability of RCRA Subtitle D
regulations to used oil destined for
disposal
d. CERCLA reportable quantities [RQs] and
used oil destined for disposal
e. Toxic Substances Control Act
regulations and used oil destined for
disposal
f. Clean Water Act regulations and used oil
destined for disposal
g. Safe Drinking Water Act regulations and
used oil destined for disposal
h. Coast Guard regulations and used oil
destined for disposal
i. Department of Transportation regulations
and used oil destined for disposal
j. Summary of no list decision for used oil
destined for disposal
C. Response to Major Comments
V. Used Oil Filter Exemption
A. Agency's Decision
B. Response to Major Comments
VI. Used Oil Re-refining and Reprocessing
Residuals
VII. State Authorization
A. Applicability of Rule in Authorized
States
B. Effect on State Authorization
VIII. Regulatory Impact Analysis
IX. Regulatory Flexibility Act
X. Paperwork Reduction Act
I. Authority
This regulatory decision is issued
under authority of sections 1004,1006,
2002, 3001 and 3014 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as amended by the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act, as amended by the Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments, and as
amended by the Used Oil Recycling Act,
42 U.S.C. 6901 et. seq.
II. Background
A. Regulation as a Hazardous Waste
On December 18, 1978, EPA initially
proposed guidelines and regulations for
the management of hazardous wastes as
well as specific rules for the
identification and listing of hazardous
wastes under section 3001 of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) (43 FR 58946). At that time,
EPA proposed to list waste lubricating
oil and waste hydraulic and cutting oil J
as hazardous wastes on the basis of
their toxicity. In addition, the Agency
proposed recycling regulations to
regulate (1) the incineration or burning
of used lubricating, hydraulic,
transformer, transmission, or cutting oil
that was hazardous and (2) the use of
waste oils in a manner that constituted
disposal.2
In the May 19,1980, regulations (45 FR
33084), EPA decided to defer
promulgation of the recycling
regulations for waste oils in order to
consider fully whether waste- and use-
specific standards may be implemented
in lieu of imposing the full set of Subtitle
C regulations on potentially recoverable
and valuable materials. At the same
time, EPA deferred the listing of waste
oil that is destined for disposal so that
the entire waste oil issue could be
addressed at one time. Under the May
19, 1980, regulations, however, any
1 The term "waste oil" includes both used and
unused oils that may no longer be used for their
original purpose.
2 "Use in a manner constituting disposal" means
the placement of hazardous waste directly onto the
land in a manner constituting disposal or the use of
the solid waste to produce products that are applied
to or placed on the land or are otherwise contained
in products that are applied to or placed on the lanol.
now codified at 40 CFR 261.2(c)(l).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 21525
waste oil exhibiting one of the
characteristics of hazardous waste
iignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and
-toxicity) that was disposed, or
accumulated, stored, or treated prior to
disposal, became regulated as a
hazardous waste subject to all
applicable Subtitle C regulations.
B. Used Oil Recycling Act (UORA)
In an effort to encourage the recycling
of used oil, and in recognition of the
potential hazards posed by its
mismanagement, Congress passed the
Used Oil Recycling Act (UORA) on
October 15, 1980 (Pub. L. 96-463). UORA
defined used oil as "any oil which has
been refined from crude oil, used, and as
a result of such use, contaminated by
physical or chemical impurities." Among
other provisions, UORA required the
Agency to make a determination as to
the hazardousness of used oil and report
the findings to Congress with a detailed
statement of the data and other
information upon which the
determination was based. In addition,
the Agency was to establish
performance standards and other
requirements under section 7 of UORA
as "may be necessary to protect the
public health and the environment from
hazards associated with recycled oil" as
long as such regulations "do not
Discourage the recovery or recycling of
used oil." These statutory provisions
originally were added as section 3012 of
RCRA by the UORA and subsequently
were amended and redesignated as
section 3014 of RCRA under the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984.
In January 1981, EPA submitted to
Congress the used oil report mandated
by section 8 of the UORA.3 In the report,
EPA indicated its intention to list both
used oil and unused waste oil as
hazardous under section 3001 of RCRA
based on the presence of a number of
toxicants in crude or refined oil (e.g.,
benzene, naphthalene, and phenols), as
well as the presence of contaminants in
used oil as a result of use {e.g., lead,
chromium, and cadmium). In addition,
the report cited the environmental and
human health threats posed by these
used oils and unused waste oils,
including the potential threat of
rendering ground water non-potable
through contamination.
C. Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments (HSWA)
On November 8, 1984, the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA)
to RCRA were signed into law. In
addition to many other requirements,
HSWA reemphasized that the protection
of human health and the environment
was to be of primary concern in the
regulation of hazardous waste. Specific
to used oil, the Administrator was
required to "promulgate regulation * * *
as may be necessary to protect human
health and the environment from
hazards associated with recycled oil. In
developing such regulations, the
Administrator shall conduct an analysis
of the economic impact of the
regulations on the oil recycling industry.
The Administrator shall ensure that
such regulations do not discourage the
recovery or recycling of used oil
consistent with the protection of human
health and the environment." (Emphasis
added to highlight HSWA language
amending RCRA § 3014(a) (see section
242, Pub. L. 98-616).)
HSWA required EPA to propose
whether to identify or list used
automobile and truck crankcase oil by
November 8, 1985, and to make a final
determination as to whether to identify
or list any or all used oils by November
8, 1986. On November 29, 1985 (50 FR
49258), EPA proposed to list all used oils
as hazardous waste, including
petroleum-derived and synthetic oils,
based on the presence of toxic
constituents at levels of concern during
and after use. Also on November 29,
1985, the Agency proposed management
standards for recycled used oil (50 FR
49212) and issued final regulations,
incorporated at 40 CFR part 266, subpart
E, prohibiting the burning of off-
specification used oil fuels 4 in non-
industrial boilers and furnaces (50 FR
49164). Marketers of used oil fuel and
industrial burners of off-specification
fuel are required to notify EPA of their
activities and to comply with certain
administrative requirements. Used oils
that meet the used oil fuel specification
are exempt from most of the 40 CFR part
266, subpart E regulations.
On March 10, 1986 (51 FR 8206), the
Agency published a supplemental notice
requesting comments on additional
aspects of the proposed listing of used
oil as hazardous. In particular,
commenters to the November 29, 1985,
proposal suggested that EPA consider a
regulatory option of only listing used oil
as a hazardous waste when disposed,
while promulgating special management
standards for used oil that is recycled.
J3 Report to Congress: Listing of Waste Oil as a
Hazardous Waste Pursuant to section (8)(2), Pub. L.
96-463; U.S. EPA, 1991.
4 Used Oil that exceeds any of the following
specification levels is considered to be "off-
specification" used oil fuel under 40 CFR 266.40(e):
Arsenic—5 ppm, Cadmium—2 ppm, Chromium—10
ppm, Lead—100 ppm, Flash Point 100 °F
minimum, Total Halogens—4,000 ppm.
The supplemental notice also contained
a request for comments on additional
issues related to the "mixture rule" (40
CFR 261.3(a)(2)(iv)), on test methods for
determining halogen levels in used oils,
and on new data on the composition of
used oil and used oil processing
residuals.
D. November 19, 1986, Decision Not To
List Recycled Used Oil
On November 19,1986, EPA issued a
decision not to list as a hazardous waste
used oil that is recycled (51 FR 41900).
At that time, it was the Agency's belief
that the stigmatic effects associated
with a hazardous waste listing might
discourage the recycling of used oil,
thereby resulting in increased disposal
of used oil in uncontrolled manners.
EPA stated that several residues,
wastewaters, and sludges associated
with the recycling of used oil may be
evaluated to determine if a hazardous
waste listing for these residuals was
necessary, even if used oil was not
listed as a hazardous waste. EPA also
outlined a plan that included making a
determination of whether or not to list,
as a hazardous waste, used oil that is
disposed and promulgation of special
management standards for recycled oil.
EPA's decision not to list used oil as a
hazardous waste based on the potential
stigmatic effects was challenged by the
Hazardous Waste Treatment Council,
the Association of Petroleum Re-
refiners, and the Natural Resources
Defense Council. The petitioners
claimed that (1) the language of RCRA
indicated that in determining whether to
list used oil as a hazardous waste, EPA
may consider technical characteristics
of hazardous waste, but not the
"stigma" that a hazardous listing might
involve, and (2) that Congress intended
EPA to consider the effects of listing on
the recycled oil industry only after the
initial listing decision.
On October 7,1988, the Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
found that EPA acted contrary to law in
its determination not to list used oil
under RCRA § 3001 based on the
stigmatic effects. (See Hazardous Waste
Treatment Council v. EPA, 861 F.2d 270
(D.C. Cir. 1988) [HWTC I].) The court
ruled that EPA must determine whether
to list any used oils based on the
technical criteria for waste listings
specified in the statute and in EPA's
implementing regulations.
E. Recent Agency Activities
After the 1988 court decision, EPA
began to reevaluate its basis for making
a listing determination for used oil. EPA
reviewed the statute, the 1985 proposed
-------
21526 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
rule, and the many comments received
on the proposed rule. Those comments
indicated numerous concerns with the
proposed listing approach. One of the
most frequent concerns voiced by
commenters was related to the quality
and "representativeness" of the data
used by EPA to characterize used oils in
1985. Numerous commenters indicated
that "their oils" were not represented by
the data and, if they were represented,
those oils were characterized after being
mixed with other more contaminated
oils or with other hazardous wastes.
Many commenters submitted data
demonstrating that the used oils they
generate, particularly industrial used
oils, did not contain high levels of
toxicants of concern.
In addition, the Agency recognized
that much of the information in the 1985
used oil composition data is several
years old, as most of the information
was collected prior to 1985. Since the
time of that data gathering effort, the
composition of used automotive oil may
have been affected by the phase-down
of lead in gasoline. The Agency also
recognized the need to collect analytical
data addressing specific classes of used
oils as collected and stored at the point
of generation [i.e., at the generator's
facility).
Finally, the toxicity characteristic
extraction procedure (EP) (45 FR 33119,
May 19, 1980] identified certain used oils
as hazardous. Due to the possibility of
changes in used oil composition
described above and promulgation of
the new toxicity characteristic [TC] rule
(55 FR 11798, March 29, 1990), the
Agency recognized that additional data
to characterize the toxicity of used oil
was needed prior to making a final
hazardous waste listing determination.
F. September 1991 Supplemental Notice
On September 23, 1991, EPA published
a Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (56 FR 48000). The 1991
Supplemental Notice presented
supplemental information gathered by
EPA and provided to EPA by individuals
commenting on previous notices on the
listing of used oil and used oil
management standards. As discussed
above, numerous commenters on the
1985 proposal to list used oil as a
hazardous waste contended that the
broad listing of all used oils would
unfairly subject them to stringent
regulation because their used oils are
not hazardous. Based on those
comments, the Agency has collected a
variety of additional information
regarding various types of used oil, the
management of these used oils, and the
potential health and environmental
effects posed when these used oils are
mismanaged. The 1991 Supplemental
Notice presented this new information
to the public and requested comment on
the information, particularly on the issue
of whether and how the information
suggests new concerns that EPA should
consider in deciding whether to finalize
all or part of its 1985 proposal to list
used oil as a hazardous waste.
In addition, the 1991 Supplemental
Notice expanded upon the November 29,
1985, proposal (50 FR 49258) to list used
oils as hazardous and a March 10, 1986,
Supplemental Notice (51 FR 8206) by
discussing regulatory alternatives not
previously presented in the Federal
Register. Based on the public comments
received relative to these two notices,
the Agency investigated several
important aspects of used oil regulation.
For these aspects, the Agency identified
alternative approaches that were not
presented explicitly in the earlier
notices. Those alternatives were
presented in the 1991 Supplemental
Notice.
The 1991 Supplemental Notice also
discussed the Agency's proposal to
amend 40 CFR 261.32 by adding four
waste streams from the processing and
re-refining of used oil to the list of
hazardous wastes from specific sources.
The Agency noted its intention to
include these residuals in the definition
of used oil in its November 29, 1985,
proposal to list used oil as hazardous.
The wastes from the processing and re-
refining of used oil, which are more fully
described later, include process
residuals from the gravitational or
mechanical separation of solids, water,
and oil; spent polishing media used to
finish used oil; distillation bottoms; and
treatment residues from primary
wastewater treatment.
The 1991 Supplemental Notice also
included a description of several
approaches the Agency was considering
for the used oil management standards
(in addition to, or in place of, those
proposed in 1985).
G. Development of Comprehensive
Market-Based Used Oil Recylcling
Program
In developing management standards,
EPA's efforts will be focused on
avoiding any damage to existing
recycling markets for used oil consistent
with protection of human health and the
environment. At the same time,
however, the Agency is interested in
obtaining the optimal level of used oil
recycling. In the Agency's 1991
Supplemental Notice, EPA identified
several innovative market-based
approaches that it was considering in
the process of developing a used oil
management program that would be
based on a melding of its authorities
under RCRA and the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA).
EPA has devoted considerable
resources toward the development of
alternative market-based management
programs. The Agency's preliminary
examination indicates that there are
important linkages between possible
section 3014 management standards and
the design of alternative incentive
systems. In general, management
standards that impose significant costs
on used oil handlers may hamper the
effectiveness of market-based programs
because they discourage recycling and
create unintended opportunities for
fraud. Furthermore, management
standards that are compatible with a
particular market-based program (or no
program at all) may be incompatible
with other plausible alternative
programs. The Agency believes that the
success of any market-based program
could be significantly affected by the
design of incentive-compatible
management standards.
Accordingly, when EPA issues its
rulemaking on recycled used oil, it will
address the issue of market based
approaches. In doing so, the Agency will
consider how market-based approaches
to used oil recycling can complement
management standards, promote
environmentally responsive behavior
and minimize compliance costs.
III. Summary of Comments Relating to
Final Rule
A. Listing Used Oil: Summary of Major
1985 & 1991 Comments-
Many comments were received on the
various aspects of the proposed listing
of used oil. Most commenters opposed
the listing of used oil as a hazardous
waste. The reasons given included that
EPA's sampling was unrepresentative
and flawed, that used oil is no more
hazardous than virgin oil, and the belief
that the levels of constituents EPA found
in used oils do not present a threat to
human health. A large number of
commenters challenged the scope of the
listing and provided a number of
examples where certain used oils should
not be included in the listing because
they do not contain the hazardous
constituents of concern at
concentrations exceeding health-based
levels that would cause the used oil to
be listed.
On November 29, 1985 (50 FR 49239),
EPA proposed to list all used oils as
hazardous waste, including petroleum-
derived and synthetic oils, based on the
presence of toxic constituents at levels
of concern as a result of use or
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
21527
adulteration after use. A sampling and
analysis effort was undertaken by EPA
in 1989 and 1990 to characterize specific
categories of used oil to determine
whether these used oils were hazardous
at the point of generation. EPA's study
was undertaken to address comments
received in response to the November
1985 proposal to list all used oils
wherein commenters claimed that
certain types of used oil were not
hazardous at the point of generation but
rather were adulterated subsequent to
use.
A number of commenters responded
that "their" oil (such as electrical
insulating or metalworking oil) did not
contain toxic constituents of concerns,
as demonstrated by EPA's own data,
and therefore, should not be listed as
hazardous waste. Other commenters
stated that used oil containing toxic
constituents would be adequately
regulated by the existing characteristics
framework, such as the TC. These
commenters believed that used oil
exhibiting the TC and destined for
disposal would be regulated as
hazardous waste, while used oil not
exhibiting the TC should not be
regulated under any circumstances.
Some commenters proposed that only
those used oils that contain certain toxic
constituents, such as lead, arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, tricholorethylene,
tetrachloroethylene, toluene, and
naphthalene, should be included in the
listing. One commenter indicated that
storage tank data rather than point of
generation data should be used to make
a listing determination since most of the
used oil management occurs after
storage. Some commenters asserted that
EPA's concern is not with used oil itself
but the mixing of used oil with other
constituents that may render the used
oil hazardous only because of post-use
adulteration. Therefore, instead of
listing all used oils, commenters
recommended that EPA should list used
oils as hazardous only if other
substances have been added after the
oil's initial use.
The Supplemental Notice of
September 23, 1991 (56 FR 448041),
presented three options for identifying
used oil as a hazardous waste. Option
One was to list all used oils as proposed
on November 29,1985 (50 FR 49239).
Option Two was to list categories of
used oil that were found to be "typically
and frequently" hazardous because of
the presence of lead, polyaromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs), arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, and benzene.
Option Three was to not list used oils as
hazardous, but rely on management
standards developed under RCRA
§ 3014 to control mismanagement of
used oil. The commenters
overwhelmingly supported Option
Three, not to list used oil as a hazardous
waste, but rely on management
standards.
A few commenters stated that as a
result of EPA's program to phase down
lead in gasoline, lead concentations in
used oil have declined. In addition,
some commenters claimed that EPA's
analyses of used oil were based on too
few samples and that these samples
were unrepresentative of actual
conditions. Some commenters expressed
a reluctance to have EPA list used oil as
a hazardous waste, but urged EPA, if
used oil is to be listed, to list only those
used oils that are disposed and not list
used oils that are recycled.
A few commenters supported the
proposal to list all used oils as
hazardous waste. They stated that used
oil has been historically mismanaged
and presents a threat to human health
and the environment.
B. Oil Filters: Summary of Major 1985
and 1991 Comments
Many comments were received on the
various issues raised by EPA concerning
used oil filters. In response to the
November 1985 proposal to list all used
oil as hazardous waste, EPA received
many comments on the effect of such a
listing on used oil filters. Commenters to
the 1985 rule stated that used oil filters
would contain used oil and, thus, would
be classified as hazardous waste under
the mixture rule at 40 CFR
261.3(a)(2)(iv). Further, commenters
stated that, due to the weight of used oil
filters, small service stations and
automobile repair shops would exceed
the conditionally exempt small quantity
generator defintion because they would
generate greater than 100 kg of
hazardous waste in a calendar month.
Commenters suggested that EPA
exclude used oil filters from the
definition of hazardous waste. Many
suggested that EPA require that used oil
filters be drained prior to disposal and
pass the "Paint Filter Test" (SW-846
Method 9095) to qualify for such an
exclusion.
A few commenters on the 1985
proposal expressed concern with any
exclusion from the definition of
hazardous waste for used oil filters.
These commenters stated that used oil
filters, particularly large filters, could
contain significant quantities of oil.
Further, these commenters pointed out
that contaminants and toxic
constitutents may be concentrated in oil
filters. The commenters suggested that
EPA conduct additional studies on the
environmental and human health risks
associated with the disposal of used oil
filters.
In September 1991, EPA proposed to
exempt used oil filters from the
definition of hazardous waste if the
filter has been crushed or drained. Thus,
such filters would not have to be
managed as a hazardous waste, even if
individual filters exhibited a hazardous
characteristic.
Most of the commenters supported
EPA's proposal to exclude from the
definition of hazardous waste (40 CFR
261.4(b)) used oil filters that have been
drained and crushed. Commenters to the
September 23,1991 proposal raised the
following two concerns regarding the
proposed exemption:
1. Draining and crushing are not the
only acceptable technologies for
removing used oil from filters and may
not be the best technologies.
2. Used oil filters do not exhibit the
toxicity characteristic and should be
exempt from Subtitle C regulation.
Some commenters suggested that
draining used oil filters for 24 hours was
sufficient and that after this time period,
crushing was not necessary. This
position was supported by some
commenters that indicated that the cost
of a crusher ranges from $1,000 to
$10,000, which could be prohibitive for
smaller service stations. One commenter
submitted data on 31 used oil filters
from trucks using gasoline (5 filters) and
diesel (26 filters), which had been
gravity drained for four to twenty hours.
The data indicate that none of the filters
exhibited the TC.
Those commenters that did not
support the exclusion stated that oil
filters can contain significant quantities
of used oil that draining alone will not
remove. The commenters disagreed as
to what constitutes proper "draining and
crushing." Commenters disagreed as to
what constitutes adequate draining and
whether crushing should be done in
addition to draining. Some commenters
requested that the Agency develop
specifications for crushing. Other
commenters stated that draining alone is
not sufficient, but should be followed by
crushing/dismantling and followed by
recycling. Their rationale was that even
after draining, filters contain 3 to 4
ounces of used oil and thus, 12 million
gallons of used oil would be disposed of
in Subtitle D landfills annually. Those
commenters that did not support a
blanket exclusion for used oil filters
generally stated that the generator
should test the filter with the TCLP.
Based on the results of the test, the
generator should handle the filters
-------
21528 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
accordingly, unless the filter will be
reclaimed.
IV. Final Listing Determination
A. General
EPA regulations, based on RCRA
sections 1004(5) and 3001, at 40 CFR
261.11 set forth the technical criteria to
determine whether a solid waste should
be listed as a hazardous waste. EPA
used the technical criteria in 40 CFR
261.11 (a)(l) and (a)(3) in making today's
used oil listing determinations.
Subsection (a)(l) of 40 CFR 261.11
allows the Administrator to list a waste
as hazardous if the waste exhibits any
of the characteristics of hazardous
waste. According to 40 CFR 261.11(a)(3),
a waste shall be listed as hazardous if it
"contains any of the toxic constituents
listed in appendix VIII and, after
considering the following factors, the
Administrator concludes that the waste
is capable of posing a substantial
present or potential hazard to human
health or the environment when
improperly treated, stored, transported
or disposed of, or otherwise managed.
* * *" The factors to be considered in
making this determination include
toxicity, fate and transport, mobility and
persistence, and bioaccumulation
potential of the constitutents in the
waste, as well as plausible
mismanagement scenarios (40 CFR
261.11(a)(3)(vii)) and other federal and
state regulatory actions with respect to
the waste (40 CFR 261.11(a)(3)(x)).
In making a listing determination for
used oil destined for disposal, EPA gave
considerable attention to the current
federal regulations governing used oils.
EPA evaluated the technical criteria for
listing in light of the current regulatory
structure controlling the management of
used oils and concluded that any
plausible mismanagement of used oil
that is destined for disposal is
addressed by current requirements.
As implied in Option Three of 1991
Supplemental Notice, EPA preserved its
ability to maintain the status quo if the
Agency's analysis of existing regulations
showed that actions have been taken to
control the mismanagement of used oil.
EPA finds that the current regulatory
structure controlling the management of
used oil destined for disposal provides
adequate controls so that used oil will
not pose a substantial threat to human
health or the environment.
Current regulations governing the
management of used oils destined for
disposal include: Those of EPA and the
U.S. Coast Guard for oil discharges into
navigable waters; U.S. Department of
Transportation requirements; EPA
regulations for polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) under the Toxic
Substances Control Act, hazardous
waste characteristics applying to used
oil that is disposed under RCRA,
underground storage tank requirements
(UST) under RCRA; Underground
Injection Control (UIC) permits under
the Safe Drinking Water Act; Spill
Prevention, Control and
Countermeasures (SPCC) plans and
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) storm
water regulations under the Clean
Water Act; and the phase down of lead
in gasoline under the Clean Air Act. In
combination, application of these
controls imposed by EPA and other
federal agencies prevent the
mismanagement of used oil to such an
extent that used oil destined for disposal
is unlikely to pose a substantial present
or potential hazard to human health and
the environment.
EPA also recognizes that several
states regulate used oil as a hazardous
waste, and some states regulate it as a
special waste. Several states ban the
disposal of used oil in municipal solid
waste landfills (MSWLFs). A used oil
handler must comply with all state
requirements applicable to used oil in
his/her state, in addition to any Federal
requirements that apply.
B. No List Determination for Used Oil
Destined for Disposal
In making the no list determination for
used oil that is destined for disposal,
EPA used the technical criteria
discussed in Section IV.A.
1. Toxicity of Used Oil
In the 1991 Supplemental Notice, EPA
proposed to expand the basis for listing
gasoline-powered engine crankcase
used oil to reflect the presence of three
toxic polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs]: Benzo(a)pyrene,
benzo(b)fluoranthene, and
benzo(k)fluoranthene. EPA based this
expansion on the analysis of two
samples of automotive crankcase used
oil analyzed for benzo(k)fluoranthene
and four samples of automotive
crankcase used oil analyzed for
benzo(a)pyrene and
benzo(b)fluoranthene. With respect to
the presence of PAHs in used oil, EPA
believes that the current regulatory
structure can control the
mismanagement of recycled used oil
containing toxic PAHs.
Based on the 1989/90 sampling and
analysis effort the Agency tentatively
determined that a high proportion of
used oils from gasoline-powered engine
exhibited the TC for lead and benzene.
Other categories of used oil did not
exhibit the TC in such a high proportion
and, in fact, did not meet the criteria for
listing since they did not contain
constituents of concern (constituents of
the TC) at levels that could pose a risk
to human health and the environment.
The phase down of lead in gasoline
under the Clean Air Act has resulted in
subsequent reduction in lead
concentrations in used oil. In addition,
in accordance with the Clean Air
Amendments, additional phase downs
are scheduled to occur, thus further
reducing the lead concentration. The
lowered lead concentrations in used oil
reduce the potential for harm to human
health and the environment from
mismanagement.
2. Regulations Governing the Plausible
Mismanagement of Used Oil Destined
for Disposal
Regulatory programs currently in
place control used oil generators,
transporters, collectors and recyclers.
Since 1985, EPA has promulgated
several regulatory programs that
directly affect the management of used
oil destined for disposal (e.g., the TC,
the UST program, the MSWLF rule, the
NPDES Storm Water program, and the
Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs). Also,
several other regulatory programs that
were in place even prior to 1985
continue to control some used oil
management practices [e.g., U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT)
shipping and handling requirements).
After assessing the extent and potential
success of current regulatory programs
and their effect on the disposal of used
oil, the Agency believes that the existing
network of regulations provides
protection from plausible disposal
mismanagement sceneries, as discussed
below.
a. Overview of RCRA subtitle C
regulations applicable to used oil
destined for disposal. Used oils
exhibiting one or more of the
characteristics of hazardous waste and
which are destined for disposal continue
to be regulated as hazardous wastes in
accordance with all applicable subtitle
C regulations, except when stored in
RCRA subtitle I underground storage
tanks as discussed in subsection b. of
this section. Mixtures of used oils and
listed hazardous wastes are listed
hazardous wastes, and used oil mixed
with a characteristic hazardous waste
must be managed as a hazardous waste
if it still exhibits a characteristic.5 Such
5 It should be noted that mixing characteristic
hazardous waste with another material to render
the waste nonhazardous constitutes treatment of
hazardous waste subject to applicable standards
under 40 CFR parts 264-265 and 270, and the
Continued
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
21529
mixtures must be managed in
accordance with all applicable subtitle
C regulations. Those generators
dentified in 40 CFR 2B2.346 and storers
oi hazardous used oil destined for
disposal are subject to the tank system
requirements at subpart J of parts 264
and 265. Used oils are also subject to the
corrective action requirements of RCRA
subtitle C, including sections 3004(u) and
3008(h), which apply to solid waste
management units at RCRA treatment,
storage, or disposal facilities.
Further, if used oil exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste and is
destined for disposal, facilities that store
such used oil are subject to the tank
system requirements at 40 CFR parts 264
or 265, subparts J. These requirements
are designed to prevent ground water
contamination and other releases to the
environment and include requirements
for daily inspection, tank integrity, and
secondary containment. If used oil
destined for disposal exhibiting a
characteristic of hazardous waste is
stored for greater than 90 days, the
facility must be permitted under RCRA
as a hazardous waste storage facility.
It is important to note that used oils
exhibiting the characteristic of EP
toxicity (prior to its revision) currently
are prohibited from land disposal unless
they meet the applicable treatment
Mandards. Treatment standards for
Hiese wastes were promulgated with the
Third Third rulemaking on June 1, 1990
(55 FR 22520). Used oils exhibiting the
new TC, but not the characteristic of EP
toxicity are not currently prohibited
from land disposal, even if the
constituent causing the waste to exhibit
the TC is also controlled by the EP. LDR
treatment standards for the newly
identified TC wastes (including the 26
newly listed organic constituents) are
scheduled to be promulgated by April
1993. Used oil which is mixed with a
listed hazardous waste must meet the
LDR standard for the listed waste.
b. Applicability of RCRA subtitle I
regulations to used oil destined for
disposal. For USTs located at permitted
hazardous waste facilities subject to
section 3004(u) of RCRA, the subtitle C
corrective action statutory authorities
supersede subtitle I corrective action
requirements to avoid overlap in
regulatory authority (see 40 CFR 280.60).
For facilities without a final HSWA
permit, subtitle I corrective action
notification requirements of section 3010 of RCRA.
For example, mixing spent mineral spirits used as a
solvent (exhibiting the characteristic of ignitability
or toxicity) with used oil to render the mineral
~pirits nonhazardous constitutes treatment.
k^6 This regulation identifies regulated generators
T>y quantity of waste generated duration of time
accumulated.
standards will apply to releases from all
petroleum and hazardous substance
USTs. UST corrective actions underway
at a facility having interim status under
RCRA subtitle C may be subject to
review by permit writers during the
development of the final HSWA permit.
These ongoing corrective action
activities may be incorporated into the
facility's final RCRA permit (53 FR
37176).
As discussed in the September 1991
supplemental proposal, EPA presumes
that used oil stored in underground
storage tanks is destined for recycling
and currently exempt from subtitle C (40
CFR 261.6(a)(3)(iii)); thus such tanks are
subject to subtitle I. The Agency
continues to believe that the subtitle I
standards are sufficient to protect
human health and the environment from
the potential releases of used oil from
USTs. In conclusion, the Agency
continues to view subtitle I as
applicable to used oil, with the
exceptions noted in the preceding
paragraph where RCRA subtitle C
authority is in place.
c. Applicability of RCRA subtitle D
regulations to used oil destined for
disposal. Nonhazardous used oil may be
disposed of in an industrial solid waste
landfill or a MSWLF. EPA recently
promulgated final disposal criteria for
MSWLFs (October 9,1991, 56 FR 50978).
The revised criteria were promulgated at
40 CFR part 258 and included location
restrictions, faciltiy design and
operating criteria, ground-water
monitoring requirements, corrective
action requirements, financial assurance
requirements, and closure and post-
closure care requirements. In addition,
many states have design and operating
requirements governing industrial non-
hazardous waste landfills.
d. CERCLA reportable quantities
(RQs) and used oil destined from
disposal. Any waste identified as a
hazardous waste (either by listing or by
characteristic) under RCRA generally
becomes a hazardous substance under
CERCLA. Such designation subjects the
hazardous waste to the section 103
reporting requirements for releases
equal to or exceeding the assigned
reportable quantity (RQ) of that
hazardous substance. In addition,
constituents in the used oil that are not
defined as hazardous waste under
RCRA may be designated hazardous
substances under CERCLA (see 40 CFR
part 302). Therefore, in accordance with
§ 302.6(b) concerning mixtures or
solutions, immediate notification is
required when an RQ or more of any of
the hazardous substances are released.
e. Toxic Substances Control Act
regulations and used oil destined for
disposal. Section 6(e) of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA)
mandates that EPA control the
manufacture (including import), use,
processing, distribution in commerce,
and disposal of PCBs. Because of the
potential hazards posed by the
uncontrolled use and disposal of PCBs,
EPA has established a comprehensive
program to control PCBs from
manufacture to disposal. A primary use
of PCBs, a viscous oil, was as an
insulating material for electrical
equipment (dielectric). PCBs were
almost always mixed with mineral oil,
silicone, or other oily materials when
used as insulating material. TSCA
regulations prohibit the use of waste oils
(including used oils) containing PCBs for
dust suppression. Prohibited uses
include, but are not limited to, use in
road oiling, use in general dust control,
use as a pesticide or herbicide carrier,
and use as a rust preventative on pipes
(40 CFR 761.20(d)). Used oil applied for
dust suppression must meet the
requirements of both RCRA and TSCA.7
Further, a release of 1 pound of PCBs
into the environment must be reported
immediately to the National Response
Center in accordance with section 103(c)
of CERCLA. Further, under the TSCA
PCB Spill Cleanup Policy, any spill of
material containing 50 ppm or greater
PCBs into sewers, drinking water,
surface water, grazing lands, or
vegetable gardens must be reported
immediately (40 CFR part 761, subpart
G). If a used oil contains PCBs, the most
stringent, applicable reporting
requirement must be followed.
/. Clean Water Act regualtions and
used oil destined for disposal. In
addition to the UST requirements
discussed above, the storage of used oil
at many petroleum-related storage
facilities is subject to SPCC regulations.8
Under section 311(j)(i)(c) of the Clean
Water Act, EPA established the SPCC
program (38 FR 34165, December 11,
1973) to protect surface waters and
adjoining shorelines from petroleum and
7 Congress banned the use of any hazardous
waste as a dust suppressant under RCRA § 3004(1).
Therefore, as noted above, any used oil that
exhibits one or more of the characteristics (other
than the characteristic of ignitability) of hazardous
waste is banned from use as a dust suppressant.
8 The SPCC regulations (40 CFR 112) currently
apply to on-shore and off-shore non-transportation
related facilities that have the potential to discharge
oil into navigable waterways and have underground
storage lank capacities greater than 42,000 gallons
or aboveground storage tank capacities of more
than 660 gallons in a single tank or an aggregate of
greater than 1,320 gallons.
-------
21530 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
other oil contamination.9 Facilities
subject to the regulations each prepare
and maintain an SPCC plan, which
includes provisions for appropriate
containment or diversionary structures
to prevent discharged oil from reaching
surface waters and adjoining shorelines.
A major goal of the SPCC plan is to
ensure that SPCC-regulated storage
tanks and storage areas are designed to
protect against releases of petroleum
and other oils to navigable waters and
adjoining shorelines. "Oil", when used
in relation to Section 311 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, means oil
of any kind or in any form, including,
but not limited to, petroleum, fuel oil,
sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with
wastes other than dredged spoil.
Concerning used oil, releases of oil to
navigable waters that (1) cause a sheen
to appear on the surface, (2] violate
applicable water quality standards, or
(3) cause a sludge or emulsion to be
desposited beneath the surface of the
water or upon adjoining shorelines, are
reportable under 40 CFR Part 110. EPA
believes that a significant number of
used oil storage facilities will store used
oil in tanks or containers prior to
disposal. The Agency also believes that
the SPCC requirements are designed to
provide a sufficient level of protection to
human health and the environment from
potential releases of used oil to
navigable water and adjoining
shorelines.
Used oil generators, storage, and
disposal facilities may be subject to the
storm water regulations (55 FR 47990,
November 16,1990) promulgated under
the Clean Water Act. The NPDES storm
water regulations at 40 CFR 122.26
provide an additional layer of
environmental protection against used
oil disposal by industrial facilities at
locations where runoff due to storm
events results in releases of used oil-
contaminated runoff to waters of the
United States. Under these regulations,
facilities with point source discharges of
"storm water associated with industrial
activity" to the waters of the United
States, including discharges through
municipal separate storm sewer systems
that ultimately reach the waters of the
United States, must apply for a National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit. "Storm water discharge
associated with industrial activity" is
9 On October 22, 1991 (56 FR 54612), EPA
proposed revisions to the 40 CFR part 112
requirements. The proposed rule addresses a
number of issues, including the mandatory nature of
most of the requirements, the required procedures
for completion of SPCC Plans, and the addition of a
faciltiy notification provision. If adopted, these
changes would improve the SPCC program's control
of potentiE 1 releases of used oil.
defined to include runoff, snowmelt
runoff, and surface water runoff that is
discharged and is directly related to
manufacturing, processing, or raw
materials storage at an industrial facility
(40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)).
The storm water regulations
specifically apply to active and inactive
landfills, land application units, and
open dumps that receive or have
received any industrial wastes (i.e.,
waste from any of the categories of
facilities identified under 40 CFR
122.26(b)(14) (i) to (xi)). The storm water
regulations apply to those facilities that
are subject to both subtitles C and D of
RCRA. Commercial or retail outlets such
as service stations or quick lube shops
are currently excluded from CWA
permit requirements unless EPA or a
State designates a particular facility for
permitting under section 402(p)(2)(E) of
the Clean Water Act.
g. Safe Drinking Water Act
regulations and used oil destined for
disposal. The Underground Injection
Control (UIC) regulations at 40 CFR
parts 144 through 148 were promulgated
pursuant to part C of the Safe Drinking
Water Act and, to the extent that the
regulations address hazardous waste,
RCRA. The UIC program regulates the
underground injection of all fluids
through wells. Under 40 CFR 144.12, "No
owner or operator shall construct,
operate, maintain, convert, plug,
abandon, or conduct any injection
activity in a manner that allows the
movement of any fluid containing any
contaminant into underground sources
of drinking water, if the presence of that
contaminant may cause a violation of
any primary drinking water regulation
under 40 CFR part 142 or may otherwise
adversely affect the health of persons."
While EPA believes it is unlikely, and
not practical technically, for large
volumes of used oil to be disposed into
injection wells, there are cases where
used oil may be mixed with other fluids
(i.e., wastewaters or oil and gas
exploration and production wastes) and
injected into UIC wells. If the presence
of used oil or any constituent causes the
injected fluid to be hazardous, any well
injecting below an underground source
of drinking water (USDW) must be
permitted for hazardous waste injection.
Any other well injecting a hazardous
waste into or above a USDW is banned,
and must be properly plugged and
abandoned.
Finally, as a further measure of
protection, under 40 CFR part 148 the
injection of hazardous wastes for which
LDR treatment standards have been
promulgated is prohibited unless the
waste has been treated to meet the
applicable standards in 40 CFR part 268
or an exemption has been granted based
on a petition submitted under 40 CFR
part 148, subpart C.
h. Coast Guard regulations and used
oil destined for disposal. Releases of
used oil to navigable waters and
shipboard management of used oil are
governed by Coast Guard regulations
promulgated pursuant to MARPOL 73/
78.10 Of primary importance to used oil
is the regulation of bilge slop generated
on-board ships. Bilge slop is a residual
liquid that collects through leakage,
seepage, or drainage in the holds of
ships and consists primarily of water
mixed with a small amount of oil. The
regulations prohibit the unrestricted
discharge of oil or oily mixtures into the
sea and require that ships either retain
bilge slop on board or separate the oil
and water and retain the oil on board
until the slop and oil can be discharged
at a licensed shore side reception
facility. Ships more than 12 nautical
miles from land may only discharge oil
or oily mixtures where the undiluted oil
concentration is less than 100 ppm,
provided the ship is not located in an
ecologically sensitive area. Ships within
12 nautical miles of land may not
discharge oil or oily mixtures unless the
undiluted oil concentration is less than
15 ppm. The regulations also address tr^
on shore management of bilge water at
port reception facilities.
i. Department of Transportation
regulations and used oil destined for
disposal. The U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) regulates the
transportation of hazardous materials in
commerce under the authority of the
Hazardous Materials Transportation
Act (HMTA) (49 CFR parts 171 to 179).
Used oil is classified as a hazardous
material if it meets the definition of
combustible liquid (flash point below
200 °F, but equal to or greater than 100
°F] or flammable liquid (flash point
below 100 °F). Used oil generators
(shippers) and transporters of DOT
hazardous materials have to comply
with any and all applicable DOT
regulations for identification and
classification, packaging, marking,
10 In 1973, the International Conference on
Marine Pollution adopted the International
Convention for the Prevention of Pollution by Ships,
1973. This Convention was subsequently modified
by the Protocol of 1978, adopted by the International
Conference on Tanker Safety and Pollution
Prevention. The 1973 Convention, as modified by
the 1978 protocol, is known as MARPOL 73/78.
MARPOL 73/78 is an international agreement
designed to address the problem of marine pollution
from ships on a global scale. It contains five
Annexes, each of which addresses a different typfc
of marine pollution. Annex I addresses oil pollution
and is currently in effect internationally.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 21531
labeling, and shipping papers. In
addition, used oil transporters (carriers]
jwve to comply with any and all
•pplicable DOT regulations for
placarding, use of shipping papers,
recordkeeping, reporting, and incident
response. Used oil that is a hazardous
waste and is destined for disposal is
subject to those DOT regulations
referenced at 40 CFR part 262, subpart
LJ.
j. Summary of no list decision for used
oil destined for disposal. For the reasons
discussed above, EPA believes that the
potential scenarios under which used oil
may be released to the environment are
adequately controlled under existing
regulations. According to current
estimates, a relatively small portion of
the used oil generated is disposed (80
million gallons compared to over 800
million gallons being recycled by
burning for energy recovery and re-
refining per year). Based on the existing
regulations, EPA determined that it was
not necessary to categorically list used
oil destined for disposal, but instead will
rely on the comprehensive set of
existing regulatory controls, particularly
the hazardous waste characteristics.
Although the Agency proposed to list
certain used oils in the September 1991
supplemental proposal, most gasoline-
powered engine oils already exhibit the
C, and listing these used oils would not
affect the way these used oils must be
managed. In other words, the existing
characteristics will adequately capture
hazardous used oils under Subtitle C
without a hazardous waste listing. In
addition, EPA believes that the current
regulatory framework can control the
mismanagement of used oil containing
toxic PAHs destined for disposal.
Therefore, EPA has determined that
use.d oil from gasoline-powered engine
crankcases need not be listed as a
hazardous waste to ensure its proper
management. As for other used oils, the
data collected in support of the 1991
supplemental notice continues to
support the conclusion that such oils are
not typically and frequently hazardous.
Those oils which may pose a threat on
disposal are addressed by the current
regulatory framework, including the
hazardous waste characteristics.
C. Response to Major Comments
Most commenters supported a no list
decision for used oil destined for
disposal, as existing regulations,
especially the TC rule, are adequately
protective. These comments were
summarized in section III. A., and
--esponses were incorporated in the
Receding preamble section. A small
number of commenters favored listing
all or some used oil destined for
disposal as hazardous waste. These
commenters cited past mismanagement
of used oil as a primary reason for the
necessity of a listing action. EPA
believes, however, that the
mismanagement incidents cited by EPA
in the September 1991 notice occurred
before implementation of major
rulemakings governing storage of used
oil. EPA believes, upon reevaluation,
that the protective nature of these
regulations is sufficient to guard against
mismanagement of used oil until the
Agency issues a hazardous waste listing
determination for recycled used oil or
promulgates additional management
standards under RCRA section 3014.
In light of the public comments
received regarding listing of gasoline-
powered engine crankcase oils as
proposed in Option 2, EPA believes that
existing regulations prevent
mismanagement of these and other used
oils destined for disposal.
V. Used Oil Filter Exemption
A. Agency Decision
EPA is today finalizing the proposed
exemption for used oil filters at 40 CFR
261.4(b)(13) which identifies solid
wastes that are not hazardous wastes.
Today's rule reduces the burden on
generators to make a hazardous waste
determination in a case where EPA has
sufficient data to provide a categorical
exemption. This exemption is limited to
non-terne-plated 11 used oil filters
which have been drained to remove
used oil. Terne-plated used oil filters are
not included in the exemption because
the terne plating makes the filter exhibit
the characteristic of toxicity for lead. As
a practical matter, if an oil filter is
picked up by hand or lifted by
machinery and used oil immediately
drips or runs from the filter, the filter
should not be considered to be drained.
Under current RCRA subtitle C
regulations, if a generator is intending to
dispose of a used oil filter, the generator
is required to determine whether the
used oil filter exhibits any of the
characteristics of hazardous waste. This
determination can be made either by
testing or by applying the generator's
knowledge of the waste or process that
generated the waste. EPA issued
guidance on this issue through a
memo 12 which states that the TCLP can
be performed on oil filters by crushing,
grinding, or cutting the filter and its
contents until the pieces are smaller
than one centimeter and will pass
through a 9.5 mm standard sieve. If the
filter exhibits any of the characteristics
of hazardous waste, the generator must
manage it in accordance with subtitle C
requirements.
Oil filters are used in two categories
of vehicles, light duty and heavy duty.
Light duty vehicles include automobiles,
passenger vans, and light duty trucks,
such as small pickup trucks. Heavy duty
oil vehicles include buses and
commercial trucks, such as dump trucks,
tractor-trailers, mining, or construction
vehicles. Oil filters may be classified
into two broad categories of cartridge or
spin-on types.13 The Filter
Manufacturers Council (FMC)
conducted toxicity characteristics
testing on 35 light duty and 11 heavy
duty spin-on oil filters. Prior to the study
being undertaken, EPA reviewed FMC's
sampling and analysis methodology.
In the FMC study, the spin-on filters
were removed from engines at operating
temperatures and either the anti-drain
back valves or the filter dome end was
punctured. Then, the filters were
allowed to gravity drain for a 12-hour
period. According to FMC, hot-draining
used oil filters for 12 hours is standard
industry practice. For spin-on oil filters
from light-duty vehicles, the study found
that none of the 35 filters exhibited the
TC, although lead, chromium, cadmium,
and benzene were detected. For spin-on
oil filters from heavy-duty vehicles, the
study determined that 5 of the 11 filters
exhibited the TC for lead. These were
also the five filters that were terne-
plated. Terne, an alloy of lead and tin,
would account for the high
concentrations of lead found, 12.0-74.5
mg/1 in the waste extract. A blank
(unused) terne-plated oil filter had a
TCLP lead concentration of 30. mg/1.
The remaining six oil filters from heavy
duty vehicles did not exhibit the TC.
FMC later clarified their comments by
writing that it is not possible to identify
any categories of filters or of end uses of
filters (e.g., by engine type, engine class,
end use application, filter size, visual
inspection of filters, etc.) which
comprise exclusively terne-coated
filters.
A 1990 study conducted by the Iowa
Waste Reduction Center at the
11 Terne is an alloy of tin and lead.
12 The memorandum, dated October 30,1990, is
from Sylvia Lowrance, Director of the Office of
Solid Waste, to Robert L. Duprey, Director of the
Hazardous Waste Management Division in EPA
Region VIII, and addresses regulatory
determinations on used oil filters.
13 Cartridge filters are typically a replaceable
pleated paper filter media formed in a cylinder
around a perforated metal centertube. Metal end
caps and nitrile rubber grommets are used to
prevent flow around the filter media. Spin-on filters
are essentially cartridge filters that are assembled
into a filter can or body.
-------
21532 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
University of Northern Iowa showed
that 44 percent to 55 percent of the used
oil could be removed through draining
and about 88 percent could be removed
through compaction. One commenter
demonstrated, through TCLP analysis,
that light-duty used automotive oil filters
from which used oil is removed by
pressurized air are nonhazardous. As
much as 8 ounces of used oil can be
removed in seconds by using this
method, according to this commenter.
Based on the data submitted, non-
terne-plated, hot-drained 14 used oil
filters do not typically and frequently
exhibit the TC. The source of the hazard
exhibited by the non-terne-plated used
oil filters is the used oil they contain
prior to being drained; thus, as much of
the oil as possible should be removed.
EPA has determined that non-terne-
plated used oil filters that have been
hot-drained of used oil for a minimum of
12 hours after puncturing either the anti-
drain back valve or the dome end do not
appear to exhibit the TC. EPA is thus
recommending a minimum 12-hour hot-
drain time for punctured or pierced used
oil filters, but is not adopting a
regulatory standard in order to allow for
the development of alternate used oil
removal techniques. Similarly, hot-
drained and crushed filters, or
dismantled and drained filters do not
appear to exhibit the TC. In addition,
light-duty automotive used oil filters that
have been subjected to air pressure for
oil removal do not appear to exhibit the
TC.
Terne-plated oil filters are not
included in the exemption; therefore, a
hazardous waste determination must be
made prior to disposal in a landfill. EPA
received inadequate data to make a
determination on other types of filters,
such as fuel filters, transmission oil
filters, or specialty filters (such as cloth
railroad oil filters). Since there is a lack
of quantitative data on these types of
filters, they are not included in the scope
of the exemption being finalized today.
The Agency is recommending that the
recyclable used oil and other recyclable
elements of the oil filter, such as the
canister, gasket, and filter paper, be
separated and recycled. EPA is therefore
requiring that filters qualifying for the
exemption first have the used oil
removed using one of the following
gravity hot-draining methods:
(1) Puncturing the filter anti-drain
back valve or the filter dome end and
hot-draining;
(2) Hot-draining and crushing;
(3) Dismantling and hot-draining; or
14 "Hot-drained" means that the oil filter is
drained near engine operating temperature and
above room temperature (i.e., 60 °F).
(4] Any other equivalent hot-draining
method which will remove used oil.
Then, once the used oil is removed, it
can be recycled (as can the scrap metal).
Finally, EPA encourages
manufacturers of terne-plated filters to
pursue source reduction alternatives to
terne plating. EPA encourages
generators to recycle used oil and used
oil filters. In choosing the used oil
removal technique, it is important to
ensure that the operation is compatible
with the ultimate recycling procedure.
For example, if the filters are destined
for a smelter, hot-draining and crushing
may be appropriate. However, if the
filters will be separated into their
component parts (e.g., used oil, metal,
and filtration media) and recycled
separately, puncturing and gravity hot-
draining may be more appropriate since
crushing may hinder the separation of
the metal from the filtration media. EPA
also encourages steel mills and scrap
metal recyclers to accept used oil filters,
from which oil has been removed, as a
solid waste for scrap feed in steel
production.
B. Response to Major Comments
As discussed above, EPA received
data that indicate that most oil filters
from which used oil is removed do not
exhibit a characteristic of hazardous
waste, including toxicity. The Agency is
not concerned about the volume of used
oil remaining in the filters subsequent to
draining because, according to
commenter-submitted data, the filters
hot-drained for at least 12 hours do not
appear to be hazardous. EPA has
responded to commenters advocating
various methods of oil removal by
promulgating an exemption for filters
from which used oil has been removed
through gravity hot-draining after
puncturing the filter, hot-draining and
crushing, or dismantling and draining.
Examples of oil removal methods
include flushing of oil filters with
pressurized air to drain used oil from oil
filters, and spinning of the oil-soaked
filter paper media removed from oil
filters to remove residual oil. Based on
the limited data available, it appears
that both of these methods adequately
remove used oil in order to make oil
filters nonhazardous. No technical
specifications or performance standards
for crushing oil filters have been
developed, although such specifications
were requested, because inadequate
TCLP data were received to support
development of a standard for crushed
filters. No correlation between crushing
force or crushed filter height and TCLP
results could be made from the available
data. Moreover, crushing specifications
could restrict the development of
alternative crusher designs and other oil
removal techniques. Supporters of the
proposed exemption contended that due.
to analytical data used, filters that have
been drained for 12 or 24 hours of free
oil will not pose any significant hazards
when disposed of as nonhazardous
waste. Although the comments supplied
by the one commenter indicated that
draining for as little as four hours may
produce a nonhazardous truck filter,
EPA had inadequate data to conclude
that a four-hour hot-drain would be
adequate for all used oil filters.
VI. Used Oil Re-Refining and
Reprocessing Residuals
In the September 23, 1991,
Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (56 FR 48027), EPA
proposed to list as hazardous waste four
residuals from the reprocessing and re-
refining of used oil. EPA's consideration
of separate listings stemmed from the
November 1985 proposal to list all used
oil as hazardous waste and the
collection of additional data on
residuals between 1986 and 1988.
The specific wastes resulting from the
reprocessing and re-refining of used oil
that were proposed for listing as
hazardous in the September 1991 notice
are:
K152—Process residuals from the
gravitational or mechanical
separation of solids, water, and oil for
the reprocessing or re-refining of used
oil, including filter residues, tank
bottoms, pretreatment sludges, and
centrifuge sludges
K153—Spent polishing media from the
finishing of used oil in the
reprocessing or re-refining process,
including spent clay compounds and
spent catalysts
K154—Distillation bottons from the
reprocessing or re-refining of used oil
K155—Treatment residues from oil/
water/solids separation in the
primary treatment of wastewaters
from the reprocessing and re-refining
of used oil
EPA received a number of comments
on these proposed listings. Based on
data and comment received in response
to the proposal, EPA has determined
that further study is required to
adequately characterize residuals from
reprocessing and re-refining of used oil
and is today deferring a decision on its
1991 proposal to list these wastes.
EPA's proposed listing was based on
data gathered from recycling facilities in
1985 and 1986. Commenters stated that
recycling practices and processes had
changed significantly in the intervening
five to six years. These commenters
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations 21533
cited that discontinued use of the acid-
clay treatment process and the
seduction of toxic constituents in the
Ksiduals.
EPA will continue to evaluate data for
residuals from the reprocessing and re-
refining of used oil. EPA will evaluate
the management practices employed at
facilities that generate these residuals to
determine whether such practices pose a
threat to human health and the
environment.
VII. State Authorization
A. Applicability of Rule in Authorized
States
Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA
may authorize qualified States to
administer and enforce the RCRA
program within the State. (See 40 CFR
part 271 for the standards and
requirements for authorization.)
Following authorization, EPA retains
enforcement authority under sections
3008, 30013, and 7003 of RCRA, although
authorized States have primary
enforcement responsibility.
Prior to HSWA, a State with final
authorization administered its
hazardous waste program entirely in
lieu of EPA administering the Federal
program in that State. The Federal
requirements no longer applied in the
authorized State, and EPA could not
•sue permits for any facilities in the
State which the State was authorized to
permit. When new, more stringent
Federal requirements were promulgated
or enacted, the State was obliged to
enact equivalent authority within
specified time frames. New Federal
requirements did not take effect in an
authorized State until the State adopted
the requirements as State law.
In contrast, under section 3006(g) of
RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6926(g), new
requirements and prohibitions imposed
by the HSWA take effect in authorized
States at the same time that they take
effect in nonauthorized States. EPA is
directed to carry out those requirements
and prohibitions in authorized States,
including the issuance of permits, until
the State is granted authorization to do
so. However, any authorized State
requirement that is more stringent than
a HSWA requirement that is less
stringent than the Federal program for
which the State was authorized remains
authorized and in effect under State law.
Today's rule is promulgated pursuant
to section 3001 (g) of RCRA, a provision
added by HSWA, and pursuant to
section 3001(b)(l) of RCRA, a non-
HSWA provision. This rule revises and
- '^arrows the scope of definition of
Hazardous waste to exclude non-terne-
plated used oil filters that have been
gravity hot-drained of used oil through
puncturing the filter anti-drain back
valve or the filter dome end and hot-
draining, hot-draining and crushing,
dismantling and hot-draining, or any
other equivalent hot-draining method
which will remove used oil. The
exemption from the definition of
hazardous waste being finalized today
for used oil filters narrows the scope of
the TC rule promulgated pursuant to
HSWA authority as well as the
characteristic of EP toxicity regulation
promulgated under non-HSWA
authority. To avoid any confusion
regarding the status of used oil filters,
EPA considers the exemption to be a
HSWA rule, since it, in part, exempts
wastes from a HSWA-promulgated rule.
B. Effect on State Authorizations
Authorized States are only required to
modify their programs when EPA
promulgates Federal standards that are
more stringent or broader in scope than
the existing Federal standards. Section
3009 or RCRA allows States to impose
standards more stringent than those in
the Federal program. For those Federal
program changes that are less stringent
or reduce the scope of the Federal
program, States are not required to
modify their programs. See 40 CFR
271.l(k). The standard promulgated
today is less stringent than or reduces
the scope of the existing Federal
requirements. This provision appears in
40 CFR 261.4(b)(13). Therefore,
authorized States would not be required
to modify their programs to adopt
requirements equivalent to or
substantially equivalent to the provision
listed above.
Because the rule is promulgated
pursuant to HSWA, a State which
chooses to submit a program
modification may apply to receive either
interim or final authorization under
section 3006(g)(2) or 3006(b),
respectively, on the basis of
requirements that are substantially
equivalent or equivalent to EPA's. The
procedures and schedule for State
program modifications for either interim
or final authorization are described in 40
CFR 271.21. It should be noted that all
HSWA interim authorizations will
expire January 1, 1993. (See 40 CFR
271.24(c).)
States with authorized RCRA
programs may already have
requirements similar to those in today's
rule. These State regulations have not
been assessed against the Federal
regulations being promulgated today to
determine whether they meet the tests
for authorization. Thus, a State is not
authorized to implement these
requirements in lieu of EPA until the
State program modification is approved.
Of course, States with existing
standards may continue to administer
and enforce their standards as a matter
of State law. In authorized States with
more stringent regulations, EPA will
continue to enforce the State's more
stringent regulations. In implementing
the Federal program, EPA will work
with States under cooperative
agreements to minimize duplication of
efforts. In many cases, EPA will be able
to defer to the States in their efforts to
implement their programs, rather than
take separate actions under Federal
authority.
States that submit their official
applications for final authorization less
than 12 months after the effective date
of these standards are not required to
include standards equivalent to these
standards in their application. However,
the State must modify its program by the
deadlines set forth in 40 CFR 271.21(e).
States that submit official applications
for final authorization 12 months after
the effective date of these standards
must include standards equivalent to
these standards in their application. 40
CFR 271.3 sets forth the requirements a
State must meet when submitting its
final authorization package.
VIII. Regulatory Impact Analysis
Today's decision not to list used oil
managed for disposal as a hazardous
waste does not impose any new
regulatory compliance requirements or
costs on used oil generators or handlers.
Although a regulatory impact analysis
under Executive Order 12291 is therefore
not required to support this decision,
this section of today's preamble briefly
summarizes the Agency's cost and
general impact analysis for the
previously proposed listing option being
considered prior to today's rulemaking.
Costs of listing disposed used oil were
evaluated in the Economic Impact
Screening Analysis Section of the
September 1991 Supplemental Notice
preamble under the two headings of
"ban on land, disposal," and "ban on
road oiling." with annual cost estimates
of $16.3 and $7.4 million, respectively (56
FR 48068-69).
Costs of the land disposal ban (listing
of disposed oil) are relatively low for
two reasons. First, relatively little used
oil is formally "land managed" in
recognized landfills, and it was assumed
in estimating costs that both household
DIY oil and non-household oil illegally
dumped by either small or large quantity
generators would not be controlled
under the subtitle C management
requirement. In addition, in the
September 1991 cost analysis, it was
-------
21534 Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 20, 1992 / Rules and Regulations
assumed as a best estimate that 75
percent of the land-disposed oil subject
to the listing would be diverted to
recycling at relatively low cost, with
only the remaining 25 percent being
managed at higher cost in a cement kiln
or equivalent Subtitle C technology.
For road oiling, it was similarly
assumed that the oil could be readily
diverted to other recycling at virtually
no additional cost (the cost of the ban
being attributable to the higher cost of
substitute dust suppression agents such
as calcium chloride).
Recycling would have been promoted
somewhat by the listing of used oil
destined for disposal because disposal
would be much more costly than
recycling options. On the other hand,
there would also be a perverse incentive
towards illegal dumping and other
improper land disposal outlets as land
disposal became more costly.
IX. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The agency certifies that, within the
scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
today's decision will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The regulation
imposes no new regulatory or economic
requirements on small business.
X. Paperwork Reduction Act
This notice contains no information
collection requirements, and therefore
imposes no new paperwork burden.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 261
Hazardous waste, Recycling.
Dated: May 1, 1992.
F. Henry Habicht, II,
Deputy A dminis tra tor.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, title 40 part 261 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
1. The authority citation for part 261
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921 and
6922.
3. Section 261.4 is amended by adding
paragraph [b)(15] to read as follows:
§ 261.4 Exclusions
*****
(b) * * *
(15) Non-terne plated used oil filters
that are not mixed with waste listed in
subpart C of this part if these oil filters
have been gravity hot-drained using one
of the following methods:
(i) Puncturing the filter anti-drain back
valve or the filter dome end and hot-
draining;
(ii) Hot-draining and crushing;
(iii) Dismantling and hot-draining; or
(iv) Any other equivalent hot-draining
method which will remove used oil.
*****
[FR Doc. 92-11385 Filed 5-19-92; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
-------
LEGI-SLATE Report for the/103rd Congress Fri, February 18, 1994 12:32pm (EST)
arch of the Federal Register to Find 1 Document...
In FR vol. 53, 1988
With Reference to '53 FR 24211'
06/27/88 [L-S document 298083, 53 FR 24206, 1765 lines]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 761
[OPTS-62053A; FLR 3369-2]
Polychlorinated Biphenyls; Exclusions, Exemptions and Use Authorizations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This final rule amends existing rules controlling the processing,
distribution in commerce, and use of PCBs by excluding additional materials
containing less than 50 parts per million (ppm) polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) from regulation under section 6(e) of the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) which generally prohibits the manufacturing, processing, distribution
in commerce, and use of PCBs. EPA has found that activities allowed under
this rule will not present unreasonable risks of injury to public health or
the environment.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule shall be effective July 27, 1988.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael M. Stahl, Acting Director, TSCA
Assistance Office (TS-799), Office of Toxic Substances, Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. EB-44, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460, .(202-554-
1404), TDD (202) 554-0551.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is issuing this regulation to:
(1) Eliminate the Viton elastomer qlove requirement for workers servicing
heat transfer and hydraulic systems.
(2) Allow certain equipment and materials that have been adequately.
decontaminated to be used and distributed in commerce.
(3) Maintain the 3 parts per billion (ppb) effluent limit for releases from
pulp and paper mills.
(4) Allow the use of waste oil containing <50 ppm PCBs as a fuel in certain
combustion units.
(5) Exclude from the ban on processing, distribution in commerce, and use,
certain products containing <50 ppm PCBs that were "legally" manufactured,
processed, distributed in commerce or used prior to October 1, 1984.
I. Background
Section 6(e) of TSCA generally prohibits the manufacture, processing,
distribution in commerce, and use of PCBs. Under section 6(e)(2), the Agency
may authorize non-totally enclosed uses of PCBs upon a determination that
such uses will not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the
-------
environment. Also, under section 6(e)(3), EPA [may by rule grant 1-year
exemptions from the general manufacture, processing, and distribution in
commerce prohibitions. Such exemptions may be granted where the petitioner
can demonstrate: "'•
(1) That the activity to be exempted will not present an unreasonable r^^-.
of injury to health or the environment. ••
(2) That good faith efforts have been made to develop a substitute forV. _.s
which does not present an unreasonable risk.
In the Federal Register of May 31, 1979 (44 FR 31514), EPA issued its first
regulation implementing the TSCA section 6(e)(2) and section 6(e)(3)
prohibitions. That first rule (the PCB Ban Rule) included among its
provisions a general exclusion from regulation for those activities involving
PCBs at levels less than 50 parts per million (ppm). The only exception to
the general exclusion for activities involving less than 50 ppm materials was
a prohibition on the use of waste oil as a dust suppressant, sealant, or
coating. This prohibition applied to waste oils with any detectable levels of
PCBs.
The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) successfully challenged this general
50 ppm regulatory cutoff, and on October 30, 1980, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit remanded the Ban Rule to EPA for further
action consistent with its opinion. The Court determined that there was not
substantial evidence in the record which would support the decision to
exclude generally from regulation all materials containing PCBs at
concentrations less than 50 ppm. The Court stated that a proper exclusion
would need to be more finely tailored to the purposes of excluding ambient
sources of PCBs, or, be premised upon a finding that the designated cutoff
does not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.
The rulemaking history of the PCB Ban Rule is described in detail in the
proposed "Exclusions, Exemptions and Use Authorizations" Rule published July
8, 1987 (52 FR 25838).
On February 20, 1981, the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA), EDF(
and other industry intervenors in the EDF v. EPA litigation, filed a join
motion with EPA seeking a stay of the court's mandate. The Court granted tn'e
joint motion on April 13, 1981, thereby staying the issuance of its mandate
pending the development by EPA of additional regulations concerning PCBs with
concentrations less than 50 ppm.
EPA undertook the regulation of PCBs in concentrations less than 50 ppm in
two phases. On October 21, 1982, the Agency issued the Closed and Controlled
Waste Manufacturing Process Rule (47 FR 46980) which excluded from the
general prohibitions a limited number of chemical manufacturing processes
defined as "closed" or "controlled waste" processes. These processes either
resulted in no PCB releases or releases only in controlled waste streams. In
essence, the Closed and Controlled Rule allowed limited new manufacture of
PCBs, but only when the PCBs were controlled and not released to the
environment.
On July 10, 1984, EPA completed the second phase of rulemaking concerning
low concentration PCBs. The "Uncontrolled Rule" (49 FR 28154) was issued
regulating manufacturing processes generating low concentration PCBs in other
than "closed" and "controlled waste" processes as well as other activities
involving previously generated low concentration PCBs. This second Rule
excluded from regulation additional manufacturing processes that generated
PCBs as byproducts and impurities and allowed the limited recycling of PCBs
in the manufacture of asphalt roofing materials and paper products. EPA found
that these additional activities could be excluded from the general
prohibition on the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, and use
of PCBs because these other activities do not present an unreasonable ris1,
injury to public health or the environment. 1
-On October 1, 1984, the date that the Uncontrolled Rule became effective,
the court lifted its stay and any activity involving any quantifiable level
of PCBs was banned unless EPA had specifically excluded, exempted, or
authorized the activity by regulation (49 FR 28173, July 10, 1984).
The practical effect of this action was to make illegal many activities
-------
involving previously generated PCBs which were neither anticipated nor
specifically evaluated during the development of the Uncontrolled Rule. Many
activities involving low concentrations of previously generated PCBs were now
prohibited,.regardless of the fact that they may have presented no greater
risk than certain activities specifically allowed in the July 10, 1984 rule.
^ 'etitions seeking judicial review of the July 10, 1984 rule were filed on
"ptember 24, 1984, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit by the American Paper Institute (API), the Fort Howard Paper Company
(Ft. Howard), the Outboard Marine Corporation (OMC), and the American Die
Casting Institute (ADCI). The challenges were consolidated for resolution,
and the Chemical Manufacturers Association (CMA) entered the litigation as an
intervenpr and respondent. EPA recognized the concerns of the petitioners,
and on August 7, 1986, EPA entered into a settlement agreement. EPA agreed to
propose specific amendments to the July 10, 1984 regulation to address the
concerns of the petitioners.
EPA proposed, in the Federal Register of July 8, 1987 (52 FR 25838), to
amend the July 10, 1984 PCB Rule (the "Uncontrolled Rule") by excluding
additional materials from regulation based on EPA's determination that
activities involving these materials do not present an unreasonable risk of
injury to health or to the environment. In the July 8, 1987 proposed rule,
EPA proposed the following amendments *o the regulations governing the
processing, distribution in commerce, and use of PCBs.
1. To generally authorize the processing, distribution in commerce, and use
of products containing less than 50 ppm PCBs provided that the PCBs present
in the products were legally manufactured, processed, distributed in
commerce, and/or used prior to October 1, 1984. The only exception that EPA
proposed to this generic exclusion of activities involving less than 50 ppm
PCBs, was to place limitations on the use of oil containing less than 50 ppm
PCBs as a fuel. EPA proposed to restrict the burning of oil containing less
than 50 ppm PCBs to industrial boilers and furnaces, which EPA believes, as a
ass, will provide for more efficient combustion than nonindustrial boilers
1 furnaces.
2. To authorize the distribution in commerce of equipment and other
materials contaminated with PCBs from a spill, provided that such materials
are decontaminated in accordance with EPA's applicable PCB spill cleanup
policies.
3. To eliminate the water discharge limit of less than 3 micrograms per
liter (3 ug/L), roughly 3 parts per billion (ppb), for total Aroclors leaving
a paper processing site.
4. To eliminate the requirement that owners of hydraulic and heat transfer
systems provide Viton elastomer gloves for workers servicing this equipment,
and that workers wear these gloves when servicing heat transfer.and hydraulic
systems.
Of the proposed amendments, the proposal to generally authorize the
processing, distribution in commerce, and use of products containing less
than 50 ppm PCBs (with a restriction on the' use of oil containing less than
50 ppm as a fuel in nonindustrial boilers) was the most significant of the
July 8, 1987 proposals and drew the most comment. The Agency invited comments
on various aspects of its proposal regarding products containing less than 50
ppm PCBs, including the exposure assessment that supports the Agency's
decision to prohibit the burning of low-concentration PCB waste oil in
nonindustrial boilers and furnaces. In the proposed rule, EPA indicated that
it would use any new information submitted to the Agency to reconsider the
appropriateness of its approach concerning the burning of oil containing less
than 50 ppm PCBs as a fuel, with the option of excluding all used oil
iducts (with less than 50 ppm PCBs) from regulation, without any
.strictions on burning or other recycling activities.
EPA received over 40 comments during the public comment period which closed
on September 8, 1987. EPA received comments from a number of different
sources, including electrical utilities, chemical manufacturers, heavy
equipment manufacturers, pulp and paper mills, members of trade associations,
the electrical equipment service industry, and an environmental group.
-------
The comments are summarized in "Response to Comments on the NPR for
Amendments to the Uncontrolled PCBs Rule," June 1988. Several comments were
also received following the close of the comment period, which EPA accepted
and considered as they contained information not available earlier. On
September 21, 1987, EPA held an informal hearing in Washington, DC at the
request of the Electrical Apparatus Service Association (EASA). EASA
addressed the issues of the buying and selling of used transformers,
salvaging and rebuilding operations, and the effect of the Proposed Rule on
this service industry. Six EASA members provided testimony on various
provisions of the Proposed Rule, and a transcript of the hearing appears in
the Docket.
EPA has considered all comments received in response to the Proposed Rule
(as well as comments received after the close of the comment period) and has
modified the rule where appropriate. A more detailed explanation of
regulatory development history is presented in the Preamble to the
Exclusions, Exemptions and Use Authorizations Proposed Rule of July 8, 1987.
A brief overview of the final rule follows.
II. Overview of the Amendments
-\
A. Gen .ral Exclusion for Products Containing.*,?•-SB than £0 PPM P~BS
On October 1, 1984 (the effective date of the Uncontrolled Rule), the Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit lifted the stay of mandate
that had been in place since the Court's decision to remand to EPA the
general 50 ppm regulatory cutoff for PCBs. The effect of this action was to
ban all PCB-related activities that were not specifically excluded,
authorized, or exempted by EPA under TSCA regulations (40 CFR Part 761). The
rule made illegal many activities involving previously generated PCBs at
concentrations of less than 50 ppm. EPA had hot anticipated the many
activities that would be banned when the general 50 ppm cutoff was removed
and many of these activities were not evaluated during the development of
1984 Uncontrolled Rule.
CMA and others raised specific concerns about the effect of this ban on the
distribution in commerce, further processing, and use of products containing
less than 50 ppm PCBs that were produced legally before October 1, 1984, but
which were in storage for use or distribution in commerce when the
Uncontrolled Rule became effective. These products, they argued, should be
allowed to be further processed, distributed in commerce, and used, but EPA
did not specifically authorize or exempt these products by the terms of the
Uncontrolled Rule. EPA agreed with the principle that materials containing
less than 50 ppm PCBs that were legally in existence before October 1, 1984
should be allowed to be further processed, distributed in commerce, and used.
Accordingly, EPA agreed to address these concerns in a proposed rule.
in the July 8, 1987 proposed rule, the Agency proposed to amend the
existing regulations by generally excluding from the TSCA section 6(e)
prohibitions the processing, distribution in commerce, and use of products
containing less than 50 ppm PCBs, provided these products were legally
manufactured, processed, distributed in commerce, or used prior to October 1,
1984. The term "legally," as used in this exclusion, includes products
created from PCB activities allowed by EPA by regulation, by exemption
petition, by settlement agreement, or pursuant to other Agency-approved
programs. The only exception that EPA proposed to this generic 50 ppm cutoff
for processing, distribution in commerce, and use of PCBs was a restriction
on the use of oil containing less than 50 ppm as a fuel in nonindustrial
boilers and furnaces. Materials containing less than 50 ppm PCBs as a resv
of a spill of 50 ppm or greater material after the effective date of the
disposal regulations (July 2, 1979) are not excluded from regulation by the
terms of this provision.
In this final rule, EPA has adopted this generic exclusion based upon its
determination that activities involving products containing less than 50 ppm
PCB generally do not present an unreasonable risk of injury to human health
-------
or the environment. EPA's analyses demonstrate that the incremental risks
associated with the processing, distribution in commerce, and use of products
with PCS levels up to 50 ppm are outweighed by the tremendous costs that
would be incurred by banning the further processing, distribution in
commerce, and use of PCBs at these levels.
While EPA has included used oil products containing less than 50 ppm PCBs
thin the class of "excluded PCB products," the Agency is restricting the
use of PCB containing oil as a fuel. EPA has also determined that the burning
of PCB containing oil in concentrations below 50 ppm in industrial boilers
and furnaces does not present an unreasonable risk to public health or the
environment under normal operating conditions. However, the finding of no
unreasonable risk for the use of PCB-containing oil as a fuel does not
include the burning of PCB containing oil under combustion conditions which
are likely to promote the formation of polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs).
EPA believes that among known classes of boilers and furnaces, nonindustrial
boilers and furnaces are most likely to create combustion conditions
conducive to the formation of PCDFs and that the burning of PCB containing
oil as. fuel during startup and shutdown operations in industrial boilers and
furnaces are also likely to create combustion conditions conducive to
incomplete combustion. Further, PCDFs are considered to be more toxic than
PCBs and their f-ormation and release during the burnin- of oil under certain
combustion conditions in nonindustrial boilers and furnaces could present a
significant risk to public health and the environment. Thus, EPA is
restricting the burning of oil containing less than 50 ppm PCBs as a fuel to
industrial boilers and furnaces except during startup and shutdown
operations.
B. Land Application of Sewage Sludges
Land application practices involving PCBs at levels less than 50 ppm are
->verned by provisions of non-TSCA regulatory programs. Therefore, EPA is not
.dressing the land application of sewage sludges under this rule because any
iisks from these activities can be eliminated or reduced by action taken
under other laws administered by EPA. EPA has the authority to manage sewage
sludge and other wastes containing less than 50 ppm PCBs (43 FR 24803, June
7, 1978), under the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) programs. Further discussion of this issue can be found
in the Proposed Rule at 52 FR 25855.
C.. Use Authorization for Hydraulic and Heat Transfer Systems—Requirement for
Use of Viton Gloves
In the 1979 Ban Rule (44 FR 31514), EPA authorized the non-totally-enclosed
use of PCBs at concentrations of 50 ppm or greater in hydraulic systems and
in heat transfer systems (40 CFR 761.30 (d) and (e)). The 1979 use
authorizations contained conditions relating to testing and retrofitting
which were designed to reduce the concentrations of PCBs in these systems to
levels less than 50 .ppm by July 1, 1984.
In the July 10, 1984 Uncontrolled Rule, EPA authorized the use of PCBs in
hydraulic and heat transfer systems at concentrations less than 50 ppm for
the remainder of their useful lives. EPA found that the continued use of
these systems did not present an unreasonable risk of injury to public health
or the environment. The 1984 use authorization, however, imposed a condition
on the continued use of this equipment which required owners of systems to
provide workers with Viton elastomer gloves for protection against dermal
'posure to PCBs. Outboard Marine Corp. (CMC) and the American Die Casting
tstitute (ADCI) raised concerns about the Viton glove requirements in a
"settlement discussion with EPA. They believed this requirement unnecessary to
prevent unreasonable risk.
After reviewing the record for its original decision to require the use of
Viton gloves, EPA found that the cost associated with requiring the use of
gloves was significantly higher than originally estimated. Further, EPA also
-------
found that the risks posed by servicing heat transfer and hydraulic equipment
containing less than 50 ppm PCBs did not outweigh the large costs associated
with requiring the use of Viton gloves, or any dther effective glove that is
commercially available.,
Accordingly, EPA is amending the authorization for hydraulic and heat
transfer systems containing less than 50 ppm PCBs by eliminating the
conditions requiring owners to provide, and maintenance workers. to wear,
gloves formulated from Viton elastomer. After evaluating economic information
not examined during the 1984 rulemaking, and updating EPA1 s estimate of the
concentration of PCBs in these systems as of 1987, EPA has determined that
the servicing of heat transfer and hydraulic systems without gloves does not
present an unreasonable risk of injury to public health or the environment.
The Agency wishes to emphasize that the use of impermeable gloves to
prevent dermal contact with PCB-containing fluids may be warranted but the
choice of such protection will be dependent on factors such as the duration
of occupational exposure, concentration of PCB-containing fluid, and the
costs and permeability of the glove material.
D. Water Discharge Limit of 3 PPB Total Aroclors for Pulp and Paper Processes
The July 10, 1984 ruie; permitted PCB recycling activities -r; • r.ig two
manufacturing industries — asphalt roofing materials manufacturer's and
manufacturers of pulp and paper products. Five conditions were set forth in
the definition of "recycled PCBs," including a limitation on the level of
PCBs allowed in water effluents. The effluent limit in the Uncontrolled Rule
limited the amount of Aroclor PCBs in water discharged from these PCB
processing sites to less than 3 micrograms per liter (mg/L) for total
Aroclors (roughly 3 parts per billion (3 ppb) ) .
Petitioners, Fort Howard and the American Paper Institute, filed a joint
petition challenging the 3 ppb total Aroclors discharge limit for pulp and
paper mills. The major concerns were that the regulation did not allow for
excursions above 3 ppb due to higher PCB levels in recycled paper entering
the process and that the TSCA concentration-based standard unfairly penalized
those mills who conserved water and had a decreased volume flow in their
effluent discharges.
EPA proposed to eliminate the, 3 ppb water effluent standard for PCBs
leaving pulp and paper mills for several reasons, including: (1) EPA's belief
that PCB discharges from pulp and paper mills are being adequately regulated
by state permitting authorities, and (2) EPA's recognition that under the
recently enacted CWA, Congress now requires that all states adopt water
quality criteria within 2 years for chemicals which have, been evaluated by
EPA. Since water quality criteria exist for PCBs, EPA believed that it had
additional assurance that all PCB effluents from recycling processes would be
controlled, eliminating the need for section 6 action under TSCA.
EPA has considered the comments and data submitted on the adequacy of state
permitting programs and concluded that it is necessary, at this time, to
retain the water discharge limit in the definition of "Recycled PCBs" given
the present status of some state NPDES permits and the foreseeable delays in
implementing state revisions of water quality standards.
. In addition, in light of comments received, that indicated a concentration-
based standard unfairly penalized those mills who conserved water, the final
rule requires manufacturers who process raw materials contaminated with
Aroclor PCBs to comply with either a concentration or a mass-based limit.
Allowing for a mass-based limitation (i.e., discharge requirements may be met
by limiting the volume flow) is consistent with the Clean Water Act's
approach to restricting discharges as well as the approach followed by st<-
under their discharge-permitting authorities. EPA believes it prudent to v.
consistent with approaches already used by the Agency and state authorities
and permit writers for controlling the PCB discharge limit into water.
Allowing for a mass-based limitation will continue to regulate the absolute
amount of PCBs added to the environment from a point source. EPA has not
changed the 3 ppb standard for discharges from asphalt roofing material
-------
manufacturing because those manufacturers have not indicated a problem in
meeting that standard.
E. Materials Decontaminated Pursuant To Spill Cleanup Policies
The PCB Spill Cleanup Policy (40 CFR Part 761, Subpart G) became effective
» May 4, 1987. The policy establishes uniform cleanup levels for specified
spill types and locations. The policy prescribes cleanup levels for different
types of "spills" according to the PCB concentrations involved in the spill,
the type of material contaminated, and the spill location. The Spill Cleanup
Policy reaffirms a longstanding Agency policy of allowing the continued
processing, distribution in commerce, and use of materials that have been
cleaned to Agency standards.
In the July 8, 1987 proposal, EPA proposed to authorize the distribution in
commerce and use of materials, equipment, and structures that had been
decontaminated in accordance with applicable spill cleanup policies in effect
at the time of decontamination, or if not previously decontaminated, then
decontaminated at the time of distribution in commerce. Although these
materials will be contaminated with low levels of PCBs, EPA proposed to
authorize these activities because EPA has already determined that this
residual levrT. of contT.:! nation will not present unreasonable risks of -.njury
to public health or the environment.
This final rule addresses materials contaminated with low level PCBs that
resulted from a spill of controlled material (PCBs in concentrations of 50
ppm or greater). EPA is excluding from the TSCA section 6(e) prohibitions on
the distribution in commerce and use of any equipment, structures, and other
materials contaminated with PCBs, that are not otherwise authorized by 40 CFR
Part 761, provided that these "materials" were decontaminated in accordance
with applicable PCB cleanup policies in effect at the time of
Decontamination, or, if not previously decontaminated, then decontaminated at
2 time of distribution in commerce in accordance with the current cleanup
iicy.
III. Discussion of Amendments
Forty-two comments were received during the comment period. The majority of
the comments received in this rulemaking generally agree with the amendments
proposed in the July 8, 1987 Federal Register notice. However, several
modifications to the rule were suggested by the commentors. This Unit of the
Preamble discusses the major comments made in response to the proposed rule,
EPA's responses to these comments, EPA's findings, and the rationale for any
additional regulatory requirements. Refer to the support document "Response
to Comments received on the NPR for Amendments to the Uncontrolled PCBs
Rule," which appears in the Rulemaking Record for EPA's responses to comments
not addressed here.
A.. 50 PPM Regulatory Cutoff
1. Excluded PCB Products. EPA's July 8, 1987 proposed rule generally
excluded from the TSCA section 6(e) prohibitions, the processing,
distribution in commerce, and use of products containing less than 50 ppm PCB
concentration provided these PCB-containing products were legally
manufactured, processed, distributed in commerce, or used prior to October 1,
1984. The term "legally" as used in this exclusion includes activities and
nroducts created by these activities EPA allowed by regulation, by exemption
u.ition, by settlement agreement, or pursuant to other Agency approved
_'ograms. EPA requested comments on its case studies of the costs and
benefits of regulating PCBs in concentrations below 50 ppm in: Investment
casting waxes and products contaminated with inadvertently generated PCBs
prior to the effective date of the Uncontrolled Rule. The following addresses
those comments and identifies other examples of products that are included in
this generic exclusion.
-------
There was strong general support from all commentors on the proposal to
generally exclude from further regulation products that were legally
contaminated with previously generated PCBs at levels under 50 ppm prior to
October 1, 1984. The proposal was supported by chemical manufacturers, other
industries, and by utilities concerned with TSCA prohibitions on the repair
and rebuilding of electrical equipment. EPA received no comments on this
proposal from environmental groups.
The major criticism expressed about the general exclusion for products
contaminated at less than 50 ppm was EPA's lack of clarity in defining what
activities and "products" were excluded from regulation by the 50 ppm cutoff.
Particularly, these commentors support EPA in its decision to exclude a
broader class of products than was described by the precise terms of the
definition set forth in the Settlement Agreement, but ask that EPA clarify
the regulatory language to better express this intent.
The precise terms of the Settlement Agreement call for the Agency to
propose to authorize the processing, distribution in commerce, and use of
existing stocks of products contaminated with PCBs at concentrations less ,
than 50 ppm, in cages where these products were legally manufactured,
processed, or distributed in commerce before October 1, 1984. As noted in
comments by Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas), strictly limiting the
definition of what is excluded would he Ve the effect of placing any procucts i-
contaminated by "ambient" PCBs after the. 1984 date'within a class of products
still subject to the ban on processing, distribution in commerce, and use.
The result is seen by SoCalGas to be at odds with the Agency's expressed
intent not to regulate "old" or ambient" PCBs at levels of less than 50 ppm
(52 FR 25843, July 8, 1987). SoCalGas is concerned that by a strict reading
of the rule, many of the products contaminated with low levels of PCBs from
historic PCB uses or during recycling activities would still be regulated.
The Agency acknowledges the validity of these comments. It is the Agency's
intent to allow the processing, distribution in commerce, and use of PCBs in
concentrations below 50 ppm provided that:
a. The PCBs were legally manufactured before October 1, 1984.
b. If the PCBs were processed, distributed in commerce, or used before
October 1, 1984, they were legally processed, distributed in commerce or
used.
c. The resulting PCB concentration (i.e., below 50 ppm) is not a result of
dilution, or leaks and spills of PCBs in concentrations over 50 ppm after the
effective date of the disposal regulations.
The only exceptions to the general 50 ppm cutoff for the use of previously
generated PCBs are EPA prohibitions on the use of PCBs at any detectable
concentration as a sealant, coating, or dust control agent, and the use of
PCBs at >/=2 ppm as a fuel in nonindustrial boilers and furnaces. Since EPA
received many comments on its proposal to restrict the use of less than 50
ppm material as a fuel in nonindustrial boilers and furnaces, EPA has
summarized these comments separately in Unit III.B of this document.
In response to an information request in the July 8, 1987 proposal, the
Outboard Marine Corporation .(OMC) submitted data on the concentration of PCBs
in investment casting waxes. At the time of the Proposed Rule, the Agency
supported the inclusion of investment casting waxes among the class of
excluded products based upon mathematical modeling which estimated average
PCB contamination in these waxes to be 10 ppm. The Outboard Marine
Corporation survey data, collected over the last 2 years, indicated that only
18 percent of the approximately 70 samples tested contained detectable levels
of PCBs. The average PCB concentration for those samples was 14 ppm. This
information confirms the Agency's earlier estimates and supports the
inclusion of investment casting waxes among the general PCB products
exclusion.
The comments also expressed strong and uniform support for the proposed
products exclusion and its effect on the further use, processing, and
distribution in commerce of components derived from non-PCB electrical
equipment (PCB electrical equipment containing less than 50 ppm PCBs in
dielectric fluids).
-------
Several commentors requested that the rule make express reference to heat
transfer and hydraulic equipment, and other miscellaneous equipment in use,
or in storage for reuse, which has been in contact with material .less than 50
ppm PCBs, rather than leaving this class of equipment inferentially covered
>->v the broad products language. The Agency has included these items and their
>aids as examples of products covered by the exclusion. Hydraulic and heat
.ansfer equipment which has been retrofilled and "reclassified" according to
TSCA procedures and regulations falls within this class of excluded products.
General Motors Corporation submitted cost data on the effects of removing the
prohibition of distribution in commerce and processing of this equipment. Two
General Motors facilities would experience an approximate $3 million savings
when the TSCA prohibitions against distribution in commerce of non-PCB heat
transfer and hydraulic equipment in use or in storage are lifted.
EPA also notes that component parts derived from the rebuilding or
salvaging of electrical equipment containing PCBs at levels less than 50 ppm
qualify as "excluded PCB products". In addition to component parts, the
exclusion also includes such activities as buying, selling, and servicing of
used non-totally enclosed transformers that contain fluids with
concentrations of less than 50 ppm PCBs. As noted in the Proposed Rule, 52 FR
25854, the Agency believes that recycling activities involving these
components do not present any significantly greater risks than other
activities connected with the unrestricted use of non-PCB electrical
equipment.
Two commentors requested that the exclusion for non PCB equipment recycling
activities be extended to PCB-contaminated electrical equipment (containing
concentrations of 50 to 500 ppm PCB). The Electrical Apparatus Service
Association (EASA) and Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG) joined in
seeking the extension of the exemption to components from PCB-contaminated
electrical equipment, or in the development of a new decontamination method
which would allow electrical utility operating companies to continue their
tivities. Concern was raised about current inventories of used components
ich would be used in the repair of PCB-contaminated transformers. In most
ses, these components are no longer manufactured, and the entire
transformer may be rendered useless without the necessary used replacement
parts.
EPA notes that the regulations presently authorize a utility that owns used
components removed from electrical equipment owned by the same utility
company to use these component parts in the repair of other equipment under
its ownership. However, if a component part from PCB-contaminated electrical
equipment is used to repair non-PCB equipment, the equipment must be
considered to be PCB-contaminated after repair.
In responses to EASA's comments EPA also notes that the existing PCB
regulations already provide a mechanism for "decontaminating" PCB-
contaminated electrical equipment so that it may be treated in the same
manner as non PCB electrical equipment. The PCB regulations allow the
reclassification of PCB-contaminated electrical equipment. Once reclassified,
a piece of equipment may be salvaged for parts without restriction.
Finally, TSCA section 6(e) provides EPA with the authority to grant
exemptions from the prohibition on distribution in commerce. This mechanism
is available for those who demonstrate to EPA that their activity will not
present an unreasonable risk of injury to public health and the environment
and that good faith efforts have been made to develop a substitute for PCBs
in the activity. For example, in 1984 the Agency granted the members of EASA
a 1-year exemption to process and distribute in commerce PCB-contaminated
transformers and component parts. The 1-year exemption would allow EASA time
t inform its members how to comply with the PCB regulations, thereby
lowing EASA members time to phase out their PCB related activities that
aquired exemptions.
EPA is adopting the generic 50 ppm exclusion for processing, distribution
in commerce, and use, based on the Agency's determination that the use,
processing, and distribution in commerce of products with less than 50 ppm
PCB concentration will not generally present an unreasonable risk of injury
-------
to health or the environment. EPA could not possibly identify and assess the
potential exposures from all the products which may be contaminated with PCBs
at less than 50 ppm. However, EPA concluded that: the majority of the
hypothetical exposures developed in support of the July 10, 1984 rule were
not.significant, and in incidents where higher exposures were calculated,
further evaluation of the assumptions showed that the estimated exposures
overestimated actual expected exposures from the products. EPA believes tha_
the qualitative conclusions reached in 1984 with regard to products (with
concentrations up to 50 ppm) from excluded manufacturing practices apply with
equal force to the products excluded by this final rule. In addition, EPA has
concluded that the costs associated with the strict prohibition on PCB
activities are large and outweigh the risks posed by these activities (see 49
FR 28179, July 10, 1984).
B. Use of PCBs Below 50 PPM as a Fuel
The July 8, 1987 proposed rule proposed to amend the PCB regulations to, in
general, authorize used oil recycling activities (use, processing, and
distribution in commerce) involving used oil containing less than 50 ppm
PCBs. Specifically, EPA proposed to include used oil among products excluded
from r relation under-the definition of "excluded PCB '£ Deducts." However, EPA
proposed to restrict used oil recycling activities by prohibiting the burning
of used oil containing any quantifiable level of PCBs as a fuel in
nonindustrial boilers.
The proposed rule also proposed to amend the definition of "qualified
incinerator" codified at 40 CFR 761.3. EPA proposed to delete the reference
to approved high efficiency boilers under 761.60(a)(3) and to replace that
deleted language with a reference to the high efficiency boiler criteria and
notification requirements set forth in Sec. 761.60(a)(2). The proposal
required the same combustion conditions as previously required but sought to
replace the approval requirements with the simpler requirement of
notification to the EPA Regional Administrator as stated in Sec.
761.60(a)(2)(ill)(B).
The proposal also sought to make another class of combustion facilities
eligible for burning used oils with less than 50 ppm PCBs. EPA proposed to
include combustion facilities recognized as acceptable for burning off
specification "used oil fuels" under 40 CFR Part 266, Subpart E. This second
class consists of the industrial "furnaces" and "boilers" which are
identified in 40 CFR 266.41(b) and whose owners have notified EPA of their
used oil burning activities. The criteria for these boilers and furnaces are
identified in 40 CFR 260.10.
Today's rule allows the burning of oil containing between 2 and 49 ppm PCBs
as a fuel in RCRA-approved industrial boilers and furnaces. The rule requires
that RCRA approved units used to burn PCB oil between 2 and 49 ppm must be
operating at normal operating temperatures (this requirement prohibits
burning such fuels during either startup or shutdown operations). By
prohibiting the use of oil as a fuel between 2 and 49 ppm PCBs during startup
and shutdown operations for these units, EPA is effectively eliminating
another source where conditions are conducive to the incomplete combustion of
PCBs and the formation of PCDFs. Ttie prohibition on the use of this oil
during startup and shutdown operations is consistent with the Agency's
current regulations for disposing mineral oil dielectric fluid (50-499 ppm
PCBs) in high efficiency boilers set forth in 40 CFR 761.60(a)(2)(iii)(A)(5).
Similar to the requirements in todays rule, the existing rules regarding high
efficiency boilers limit the fuel feed rate for PCBs. Section
76l.60(a)(2)(iii)(A)(4) states that mineral oil dielectric fluid cannot
compose more than 10 percent, 5-49.9 ppm PCBs, (on a volume basis) of the
total fuel feed rate. EPA believes that the requirements for burning PCB
fluid between 2 and 49 ppm PCBs during startup and shutdown operations in
industrial boilers and furnaces should be consistent with the existing
disposal rules set forth in 40 CFR 761.60.
Today's rule also prohibits the burning of oil containing detectable
-------
concentrations of PCBs in nonindustrial boilers and furnaces because these
units, as a class, are more likely than RCRA-approved industrial boilers and
furnaces to operate under combustion conditions'that are conducive to the
volatilization of PCBs and the formation of toxic products from the
^complete combustion of PCBs.
[n the Proposed Rule, EPA concluded that nonindustrial boilers are
^pically small to medium size unmanned units that may not achieve optimum
combustion conditions when burning fuel that athe unit was not designed to
burn. EPA believed that very few, if any, of "these units are equipped with
emissions control equipment, while many industrial boilers/furnaces are so
equipped. Further, nonindustrial units are more likely to be located in an
urban setting where sources are frequently clustered together, they generally
have lower stack heights, and have a sporadic mode of operation. Emissions
plumes from numerous sources can overlap and increase ambient air
concentrations of PCBs and PCDFs while simultaneously exposing a larger
population. In contrast, large boilers and industrial furnaces are more
likely to be operated by trained operators and equipped with combustion
controls to maintain combustion efficiency when burning fuels mixed with low
concentration PCBs.
The Agency requested comments on its proposal to prohibit the burning of
used c-11 containing less than 50 ppm PCBs in r->nindustr?al boilers. (See 52
FR 25854, July 8, 1987). Several commentors asserted that all used oil
products under 50 ppm should be excluded from all TSCA reaulations, including
burner restrictions. -Several commentors who opposed the burner restrictions
focused their objections on the risk assessment that EPA developed in support
of its proposal. Two commentors stated that the assessment overstated the
potential of PCDF formation, and criticized the conservative assumptions in
the risk assessment, including the frequency and duration of used oil burning
in residential boilers. However, EPA did not receive substantive information
to allow the Agency to reevaluate the risk of PCDF formation and make the
• quired finding that such burning does not present unreasonable risks.
.nmentors did not provide information to support an adjustment to the
assumptions underlying the assessment for the potential for PCDF formation
such as combustion efficiency, residential combustion unit sizes and types,
operating temperatures, formation of PCDF's under differing combustion
conditions, etc.
In the risk assessment developed for the proposed rule, the Agency
concluded that inhalation exposures associated with the volatilizing of PCBs
during the burning of used oil (with PCBs at the 50 ppm level or lover) in
small boilers were not significant. However, the Agency's quantitative
oncogenic risk for the potential inhalation exposures associated with the
formation and release of polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs) from small-
and medium-sized nonindustrial boilers (which may operate under inefficient
conditions) was considered significant because the risks fall into the 1x10-3
to 1x10-4 range. Moreover, only 23 percent of this oil is burned this way; a
prohibition does not create great economic impact. Since EPA received no data
which refutes the risk assessment, the final rule retains the prohibition on
the use of waste oil containing less than 50 ppm PCB as a fuel in
nonindustrial boilers. Nonindustrial boilers include but are not limited to
those located in single or multifamily residences; commercial establishments
(such as hotels, office buildings, laundries, service stations, greenhouses);
and institutional establishments (colleges, hospitals, schools, prisons).
In this rule, EPA is designating within the class of "incinerators"
qualified to burn oil containing between 2 ppm and 50 ppm PCBs those:
(1) Incinerators approved for PCB destruction under Sec. 761.70.
(2) High efficiency boilers which operate under the conditions of Sec.
1.60(a)(2)(iii)(A) and whose owners have notified EPA of their used oil
burning activities under Sec. 761.60 • (a)(2)(iii)(B).
(3) Incinerators approved under the authority of RCRA section 3005(c).
(4) Industrial furnaces and boilers which are identified in 40 CFR 260.10
and 40 CFR 266.41(b), and whose owners have notified the Agency of their used
oil burning activities. The list of industrial furnaces includes cement
-------
kilns, lime kilns, phosphate kilns, aggregate kilns (including asphalt
kilns), coke ovens, blast furnaces; and smelting, melting, and refining
furnaces. Furthermore, under these RCRA rules, the Regional Administrator may"
designate additional enclosed, controlled flame combustion devices as
"boilers" on a case-by-case basis as stated under criteria set out in 40 CF^
260.32. Boilers designated under 40 CFR 260.32 by a Regional Administrator
would also qualify as incinerators for the burning of oil containing 2 ppm
49 ppm PCBs.
One commentor, Econ, Inc., criticized the lack of specificity in combustion
criteria for boilers, suggesting that boiler operators could comply with a
regulation that specified proper boiler operating parameters. This commentor
asked that the final rule specify the combustion criteria (e.g. temperature,
residence time, pressure, excess oxygen) that operators must attain. Another
commentor took a contrary view, asserting that the rule should remain
faithful to the RCRA approach of specifying only classes of eligible
industrial boilers and furnaces, without restricting the specifics of
operation.
EPA has determined not to include, within the scope of this rulemaking, a
determination of combustion criteria for boilers, nor to set combustion goals
that operators must attain, because, the Agency plans to propose, under RCRA,
technical s-ts dards for burnin? off-specification used oil fuel in boil rs
arid industrial furnaces. This rulemaking would take into account when and how
these wastes can be burned safely in these devices. It would also include
combustion criteria and most likely control emissions of toxic organics.
While EPA will not develop such combustion criteria in the present
rulemaking, the Agency will reexamine TSCA controls on the burning of less
than 50 ppm PCB oils after the development of the RCRA standards and
combustion criteria.
Several commentors agreed that used oil burning should be limited to the
larger industrial boilers and furnaces, but they objected to regulatory
requirements for certification and notification. These commentors were BOS'
frequently concerned about the chilling effect that the certification and
notification requirements would have on the availability of oil-burning
capacity among the desirable industrial burners. While a concern was
expressed that any regulation of qualified burners would have deleterious
effects, most of the criticism was directed at the proposal to allow burning
of PCB-containing used oil only in the industrial boilers and furnaces whose
owners have previously notified the Agency under either RCRA or TSCA of their
oil or waste burning activities. The argument most frequently made was that
very few industrial burners have accepted EPA's invitation to register and
burn "off-specification" used oil fuel, so that the RCRA Burn Ban regulation
has in fact been an impediment to the marketing of these fuels to the larger
industrial boilers capable of efficient combustion.
Based upon its experiences following the promulgation of similar
notification requirements under RCRA, EPA disagrees that the notification
requirement of this rule will create a significant disincentive for the
burning of oil containing 2 ppm to 49 ppm in industrial furnaces and boilers.
As part of the rule regulating the burning of used oil for energy recovery
(40 CFR Part 266, Subpart E), marketers and burners of off-specification used
oil fuels are subject to certain administrative requirements, including *
one-time notification as to waste burning activities and the securing of an
EPA identification number. The notification provides the Agency with the
number, type and location of burners. In order to minimize the reporting
burden, burners which previously notified the Regional Administrator, of their
waste as fuel activities (see Sees. 266.35(b) and 266.44(b)) are considered
under the present rule to be eligible to burn under 50 ppm PCB waste oil
without additional notification.
Burners which have not previously complied with 40 CFR Sees. 266.35(b) and
266.44(b) are required to file a TSCA notification with the Regional
Administrator and receive acknowledgement of the receipt of the notification
prior to burning. This acknowledgement merely serves as a confirmation that
EPA has received notification and does not serve as an approval or
-------
endorsement by EPA of the adequacy of the notifier's combustion unit or
business practices.
Under this final rule, before an eligible burner accepts its first shipment
of used oil fuel containing less than 50 ppm PCBs from a marketer, he is
squired to provide the marketer a one time written and signed notice
-tifying that he will burn the used oil only in an incinerator (Sec. 761.3)
in a combustion device identified in 40 CFR 266.41(b).
Marketers will be required to retain copies of their used oil analyses (or
other information relating to PCB levels in oil) for 3 years; they would also
be required to retain a copy of each certification that they have received
from burners from the date of the last transaction with that burner.
There were strong objections expressed in several comments for keeping the
RCRA reference to space heaters, 40 CFR 266.41(b)(2)(iii), that burn waste
oil generated on-site. The RCRA provision was initially enacted in response
to concerns expressed by the automotive oil industry that suggested that
banning the burning of used oil in space heaters would severely disrupt the
flow of used oil and possibly encourage disposal of automotive waste oils in
municipal landfills. The National Oil Recyclers Association suggested that
this exception flies in the face of all the discussion about significant
risks in small boilers. Others amplified on the poor combustion performance
of these units, particularly, their low stack temperature, sirr? 1 chambers,
and poor efficiency during start up.
In addition, the Agency received comments on the proposed rule which
indicated PCB used oil fuels are frequently burned in space heaters outside
the automotive industry, i.e., transformer repair and servicing shops. In
light of these comments the Agency has reconsidered the proposal to allow
burning of PCB used oil fuels in space heaters. The Agency has determined
that continuing to allow the burning of PCB used oil fuels only in the
automotive industry's space heaters will not present an unreasonable risk to
human health or the environment provided the provisions of 40 CFR
6.41(b) (2) (iii) (A)', and (C) are met. However, EPA is prohibiting the
:ning of said fuel in space heaters outside the automotive industry area
-iiere the risks are likely to be greater. The Agency is allowing the burning
of PCB used oil fuels from the automotive industry because it does not expect
used oil from automotive sources to routinely contain PCBs in concentrations
significantly above the level of detection. In addition, because of the
historic uses of PCBs in electrical equipment and heat transfer and hydraulic
equipment, EPA assumes the vast majority of PCB-containing used oil
originates from industrial nonautomotive sources. Thus, EPA does not expect
that a large quantity of PCB-containing used oil will in fact be burned in
automotive-industry space heaters.
The burning of PCB used oil as fuel in areas including but not limited to
transformer repair shops, where PCB concentrations are likely to be well
above the level of detection (i.e., 2 ppm) presents a greater likelihood for
the formation of highly toxic byproducts associated with the poor combustion
of higher concentration PCBs in these devices. Therefore, EPA, to remain
consistent in avoiding such risks, is prohibiting the burning of PCB used oil
as fuel, in space heaters outside the automotive industry.
Several commentors have requested that the Agency clarify the term
"detectable level of PCBs" which is used to describe the used oils to which
this burning restriction applies (40 CFR 761.20(e». The preamble of the
Proposed Rule (52 FR 25854) stated that "detectable" means "practical limit
of quantitation (i.e., 2 ppm). The Chemical Manufacturers Association
recommended that EPA include this clarification in the regulatory language by
referring specifically to the definition, "less than 2 micrograms per gram
om any resolvable gas chromatographic peak," previously included in the
jA regulations for nondetectable PCBs in products of closed waste
manufacturing processes (47 FR 46995, October 21, 1982). This definition has
been accepted by the Agency and will be incorporated in the Rule to clarify
which used oils are considered to have detectable PCBs.
Several comments were received which addressed the availability of
analytical methods for meeting the level of detection and the impact of this
-------
level on recycling and burning of waste oil for fuel. James River Corporation
and Texaco Inc. requested that the Agency consider a level higher than the
one proposed—specifically—5 ppm—which was felt would meet the goals of the*
regulation and the concerns for feasibility expressed by recyclers. Other
thresholds suggested were 20 ppm (on the grounds that it was feasible in t
field); 25 ppm, or even 35 ppm.
The Agency has determined that analytical procedures have been demonstrax.7
to be capable of accurately and reproducibly determining the concentration of
PCBs in Bunker C Fuel Oil at 2 ppm using a quantitation procedure based on
one congener per homolog standard. Both Gas Chromatography/Electron Capture
and Gas Chromatograph/Hall Detector Electron Capture are effective and easily
implemented. Therefore, the level of quantitation (articulated in earlier
TSCA regulations—47 FR 46995) is specified as 2 ppm.
A large number of comments addressing an alternative PCB threshold
implicitly endorsed blending to meet any specified PCB threshold. These
comments pointed out that the TSCA prohibitions on dilution do not apply
where a regulation specifically allows it, and that allowing blending would
make the rule consistent with the RCRA Burn Ban Rule. It was also suggested
that blending would facilitate the injection of the fuel into the boiler, and
result in better combustion and destruction of the PCBs.
Unlike RCRA regulations fAr< hazardous..waste disposal, the TSCA PCB disposal
regulations dictate different disposal requirements depending upon the
concentration of PCBs in the vaste. This approach was adopted because EPA.
recognized that PCBs are ubiquitous in the environment and are present in
measurable quantities as contaminants in many materials. EPA struggled to
establish a manageable disposal system that recognized the widespread
contamination that 30 or so years of indiscriminant disposal created yet one
that would strictly control the disposal of any PCBs removed from use after
the Congressional ban in 1977. The result was a disposal system based upon
PCB concentrations in waste and a strict prohibition against dilution as a
mechanism for avoiding proper disposal. |
Allowing blending-down to either below the level of detection or below 5
ppm PCBs under this rule would be a departure from EPA's longstanding
position that requires material once tested for PCB concentration to be
treated under the regulations based upon its measured concentration. EPA is
acutely aware of the difficulties in effectively monitoring compliance with
the prohibition on dilution and is concerned about the potential avenue that
it would be opening up for the improper disposal of 50 ppm or greater
materials in allowing blending-down to either below the level of detection or
below 50 ppm in this rule. Therefore, EPA is maintaining its longstanding
policy to prohibit dilution.
EPA's proposal to allow batch testing by marketers as a way of saving
analytical testing costs met with approval in the comments. The National Oil
Recyclers note that, by the time a shipment of used oil reaches a processing
plant, it is a mixture of oil from several generators. They maintain that the
cost of testing each individual sample before it was added to a shipment
would be prohibitive. In addition, they indicate that turn-around time for
laboratory tests may range from a few days to 2 weeks, unless a high
surcharge is paid for priority service. Costs for PCB testing have been cited
as ranging from $25 to $65 per sample. With the low current markets in waste
oil, as highlighted in comments from Harbor Oil, Inc., the expense of
requiring individual samples, rather than batch testing, would be
prohibitive. The Agency regulations, therefore, allow for batch testing,
along with certification. It is important to note that, if any PCBs at a
concentration of 50 ppm or greater have been added to the container, then the
total container contents must be considered as having a PCB concentration
50 ppm or greater for purposes of complying with the disposal requirements
40 CFR 761.60. Batch testing, along with proper records documentation,
provides for an environmentally sound program for collecting and burning oils
with detectable levels of PCBs while at the same time preserving and
protecting our limited waste oil markets.
This final rule makes the TSCA regulations more consistent with the
-------
Agency's overall strategy for regulating the recycling of used oil. After
evaluating the risks posed by these activities, EPA has determined that the
use, processing, and distribution in commerce of used oil containing less
than 50 ppm PCBs does not generally present an unreasonable risk of injury to
man health or the environment. EPA is not able to determine that burning
ed oil as fuel in nonindustrial boilers will not present an unreasonable
sk. EPA believes that the burning of PCB-containing used oil fuels in
combustion facilities which operate under inefficient combustion conditions
will promote the formation of highly toxic PCDFs; (see 52 FR 25849-50 for
further discussion on exposure risks associated with the incomplete
combustion of PCBs). .
Due to the potential for the formation of PCDFs in inefficient combustion
facilities burning PCB-containing used oil, EPA believes that it is prudent
to adopt an approach in this final rule which is consistent with that of the
RCRA Burn Ban Rule for burning hazardous waste and off-specification used oil
fuels. EPA believes that the rationale set forth in the RCRA Burn Ban Rule
preamble for designating nonindustrial boilers as the prohibited class of
combustion facilities (50 FR 49191) provides a compelling argument for
similarly restricting the burning of used oil products containing PCBs at the
less than 50 ppm level. This prohibition on burning PCB-contaminated oils in
non-industrial boilers will afford an . nterim measure of prudent control
until EPA completes its ongoing comprehensive evaluation of combustion
conditions in various boilers and furnaces. Upon completing this evaluation,
EPA will promulgate rules prescribing combustion performance standards under
RCRA. The net result will be to allow or disallow burning of hazardous waste
fuels based on actual combustion capabilities rather than their
classification as an "industrial" or "nonindustrial" boiler or furnace.
In addition to a consideration of the toxicity of PCBs and the magnitude of
exposure to humans and the environment, the TSCA unreasonable risk standard
requires EPA to consider the economic impacts and other societal costs
»-.sociated with the regulation of a chemical. EPA evaluated the economic
ipacts of maintaining the current prohibition of all used oil recycling
activities, (see Ref. 28, Support Document entitled "PCB Rule Revision: Cost-
Effectiveness Analysis and Estimates of Exposed Population.") EPA concludes
that the risks associated with the recycling (use, processing, and
distribution in commerce) of used oil products containing less than 50 ppm
PCBs are generally outweighed by the enormous costs associated with
prohibiting such activities, the cost associated with depriving society of
the benefits of recycled oil products, and the net reduction in environmental
protection associated with a curtailment in recycling activities. Secondly,
EPA believes that the net regulatory impact on restricting the burning of
used oil .containing less than 50 ppm PCBs to industrial boilers and furnaces
will be insignificant. This final rule makes PCB-containing used oil (<50 ppm
PCBs) available to a much larger universe of eligible combustion facilities
than allowed under, the previous regulation. The availability of these
.combustion facilities (qualified incinerators, industrial furnaces,
industrial boilers, utility boilers, etc.) and the availability of other
recycling markets (e.g., other industrial uses and rerefining) should provide
more than adequate capacity to handle any market shifts caused by the
prohibition on burning in nonindustrial boilers. EPA believes that the oil
management system has already responded to the Burn Ban Rule by diverting the
bulk of used oil fuels away from the nonindustrial boiler market, and any
further diversion.resulting from this final rule should be minimal. For these
reasons, EPA concludes that allowing the burning of PCB-containing used oil
•fuels (<50 ppm PCBs) under the conditions set forth in this document will not
•esent an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.
In this final rule, to be consistent with the approach adopted by the RCRA
"Burn Ban Rule for marketers and burners of used oil fuel, EPA is implementing
a combination of limited testing requirements, prohibitions, and
recordkeeping requirements for burners and marketers of used oil fuel between
2 and 49 ppm PCBs. These provisions are to help ensure compliance with the
prohibition on burning this PCB used oil fuel in nonindustrial boilers and
-------
furnaces.
For regulatory purposes used oil fuel is presumed to contain PCBs above the
practical limit of quantitation (i.e., 2 ppm) and therefore would be subject"
to these restrictions, unless the marketer obtains PCB analyses (test data)
or other information documenting that the used oil fuel does not contain
detectable levels of PCBs. The Agency believes that presuming used oil to
contaminated with PCBs above 2 ppm is a prudent regulatory tool to ensure
proper burning of waste oils. This is not. meant to imply that all waste oil
is, without question, contaminated with PCBs above the level of detection, as
test data and other information documenting the oil's concentration will
demonstrate. The first person who makes the claim that the used oil fuel does
not contain PCBs at quantifiable levels must obtain the analyses or "other
information" to support his claim. The "other information" could include
personal, special knowledge of the source and composition of the used oil, or
a certification from the generator claiming that the oil does not contain
PCBs above the practical limit of quantitation (2 ppm).
The prohibitions apply to both burners and "marketers" (as defined in 40
CFR 761.3). A person may market (process or distribute in commerce) used oil
at levels between the practical limit of quantitation (2 ppm) and 50 ppm for
energy recovery only to those burners who qualify either as a "qualified
incinerator11 under 40 CFR 761.3 or as a combuftion device,, identified in 40
CFR 266.41(b). Before an eligible burner accepts its first shipment of used
oil fuel containing PCBs at concentrations <5C ppm, but. >2 ppm from a
marketer, he will be required to provide the marketer a one-time written
notice certifying that he will burn the used oil only in a qualified
incinerator (Sec. 761.3) or in a combustion device identified in Sec.
266.41(b). Marketers will be required to retain copies of their used oil
analyses (or other information relating to PCB levels in oil) for 3 years;
they would also be required to retain a copy of each certification that they
have received from burners from the date of the last transaction with the
burner.
By imposing the requirements on marketers and burners EPA believes it wi
effectively ensure compliance with the prohibition on the burning of used oil
fuel in nonindustrial boilers. This is consistent with the RCRA Burn Ban Rule
which imposes recordkeeping and reporting requirements controls to prohibit
burning of off-specification used oil fuels in nonindustrial boilers.
C. Viton Glove Requirement
The Circuit Court's decision overturning EPA's rule which would allow a
general 50 ppm cutoff, effectively prohibited the use of heat transfer and
hydraulic systems containing less than 50 ppm PCBs. So, EPA, in the July 10,
1984 rule authorized the use of PCBs at concentrations less than 50 ppm in
these systems for the remainder of their useful lives provided owners of
these systems provided workers performing repair and maintenance operations
on these systems with Viton elastomer gloves to protect against dermal
exposure to PCBs (40 CFR 761.30(d)(6) and 761.30(e)(6)).
The Viton glove requirement was the subject of many comments received after
promulgation of the July 10, 1984 rule. Due to the interest aroused by this
requirement, EPA reexamined the potential exposures and economic impacts
presented by the inclusion of a protective clothing requirement referring
exclusively to gloves formulated from Viton elastomer. After considering
additional economic information which was not considered during the previous
rulemaking and after further evaluation of the potential exposures, the
Agency has concluded that the Viton elastomer glove requirement is not
necessary to protect against any unreasonable risks presented by the
continued use of authorized heat transfer and hydraulic systems. Therefore^
EPA proposed to delete the requirement from the use authorizations for heat"
transfer and hydraulic systems.
Several comments were received which supported the proposal to eliminate
the exclusive Viton glove requirement for workers performing maintenance on
heat transfer and hydraulic systems. General Motors Corporation suggested
-------
that the 1984 risk assessment greatly overstated the concentration of PCBs
actually in the equipment. The data show that the average concentration of
PCBs in hydraulic and heat transfer equipment to be 12 ppm. The commentor
indicated that the assumption used in the 1984 risk assessment, that the PCB
Concentrations are constant at 50 ppm over the entire period of exposure, is
"^ consistent with the fact that the equipment does leak and is topped off
'.th fluids containing no PCBs. The General Motors data are consistent with
the Agency conclusions expressed in the July 8, 1987 (52 FR 25841) proposed
rule that the majority of the presently authorized hydraulic and heat
transfer systems have PCB concentrations well below 50 ppm and support EPA's
belief that the actual lifetime average PCB exposures resulting from
servicing of heat transfer and hydraulic systems should be at least one order
of magnitude less than those predicted by the 1984 assessment.
All commentors agree that the risk to maintenance workers did not warrant
the costs associated with the exclusive Viton polymer requirement. The
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) agreed that
recommending only the use of Viton gloves is overly restrictive and not
warranted based on recent research findings conducted for NIOSH by the Los
Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). A number of alternative glove materials
were suggested (Viton SFe, butyl, neoprene, Saranex Tyvek, nitrile, Teflone)
which were shown to provide good protection against a T.CB mixture (52 percent
Aroclor 1254 in 48 percent trichlorobenzene) for at least 8 hours. The LANL
studies, while developing information relative to the effectiveness of glove
materials when handling high concentration PCBs, do not address effectiveness
of lower cost glove materials for use with low concentration PCB mineral
oils.
The Agency recognizes the concern expressed by NIOSH for worker protection
during such time as they are engaged in contact with PCBs and strongly
recommends the use of impermeable gloves and clothing designed to prevent
skin contact with PCBs, particularly when PCBs are present in concentrations
500 ppm or greater. The choice of glove material will depend on the
ncentration of PCBs, the duration of occupational contact with PCBs, and
v.ne cost and permeability of the glove material.
The Viton glove requirement arose from concerns caused by a May, 1984
exposure assessment conducted in support of the July 10, 1984 rule. (For
details of the exposure assessment see Vol. 4 of support document for the
July 10, 1984 rule entitled "Exposure Assessment for Incidentally Produced
Polychlorinated Biphenyls"). The hypothetical worst case dermal exposure
presented in this report was believed, at the time significant enough to
justify the imposition of the Viton glove requirement. However, upon further
examination, EPA has concluded that the 1984 assessment overstates the likely
dermal exposures and associated risks and that the estimated exposures do not
justify the imposition of the enormous costs associated with the previous
protective glove requirement.
EPA also considered information not previously examined by the Agency
concerning the.costs to industry associated with the exclusive Viton glove
requirement. At the time of the July 10, 1984 rule, Viton elastomer, was the
only material known to EPA which possessed the necessary resistance to PCB
breakthrough. Although the costs of the Viton gloves were significant, EPA
reasoned that the incremented costs associated with the inclusion of the
Viton glove requirement were minimal relative to the costs which industry
would incur without a use authorization for less than 50 ppm systems.
However, in response to numerous comments received after the July 10, 1984
rule, EPA reexamined the costs associated with the Viton glove requirement
and found them to be exorbitant in light of the "worst-case" exposures
timated in the exposure assessment. The incremental costs associated with
.e Viton glove requirement are in the order of $600 million over 10 years.
The Agency has concluded that the potential risks presented by these
activities do not warrant the imposition of incremental costs of this
magnitude.
As a result of the 1984 risk assessment which over estimated the risk of
dermal occupational exposure to repair and maintenance workers and the
-------
incremented costs associated with the Viton glove requirement the Agency is
amending the use authorizations for hydraulic and heat transfer systems by
eliminating the conditions requiring owners to provide repair and maintenance
workers with gloves formulated with Viton elastomer.
D. 3 PPB Water Effluent Limitation
The Uncontrolled PCB Rule set forth, among other things, the category of
"recycled PCBs" processes that are excluded from the TSCA section 6(e) bans
on manufacturing, use, and distribution in commerce. These excluded processes
involved manufacturers who use raw materials contaminated with Aroclor PCBs
to manufacture new products instead of using virgin materials. Recycling old
products yields both environmental and economic benefits since that practice
conserves natural resources, reduces energy use, and reduces solid waste
generation.
In response to the proposal to exclude these activities in the Uncontrolled
PCB Rule, EPA received information from only two manufacturing industries:
The asphalt roofing materials manufacturers and manufacturers of pulp and
paper products. After evaluating whether these specific activities would
present unreasonable rjLsks of injury to health and the environment, EPA
announced in the July ^9, 1984 rule that it would exclude thtC- PCB recycling
products and processes "(pulp and paper and asphalt roofing) , if certain
conditions are met. . " ^
The provision which excludes "recycled PCBs" from the section 6(e)
prohibitions is codified at 40 CFR 761.l(f). The term "recycled PCBs" is
defined at 40 CFR 761.3 by five conditions that limit Aroclor PCB
concentrations in the products, wastes, water discharges, and air emissions.
EPA determined in the final Uncontrolled PCBs Rule that PCB recycling
activities conducted under these conditions would not present an unreasonable
risk of injury to health or the environment.
The specific provision in the definition of "recycled PCBs" (40 CFR 761."
that is the subject of this rulemaking pertains to provision number (4) whi
establishes the limits on releases of Aroclor PCBs in water discharges from
sites processing paper products. The final rule retains the existing
concentration-based discharge limit, but otherwise amends the provision by
allowing a mass-based limitation. Provision number (4) stated: "The amount of
Aroclor PCBs added to water discharged from a processing site must at all
times be less than 3 micrograms per liter (micro-g/1) for total Aroclors
(roughly 3 parts per billion)."
Petitioners*, Ft. Howard and API, raised objections to this condition as it
relates to discharges from mills in the pulp and paper industry. The major
concerns were that the language which limited discharges to 3 ppb "at all
times" (a concentration-based limitation) penalized paper mills which, in the
interest of water conservation, decreased their volume flow or releases and,
as a result, exceeded the 3 ppb limitation. EPA received no objections to
this provision from the asphalt roofing industry.
EPA reexamined the 3 ppb Aroclors discharge limit for pulp and paper mills
in light of the petitioners' claims and other comments received by the
Agency. As a result, the Agency proposed to eliminate from the definition of
"recycled PCBs" the provision limiting Aroclor PCB releases in water
discharges from pulp and paper mills to 3 ppb.
EPA received comments both pro and con on this proposal. Some commenters
supported the proposal to eliminate the 3 ppb limitation because they
believed that PCBs in the effluents from pulp and paper mills were being
adequately controlled under the CWA permit programs. They contended that tb-
states and EPA regional offices are in fact doing an adequate job regulati
PCB discharges in their NPDES permits.
EPA also received comments that opposed the proposal to eliminate the 3 ppb
limitation, arguing that the current state of regulation by the states is
inadequate to control discharges from pulp and paper mills and therefore a
TSCA effluent limit should be maintained to exclude these activities from the
processing prohibition. These commenters argued that removing this limit
-------
would create a gap in controlling PCB discharges into water.
At this time EPA has not established an effluent guideline for PCBs under
the CWA. Although states have begun to revise their water quality standards
under the Water Quality Act of 1987 for CWA toxic pollutants, this process
ll take longer than the expected 2 years to implement. EPA has considered
s concerns about the adequacy of controls on PCB effluents through
•dividual permits and concluded that it is appropriate to retain a water
discharge limit in the definition of "recycled PCBs" given the present status
of some state NPDES permits and the delays in implementing state revisions of
water quality standards. EPA reached this conclusion in view of the fact that
there is currently no effluent limitation guideline or standard for
discharges of PCBs from pulp and paper mills and in view of the ongoing but
as yet incomplete process in implementing state revision of water quality
standards. Any subsequent PCB discharge standard promulgated under the CWA
would obviate the need for a limitation in this rule, and EPA would revoke
the limitation at that time.
The final rule describes the limit in a manner which requires manufacturers
in the pulp and paper industry who use raw materials contaminated with
Aroclor PCBs to comply with either a concentration or mass-based limit.
Comments on the Uncontrolled Rule and the July 8, 1987 proposal to amend that
rule pointed-, ~*ut the sJwrtcomings in EPA's approach to establishing a v tter
discharge limit solely, as an absolute concentration limit. EPA agrees that
the PCB water discharge limit in this rule should be consistent with mass-
based approaches already used by EPA and state authorities and permit writers
under the CWA.
When EPA established the 3 ppb water discharge limit forled PCBs, the
intent was to control these additional uncontrolled PCBs released into the
environment. The 3 ppb limit represented a level determined by EPA to be a
universally achievable and reliable level of quantitation (LOQ) which would
best ensure, together with the other restrictions in the definition, that no
^reasonable risk of injury to health or environment would be posed by these
nufacturing processes. Under the CWA, discharges are limited by a variety
of technology-based effluent limitations and standards with more stringent
water quality-based standards applied as needed. When EPA promulgated the
Uncontrolled PCBs Rule, the Agency did not intend to create inconsistencies
in the approaches to regulation of discharges.
Comments on the proposed rule show that establishing an equivalent mass
limitation on water discharges from recycled PCBs activities would provide an
equivalent level of protection as the 3 ppb limit. Allowing a mass limitation
would regulate the absolute amount of PCBs added to the environment from a
point source. EPA has considered these comments and decided that as an
alternative to the 3 ppb concentration-based limit, persons may comply with
this concentration limit converted to a mass-based limitation. Conversion
from concentration to mass-based limitations can be accomplished by
multiplying the appropriate subcategory flow factor (average wastewater flow
expressed as kl per kkg product) for a facility by the concentration limit
(expressed in ppb) and an appropriate conversion factor (l.OE-06) to obtain
the amount of PCBs allowed per weight of product (expressed as kg PCBs per
kkg product). The total daily discharge allowance for PCBs would then be
calculated by multiplying the amount of PCBs allowed per weight of product by
the annual average daily production for the facility (expressed as kkg
product per day). Further guidance to convert the concentration-based
standard to the mass-based limitation is available in the public record.
E. Distribution in Commerce and Use of Decontaminated Equipment, Structures,
d Materials
In the July 8, 1987 proposed rule, EPA proposed to exclude from regulation
an additional class of materials contaminated with PCBs at levels below 50
ppm (or the applicable cleanup standard for solid surfaces). Unlike the class
of products discussed earlier in this rule, the PCBs discussed in this
section did not originate from contamination resulting from historic
-------
manufacturing, use, or recycling activities. Rather, the <50 ppm
concentration levels (or the applicable cleanup standards for solid surfaces)
present in these materials are associated with leaks and spills (i.e.
improper disposal) of >50 ppm material. That is, the residual PCBs remain
after proper cleanup of a spill of controlled material.
EPA proposed to formally exclude from the TSCA section 6(e) prohibitions
use and distribution in commerce, certain equipment, structures, and other
materials that have inadvertently become contaminated with PCBs because of
spills from, or proximity to, a PCS Item with PCB concentrations greater than
50 ppm provided that these materials were decontaminated to the specified
level below 50 ppm PCBs in accordance with applicable EPA PCB cleanup
policies at the time of decontamination. Spills in this case must not have
been the result of any intentional discharge of PCBs, and the contamination
must be attributable to PCB Items and activities which are themselves
authorized.
The proposal also excluded from regulation the PCB use prohibition on
materials or equipment which became contaminated with PCBs prior to the
effective date of the section 6(e) bans and which have not undergone
decontamination under any EPA PCB cleanup policy. However, these materials
would have to be decontaminated according to current PCB cleanup policies set
forth, in EPA's nationwide spill cleanu; -policy.
The proposal was not intended to act fs an alternative to the
reclassification provision in 40 CFR Part 761 for PCB Equipment, PCB
Articles, or other PCB Items containing PCBs. The availability of >
decontamination as a means of allowing the further use and distribution in
commerce of PCB Items is limited to the decontamination procedures specified
in 40 CFR 761.79 for PCB Containers and movable equipment in storage areas.
The July, 1987 proposal was intended to merely codify an existing (though not
specifically authorized) practice.
Two commentors agreed with the proposal to allow the distribution in
commerce and processing of equipment and other materials that are adequate'
decontaminated in accordance with spill cleanup policies. One commentor
objected to the terms of the proposal in codified Sec. 761.20(c)(5) arguing
that it could be construed to apply even to the metalworking, machining, or
similar equipment in which used oil with under 50 ppm PCBs is used.
As stated above, this exclusion addresses equipment, structures, and other
materials that have inadvertently become contaminated with PCBs >50 ppm as a
result of a spill and have subsequently been decontaminated according to the
appropriate spill cleanup procedures at the time of decontamination. The
proposed language in Sec. 761.20(c)(5) does not clearly set forth the
Agency's intention that equipment, structures, and other materials covered by
this exception are those which have inadvertently become contaminated with
PCBs above 50 ppm because of spills from, or proximity to, a PCB Item whose
use was authorized. Section 761.20(c)(5) has been modified to be consistent
with this intent.
Since the promulgation of EPA's nationwide PCB Spill Cleanup Policy (52 FR
10688), specific cleanup levels have been established for different types of
spills according to the PCB concentration involved in the spill, the type of
material contaminated, and the spill location. Spills of less than 50 ppm
PCBs are not covered under this policy.
In establishing this cleanup policy for typical PCB spills, EPA recognized
that the risks posed by spills of PCBs vary, depending upon spill location
and the amount of PCBs spilled. The PCB cleanup policy requires cleanup of
PCBs to different levels depending upon spill location, the potential for
exposure to residual PCBs remaining after cleanup, the concentration of the
PCBs initially spilled and the nature and size of the population potentia?
at risk of exposure. Thus, this cleanup policy applies the most stringent ^
requirements for spill cleanup to areas where there is the greatest potentia1
for human exposures to spilled PCBs. Implicitly, the further use, processing,
and distribution in commerce of materials decontaminated in accordance with
the provisions of the nationwide cleanup policy will not present an
unreasonable risk.
ft
-------
Since the effective date of the nationwide cleanup policy (May 4, 1987),
the provisions of the policy have superseded the regional policies previously
in effect. This amendment, of course, excludes from regulation eligible
materials already decontaminated in conformity with regional policies prior
+•0 that date.
. Rulemaking Record
In accordance with the requirements of section 19(a)(3) of TSCA, EPA is
issuing the following list of documents, which constitutes the record of this
final rulemaking. This record includes basic information considered by the
Agency in developing this final rule, including appropriate Federal Register
notices, published and unpublished reports, economic and exposure analyses,
and various communications before the final rule was issued. A full list of
these materials will b'e available on request from EPA's TSCA Assistance
office listed under "FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT." However, any
Confidential Business Information (CBI) that is part of the record for this
rulemaking is not available for public review. A public version of the
record, from which CBI has been deleted, is available for inspection.
A..Previous Rulemaking Record-
(1) Official Rulemaking Record from "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Disposal and Marking Rule," Docket No. OPTS-68005, 43 FR 7150, February 17,
1978.
(2) Official Rulemaking Record from "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions
Rule," 44 FR 31514, May 31, 1979.
(3) Official Rulemaking Record from "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions;
e in Electrical Equipment," Docket No. OPTS-62015, 47 FR 37342, August 25,
32.
(4) Official Rulemaking Record from "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions:
Use in Closed and Controlled Waste Manufacturing Processes." Docket No. OPTS-
62017, 47 FR 46980, October 21, 1982.
(5) Official Rulemaking Record from "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions;
Amendment to Use Authorization for PCB Railroad Transformers." Docket No.
OPTS-62020, 48 FR 124, January 3, 1983.
(6) Official Rulemaking Record for "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions:
Response to Individual and Class Petitions for Exemption." Docket No. OPTS-
66006A, 49 FR 28154, July 10, 1984.
(7) Official Rulemaking Record from "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions;
Exclusions, Exemptions, and Use Authorizations." Docket No. OPTS-62032A, 49
FR 28172, July 10, 1984.
(8) Official Rulemaking Record from "Polychlorinated Biphenyls {PCBs):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions;
Use in Electrical Transformers." Docket No. OPTS-62035D, 50 FR 29170, July
17, 1985.
(9) Official Rulemaking Record from "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions:
Response to Exemption Petitions." Docket No. OPTS-66008E, 51 FR 28556, August
1986.
f
Federal Register Notices
(10) 46 FR 27617, May 20, 1981, USEPA, "Polychlorinated Biphenyls {PCBs);
Manufacture of PCBs in Concentrations Below Fifty Parts Per Million: Possible
Exclusion from Manufacturing Prohibition; Advance Notice of Proposed
-------
Rulemaking.
(11) 44 FR 31514, May 31, 1979, USEPA, "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions."
(12) 44 FR 53438, September 13, 1979, USEPA, "Criteria for Classification
of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices."
(13) 47 FR 47980, October 21, 1982, USEPA, "Polychlorianted Biphenyls
(PCBs): Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use .
Prohibitions: Use in Closed and Controlled Waste Manufacturing Processes."
(14) 47 FR 52066, November 18, 1982, USEPA,* "Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard
Point Source Category Effluent Limitations Guidelines and New Source
Performance Standards; Proposed Rule."
(15) 48 FR 55076, December 8, 1983, USEPA. "Polychlorinated Biphenyls
(PCBs): Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use
Prohibitions: Exclusions, Exemptions, and Use Authorizations: Proposed Rule."
(16) 49 FR 28172, July 10, 1984, USEPA, "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBS):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions:
Exclusions, Exemptions, and Use Authorizations: Final Rule."
(17) 49 FR 28154, July 10, 1984, USEPA, "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs):
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions:
Response to Individual and Class Petitions for Exemptions."
(18> 50 FR 1-9170, July 17, 1985, USEPA, "Polychlorin. -ted Biphenyls in
Electrical Transformers: Final Rule."
(19) 50 FR 49212, November 29, 1985, USEPA, "Hazardous Waste Management
System: Recycled Used Oil Standards: Proposed Rule."
(20) 50 FR 49258, November 29, 1985, USEPA, "Hazardous Waste Management
System; General, Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste: Used Oil;
Proposed Rule."
(21) 50 FR 49164, November 29, 1985, USEPA, "Hazardous Waste Management
System: Burning of Waste Fuel and Used Oil Fuel in Boilers and Industrial
Furnaces."
(22) 51 FR 28556, August 8, 1986, USEPA, "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB
Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibitions:
Response to Exemption Petitions."
(23) 51 FR 41900, November 19, 1986, USEPA, "Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste: Used Oil: Notice Announcing Decision Not To Adopt Proposed
Rule Listing Used Oil as a Hazardous Waste.
(24) 52 FR 10688, April 2, 1987, USEPA, "Polychlorinated Biphenyls Spill
Cleanup Policy."
(25) 52 FR 25838, July 8, 1987, USEPA, "Polychlorinated Biphenyls;
Exclusions, Exemptions and Use Authorizations; Proposed Rule."
C. Support Documents
(26) August 7, 1986 Settlement Agreement filed with United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in Docket Nos. 84-1481 and 85-
1118. .
(27) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Versar, Inc., "Assessment of Exposures Resulting
from Recycle/Reuse of Used Oil Containing PCBs at Levels Less Than 50 PPM"
(January, 1987).
(28) USEPA, OPTS, ETD, Putnam, Hayes and Barlett, Inc., "PCB Rule Revision,
Cost Effectiveness Analyses and Estimates of Exposed Population" (March,
1987).
(29) USEPA, OTS Versar, Inc., "Development of a Study Plan for Definition
of PCBs Usage, Wastes, and Potential Substitution in the Investment Casting
Industry." (January, 1976).
(30) USEPA, OPTS, ETD, ICF, Inc. "Costs of Prohibiting Reclaimed Inv«str
Casting Wax Containing PCBs Below 50 PPM" (DRAFT) (September, 1985).
(31) USEPA, OPTS, EED, US Congress House of Reps., January 17, 1985 latter
from Honorable Ralph Regula to William Prendergast, EPA, forwarding January
10, 1985 letter from constituent, Charles LeBeau, Cambridge Mill Product*,
Inc.
(32) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from John A. Moore, EPA to Honorable Ralph S.
-------
Regula (January 3, 1985).
(33) USEPA, OPTS, BED, "Potential PCDF Formation during Combustion of Used
Oil Containing Low Levels of PCBs."
(34) USEPA, OPTS, EED, "Exposure Estimates for the Amendment to the PCB
^gulation." (November 20, 1986).
(35) USEPA, OPTS, EED, "Exposure Estimates for the Amendment to the PCB
•regulation" (December 23, 1986).
(36) USEPA, OPTS, EED, "A Manual for the Preparation of Engineering
Assessments" (September 1, 1984).
(37) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from C. Nelson Schlatter, Edmont Corporation
to Dr. John Moore, EPA (October 15, 1984).
(38) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Dr. John A. Moore, EPA to C. Nelson
Schlatter, Edmont Corporation (November 15, 1984).
(39) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Oswald Schindler, Intermarket Latex Inc.
to Martin Halper, EPA (November 13, 1984).
(40) USEPA, OPTS, ETD, "Addendum to the Heat Transfer and Hydraulic Systems
RIA" (undated).
(41) USEPA, OPTS, ETD, "PCB Glove Requirement Costs: Present Value"
(February, 1987).
(42) USEPA, OW, PCB Information Survey, deink Direct Dischargers by Region
and NrDES Permit Numbers (November, 1984).
(43) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Richard S. Wasserstrom, American Paper
Institute, Inc. to Alan Carpien, EPA (October 11, 1984).
(44) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Richard J. Kissel, Attorney for ADCI and
.OMC. to John A. Moore, EPA (October 24, 1984).
(45) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Alan Carpien, EPA to Richard J. Kissel,
Attorney for ADCI and OMC (November 20, 1984).
(46) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Timothy S. Hardy, Attorney for CMA to
Alan Carpien, EPA (November 27, 1984).
(47) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Richard S. Wasserstrom, API to Alan
Irpien, EPA (August 20, 1985).
(48) USEPA, OPTS, EED, letter from Timothy S. Hardy, Attorney for CMA, to
Alan Carpien, EPA (August 28, 1985).
(49) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Jeffrey C. Fort, Attorney for ADCI and
OMC to Alan Carpien, EPA (November 22, 1985).
(50) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter From Suzanne Rudzinski, EPA to Timothy S.
Hardy, Attorney for CMA (January 21, 1986).
(51) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Robert J. Fensterheim, CMA to Suzanne
Rudzinski, EPA (March 19, 1985).
(52) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Robert J. Fensterheim, CMA to Suzanne
Rudzinski, EPA, June 17, 1985).
(53) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Suzanne Rudzinski, EPA to Robert J.
Fensterheim, CMA (July 17, 1985).
(54) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Toni K. Allen, Attorney for USWAG, to
Lee M. Thomas, Administrator, EPA (August 12, 1986).
(55) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from John A. Moore, EPA to Toni K. Allen,
Attorney for USWAG (September 9, 1986).
(56) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Suzanne Rudzinski, EPA to George Fekete,
Jr., Pennwalt Corporation (October 22, 1986).
<57) USEPA, OPTS, "BED, Letter to Suzanne Rudzinski, EPA from Paulette Vest,
Vest Metal Company (October 22, 1986).
(58) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Letter from Suzanne Rudzinski and John J. Neylan
III, EPA to Lt. General Vincent M. Russo, Defense Logistics Agency (August
28, 1986).
(59) NIOSH (1977), Criteria for recommended standard . . . occupational
posure to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). U.S. Department of Health,
_F-4Ucation, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Center for Disease Control,
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHEW (NIOSH)
Publication No. 77-225.
(60) USEPA, OSW, List of Facilities Who Burn Waste Fuel—Data Request for
OPPI/IMS (August 10, 1987).
(61) Lake Michigan Toxic Pollutant Control/Reduction Strategy (Final
-------
Draft), May 9, 1986.
(62) USEPA, OW, Development Document for Proposed Effluent Limitation
Guidelines and Standards for Control of Polychlorinated Biphenyls in the
Deink Subcategory of the Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Point Source Category
(October, 1982).
(63) USEPA, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati
OH, "Test Method—The Determination of Polychlorinated Biphenyls in
Transformer Fluid and Waste Oils" (September 1982).
(64) USEPA, OSW, TAB, Letter from Alvia Gaskill, RTI to Denise A. Zabinski,
EPA (November 5, 1987).
(65) USEPA, OSW, "A Risk Assessment of Waste Oil Burning in Boilers and
Space Heaters" (January 1984).
(66) USEPA, OSW, EAB, Temple, Barker and Sloane, Inc., "Background
Document: Regulatory Impact Analysis of Proposed Standards for the Management
of Used Oil" (November 1985).
(67) USEPA, OAQPS, "Waste Oil Combustion Cancer Risk Assessment" (October
1987).
(68) USDOJ/US Court of Appeals, Letter from I.J. Grishaw to G.A. Fisher
(August 8, 1986).
(69) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Memo to Rulemaking Record from R. La Shere re:
Meeting wit.lv"'7. Gendre=»v. of Pioneer Fuel (September 10, 1987). <
(70) USEPA,. OPTS, EED, Letter from D.M. Keehner, EPA to Mark Van Putten,
National Wildlife Federation (September 11, 1987).
(71) USEPA, OPTS, EED, Memo to Rulemaking Record from Jane Kim, "1984
Survey of State and Regional Permitting Personnel Concerning Limitations on
PCB Discharges by Deinking Mills." (October 22, 1987).
(72) USEPA, OW, ITD, Memo from Wendy Smith, to Tom Simons, EED, OPTS, USEPA
re: Office of Water Information for Amendments to Uncontrolled Rule (January,
1988).
(73) Ft. Howard Paper Company, Copies of Discharge Monitoring Report Forms
for Ft. Howard Paper Company in Muskogee, OK, from January 1985 to May 19P
(74) Ft. Howard Paper Company, Whole Fish Tissue PCB Study, Ft. Howard
Corporation, Muskogee, OK. NPDES Permit No. OK 0034321. Final Report
(December 10, 1987).
(75) Ft. Howard Paper Company, Expired and Current NPDES Discharge Permits
for Ft. Howard Paper Corporation, Muskogee, OK.
(76) State of Wisconsin, Dept. of Natural Resources, Ft. Howard Paper
Company, Green Bay, WI, NPDES Discharge Monitoring from January 1982 to
October 1987, WPDES Permit N|Z WI-0001848.
(77) USEPA, ORD, OHEA, Drinking Water Criteria Document for Polychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCB's) May, 1987. Prepared for ODW, USEPA ECOA-CIN-414.
(78) USEPA, Region VIII, Comments on the Draft Final Regulation, Titled
Polychlorinated Biphenyls; Exclusions, Exemptions, and Use Authorizations
Including Information on Startup of Coal Fired Power Plants (March 15, 1988)
(79) USEPA, OTS, EED,CRB, Response to Comments on the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking for Amendments to the Uncontrolled PCB Rule (.June 1988).
(80) USEPA, OW, EGD, Development Document for Effluent Limitations
Guidelines and Standards for the Pulp, Paper, and Paper Board and the
Builders' Paper and Board Mills, Point Source Categories. EPA 440/1-82/025,
October 1982.
(81) EPA, OTS, Guidance for Conversion of Water Discharge Concentration-
based Standards to Mass Based Limitations for PCBs under TSCA (May 1988).
V. Other Regulatory Requirements
A. Executive Order 12291
Under Executive Order 12291 issued February 17, 1982, EPA must judge
whether a rule is a "major rule," and therefore, subject to the requirement
that a Regulatory Impact Analysis be prepared. EPA has determined that this
final rule is not a "major rule" because it does not meet the criteria set
forth in section l(b) of the Executive Order.
-------
The effect on the economy will be the avoidance of significant costs which
would otherwise be incurred if EPA maintained the existing use authorizations
for hydraulic and heat transfer systems, which include the Viton glove
requirement. Likewise, .the rule avoids the substantial costs associated with
maintaining existing prohibitions of activities involving products containing
w. levels (under 50 ppm) of PCB contamination.
No significant increases in prices are expected to occur as a result of
this rule. No significant adverse effects, are expected on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of the
United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
This rule was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review as required by Executive Order 12291.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (the Act) (15 U.S.C. 601 et.
seq., Pub. L. 96-534, September 19, 1980), requires EPA to prepare and make
available for comment a regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with
rulemaking. The initial regulatory flexibility analysis described the impact
of the proposed rule on small business entities. Section 605(b) of the Act
"shall not apply to ar.y proposed or final rule if the Agency • srtifies that
the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities."
In accordance with secti'on 605 (b) of the Act, EPA certifies that this rule
will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
businesses. The rule is, in fact, nondiscriminatory in its impact on business
entities, and the impact on all business entities is generally to exclude
from regulation activities currently prohibited under TSCA section 6(e), and
not previously authorized, exempted, or excluded by regulation. Small
businesses will share equally in the benefits of this rule, including the
\imination of the Viton glove requirement in the use authorization for
draulic and heat transfer systems, and the general exclusion for products
contaminated with PCBs at levels below 50 ppm. Any impact on small business
entities is not appreciably greater than the impact already being borne by
these entities under the existing prohibition on burning offspecification
used oil in nonindustrial boilers. This rule will implement the limited
restrictions on burning PCB-containing used oil (under 50 ppm) in a manner
such that any additional economic burdens will be borne primarily by the
marketers of the used oil.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., authorizes the
Director of OMB to review certain information collection requests by Federal
agencies. Under OMB Control Number 2070-0008, OMB has approved an information
collection request submitted by EPA in connection with the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements which facilitate the implementation and enforcement of
the Uncontrolled PCBs Rule. Further, under OMB Control Number 2050-0047, OMB
has approved the information collection requirements (including invoice
shipping papers, certifications, and used oil analysis) which facilitate the
implementation of the prohibition on burning certain used oil fuels in
nonindustrial boilers. OMB has also approved the provisions of this final
rule, which requires that information related to PCBs in used oil fuels be
added to the existing information collections previously approved by OMB.
'st of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 761
Environmental protection, Hazardous materials, Labeling, Polychlorinated
biphenyls, Reporting and Recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 8, 1988.
-------
Lee M. Thomas,
Administrator .
Therefore, 40 CFR Part 761 is amended as follows:
PART 761 — [AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 761 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605, 2607, and 2611; Subpart G also issued under 15
U.S.C. 2614, and 2616.
2. In Sec. 761.1 by adding paragraph (f ) (4) to read as follows:
Sec. 761.1 Applicability.
*****
* * *
(4) Except as provided ii*-?.^c. 761. 2/K (d) an* (e) , persons who process,
distribute in commerce, or use/products containing excluded PCB products as
defined in Sec. 761.3, are exempt from the requirements of Subpart B of this
Part.
3. In Sec. 761.3 by adding and alphabetically inserting a definition for
"Excluded PCB products," "Market/Marketers," and "Quantifiable Level/Level of
Detection," and by revising the definitions for "Qualified Incinerator" and
"Recycled PCBs" to read as follows:
Sec. 761.3 Definitions.
*****
"Excluded PCB products" means PCB materials which appear at concentrations
less than 50 ppm, including but not limited to:
(1) Non-Aroclor inadvertently generated PCBs as a byproduct or impurity
resulting from a chemical manufacturing process.
(2) Products contaminated with Aroclor or other PCB materials from historic
PCB uses (investment casting waxes are one example) .
(3) Recycled fluids arid/or equipment contaminated during use involving the
products described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this definition (heat
transfer and hydraulic fluids and equipment and other electrical equipment
components and fluids are examples) .
(4) Used oils, provided that in the cases of paragraphs (1) through (4) of
this definition:
(i) The products or source of the products containing < 50 ppm
concentration PCBs were legally manufactured, processed, distributed in
commerce, or used before October 1, 1984.
(ii) The products or source of the products containing < 50 ppm
concentrations PCBs were legally manufactured, processed, distributed in
commerce, or used, i.e., pursuant to authority granted by EPA regulation, by
exemption petition, by settlement agreement, or pursuant to other Agency-
approved programs;
(iii) The resulting PCB concentration (i.e. below 50 ppm) is not a result
of dilution, or leaks and spills of PCBs in concentrations over 50 ppm.
*****
"Market/Marketers" means the processing or distributing in commerce, or the
person who processes or distributes in commerce, used oil fuels to burners or
other marketers, and may include the generator of the fuel if it markets the
fuel directly to the burner.
-------
"Qualified incinerator" means one of the following:
(1.) An incinerator approved under the provisions of Sec. 761.70. Any level
PCB concentration can be destroyed in an incinerator approved under Sec.
1.70.
(2) A high efficiency boiler which complies with the criteria of Sec.
761.60(a)(2)(iii)(A), and for which the operator has given written notice to
the appropriate EPA Regional Administrator in accordance with the
notification requirements for the burning of mineral oil dielectric fluid
under Sec. 761.60(a)(2)(iii)(B).
(3) An incinerator approved under section 3005(c) of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6925(c)) (RCRA).
(4) Industrial furnaces and boilers which are identified in 40 CFR 260.10
and 40 CFR 266.41(b) when operating at their normal operating temperatures
(this prohibits feeding fluids, above the level of detection, during either
startup or shutdown operations).
"Quantifiable Level/Level of Detection" means 2 micrograms per gram from
any resolvable gas chromatographic peak, i.e. 2 ppm.
*****
"Recycled PCBs" means those PCBs which appear in the processing of paper
products or asphalt roofing materials from PCB-contaminated raw materials.
Processes which recycle PCBs must meet the following requirements:
(1) There are no detectable concentrations of PCBs in asphalt roofing
material products leaving the processing site.
(2) The concentration of PCBs in paper products leaving any manufacturing
site processing paper products, or in paper products imported into the United
ates, must have an annual average of less than 25 ppm with a 50 ppm
ximum.
(3) The release of PCBs at the point at which emissions are vented to
ambient air must be less than 10 ppm.
(4) The amount of Aroclor PCBs added to water discharged from an asphalt
roofing processing site must at all times be less than 3 micrograms per liter
(micro-g/L) for total Aroclors (roughly 3 parts per billion (3 ppb)). Water
discharges from the processing of paper products must at all times be less
than 3 micrograms per liter (micro-g/1) for total Aroclors (roughly 3 ppb),
or comply with the equivalent mass-based limitation.
(5) Disposal of any other process wastes at concentrations of 50 ppm or
greater must be in accordance with Subpart D of this part.
4. In Sec. 761.20 by revising paragraph (a) and the introductory text of
paragraph (c), and by adding paragraphs (c) (5) and (e), and the OMB control
number to read as follows:
Sec. 761.20 Prohibitions. .
*****
(a) No persons may use any PCB, or any PCB Item regardless of
concentration, in any manner other than in a totally enclosed manner within
the United States unless authorized under Sec. 761.30, except that:
(1) An authorization is not required to use those PCBs or PCB Items which
Consist of excluded PCB products as defined in Sec. 761.3.
(2) An authorization is not required to use those PCBs or PCB Items
_F.sulting from an excluded manufacturing process or recycled PCBs as defined
in Sec. 761.3, provided all applicable conditions of Sec. 761.l(f) are met.
(3) An authorization is not required to use those PCB Items which contain
or whose surfaces have been in contact with excluded PCB products as defined
in Sec. 761.3.
(4) An authorization is not required to apply sewage sludges, contaminated
-------
with PCBs below 50 ppm, to land when regulated by authorities under the Clean*
Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
(c) No persons may process or distribute in commerce any PCB, or any PCB
Item regardless of concentration, for use within the United States or for
export from the United States without an exemption, except that an exemption
is not required to process or distribute in commerce PCBs or PCB Items
resulting from an excluded manufacturing process as defined in Sec. 761.3, or
to process or distribute in commerce recycled PCBs as defined in Sec. 761.3,
or to process or distribute in commerce excluded PCB products as defined in
Sec. 761.3, provided that all applicable conditions of Sec. 761.1(f) are met.
In addition, the activities described in paragraphs (c) (1) through (5) of
this section may also be conducted without an exemption, under the conditions
specified therein.
*****
(5) Equipment, structures, or other materials that were contaminated with
PCBs t^.-cause of spills from, or proximity tatr/* PCB Ite- />50 prn, and which
are not' otherwise authorized for use or distribution in commerce under this
part, may be distributed in commerce, provided that these.materials were
decontaminated in accordance with applicable EPA PCB spill cleanup policies
in effect at the time of the decontamination or, if not previously
decontaminated, at the time of the distribution in commerce.
***** •
(e) In addition to any applicable requirements under 40 CFR Part 266,
Subpart E, marketers and burners of used oil who market (process or ,
distribute in commerce) for energy recovery, used oil containing any
quantifiable level of PCBs are subject to the following requirements:
(1) Restrictions on marketing. Used oil containing any quantifiable level
of PCBs (2 ppm) may be marketed only to:
(i) Qualified incinerators as defined in 40 CFR 761.3.
(ii) Other marketers identified in 40 CFR 266.41(a)(1).
(iii) Burners identified in 40 CFR 266.41(b). Only burners in the
automotive industry may burn used oil generated from automotive sources in
used oil-fired space heaters provided the provisions of 40 CFR
266.41(b)(2)(iii) (A), (B) and (C) are met. The Regional Administrator may
grant a variance for a boiler that does not meet the 40 CFR 266.41(b)
criteria after considering the criteria listed in 40 CFR 260.32 (a) through
(f). The applicant must address the relevant criteria contained in 40 CFR
260.32 (a) through (f) in an application to the Regional Administrator.
(2) Testing of used oil fuel. Used oil to be burned for energy recovery is
presumed to contain quantifiable levels (2 ppm) of PCB unless the marketer
obtains analyses (testing) or other information that the used oil fuel does
not contain quantifiable levels of PCBs.
(i) The person who first claims that a used oil fuel does not contain
quantifiable level (2 ppm) PCB must obtain analyses or other information to
support that claim.
(ii) Testing to determine the PCB concentration in used oil may be
conducted on individual samples, or in accordance with the testing procedures
described in Sec. 761.60(g)(2). However, for purposes of this part, if any
PCBs at a concentration of 50 ppm or greater have been added to the contai
or equipment, then the total container contents must be considered as havi
a PCB concentration of 50 ppm or greater for purposes of complying with the
disposal requirements of this part.
(iii) Other information documenting that the used oil fuel does not contain
quantifiable levels (2 ppm) of PCBs may consist of either personal, special
knowledge of the source and composition of the used oil, or a certification
-------
from the person generating the used oil claiming that the oil contains no
detectable PCBs.
(3) Restrictions on burning, (i) Used oil containing any quantifiable
levels of PCB may be burned for energy recovery only in the combustion
facilities identified in paragraph (e)(l) of this section when such
xcilities are operating at normal operating temperatures (this prohibits
aeding these fuels during either startup or shutdown operations). Owners and
operators of such facilities are "burners" of used oil fuels.
(ii) Before a burner accepts from a marketer the first shipment of used oil
fuel containing detectable PCBs (2 ppm), the burner must provide the marketer
a one-time written and signed notice certifying that:
(A) The burner has complied with any notification requirements applicable
to "qualified incinerators" (Sec. 761.3) or to "burners" regulated under 40
CFR Part 266, Subpart E.
(B) The burner will burn the used oil only in a combustion facility
identified in paragraph (e)(1) of this section and identify the class of
burner he qualifies.
(4) .Recordkeeping requirements. The following recordkeeping requirements
are in addition to the recordkeeping requirements for marketers found in 40
CFR 266.43(b)(6) (i) and (ii), and for burners found in 40 CFR 266.44(e).
(i) Marketej j. Marketers who first claim that the r'-'sd oil fv •?_ contains no
detectable PCBs must include among the records requir^c". by 40 Cri<
266.43(b)(6)(i), copies of the analysis or other information documenting his
claim, and he must include among the records required by 40 CFR
266.43(b)(6)(ii), a copy of each certification notice received or prepared
relating to transactions involving PCB-containing used oil.
(ii) Burners. Burners must include among the records required by 40 CFR
266.44(e), a copy of each certification notice required by paragraph
(e)(3)(iii) of this section that he sends to a marketer.
Approved by the office of Management of Budget under OMB control number
J50-0047)
Sec. 761.30 [Amended] » ' .
5. In Sec. 761.30 by removing paragraphs (d) (6) and (7) and paragraphs (e)
(6) and (7).
6. In Sec. 761.30, in the introductory text of paragraphs (d) and (e), by
revising the reference "paragraphs (d) (1) through (7)" to read "paragraphs
(d) (1) through (5)" and the reference "paragraphs (e) (1) through (7)" to
read "paragraphs (e) (1) through (5)" respectively.
[FR Doc. 88-14291 Filed 6-24-88; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
-------
Monday
September 23, 1991
40 GFR Parts 261 and 266
9
-------
48000 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday, September 23. 1991 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 261 and 266
[FRL-3974-4; EPA/OSW-FR-91-023]
Hazardous Waste Management
System; General; Identification and
Listing of Hazardous Waste; Used Oil
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: This notice announces the
availability of additional data on the
composition of used oil and used oil
residuals. EPA will consider the new
data in making its final decision
whether or not to list some or all used
oils as hazardous waste, as proposed in
November, 1985. Also, based on a
portion of the new data, EPA is today
considering amending its regulations
under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) by listing as
hazardous four wastes from the
reprocessing and re-refining of used oil.
Finally, today's notice provides
additional information on the proposed
used oil management standards for
recycled oil under section 3014 of RCRA.
Public comment is requested on the
proposed used oils and residuals to be
listed as hazardous, on a number of
specific aspects of the newly available
data, on specific aspects of the Agency's
approach for used oil management
standards, and on several aspects of the
hazardous waste identification program
as related to used oil.
DATES: Comments will be accepted until
November 7,1991.
ADDRESSES: The public must send an
original and two copies of their
comments to EPA RCRA Docket [OS-
305), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20460, Place the Docket Number F-
91-UOLP-FFFFF on your comments.
The EPA RCRA Docket is located in
room 2427, 401 M Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20460. The docket is
open from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except for Federal
holidays. The public must make an
appointment to review docket materials
by calling (202] 260-9327. The docket
numbers F-85-UO-FFFFF and F-91
ULOP-FFFFF are available for the
public review. The public may copy a
maximum of 100 pages from any
regulatory document at no cost.
Additional copies cost $.20 per page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For general information contact the
RCRA Hotline, Office of Solid Waste,
U.S. Environmental Protection .Agency,
401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC
20460; Telephone 800-124-9346 (toll free)
or 703-920-9810 locally. To obtain
copies of the supplemental proposal,
contact EPA RCRA Docket, at 202-260-
9327 or Regulatory Development Branch
at 202-260-8551. If no answer, please
leave your name and address to receive
a copy of the supplemental proposal.
For information on specific aspects of
this rule, contact Ms. Rajni D. Joglekar,
U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Telephone (202)
260-3516.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATSON:
I. Background
A. Regulation of Hazardous Waste
B. Used Oil Recycling Act
C. Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments
D. Decision Not to List Recycled Used Oil
E. Recent Agency Activities
F. Purpose of Today's Notice
II. Incentives for Promoting the Collection
and Recycling of Do-It-Yourselfer-
Generated Used Oil and Used Oil
Procurement Activity
A. DIY-Generated Used Oil
1. Acceptance of DIY Used Oil and Oil
Filters by Used Oil Generators and
Retailers
2. Acceptance of DIY Oil by Used Oil
Recyclers, Re-refiners, and Refiners
3. Target System for Lube Oil Producers
4. Used Oil Credit System
5. Deposit-Refund System for Used Oil
B. Used Oil Procurement Activity
III. Uoed Oil Identification and
Characterization
A. Used Oils to be Evaluated At The Point
Of Generation
B. Data Collection
C. Point of Generation Data
1. Stratified Random Sampling Plan
2. Analytical Approaches Used
3. New Methods Under Consideration for
Used Oil
4. Coramenter Submitted Analytical Dala
5. Results
a. Compositional Analysis
b. Toxicity Characteristic Analysis
D. Used Oil Stratification Based on
Hazardousness and Listing Options
1. Listing Options Overview
1 2. Analysis of New Options
IV. Oily Wastewaters
V. Used Oil Mixtures To Be Evaluated
A. Mixtures of All Used Oils and
Hazardous Waste
B. Mixtures of Listed Used Oil and Other
Materials
1. Applicability To Listed and
Characteristic Used Oils
2. Applicability of the Mixture Rule to
Specific Solid Wastes
a. Industrial Wipers
b. Sorptive Minerals
C. Oil Filters
D. Mixtures of Small Quantities of Listed
Used Oil and Solid Waste
E. Mixtures of Non-listed, Hazardous Used
Oil and Solid Waste
1. Shock Absorbers
2. Request for Comment on Other
VI. Derived-From Rule ,
A. Applicability to Use4 Oil Fuel Residuals
1. Residuals From Burning Off-
Specification and Specification Used Oil
Fuel ;
2. Co-firing Specification Used Oil Fuel
With Fossil Fuels or Virgin Fuel Oils
B. Applicability to Used Oil Reintroduced
in Petroleum Refinery Processes
VII. Re-processing and Re-refining Residuals
A. Residuals as Related to Used Oil
B. Re-refining and Reprocessing Waste
Streams
C. Re-refining and Reprocessing Data
Availability
D. Listing of Residuals
1. Constituents of Concern
2. Fate and Transport of Toxic Constituents
in the Environment
3. Potential for Environmental Hazard
VIII. The Agency's General Approach to
Used Oil Management Standards
A. Potential Hazards of Used Oil
B. The Basic Approach
1. Some level of control may be necessary
for all used oils, whether they are
identified as hazardous or not.
2. Used oil handlers should be regulated
under one set of management standards
to the extent possible.
3. Used oil standards should be developed
and applied in a manner that allows for
full consideration of recycling impacts.
C. Phased Regulatory Approach
D. § 3014(a) Used Oil Management
Standards Based on a Presumption of
Recycling
1. Use of § 3014(a) Standards to Control
Used Oil Management
2. Basis for Presumption
3. Rebuttal of Recycling Presumption'
E. Controls on the Disposal of Used Oil1
1. Demonstration Before Disposal
a. Testing for Hazardousness
b. Control of Nonhazardous Used Oil
Disposal
2, Disposal Guidelines
3. Banning All Used Oil Disposal on Land
F. Other General Changes From the 1985
Proposed Rule
1. Modification of Current Exemption for
Characteristic Used Oil To Be Recycled
2. Application of the 1,000 ppm Halogen
Rebuttable Presumption to All Used Oils
3. Options for Regulation of Used Oil
Generators
4. Dust Suppression/Road Oiling
5. Proposed Exemption for Primary Oil
Refiners
6. Underground Storage Tanks
7. Applicability of SPCCRequirements
8. Accumulation Limit for Used Oil Storage
IX. .Other Specific Phase I Management
Standards
A. Applicability
1. Rebuttable Presumption
2. Mixtures of Used Oil and Absorbent
Materials
3. Reclamation of Used Oils Containing
CFCs
4. Oil/Water Mixtures
5. Used Oil Filters
6. Used Oil Used as a Fuel in Incinerator!,
and Municipal Solid Waste Combustors
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 5,6, No. 184 /Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules,
48001
B. Generator Requirements
1. Storage in Containers and Tanks
a. Storage in Containers
b. Storage in Aboveground Tanks
c. Storage in Underground Tanks
2. Release Detection and Cleanup Response
a. Detection and Cleanup of Releases and
Leaks During Storage and Transfer
b. Generator Spill Clean-up Requirements
and CERCLA Liability
3. Generator Identification (ID) Numbers
4. Generator tracking of Used Oil
Shipments Off-Site
5. Generator Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements
C. Transporter Requirements
1. Transporter Storage Requirements
a. Storage in Containers
b. Storage in Aboveground and
Underground Tanks
2. Transporter Discharge Cleanup
3. Transporter Tracking of Used Oil
4. Transporter Recordkeeping and
Reporting Requirements
D. Used Oil Recycling Facilities
1, Recycler Storage
a. Container Storage
b, Aboveground Tank Storage
c. Underground Tank Storage
d. Storage in Surface Impoundments
2. Recycler Tracking of Used Oil
3. Recycler Release Response and Cleanup
4. Recycler Closure and Financial
Responsibility
5. Recycler Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements
a. Recordkeeping
b. Reporting
6. Analytical Requirements
7. Recycler Permits
E. Used Ojl Marketers
F, Burners of Specification Used Oil
G. Burners of Off-Specification Used Oil
1. Burner Storage
2. Burner Analysis Requirements
3. Space Heaters
4. Burner Permitting and Corrective Action
H. Facilities Using Distillation Bottoms or
Baghouse Dust to Produce Asphalt
Products
I. Road Oilers
J. Disposal Facilities
X. Economic Impact Screening Analysis
Pursuant to Executive Order 12291
A. Scope and Approach for Impact
Screening
B. Section 3014 Mahagement Standards for
Recycled Used Oil
1. Background Assumptions and Regulatory
Options Analyzed for Phase I
Management Standards
2. Existing (Baseline) Regulations and
Practices that Limit Incremental Impacts
of Phase I Management Standards
3. Summary of Potentially Affected
Activities and Facilities Under Phase I
Management Standards With No Small
Business Generator Exemption
4, Summary of Potentially Affected
Facilities Given a Small Business
Generator Exemption
C. Listing and Related and Disposal
Options
1. Ban on Road Oiling
2. Ban on Land Disposal
3. Listing Processing and Re-refining
Residuals
4. Regulation of Used Oil Distillation
Bottoms
a. Option I: Distillation Bottoms Listed as
Hazardous Waste
b, Option II: Distillation Bottoms Regulated
as Recycled Used Oil
S. Residuals Derived From Burning Used Oil
D. Summary of Cost and Economic Impacts
1. National Costs
2. Facility- and Sector-Specific Costs
XI. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
XII. Paperwork Reduction Act
Appendix A: Status of Proposed Provisions
I. Background
A. Regulation of Hazardous Waste
On December 18,1978, EPA initially
proposed guidelines and regulations for
the management of hazardous wastes as
well as specific rules for the
identification and listing df hazardous
wastes under Section 3001 of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) (43 FR 58946). At that time,
EPA proposed to list waste lubricating
oil and waste hydraulic and cutting oill
as hazardous wastes on the basis of
their toxicity. In addition, the Agency
proposed recycling regulations to
regulate (1) the incineration or burning
of used lubricating, hydraulic,
transformer, transmission, or cutting oil
that was hazardous and (2) the use of
waste oils in a manner that constituted
disposal.2
In the May 19,1980 regulations (45 FR
33084), EPA decided to defer
promulgation of the recycling
regulations for waste oils in order to
consider fully whether waste- and use-
specific standards may be implemented
in lieu of imposing the full set of subtitle
C regulations on potentially recoverable
and valuable materials. At the same
time, EPA deferred the listing of waste
oil for disposal so that the entire waste
oil issue could be addressed at one time.
Under the May 19,1980 regulation,
however, any .waste oil exhibiting one of
the characteristics of hazardous waste
(ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and
toxicity) that was disposed, or
accumulated, stored, or treated prior to
disposal, became regulated as a
hazardous waste subject to all
applicable subtitle C regulations.
B. Used Oil Recycling Act
In an effort to encourage the recycling
of used oil and, in recognition of the
1 The term "waste oil" includes both used and
unused oils that may no longer be used for their
original purpose.
B "Use in a manner constituting disposal" means
Hie placement of hazardous waste directly onto the
land in a manner constituting disposal or the use of
the solid waste to produce products that are applied
to or placed on the land or are otherwise contained
in products that are applied to Or placed on the land
(40 CFR 281.2(c)(l)). ,
potential hazards posed by its
mismanagement, Congress passed the
Used Oil Recycling Act (UORA) on
October 15,1980 (Pub. L. 96-463). UORA
defined used oil as "any oil which has
been refined from crude oil, used, and as
a result of such use, contaminated by
physical or chemical impurities." Among
other provisions, UORA required the
Agency to make a determination as to
the hazardousness of used oil and report
the findings to Congress with a detailed
statement of the data and other
information upon which the
determination was based. In addition,
the Agency was to establish
performance standards and other
requirements under section 7 of UORA
as "may be necessary to protect the
public health and the environment from
hazards associated with recycled oil" as
long as such regulations "do not
discourage the recovery or recycling of
used oil." These provisions are now
included in section 3014 of RCRA.
In January 1981, EPA submitted to
Congress the used oil report mandated
by section 8 of the UORA.3 In the report,
EPA indicated its intention to list both
used and unused waste oil as hazardous
under section 3001 of RCRA based oh
the presence of a number of toxicants in
crude or refined oil (e.g.t benzene,
naphthalene, and phenols), as well as
the presence of contaminants in used oil
as a result of use [e.g., lead, chromium,
and cadmium). In addition, the report
cited the environmental and human
health threats posed by these waste oils,
including the potential threat of
rendering ground water unpotable
through contamination.
C. Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments
On November 8,1984, the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA)
were signed into law. In addition to
many other requirements, HSWA
mandated that the protection of human
health and the environment was to be of
primary concern in the regulation of
hazardous waste. Specific to used oil,
the Administrator was required to
"promulgate regulations * * * as may
be necessary to protect human health
and the environment from hazards
associated with recycled oil. In
developing such regulations, the
Administrator shall conduct an analysis
of the economic impact of the
regulations on the oil recycling industry.
The Administrator shall ensure that
such regulations do not discourage the
3 Report to Congress: Listing of Waste Oil as a
Hazardous Waste Pursuant to section (8)(2), Pub. L.
96-463; U.S. EPA, 1981.
-------
48002 Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday. September 23, 1991 /Proposed.
recovery or recycling of used oil
consistent with the protection of human
health and the environment." (Emphasis
added to highlight HSWA language
amending RCRA section 3014(a) (see
section 242, Pub. L. 98-616}.) This altered
EPA's mandate with respect to the
regulation of used oil by requiring that
protection of human health and
environment be a prime consideration,
even if such regulation may tend to
discourage the recovery or recycling of
used oil.
HSWA required EPA to propose
whether to identify or list used
automobile and track crankcase oil by
November 8,1985, and to make a final
determination as to whether to identify
or list any or all used oils by November
8,1986. On November 29,1985 (50 FR
49258), EPA proposed to list all used oils
as hazardous waste, including
petroleum-derived and synthetic oils,
based on the presence of toxic
constituents at levels of concern from
adulteration during and after use. Also
on November 29,1985, the Agency
proposed management standards for
recycled used oil (50 FR 49212) and
issued final regulations, incorporated at
40 CFR part 266, subpart E, prohibiting
the burning of off-specification used oil 4
in non-industrial boilers and furnaces
(50 FR 49164). Marketers of used oil fuel
and industrial burners of off-
specification fuel are required to notify
EPA of their activities and to comply
with certain notice and recordkeeping
requirements. Used oils that meet the
fuel oil specification are exempt from
most of the 40 CFR part 266, subpart E
regulations.
On March 10,1986 (51 FR 8206), the
Agency published a supplemental notice
requesting comments on additional
aspects of the proposed listing of used
oil as hazardous. In particular,
commenters to the November 29,1985
proposal suggested that EPA consider a
regulatory option of only listing used oil
as a hazardous waste when disposed,
while promulgating special management
standards for used oil that is recycled.
The supplemental notice also contained
a request for comments on additional
issues related to the "mixture rule" (40
CFR 261.3(a)(2)(iii)), on test methods for
determining halogen levels in used oils,
and on new data on the composition of
used oil and used oil processing
residuals.
* Used Oil that exceeds any of the following
specification levels is considered to be "off-
specification" used oil under 40 CFR 268.40(e}:
Arsenic—5 ppm. Cadmium—2 ppm, Chromium—10
ppm. Lead—100 ppm. Flash Point—100 "F minimum,
Total Halogens—4,000 ppm.
D. Decision Not to List Recycled Used
Oil
On November 19,1986, EPA issued a
decision not to list as a hazardous waste
used oil that is being recycled (51 FR
41900). At that time, it was the Agency's
belief that the stigmatic effects
associated with a hazardous waste
listing might discourage recycling of
used oil, thereby resulting in increased
disposal of used oil in uncontrolled
manners. EPA stated that several
residues, waste waters, and sludges
associated with the recycling of used oil
may be evaluated to determine if a
hazardous waste listing was necessary,
even if used oil was not listed. EPA also
outlined a plan that included making the
determination whether to list used oil
being disposed as hazardous waste and
promulgation of special management
standards for recycled oil.
EPA's decision not to list used oil as a
hazardous waste based on the potential
stigmatic effects was challenged by the
Hazardous Waste Treatment Council,
the Association of Petroleum Re-
refiners, and the Natural Resources
Defense Council. The petitioners
claimed that (1) the language of RCRA
indicated that in determining whether to
list used oil as a hazardous waste, EPA
may consider technical characteristics
of hazardous waste, but not the
"stigma" that listing might involve, and
(2) that Congress intended EPA to
consider the effects of listing on the
recycled oil industry only after the
initial listing decision.
On October 7,1988, the Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
found that EPA acted contrary to law in
its determination not to list used oil
under RCRA section 3001 based on the
stigmatic effects. (See Hazardous Waste
Treatment Council v. EPA, 861 F.2d 270
(D.C. Cir. 1988) [HWTC I].) The court
ruled that EPA must determine whether
to list any used oils based on the
technical criteria for waste listings
specified in the statute.
E. Recent Agency Activities
After the 1988 court decision, EPA
began to reevaluate its basis for making
a listing determination for used oil. EPA
reviewed the statute, the proposed rale,
and the many comments received on the
proposed rale. Those comments
indicated numerous concerns with the
proposed listing approach. One of the
most frequent concerns voiced by
commenters related to the quality and
"representativeness" of the data used by
EPA to characterize used oils in 1985.
Numerous commenters indicated that
"their oils" were not represented by the
data and, if they were represented,
those oils were characterized when
mixed with other more contaminated
oils or other hazardous wastes. Many
commenters submitted data
demonstrating that their oils,
particularly industrial uSed oils,' did not1
contain high levels of toxicants of
concern.
In addition, the Agency recognized
that much of the information in the 1985
used oil composition data is more than
five years old, as most of the
information was collected prior to 1985.
Since the time of that data gathering
effort, used automotive oil composition
may have been affected by the phase-
down of lead in gasoline. The Agency
also recognized the need to collect
analytical data addressing specific
classes of used oils as collected and
stored at the point of generation (i.e., at
the generator's facility).
Finally, the promulgation of the
toxicity characteristic (TC) (55 FR 11798,
March 29,1990) is known to identify
certain used oils as hazardous. Due to
the possibility of changes in used oil
composition described above and the
new TC, the Agency recognized that
additional data on used oil
characterization may be needed prior to
making a listing determination. The
Agency believes it is important to
consider the effects of the TC before
taking final action on the listing
determination and used oil standards in
accordance with its mandate in section
3014(b) of RCRA to "list or identify"
used oil as a hazardous waste.
F. Purpose of Today's Notice
EPA's overall approach to used oil
consists of three major components.
First, EPA identifies approaches for
making a determination whether to list
or identify used crankcase oil rind other
used oils as hazardous wastes, as
required by section 3014(b). (See
discussion in section III of this notice.)
Second, EPA proposes a number of
alternatives relating to management
standards to ensure proper management
of used oils that are recycled. EPA
discusses an approach under which the
management standards would be issued
in two phases. (See discussion in
sections VIH.C arid IX of this notice.)
Phase I will consist of basic
requirements for used oil generators,
transporters, road oilers, and recyclers
including burners and disposal facilities
to protect human health and the
environment from the potential hazards
caused by mismanagement of used oil.
Once the Phase I standards are in place,
EPA may decide to evaluate the
effectiveness of these standards in
reducing the impact on human health
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 164 / Monday, September 23. 1991 /Proposed Rules 48003
and the environment. Upon such
evaluation, EPA will consider whether
or not more stringent regulations are
necessary to protect human health and
the environment, and propose these
regulations as Phase II standards. The
third part of EPA's general approach to
used oil is the consideration of
rionregulatory incentives and other
nontraditional approaches to encourage
recycling and mitigate any negative
impacts the management standards may
have on the recycling of used oil, as
provided by section 3014(a). (See
discussion in section II of this notice.)
Today's notice presents supplemental
information gathered by EPA and
provided to EPA by individuals
commenting on previous notices on the
listing of used oil and used oil
management standards. As discussed
above, numerous commenters on the
1985 proposal to list used oil as
hazardous contended that the broad
listing of all used oils unfairly subjects
them to stringent subtitle C regulations
because their oils are not hazardous.
Based on those comments, the Agency
has collected a variety of additional
information regarding various types of
used oil, their management, and their
potential health and environmental
effects when mismanaged. Today's
notice presents that new information to
the public and requests comment on that
information, particularly if and how this
information suggests new concerns that
EPA may consider in deciding whether
to finalize all or part of its 1985 proposal
to list used oil as a hazardous waste.
In addition, today's notice expands
upon the November 29,1985 (50 FR
49258] proposal to list used oils as
hazardous and the March 10,1986 (51 FR
8206) supplemental notice by. discussing
regulatory alternatives not previously
presented in the Federal Register. Based
on the public comments received
relative to the two notices, the Agency
has investigated several important
aspects of used oil regulation, including
application of the mixture rule (40 CFR
261.3{a)(2)(iii)) to used oils. For these
aspects, the Agency has identified
alternative approaches that were not
presented explicitly in the earlier
notices. Those alternatives are
presented in today's notice. (See
discussion in sections IV and V of this
notice.)
Today's notice also discusses the
Agency's intention to amend 40 CFR
261.32 by adding four waste streams
from the reprocessing and re-refining of
used oil to the list of hazardous wastes
from specific sources. (See discussion in
section VII of this notice.) The Agency
noted its intention to include these
residuals in the definition of used oil in
its November 29,1985 proposal to list
used oil as hazardous. The wastes from
the reprocessing and re-refining of used
oil, which are more fully described later,
include process residuals from the
gravitational or mechanical separation
of solids, water, and oil; spent polishing
media used to finish used oil; distillation
bottoms; and treatment residues from
primary wastewater treatment.
Today's notice also includes a
description of some of the management
standards (in addition to or in place of
those proposed in 1985) that EPA is
considering promulgating with the final
used oil listing determination. EPA,
under various RCRA authorities, is
considering management standards for
used oils, whether or not the oil is
classified as hazardous waste. (See
discussion in sections VIII and IX of this
notice.)
When promulgated, the standards
may: (a) Prohibit road oiling, (b) restrict
used oil storage in surface
impoundments, (c) limit disposal of
nonhazardous used oil, (d) require
inspection, reporting, and cleanup of
visible releases of used oil around used
oil storage containers and aboveground
tanks and during used oil pickup,
delivery, and transfer, (e) impose spill
cleanup requirements and allow for
limited CERCLA liability exemptions, (f)
institute a tracking mechanism to ensure
that all used oils reach legitimate
recyclers, and (g) require reporting of
used oil recycling activities. The used oil
burner standards included in 40 CFR
part 266 subpart E will continue to
regulate the burning of used oil for
energy recovery. All of the requirements
(including those in part 266, subpart E)
may be placed in a new Part [e.g., 40
CFR part 279). Used oils that are
hazardous (either listed or
characteristic) that cannot be recycled
are not included in these provisions, but
are instead subject to 40 CFR parts 261-
270.
With today's notice, EPA is providing
information and requesting comment on
management standard options that
expand upon or differ from those
proposed in 1985. What is provided with
today's notice is not an exhaustive list
or discussion of possible used oil
management standards, but a discussion
of some additional standards that are
under consideration by EPA. In some
cases, EPA is providing information in
this notice to clarify issues in response
to public comment on the Agency's 1985
proposed rule, so that commenters may
have the opportunity to consider
additional issues the clarification may
raise. In other cases, the Agency is
providing information and soliciting
comment on additional management
standards or management standards
that vary from those proposed in 1985.
(See appendix A that cites the
appropriate Federal Register pages from
the 1985 proposal. Also see specific
sections in this notice for used oil
management standards.)
Given the extensive body of public
comment on used oil issues in general,
the Agency will request public comment
only on specific considerations for
which new alternatives have been
identified. Comments are not solicited
regarding other elements of the 1985
proposal and subsequent notices.
However, these earlier-announced
alternatives and comments received
about them remain part of this
rulemaking and of EPA's full
consideration of used oil issues. EPA
will respond to comments previously
received upon finalization of the rule.
II. Incentives for Promoting the
Collection and Recycling of Do-It-
Yourself Generated Used Oil and Used
Oil Procurement Activity
In 1988,1.3 million gallons of used oil.
was generated. FiftyTseven percent of
the 1:3 million gallons generated entered
the used oil management system and
was recycled. Of the remaining used oil,
the do-it-yourselfer (DIY) generator
population (i.e., generated by
homeowners) disposed of approximately
183 million gallons of mostly automotive
crankcase oil, while nonindustrial and
industrial generators dumped/disposed
of 219 million gallons. EPA believes that
the majority of the remaining 43 percent
of used oil that was generated could^and
should be recycled in an effort to meet
the nation's petroleum needs and
conserve natural resources.
A. DIY-Generated Used Oil
RCRA does not provide authority to
regulate the disposal of household waste
(e.g., DIY-generated motor oil and oil
filters), nor does it give EPA the
authority to mandate collection
programs for DIY-generated used oil.
Over the past five years, EPA has
developed public education programs
and informational brochures to
encourage DIY generators of automotive
crankcase oil to recycle their used oil.
The Agency realizes, however, that
educational outreach alone may not be
adequate, given the absence of a
mechanism to facilitate the collection of
used oil from these generators. Very
little DIY oil is currently being recycled
(<10 percent of DIY-generated used
motor oil). Commenters have indicated
that local collection programs can be
-------
48004 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday, September .23^ 1991,/Proposed Rules
successful over the long term only if
petroleum prices remain high or if used
oil handlers are required to accept used
oil from DIY generators in exchange for
some benefit.
Some states encourage collection and
recycling of DIY used oil by providing
some regulatory relief to used oil
generators accepting DIY used oil. For
instance, in New Jersey, automotive
service stations are exempt from
manifesting requirements if they accept
DIY used oil. Several other states that
regulate used oil offer similar relief to
used oil handlers that collect or recycle
DIY oil. EPA is interested in learning
more about the effectiveness of these
state requirements in increasing the
recycling of used oil and minimizing DIY
oil dumping. EPA, therefore, requests
information on program feasibility and
effectiveness, particularly from used oil
handlers .located in states with similar
programs.
RCRA does not give EPA the authority
to mandate the recycling of used oil.
However, the Agency does have
authority to require such management of
used oil under Section 6 of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). Section
6(a) provides that if the manufacture,
processing, distribution, use, or disposal
of a chemical substance or mixture
presents an unreasonable risk of injury
to health or the environment, the
Administrator shall, by rule, apply"
requirements to that substance, to the
extent necessary to protect against such
risk. Commenters have suggested that
section 6 be used to promote used oil
recycling. This could be achieved by
requiring lubricating oil manufacturers
to use a certain percent (to be
determined) of DIY used oil in their
production processes.
The Agency has evaluated and
documented the environmental harm
caused by mismanagement of used oil.
This is discussed in detail in section
VHI.A of today's notice, and in
"Environmental Damage From Used Oil
Mismanagement," which is included in
the docket for today's notice. EPA
believes it may be beneficial to use the
authority in TSCA section 6 and other
TSCA provisions to mandate the
recycling of used oils that feasibly can
be recycled. Recycling used oil and not
disposing of it is a more environmentally
preferable management alternative. EPA
requests comment on whether TSCA
section 6 is an appropriate statutory
mechanism to control used oil
mismanagement via its recycling.
There are five approaches currently
under consideration. EPA requests
comment on these approaches and other
alternatives that warrant the Agency's
consideration. These approaches, if
implemented, might establish a system
of both regulatory and incentive-based
mechanisms to address: (1) The
production of lube oils, (2) their
collection after initial use and (3) their
recycling or proper disposal in a manner
consistent with the goals of RCRA
section 3014. To obtain and respond to
public comment before taking any of
these steps, and to ensure that they may
achieve their intended purposes in the
least burdensome and most efficient
manner, EPA is soliciting comments on,
and requesting that those comments be
organized to separately address the five
approaches under consideration. While
EPA solicits comments on these possible
approaches, EPA wishes to emphasize
that it is not today proposing to adopt
any incentive system when it finalizes
the Phase I management standards
discussed in sections VIII and IX below.
Rather, the following discussion is akin
to an ANPRM on these issues. A
description of each follows.
1. Acceptance of DIY Used Oil by Used
Oil Generators and Retailers
Similar to some state programs, EPA
may require used oil generators and
lube oil retailers to follow certain steps,
including posting signs stating their
acceptance of DIY-generated used oil,
checking DIY-generated used oil for
evidence of mixing, and maintaining
collection containers in compliance with
storage standards. EPA might use TSCA
section 6 authorities to promulgate such
rules.
As explained hi a later section of this
notice, certain used oil generators {i.e.,
service station dealers, any government
agency that establishes a facility solely
for the purpose of accepting used oil,
and refuse collection services required
to collect and deliver used oil to an oil
recycling facility), as defined in section
101(37) of CERCLA, may become eligible
for an exemption from CERCLA liability
under CERCLA section 114(c). These
generators may be required to, at a
minimum, support their claim of DIY-
generated used oil acceptance by
maintaining records of the quantities of
DIY-generated used oil collected and
comply with the section 3014 used oil
management standards.
2. Acceptance of DIY Oil by Used Oil
Recyclers, Re-refiners, and Refiners
This program could be similar to the
one for used oil generators except that
used oil recyclers and re-refiners,
including lubricating oil manufacturers,
may be collecting DIY-generated used
oil (or contracting collection) either at
curbside or in specific locations. EPA
may require ^commercial used oil
recyclers/re-refiners to initiate
community, municipality, or civic
organization-based DIY collection
programs. The requirements that the
Agency may explore for used oil
recyclers/re-refiners are the same as
those being considered for lube oil
retailers, with minor differences. lake
lube oil retailers, recyclers might be
required to accept DIY-generated used
oil and check incoming oil for evidence
of mixing. Additional provisions may
include keeping records of annual
quantities of DIY-generated used oil
accepted, and reporting the disposition
of DIY-generated used oil. Lube oil
manufacturers may be required to use a
certain percent of lube oil feedstock
coming from DIY-generated used oil.
The DIY-generated used oil collected
through such programs must be
managed in accordance with all
applicable used oil management
standards by the collectors and
processors, however.
3. Target System for Lube Oil Producers
EPA is considering the establishment
of a "target" system for all lube oil
producers under TSCA section 6, under
which each producer may have to
recycle, or arrange for recycling of,
specific quantities of used oil. EPA may
require that lube oil producers and
importers follow certain steps, such as
registering with EPA, reporting annually
on whether projected recycling targets
were met, and providing documentation
to support compliance with EPA-
designated targets. Under the RCRA
authority, EPA would require used oil
purchase, sales, and recycling data
collection and reporting while under the
TSCA authority, EPA would ban sales of
lube oil by certain non-registered
producers and importers as discussed
below.
Under such a program, EPA might ban
or otherwise restrict lube oil sales by
non-registered producers and importers,
The Agency is also considering setting
recycling targets (e.g., a mandatory
recycling ratio or other numerical target)
for each lube oil producer and importer
based on their share of the lube oil
market. The targets might be established
for used oil in general, or they might be
specifically directed at DIY-generated
used oil. EPA solicits comments on this
approach.
4. Used Oil Credit System
EPA also is considering using TSCA
section 6 authorities to set a mandatory
"recycling ratio" (i.e., a target) for used
oil and,to require lube oil producers to
bear the responsibility for assuring that
used oil is recycled in accordance with
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48005
the established ratio.5The mandatory
recycling ratio may be set as a
percentage of the annual production
quantity of lube oils. In the initial year
of the program EPA could set the
recycling ratio at the current recycling
rate for used lube oils (e.g., 30%). The
Agency could then increase the
mandatory recycling ratio annually [e,g.,
by 2% per annum) to encourage
increased levels of used oil recycling.
Lube oil manufacturers may be
responsible for accepting DIY-generated
used oil, implementing the mandatory
recycling ratio and demonstrating
compliance with the mandatory
recycling ratio. The credit system differs
from the "target" system, in that this
demonstration could be made in one of
several ways. Manufacturers could
recycle used oil themselves by collecting
and putting used oil back through the
refinery process, could purchase re-
refined oil from a re-refiner or processor,
or could purchase "used oil recycling
credits" from re-refiners or used oil
processors. Used oil re-refiners and
processors may generate credits for
every unit of used oil recycled.
Recycling credits generated by re-
refiners and processors could be sold to
primary lube oil manufacturers at a
price set by market forces.
EPA requests comments on the
mechanisms described above for
promoting the collection and recycling
of DIY-generated and other used oils.
EPA solicits comments in particular on
several issues. First, should a system of
differential credits for used oil re-
refining be implemented, under which ~-
used oil recycled through re-refining
generates, e.g., 1.5 times as many credits
per gallon as reprocessing for fuel?
Second, what role, if any, should EPA
play as a potential seller of last resort if
credits are in short supply? Third,
should EPA allow the banking of such
credits and if so, what limitation(s) may
be placed on the use of banked credits?
Fourth, what "balance period" should be
selected for manufacturers to
demonstrated compliance with the
recycling ratio, and how may such
balance periods relate to the calendar
year? Fifth, how should the recycling of
U.S. oil in foreign recycling facilities
(e.g., Canada) be handled for purposes
of generating credits?
5. Deposit-Refund System for Used Oil
EPA also believes a deposit-refund
system to encourage collection of
additional quantities of DIY-generated
•The credit system described here Is essentially
the same system provided for under the proposed
"Oil Recycling Incentives Act" (H.R. 872, S. 399,
102nd Congress 1st session}.
used oil can be developed. Under this
approach retailers of lube oil may be
required to collect a deposit on certain
quantities of lube oil. If lube oil retailers
are required to accept used oil, these
facilities could then refund deposit
amounts to customers on returning their
used oil. EPA is concerned over the
large quantity of used oil improperly
disposed by DIY oil changers and is
seriously considering requiring such
deposits and refunds to increase
collection from this segment. EPA
believes that while a mandatory
recycling percentage—such as those
described above will increase the
overall collection of all types of used
oil—such a system does not directly
address the DIY segment. EPA is
concerned that if sufficient funding
under the "deposit/refund system" is
not available to the retailer, the cost of
making refunds will have an impact on
the retailers' net profit. EPA requests
comment on the likely impacts on the
business of such a system and how the
impact could be minimized.
The amount of lube oil on which
deposits may be paid may undoubtedly
be greater than used oil returned by
customers for refund, because some oil
is inevitably not captured from the filter,
etc. This result may either produce some
excess revenue to retailers, or may
allow a somewhat greater amount to be
paid in refund than the deposit amount.
EPA solicits comment on several
specific issues pertaining to a deposit-
refund system for used oil implemented
at retail. First, what may be sufficient
monetary amounts of such deposits and
refunds to induce various levels of
change in DIY behavior without
inducing possible perverse effects—such
as diluting the oil to increase its volume?
Second, what level of deposits and
refunds might be required to induce
additional DIY recycling over time?
Third, what would the administrative
and other burdens of such a system?
Fourth, would it be appropriate to
implement both a mandatory recycling
ratio and a deposit-refund system? Fifth,
since the system would probably
produce excess revenue to retailers if
the deposit amount were equal to the
refund amount, should EPA consider
either differential deposits and refunds
or allow retailers to retain excess
revenue to defray program costs? Sixth,
to reduce the impacts of changes in
virgin oil prices on recycling, should the
deposit/refund amounts be "pegged" (in
an administratively set schedule) to a
benchmark virgin oil price?
B. Used Oil Procurement Activity
Besides efforts to encourage the
collection of DIY-generated used oil,
EPA has instituted other measures to
encourage used oil recycling. For
example, in 1988 EPA published a fi"al
procurement guideline for Federal
Procurement of lubricating oils
containing re-refined oil. The 1988
guideline designates lubricating oils as
products for which the procurement
requirements of RCRA section 6002
apply. The guideline also provides
guidance to Federal government
procuring agencies for complying with
the requirements of RCRA section 6002
procurement provisions. All procuring
agencies and all procurement actions
involving lubricating oils where the
agency buys $10,000 or more of the lube
oil products at one time, or during the
course of the past fiscal year, are
required to comply with the section 6002
guidelines. The purpose of RCRA
section 6002, and EPA's subsequent
procurement guidelines, is to stimulate
demand for products made from
recycled materials and to assist in
stabilizing the market for these
products. In addition, EPA currently is
working with the General Sendees
Administration and the Department of
Defense to certify vendors of recycled
lube products for civilian and military
purchases. EPA also is investigating
vehicle warranty issues for vehicles
using re-refined lube products. In some
cases car dealerships are refusing to
honor manufacturers' vehicle warranties
if re-refined lube oils are used in the
vehicles. EPA currently is investigating
the root of this issue and may work with
vehicle manufacturers to establish
company positions that could be passed
on to individual dealerships.
III. Used Oil Identification and
Characterization
In 1985 and 1986, commenters
expressed substantial concern regarding
the impact of listing all used oils as
hazardous wastes. Many commenters
pointed out that certain used oils were
not hazardous at the point of generation
(i.e., at the point that the used oil was
removed from a crankcase or drained
from machinery). Commenters also took
exception to the data used to
characterize used oil, saying that the
information did not properly represent
the spectrum of used oils generated. In
addition, many commenters indicated
uncertainty regarding the impact of the
mixture rule on wastes containing de
minimis quantities of used oils.
Commenters also expressed concern
regarding the appropriateness of subtitle
C regulation for derived-from residuals
such as wastewater treatment sludges.
Today's notice identifies the issues
presented by commenters, presents
-------
48006
Federal Registet / \ ol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
alternatives devised by .either the
Agency or the commenters, and requests
public comment on the efficacy of the
presented alternatives.
A. Used Oils To Be Evaluated at the
Point of Generation
In response to the 1985 proposal to list
used oil as a hazardous waste,
numerous commenters contended that
not all used oils are typically and
frequently hazardous at the point of
generation. These commenters argued
that used oil drained directly from a
crankcase or machinery reservoir may
not contain the constituents of concern
at levels exceeding regulatory concern
and, in fact, that used oils were
adulterated after the point of generation
through mixing with other wastes.
The Agency initiated an investigation
of used oils at the point of generation.
Also, the Agency sought to determine
whether significant differences existed
in the composition of and hazards
associated with various used oil
streams. Thus, in contrast to the
November 1985 proposed rule, which
may have identified and listed all used
oils as hazardous, the Agency
investigation sought to determine
whether or'not a basis for listing existed
for separate types of used oils. The EPA
study addressed whether each type of
used oil met the criteria for listing at the
point of generation, whether the existing
toxicity characteristic may capture
those types of used oil that are clearly
hazardous, and whether good
housekeeping (management) practices
could prevent post-use adulteration of
used oils. Thus, the Agency sought to
determine which types of used oil met,
a! the point of generation, the criteria for
listing as contained in 40 CFR 261.11.
B. Data Collection
EPA began a sampling and analysis
study in 1989 that addressed the
composition of used oils at the point of
generation. During the study, EPA was
able to obtain samples of used oils as
drained from the crankcase or oil
reservoir of automobiles, other vehicles,
and machinery and from on-site storage
tanks. This approach allowed a
comparison of the composition of the
used oils at the point of generation to
the composition of used oils in storage
tanks and identification of the extent of
any post-use adulteration that occurred.
While storage tanks are not the only
place where post-use adulteration could
occur, EPA selected this sampling
strategy because they are the first place
adulteration could conceivably occur.
The newly generated data from the 1989
study are discussed in detail later in
today's notice. At this time, the Agency
requests comment on this newly
collected data and on the concept of
basing the listing determination solely
on used oils at their point of generation
rather than after collection and likely
adulteration, the latter being the
approach considered in the November
1985 proposal.
The Agency notes that, as discussed
more fully below, the management
standards for used oil may well include
requirements designed to control and
discourage adulteration of used oil. If
effective, such management standards
could reduce the adulteration cf as
generated used oil, thus allowing the
Agency to determine whether to list or
identify as hazardous used oil from
various segments on the basis of the
concentrations of the constituents of
concern as generated. Although EPA
believes that adulteration of as
generated used oil is a reasonable
mismanagement scenario and is
concerned that regulations may not fully
stop this practice, the Agency is
considering a number of proposals (e.g.,
rebuttable presumption and 1,000 pprn
halogen cutoff for non-intentional
mixing of hazardous solvents or wastes)
that may, in effect, require those who
adulterate as generated used oil to
manage the waste as hazardous. The
Agency is particularly interested in
comments that address whether or not
evaluation and listing of used oils at the
point of generation is protective of
human health and the environment,
whether it is consistent with the criteria
for listing contained in section 3001 of
RCRA and 40 CFR § 261.11, and whether
EPA may continue to consider post-use
adulteration of used oil as a basis for
listing used oil as hazardous.
In conducting the sampling and
analysis study, EPA considered several
factors. When the toxicity characteristic
(TC) was promulgated on March 29,1990
(55 FR 11798), it added 11 constituents to
the original list of 14 EP Toxic
constituents that may cause a waste to
be characteristically hazardous. The
Agency believed that it might be
necessary to address the additional
organic constituents and the new TC
Leaching Procedure in its study. Second,
EPA recognized that for a significant
number of used oil samples collected
and analyzed prior to the 1985 proposal,
analytical data were not available
regarding the possible presence of
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) in used oils, PAHs may present
a significant danger to human health if
present in high enough quantities.. Of
particular concern were PAHs such as
benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranthene,
and benzo(k)fluoranthene, all of which
are currently included as appendix VIII
constituents.
In order to address used oils as
generated, the Agency defined a number
of unique types or classes of used oil.
On the basis of the information gathered
prior to 1985 and on the public
comments received in response to the
November 29,1985 proposed listing, the
Agency identified a number of
independent segments within the used
oil universe. In addition to the most well
known used oil generators [i.e.,
automotive and diesel engines), the
Agency identified several smaller used
oil segments, including diesel powered
heavy equipment and railroad engine
crankcase oils, marine oil, hydraulic oil
and fluids, metalworking oil, electrical
insulating oil, natural gas-fired engine
oil, and aircraft engine oil. Selection of
these segments is discussed in "Used
Oil Characterization Sampling and
Analysis Program," which is included in
the docket for today's rule 6
Each of these segments was evaluated
primarily for the presence of selected
TC constituents (arsenic, chromium,
cadmium, lead, barium, benzene,
trichloroethylene, and tetrachloro-
ethylene) and secondarily for the
presence of PAHs. The segments also
were evaluated to determine the
compositional concentration of the
specified constituents and to determine
to what extent samples exhibit the
toxicity characteristic. This approach
was undertaken so that a decision
whether to list any or all portions of the
used oil universe might adequately
reflect the hazardous nature of each
segment.
C. Point of Generation Data
1.. Stratified Random Sampling Plan
A sampling and analysis study of
known generators representing the'
various used oil categories was
undertaken by EPA in 1989 to (1)
provide updated information on the
composition of automotive and
industrial used oils at the point of
generation and (2) determine the. status
of these used oils with respect to the
toxicity characteristic (TC). The sectors
chosen for study based on the above
discussion are shown in Table III.C.l.
8 Briefly, the sample type and size was
determined based on|the 1985 .sampling-end!;'
analytical study, da,ta received.fcom.ths.
commenters in response to the 1985 proposal, anu
the current used oil'generation and 'storage
practices. A limited'humber of samples wert'
collected for certain used oil (
-------
^Federal Register / Vol. 56.'No. 184 /.Monday. September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48007
TABLE HI.C.1,—USED OIL SECTORS
Automotive Oil and Fluids, including:
—AutomoTwe (unleaded gasoline engine)
Crankcase Oil ;.....
—Automotive Oils/Fluids in Used Oil Stor-
age Tanks......
Diesel Engine Crankcase Oil, Including:
—Truck/Bus Engine Crankcase Oil
—Truck/Bus Cite/Fluids in Used Oil Stor-
age Tanks
—-Dissa! Powered Heavy Equipment Crank-
case Oil....; ,...;
—Raiiroad Engine Crankoase Oil
Marine Oil.
Hydraulic Oils/Fluids.
Metalworking Oil.
Electrical Insulating Oil.
Natural Gas-Fired Engine
Aircraft Engine Oil.
Aircraft Oil/Fluids in Storage Tanks.
Based on the information gathered
prior to 1985 and on the public
comments received in response to the
1985 proposed listing, the Agency
identified a number of independent
segments within the used oil universe.
The segments included automotive and
diesel engine oils as, well as categories
of industrial used oil, as, shown in Table
iii.c.1.
Once the categories were established,
sampling frames consisting of lists of
used oil generators (i.e., units) .
repr esenting each category were
developed, The generators were
identified in localized geographic
regions (1) to reduce time and travel
costs associated with the field sampling
so that resources could be allocated
toward laboratory analyses and (2) to
better define the location and
population of generators to be sampled.
The sampling strategy was not intended
to characterize variation in used oil on
the basis of geographic origin because
no information suggests that used oil
collected from generators in localized
regions vary. Generally, engines are
designed to run within specific
temperature ranges, with variations;
dependant upon climatic temperature
conditions. We would expect that,
across the United States, similarly
designed engines will run at similar.
temperatures and will break down and/
or contaminate the engine oil in similar
ways. In the early stages of the used oil
sampling and analysis program, EPA
collected a limited number of used oil
samples in Houston; Texas. These
samples were collected toiallow
laboratory personnel to become familiar
with the physical and chemical
properties of used oil. The samples
collected in Houston, while limited, tena
to corroborate the assumption that
geographic variability will not strongly
impact the overall findings of the study.
Generators included in each
subpopulation (strata) were identified
through telephone directories, Standard
Industrial Code (SIC) classifications, an
automated data base, and trade
organizations. Simple random sampling
of each used oil generator subpopulation
was conducted in order to reduce bias in
the selection of generators. Greater
detail regarding the sampling frames
used is presented in "Used Oil
Characterization Sampling and Analysis
Program," in the docket.
The selected sites were visited and
samples were collected. The number of
samples collected in each of the targeted
sectors ranged from four to twenty. For
some sectors (where the adulteration
can potentially occur) it was possible to
collect used oil samples from both the
point -of generation and the on-site
storage tank, thereby allowing an
evaluation of the extent to which used
oil in on-site storage units may undergo
adulteration.
The thrust of the latest sampling effort
was to substantiate and further
elucidate the previously collected used
oil characterization data,-not to develop
a set of new data on which to base the
listing decision. In 1985, EPA obtained
data from approximately 1,000 samples
that were representative of the
generation and storage practices. For
many used oil industrial segments, new
samples were collected in 1988 as spot
check samples to verify the 1985
characterization data. For the other used
oil segments (e.g., automotive crankcase
oils), used oil samples were collected in
larger numbers to (a) assess the changes
in used Oil characteristics resulting from
the phase-down of lead in gasoline and
(b) differentiate as generated versus
storage tank/samples of used oil. The
data presented in today's notice will be
evaluated along with the data provided
by the commenters during the comment
period-for this notice. EPA also will
evaluate the data used in 1985 proposal
to list used oil and the commenter
submitted data received in response to
the 1985 proposal.
: EPA believes that waste
characterization data provides one of
the decision-making tools when making
a listing determination; under 40 CFR
§ 261.11(a)(3). EPA also considers the
< following decision-making factors:
waste quantities, toxicity, and hazard
potential of the constituents, mobility
and transport potential of the waste in
the environment, known health and
environmental damage cases, plausible
types of improper management of waste,
and actions taken by the other
governmental agencies or regulatory
programs (e.g., state regulations or other
Federal regulations).
2. Analytical Approaches Used ,
In coordination with the 1989 EPA
used oil sampling and analysis effort, a;
Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPjP)
was prepared and implemented in
accordance with the EPA format and
guidance specified in SW-846, "Test
Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste
(Physical/Chemical Methods), Third
Edition." The QAPjP details the
analytical plan and procedures
implemented to verify the quality of the
data obtained.
The analytical program was designed
to characterize used oils with respect to
the compositional concentration of the
constituents of concern and with respect
to the Toxicity Characteristic (TC). In
order to do this, the Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure
(TCLP) was applied to used oil samples,
and after filtration, the liquid phase
(filtrate) of the samples were analyzed
for selected constituents of concern
using analytical methods from SW^-846.
While EPA has not designated standard
reference materials for the TCLP, many
standard reference materials exist for
the analytical methods that were
subsequently employed. For example, in
conducting organometallic analysis,
EPA employed Conostan, a petroleum-
derived standard reference material.
Information on standard reference
materials used is further elucidated in
the background document on the
sampling and analysis effort.
In conducting the TCLP, the initial
step is filtration of the sample. The
TCLP calls for the used oil sample to be
filtered using a 0.6-0.8 /AHI glass fiber
filter. Upon completion of filtration, two
fractions of the used oil sample exist.
The first is the filtrate, which has passed
through the filter. The second is the
solids, which have not passed through
the filter but are, in turn, used to form
leachate following acid extraction. EPA
ran a compositional analysis on the
filtrate to determine the concentration of
constituents that could be released from
the used oil.
Next EPA assumed that minimal
concentrations of hazardous
constituents would leach from the solid
phase {i.e., the material remaining on the
filter) if the full TCLP was performed.7
7 The full TCLP method calls tor rotary agitation
followed by pressure filtration and analysis of the
leachate of the solid portion of a waste sample if it
contains greater than 0.5% solids.
-------
48008
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday. September 23; I99t / .pE0nnBt.A Rules
This assumption, which was verified by
further laboratory analyses, enabled
EPA to estimate the TCLP final analyte
concentration based on the
concentration of TC compounds found
in the filtrate. Compositional data from
the initial filtrate phase also provided
EPA with data to estimate the
composition of the unfiltered used oil
sample. It should be noted that these
estimates are lower bounds for the
TCLP final analyte and compositional
concentrations for each used oil sample.
The Agency confirmed that these lower
bounds are a fair estimate of the full
TCLP concentrations for the used oil
sample. Additional detail regarding
these leaching analyses can be found in
the docket.
Total compositional concentrations
were estimated by assuming that the
contaminant concentrations in the
filtrate were identical to those in the
unfilterable portion. Thus, the total
concentration would be equal to the
filtrate concentration. This assumption
is justified based on laboratory
evidence; used oils tend to clog the filter
after a portion has passed through. Only
in rare cases were solid particles found
to clog the filter, rather, the filter clogged
from the oil itself and little difference
between the unfilterable portion and the
filtrate could be discerned. This leads
the Agency to contend that the filtrate is
representative of the used oil as a
whole.
After filtration, analyses were
conducted on the filtrate portion of the
sample. All of the samples were
analyzed for metallic contaminants.
Approximately twenty-five percent of
the samples were analyzed for organic
constituents. The Agency believed that
most used oils that contained TC
constituents would exhibit the
characteristic for D008 [Lead], as well as
other characteristics. Since lead was
believed to be the dominant TC
constituent, more metals analyses were
conducted than organic analyses.
Table III.C.2 provides a summary of
the analytical methods used to
characterize the samples. Full detail on
these methods and their application to
used oils can be found in "Used Oil
Characterization Sampling and Analysis
Program," in the docket.
TABLE IIS.C.2—ANALYTICAL METHODS FOR
TESTING USED OIL
Parameter:
Filtration
Inorganics
Volatile Organics
Semi-Volatiie
Organlcs
PCBs
Analytical Method:
9 SW-846 Method 1311,
Toxicity Characteristic
Leaching Procedure
(TCLP).
Sample Preparation:
• SW-846 Method 3040,
Dissolution Process for
Oils, Greases, or Waxes
(kerosene dissolution).
« SW-846 Method 3051,
Microwave .Digestion
(HNO3 only).
Analysis:
9 SW-846 Method 6010,
Inductively Coupled
Plasma Atomic Emission
Spectroscopy, or
« SW-846 Method 7000
series, Atomic Absorp-
tion/graphite furnace.
• SW-846 Method 8240
GC/MS for Volatile Or-
ganlcs (purge and trap).
© SW-846 modified
Method 3810, Head-
space (with isotope dilu-
tion).
Sample Preparation:
« SW-846 Method 3580,
Waste Dilution.
Analysis:
« SW-846 Method 8310,
Polynuclear Aromatic Hy-
drocarbons (HPLC).
8 SW-846 Method 8270,
GC/MS for Semi-Volatile
Organics: Capillary
Column Technique
(modified for selective
ton monitoring).
« SW-846 Method 8080,
Organochlorine Pesti-
cides and PCBs.
3. New Methods Under Consideration
For Used Oil
In conducting the analysis of the used
oil samples that were collected, the
Agency found that several of the
available analytical protocols
enumerated in SW-846 required
adaptation and one required
modification in order to efficiently
analyze for the target analytes found in
the used oil matrix. The Agency is not
requesting comment on the modified
methods at this time, but is presenting
this discussion for information purposes
only. The modified method was used to
detect volatile organic analytes in oily
waste. As stated below, the method
modification was undertaken to detect
very low levels of organics in used oil.
This modification allowed detection of
small quantities of volatile organics and
increased (rather than decreased) the
potential for a used oil sample to exhibit
the TC for volatile organic constituents.
A draft copy of the method is available
in the docket for today's notice and the
Agency intends to propose a revised
SW-84& Method 3810 in the near future.
No modified methods were necessary
for metal analyte detection.
Analytical difficulties were
particularly troublesome with respect to
organic analytes. These difficulties
arose because the analytical detection
limits required by this investigation
were somewhat lower than those that
could be achieved by existing
methodology in these matrices.
For volatile organic contaminants, the
Agency found that the traditional purge
and trap GC/MS method (Method 8240}
did not provide detection limits that
were sufficiently low. As an alternative,
the Agency has modified an existing
headspace screening method (Method
3810) to include isotope dilution. This
allows convenient injection of
headspace samples. This modified
method, which is included in today's
docket, includes the addition of several
standard isotopes that correspond to
each of die target analytes. Based on the
results of the analyses in the evaluation
of used oils, the Agency is considering
addition of this method to SW-846, At
this time,' the Agency is conducting
studies of automated headspace
methodology in order to expand its
applicability beyond the target analytes
addressed under the used oil
investigation. Improved reproducibility
for the method can be obtained by using
an automated headspace analyzer in
place of the manual syringe.
For semi-volatile organics analyses,
the Agency had similar difficulties. The
existing SW-846 methods were
adequate for analyzing most samples,
but the used oil matrix required
dilutions that yielded unacceptable
detection limits. To improve Ihe
detection levels, the Agency utilized a
specific ion monitoring (SIM) option on
the GC/MS. Instead of scanning the
sample for a full spectrum of semi-
volatile compounds, the Agency found ,
that detection limits an order of
magnitude lower could be achieved
using SIM. This adaptation is entirely
within the scope of Method 8270 and
allowed the Agency to lower the
detection limit for specific semi-volatile
organic constituents, PAHs. The Agency
is considering the applicability of SIM to
other analytical programs at this time.
However, since most semi-volatile
analyses are targeted for a wide range
of compounds, application of SIM may
be limited to those situations where few
target analytes are being investigated.
4. Commenter Submitted Analytical
Data
Many commenters on the 1985
proposal to list used oils as hazardous
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday. September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48009
waste stated that certain used oils"
should not be classified as hazardous.
After EPA published its decision not to
list used oil as hazardous waste (51 FR
41900, November 19,1986), several
commenters submitted data regarding
the composition of and constituent
concentrations in used oils generated at
their facility or facilities. The Agency
has reviewed this newly submitted data,
which is located in the docket for
today's notice, and will consider the
data in making a decision to list.
Comments are welcome on the newly
submitted data, as discussed below.
Reynolds Metal Company submitted
analytical data regarding the constituent
levels in used oils from three aluminum
roiling plants as well as oil sludge
residue resulting from oil treatment.
Additional data on aluminum mill oil
was submitted by Alumax. Reynolds
analyzed two types of oil before and
after use: A light weight synthetic oil
and a water-based oil emulsion. The
data submitted suggest that
metalworking oils generated in the
aluminum rolling process do not
typically exhibit the TC for metal
contaminants,
Reynolds conducted additional
analyses of the same three types of
virgin and used oil samples for organic
constituents. The data for volatile
organics indicate that virgin and used
metalworking oils employed by
Reynolds in the production process do
not exhibit the TC characteristic. For
semi-volatile organics, the data for
samples of water-based oil emulsion
indicate that this type of oil does not
exhibit the TC for semi-volatiles.
However, data for samples of
lightweight synthetic oil and petroleum
solvent were submitted with such high
detection limits that the Agency is
precluded from rendering an opinion.
Alumax submitted data on two
samples of rolling oil from one mill
operation. The samples were of cold mill
oil and hot mill oil. Analytical data
indicate that toxicity characteristic
constituents are not present at levels of
regulatory concern in the two samples
and detection limits were well below the
regulatory level. Further, Alumax
provided analytical data on volatile and
semi-volatile constituents in each of the
two samples, which indicate that the
constituents are not present at levels of
regulatory concern.
The Agency believes that data
submitted by Reynolds Metal Company
and Alumax for metalworking oils used
in aluminum mills may support the
conclusion that these oils generally do
not exhibit the toxicity characteristic
and are not hazardous at the point of
generation. EPA requests comments on
the used oil data submitted by Reynolds
and Alumax that can be found in the
RCRA Docket for today's notice.
In addition, Reynolds submitted data
regarding the characterization of an oil
sludge. It is not clear from the
information whether the sludge is a
distillation bottom from a vacuum
distillation process employed in the
recovery of oil or whether the sludge is
from the wastewater treatment process.
Further, Reynolds did not submit any
TCLP analysis data on oily sludges. The
Agency encourages Reynolds and other
commenters to submit process
information, characterization, and
additional data concerning such sludges.
5. Results
a. Compositional analysis. As
previously discussed, EPA determined
the constituent concentrations found in
the liquid phase of the sample after
filtration. The summary of the sampling
and analysis study results is presented
in Table III.C.3, which shows the data
separately for each category of used oil
sampled and analyzed.
TABLE III.C.3A.—USED OIL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Constituent
Arsenic....
Barium
Lead
Benzene
Trichloroethylene ....
Perehloroethylene...
Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroeth-
anes
Benzo(b)fluor-
anthene
Benzo(k)fluor-
anthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
PCBs
Automotive crankcase oil-
Unleaded gasoline engines
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
12
12
12
12
12
7
7
' 7
7
7
4
2
4
2
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
0
5
7
10
12
6
0
0
1
Q
4
2
4
0
Concen-
tration
range
(ppm)
<1
1.0-43
0.5-3.4
0.8-23
5.5-150
0.53-13:2
<25
<25
25
<25
13-91
10-22
25-86
ND
Automotive oils/fluids—
Storage tank samples
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
8
8
8
8
8
6
6
6
6
6
3
3
3
3
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
0
3
5
3
8
5
0
4
3
0
3
3
3
0
Concen-
tration
range
(ppm)
<2.4
11.6-32.6
1.0-5.0
2.67-5.0
29-345
0.28-420
<50
89-1700
51-2100
<50
5-19
1.9-12
7.3-24
ND
Diesel engine crankcase
oil— from truck and buses
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
10
10
10
10
10
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
1
•Con- '•
taminant
detect-
ed
1
2
2
5
10
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
Concen-
tration
range
(ppm)
2
1.5-6.4
0.7-3
1.8-7.1
2.9-19.0
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.5
1.1
2.0
ND
Diesel truck/bus
maintenance — Facility
storage tanks
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
10
10
10
10
10
2
2
2
2
2
4
3
4
1
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
1
2
6
2
9
2
1
1
1
0
2
1
1
0
Concen-
tration
range
(ppm)
0.39
9.7-76.4
0.27-1.9
2.45-7.0
8.0-133
19.3
1.0
74
60
<2
2.4-46
1.2
3.0
ND
Diesel heavy equipment —
Crankcase oil
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
10
10
10
10
10
2
2
2
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
0
1
6
5
8
0
0
0
Concen-
tration
range
.(ppm)
<1
1.5
0.8-4.5
1.5-8
1-33.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<5
<5
<5
NA
(1) Analyte concentrations in TCLP filtrate. ND=Constituent not detected. Detection limits varied with matrix affects. NA=No« analyzed. Revised: 2-12-91.
-------
48010 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday, September 23. 1991 / Proposed Rules
TABLE IH.C.3B.—USED OIL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Constituen<
Arsenic ...___
Chromium
Lead
Perchloroethylene
Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethanes ...
Benzo(b)fluorarrthene .
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
PCBs
Heavy equipment
maintenance facility storage
tanks
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
4
4
4
4
4
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
4
0
4
3
4
Concen-
tration
range
(ppm)
0.38-1.59
<10
0.51-1.48
0.89-2.43
10.8-142
MA
NA
MA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Diesel railroad engine
crankcase oil
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
11
11
11
11
11
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
0
4
1
8
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Concen-
tration
range
(ppm)
<1
1.3-4.3
12.0
1.1-43.3
1.5-31.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2-5
<2.5
<2-5
<5
<5
<5
NA
Marine oil— marina used oil
storage tanks
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
7
7
7
7
7
1
1
1
1
1
—
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
0
7
7
7
7
0
0
0
0
0
Concen-
tration
range
(ppm)
<1
2.0-9.9
1.0-3.4
3.1-6.4
65.0-360
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
NA
NA
NA
NA
Marine oHoreign cargo ;
ships*
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
8
7
8
8
8
::=
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
0
1
0
6
7
-— —
Concen-
tration
range
(ppm)
<1
17.8
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
TABLE III.C.3D.—USED OIL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS SUMMARY—Continued
Constituent
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoran leno .. . .
Bonzo(a)pyrene
PCBs
Aircraft oil/fluids—used oil
storge tanks
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
1
1
1
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
0
0
0
Concen-
tration
range
(ppm)
<1
<1
<1
NA
Virgin oil
Number of
samples
Ana-
lyzed
5
5
5
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
0
0 :
0
Concen-
tration
range
(pprn)
<5
<5
<5
NA
(1) Analyte concentrations in TCLP filtrate. ND=Constituent not detected. Detection limits varied with matrix affects. NA=Not analyzed. Revised: 2-12-91.
The analytical results are for the
analysis of the TCLP filtrate only and
provide the number of samples
analyzed, the number of samples in
which a specific contaminant was
detected, and the range of
• concentrations of the specific
contaminant that was detected. QA/QC
data generated in conjunction with the
analytical program are available in
today's docket. The concentration range
(in parts per million) provides an
indication of the extent to which a
particular category of samples contains
a given contaminant and to what extent
the samples in that category may exceed
regulatory levels of concern for
compositional concentrations. The
Agency evaluates a number of factors in
making a listing determination, all of
which are detailed in 40 CFR 261.11.
Among the criteria for listing a waste as
hazardous, 40 CFR 261.11(a)(3) states
that the Administrator may list a waste
as "toxic" hazardous waste if it contains
any of the hazardous constituents in
appendix VIII, after consideration of
such additional factors as the toxicity
and concentration of constituents in the
waste, the mobility and persistence of
the constituents in the waste, the
degradability of the waste, the
bioaccumulation potential, the plausible
types of improper management of the
waste, the quantity of waste generated,
and the nature and severity of the
human health and environmental risks
posed by the waste. EPA is continuing to
rely upon the data presented in the 1985
proposal regarding the mobility,
persistence, and bioaccumulation
potential of used oil since the Agency
has not received information refuting its
findings on these additional factors. The
Agency also has developed additional
data regarding environmental damage
caused by past improper management of
used oil (see "Environmental Damage
From Used Oil" in today's docket and
section VIII.A of today's notice).
However, the newly available sampling
and analysis data has caused the
Agency to revise its analysis of the
nature and toxicity of the waste and the
human health and environmental risks
posed.
When considering appendix VIII
constituents, the nature of the toxicity of
the constituent in the waste can be
determined using the health-based
numbers developed by EPA for the
constituents in question. For the
purposes of this evaluation, EPA has
used the Maximum Contaminant Level
(MCL) most recently promulgated-under
the Safe Drinking Water Act. If an MCL
was not available, the Risk Specific
Dose (RSD), which corresponds to a
specific level of risk (1X10"6! to an
individual of contracting cancer over a
70-year lifetime from the intake of
contaminated drinking water, was
employed. The health-based numbers
(HBNs) for tetrachloroethanes and the
three PAHs (benzo(a)pyrene,
benzo(b)fiuoranthene, and
benzo(k)fluoranthene) are RSDs. The
remaining HBNs are MCLs. In the case
of lead, EPA is presenting evaluations of
the MCL for lead (0.05 parts per million).
A newly promulgated "action level" for
lead (0.015 parts per million) was
promulgated on June 7,1991 (56 FR
26460) and constitutes the level at which
treatment technologies must be
undertaken by drinking water supply
facilities. EPA has not decided whether
to consider an amendment to the
Toxicity Characteristic level of 5 ppm
lead based on the action level, and so,
for the listing evaluation below, we
continue to rely on the 0.05 ppm MCL.
Table III.C.4. presents the HBNs for the
constituents of concern.
BILLING CODE 6SSO-50-M
-------
48012
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23,1991 / Proposed Rules
TABLEIII.C.4 - USED OIL CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS AND HBNS
AUTOMOTIVE CRANKCASE OIL (UNLEADED GASOLINE ENQIKE8)
Constituent
Lead
Trichloroethytene
Perchloroethylane
Tetrachloroethanee
3enzo(b}nuoranthene ...
3enzo(k)f1uofantnene ...
Benzc1,000x
HEN HBN HBN
000
200
340
320
011 2
025
000
000
0 1 0
000
004
002
004
000
AUTOMOTIVE OILS/FLUIDS - STORAGE TANKS
Constituent
Barium
Chromium
Lead
Trichloroethylene
Perchloroethytan*
Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethanes
Benzo(b)nuoranthene ...
Benzo(k)fluoranthene ...
Benzo(a)pyren9
PCB«
Health
Baaed
Number
(mg/L)
05
T
001
0.05
005
OOOS
0.005
0.005
0.2
0.001
3.0E-08
3.0E-0*
30E-OS
5.0E-04
Total
Number
Samples
Analyzed
8
8
1 1
11
1 1
11
a
e
e
6
3
3
3
3
Number
Samples
Constituent
Not Detected
e
5
4
8
0
2
a
2
3
e
0
0
0
3
Number Samples With Positive
Constituent Defection
#i100x 100xo*s1,QOOx #>1,000x
HBN HBN HBN
000
300
130
300
OSS
3 1 5
000
004
0 1 2
000
003
003
003
000
DIESEL ENGINE CRANKCASE OIL - TRUCKS AND BUSES
Constituent
Cadmium
Lead
Tnchloroelhylene
P«rchlofoethy1en«
Tetrachloroethane*
Benz1,000x
HBN HBN HBN
100
000
110
410
550
000
000
000
00 0
000
0 0 1
0 0 1
oo i
000
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23,1991 / Proposed Rules
48013
TABLE III.C.4 - USED OIL CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS AND HBNS
(continued)
DIESEL TRUCK&BUSES - STORAGE TANKS
Constituent
Ar&enic . .
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Benzene
Trfchloroethvtene
Perchloroethylene
Tetrachloroethanes
Benzo{b)f]uoranthene ...
Benzo(k)fluoranthene ...
PCBs
Health
Based
Number
(mart.)
OS
1
001
005
005
0.005
0.005
0.005
02
0.001
3.0E-08
3.0E-08
30E-08
5.0E-04
Total
Number
Samples
Analyzed
10
10
10
10
10
3
Z
2
2
2
4
3
4
1
Number
Samples
Constituent
Not Detected
8
s
4
3
0
0
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
1
Number Samples With Positive
Constituent Detection
#s100x 100x<*s1.000x #>1,000x
HBN HBN MBN
100
200
420
1 1 0
073
0 1 2
0 1 0
o o ^
0 1 0
000
002
0 0 1
0 0 1
0 0 0
DIESEL ENGINE CRANKCASE OIL - HEAVY EQUIPMENT
Constituent
Lead
Trichloroethylene
Perchloroethytene ...
Tetrachloroethanee
Behzo(b)fluoranthene ...
Benzo(k)fluoranthene ...
PCBs
Health
Based
Number
(mg/L)
05
1
0.01
005
005
0.005
0.005
0.005
02
0.001
3.0E-09
3.0E-06
3.0E-06
5.0E-04
Total
Number
Samples
Analyzed
10
10
10 -
10
10
0
0
0
0)
0
2
2
2
0
lumber
Samples
Constituent
Not Detected
10
10
4
5
2
6
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
0
Number Samples With Positive
Constituent Detection
#s100>t 100x1,000x
HBN HBN HBN
000
000
420
410
530
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
HEAVY EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FACILITY - STORAGE TANKS
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Trichloroethyton*
Perchloroethytene
Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethane* ......
Benzo(b)fluoranth9ne ...
Benzo(k)fluor«nthen» ...
Sonzo(c)pyr«fM
PCB»
Health
Based
Number
(mg/L)
0.5
1
0.01
0.05
0.05
0005
0.005
0.005
0.2
0.001
3.0E-08
3.0E-06
30E-06
5.0E-04
Total
Number
Samples
Analyzed
4
4
4
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
,- ,5
Number
Samples
Constituent
Not Detected
0
4
0
1
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Number Samples With Positive
Constituent Detection
#s100x 100x<#s1,000x #>1,000x
HBN HBN HBN
400
000
3 1 0
300
0 3 1
0 0 0 '
00 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 00
000
000
000
000
-------
48014
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday, September 23.1991 / Proposed Rules
TABLE III.C.4 - USED OIL CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS AND HBNS
(continued)
DIESEL EN«3JNE CRA**CKCASE OIL - RAILROAD
Cone&tuonf
Lead
"richloroethyten* ...
Perch loroethytene
Tatrachlorcwthanee
3enzo(b)ftuorantften® ...
B0n2o1,OOOX
HBN HBN HBN
000
000
0 1 1
440
520
000
000
ooo
000
e o o
000
00 0
000
000
MARINE OIL - MARINA OIL STORAGE TANKS
Constituent
Araenic
Lead
TrichloroetnyJene
Perehloroethyten*
Tstrachlofosthanee
3enzo(b)fluofanthane ...
Benzo(k)fluorantr>«na ...
Benzo(a)pyrene
pce»
Health
Based
Number
(mg/L)
OS
1
0.01
005
oos
ooos
o.oos
0.006
0.2
0.001
3.0E-OS
3.0E-0*
30E-O8
SOE-04
Total
Number
Samplee
Analyzed
7
j
r
j
7
I
1
t
1
0
0
0
0
Number
Sampleoi
Constituent
Not Detected
7
1
0
o
0
t
1
1
1
1
0
0
o
0
Number Samples With Positive
Constituent Detection
#s100x 100x<*s1,000x #>1.000x
HBN HBN HBN
000
00 0
180
43 0
00 7
00 0
CCO
000
00 0
000
000
000
00 0
ooo
MARINE OIL - FOREIGN CARGO SHIPS
Constituent
Arsenic ,
Cadmium
Chromium .
Lead
Benzene
Trlchloroathylene
Perchlofosthyfen*
Trlchloroethans
Tetrgchloroetrianei
Benzo(b)fluoranthene ...
Benzofkjfluoranthene ...
Benzo(a)pyren«
PCBs
Health
Based
Number
(mg/L)
0 5
0 01
0 06
0 05
0 005
O.OOS
o.oos
02
0.001
3.0E-C8
3.0E-08
30E-C8
50E-Q4
Totai
Number
Sample*
Analyzed
8
7
8
&
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
Number
Samples
Constituent
Not Detected
g
0
0
0
0
0
0
Number Samples With Positive
Constituent Detection
telOOx 100x<#a;1,000x #>t,000x
HBN HBN HBN
000
ooo
000
000
000
000
-------
Federal Register / Vol.-56, No. 184 / Monday,, September 23,1991 / Proposed Rules
48015
TABIE III.C.4 - USED O±L CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS AND HBNS
(continued)
MISCELLANEOUS MARINE OILS
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Benzene
Trichtoroethytone .
Perchloroethyisne
Trichtcroethane .
Tetrachloroethanes
Benzc1.00QK
HBN HBN H8N
00 0
01 0
ISO
2 0 1
© 0 0
& 0 0
ooo
00 0
900
a> o o
000
000
000
HYDRAULIC OILS/FLUIDS
Constituent
Barium
Cadmium
Lead
Trichloroethylene
Perchloroethylene
Tetrachloroethanes
Benzo(b)fluoranthene ...
Benzc1.000x
HBN HBN HBN
100
1 1 0
0 6 1
300
5-2 0
100
000
000
000
000
0 0 0
000
000
000
METALWORMNG OILS/FLUIDS
Constituent
Arsenic
Cadmium
Lead
Trichloroethylen*
Perchloroethylerw
Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethane*
Benzo(b)fluoranthene „.
Benzo1,000x
HBN HBN HBN
30 0
00 0
050
2 1 0
5 3 1
'0 0 0
0 0 0
0 00
000
0 0 0
001
000
: 0 0 0
0 0 0
-------
48016
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23,1991 / Proposed Rules
TABLE III.C.4 - USED OIL CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS AND.HBNS
(continued)
NATURAL GAS-RUED ENGINE OIL
Constituent
Lead
Perch loroelhylena
Tetrachloroethanes
Benzo1,OOQx
HBN HBN HBN
000
000
000
000
000
AIRCRAFT ENGINE OIL
Constituent
Trichloroethylene ....
Perchloroetnylene
Tatrachloroethane*
Benzofbjfluofanthene ...
Benzo(k)fluofanthena ...
PCB»
Based
Number
(mart.)
0.5
0 05
0.05
0.005
O.COS
0.001
3.oE-oe
3.0E-08
5.0E-04
Total
Number
Sampled
Analyzed
10
10
4
4
4
1
1
.
»0
Number
Samplei
Constituent
Not Detected
6
S
4
4
4
t
1
0
Number Samples With Positive
Constituent Detection
p»s100x 100x<#s1,.000x #>1.000x
HBN HBN HBN
0 -0 6
000
000
000
000
AIRCRAFT OIUFLUJDS - STORAGE TANKS
1
Constituent
Trichloroethylerw .........
Perchloroethytene ........
Trichloroethana
Tetrachloroethanet
Benzo(b}fluorantnene ...
Ben2o(k)fluor«nlhene ...
B«nzo(a)pyr«n« —
pCBt
Based
Number
(mg/t)
0 5
0 01
0.05
0.006
O.OOS
0.2
0.001
3.0E-08
3.0E-08
s.oE-oe
5.0E-W
Total
Number
Sample*
Analyzed
7
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
0
Number
Sample*
Constituent
Not Detected
3
1
3
1
0
Number Sample* With Positive
Constituent Detection
»S100X 100x<#i1.000x #>1.000x
HBN HBN HBN
t o o
1 0 0
1 4 1
1 3 0
0 1 5
1 0 0
ooo
000
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23,1991 / Proposed Rules
48017
TABLE III.C.4 - USED OIL CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS AND HBNS
(continued)
ELECTRICAL INSULATING O!L
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium .. .
Lead
Benzene .
Triehloroethylsrje
Perchloroethylena
Triohloroethane
Tetrachloroethanes
Benzo(b)fli!orantfi3ne ...
Benzo(k)fluoranthene ...
Benzo(a)pyrene
PCB3
Health
Based
Number
(mg/L)
OS
1
0.01
005
0 05
0 005
0.005
0.005
0.2
0.001
3.0E-06
3.0E-C6
30E-00
5.0E-04
Total
Number
Samples
Analyzed
11
11
11
11
11
7
7
7
7
7
3
3
3
2
Number
Samples
Constituent
Not Detected
11
11
11
11
10
7
7
7
7
7
3
3
3
1
Numbar Samples With Positive
Constituent Detection
#s1 OOx 1 00x1 ,000x
HBN HBN HBN
000
000
000
000
1 0 0
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
0 0 1
VIRGIN OiL SAMPLES
Constituent
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Benzene
Trichloroethylene
Perchloroethylene
Trichloroethane
Tetrachloroethanes
Benzo(b)fluorantbene ...
Benzo(k)fluoranthena ...
Benzo(a)pyrene
pCBs . ..
Health
Based
Number
(mgIL)
0.5
1
0.01
0.05
0.05
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.2
0.001
3.0E-06
3.0E-06
3.0E-O8
5.0E-04
Total
Number
Samples
Analyzed
6
8
e
e
e
2
2
2
2
2
5
5
5
0
Numbar
Samples
Constituent
Not Detected
6
9
4
e
5
2
2
2
2
2
5
5
5
0
Number Samples With Positive
Constituent Detection
#s100x 100x<#s1,000x #>1,000x
HBN HBN HBN
000
000
200
000
1 0 0
000
000
000
000
000
000
0 0 0 -
000
000
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
-------
48018
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday. September, 23. 1991 / Proposed Rules
Information regarding the
concentration of the appendix VIII
constituents in the waste is available
from the extensive sampling and
analysis effort undertaken by the
Agency and is presented in Table III.C.3,
To assess the threat posed by each of
the categories of used oil, the Agency
compared the compositional
concentration of each constituent of
concern to its corresponding health-
based number.
Historically, EPA has evaluated toxic
constituent concentrations in relation to
the corresponding HBN. In making a
determination to list a particular waste,
KPA examines concentrations for the
constituents of concern, assuming that
some dilution and attenuation (D/A)
will'occur. EPA generally relies on D/A
factors that encompass a broad range of
possibilities, ranging from 100 to 10,000,
which correspond to concentrations for
each constituent of concern in the
environment that are 1 percent and 0.01
percent, respectively, of their
concentrations in the waste. In the past,
EPA has determined that compositional
concentrations exceeding 1,000 times
HBN and leachate concentrations
exceeding 100 times HBN are typically
hazardous and pose a risk to human
health or the environment. The reason
for this differentiation lies in the fact
that leachate concentrations already
simulate some degree of environmental
effect on the waste, while compositional
concentrations do not.
EPA has evaluated compositional
concentrations of the constituents of
concern in used oils based upon the
recently collected analytical data to
determine (1) the number of samples in
which the constituent was not detected
or for which the value was below
detection limits; (2) the number of
samples in which the reported
concentration was less than 100 times
greater than the HBN; (3) the number of
samples in which the reported
concentration was between 100 and
1,000 times greater than the HBN; and
(4) the number of samples in which the
reported concentration was greater than
or equal to 1,000 times the HBN. These
results are shown in Table III.C.4.
The data indicate that automotive
crankcase oils generally contain high
levels of polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs). Of the samples
analyzed, 100 percent exceeded the
health-based number for
benzo(b)fluoranthene and
benzo(a)pyrene by a factor of greater
than 1,000. No other category of "as
generated" used oil exhibited such
consistently high levels of PAHs. Data
for automotive oil/fluid from storage
tanks correlate positively to the "as
generated" data for PAHs in that similar
concentrations of PAHs were detected
in as generated automotive samples and
in automotive storage tank samples.
Like the data for as generated
automotive crankcase samples, all
automotive used oil storage tanks
samples (100 percent) exceeded the
health-based number for all PAHs by a
factor of more than 1,000,
The constituent data also indicate that
aircraft engine oils exceeded the MCL
for lead by a factor of greater than 1,000
in 50 percent of the ten samples. In fact,
those five samples contained
. concentrations of lead that were greater
than 10,000 times the MCL. These five
samples were obtained from piston-
engine aircraft. Samples from turbo-prop
aircraft do not exhibit such high
concentrations of lead. As with
automotive crankcase oil, samples from
aircraft oil/fluid storage tanks show
lead levels that consistently exceed the
MCL by a factor of greater than 1,000.
All marine oil storage tank samples
exceed the MCL for lead by a factor of
greater than 1,000.
b. Toxicity characteristic analysis. As
discussed previously, the Agency also
believes that it is useful to evaluate the
extent to which used oil exhibits the
toxicity characteristic. To accomplish
this evaluation, EPA determined the
TCLP final analyte concentrations from
the constituent concentrations found in
the liquid phase of the sample after
- filtration. An assumption was made that
the concentrations of contaminants was
much higher in the filtrates than in the
leachates. This assumption was based
on analytical data that demonstrated
that the two phases, filtrate and
leachate, are different and, further, that
the concentration of contaminants in
filtrates was higher than in leachates.
The concentration values were
evaluated to determine the percent of
used oil in each category that exhibits
the TC.
Based on the Agency's evaluation of
the used oil analytical data and the
assumption that sample data are
representative of similar used oils
nationwide, it was determined that
certain types of used oils exhibit the
toxicity characteristic and contain other
hazardous substances that are of
regulatory concern to EPA. Table III.C.5
presents the percent of samples in each
used oil category that exhibited the TC.
TABLE III.C.5.—PERCENT OF USED OILS EXHIBITING TC
used oil category
Automotive Crankcase Oil — Unleaded Gasoline Engines
Automotive Oils/Fluids — Storage Tank Samples
Diesel Trucks and Buses — Crackcase Oil
Diesel Trucks/Buses — Storage Tank Samples -.
Diesel Heavy Equipment—Crankcase Oil
Diesel Railroad Engine — Crankcase Oil
Marine Oil— Marina Used Oil Storage Tank Samples 4
Hydraulic Oils/Fluids
Metalworking Oils/Fluids
Electrical Insulating Oil
Natural Gas-Fired Engine Oil
Aircraft Engine Oil:
—Turbojet aircraft
— Piston engine aircraft
Aircraft Oils/Fluids—Storage Tank Samples
No. of
samples
evaluated
12
8
10
10
10
10
7
11
12
10
15
5
4
7
Percent of
samples
exhibiting
TC'
75
100
10
70
0
20
86
45
17
0
20
0
100
86
Confidence limits 2
Lower
confidence
limit 3
(percent)
50
75
1
35
0
6
50
20
5
0
4
0
50
50
Upper
confidence
limit 3
(percent)
90
100
35
88
22
50
99
70
40
22
33
38
100
99
1 Based on estimated final analyte concentrations of one or more TC constituents. Majority of sampfes exhibited TC for tead; however, some exceeded TC levels
for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, or organic constituents.
2 Confidence limits for a proportion at the 90th percentile.
3 From Table A-22, Experimental Statistics, National Bureau of Standards Handbook 91. 1963. . . rr h
4 Samples exhibited TC for lead only. Supplemental point-of-generation data indicate crankcase oils from gasoline powered manne engines are 10 nazardous for
lead
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23. 1991 / Pfoppsed-Rules
43019
Results of sample surveys in which a
small number of samples are collected
are subject to some uncertainty;
therefore, the upper and lower
confidence limits were determined and
reported. The upper and lower
confidence levels are shown in Table
lll.C.5 and reflect, respectively, the
highest and lowest percentage of
samples that could be expected to
exhibit the TC. Confidence limits such
as these provide a numerical basis for
determining how often a given
population of used oil will emulate the
sample population. At the 90th
percentile, it can be stated that for 9 of
10 sample collection/analysis events,
the estimated percent of samples
exhibiting the TC (i.e., 90 percent) will
fall somewhere within the upper and
lower limits.
While EPA has considered the upper
and lower boundaries, the Agency
believes that the percent of samples
exhibiting the TC shown in the table is
the best approximation of the
percentage of used oil in each category
that can be expected to exhibit the TC.
The Agency is not basing its
determinations on the best
approximation alone but EPA conducted
statistical analysis of the concentration
data and supported this conclusion (see
statistical analysis procedure discussed
in detail in the background document
"Used Oil Characterization Sampling
and Analysis Program"). The Agency is
presenting confidence limits to show the
variability in the degrees of precision of
the percentage estimates and to provide
the public with the broad data available
on the statistical analyses.
Despite the phase-down of lead
additives in gasoline, automotive
crankcase oils from unleaded gasoline
engines exhibited the TC in 75% of the
samples, primarily for lead. The Agency
is requesting comment on the source or
sources of lead in automotive crankcase
used oil, which may include gasoline
blow-by, bearings and parts, or leaking
seals. The Agency is interested not only
in data on the sources of lead in auto
crankcase used oil, but also in possible
ways to eliminate or reduce the lead. All
samples from used oil storage tanks at
automotive maintenance facilities (100
percent) exhibited the. TC for lead, as
well as other constituents such as
solvents. Although difficulties exist in
analyzing the samples for TC organics, it
is likely that automotive crankcase oils
and oil froin used oil storage tanks will
exhibit the TC for benzene, since the
compositional data indicate the
presence of benzene in elevated
concentrations. The data also suggest
that used oils from gasoline-powered
marine craft exhibit the TC for lead and
piston-engine aircraft exhibit the TC for
cadmium and lead, respectively.
The EPA data suggest that used oils
from turbojet/turbofan-type aircraft do
not exhibit the TC (0 percent) while used
oils from piston-engine aircraft do
exhibit the TC, primarily for lead.
Approximately 86% of oil from used oil
storage tanks at aircraft maintenance
facilities exhibit the TC for lead in very
high concentrations and 86 percent of
samples from marine oil storage tanks
were TC hazardous. In part, the lead
content in marine oil storage tanks may
be attributable to mixing of otherwise
non-hazardous marine oils with lead-
contaminated used oils from gasoline-
powered marine engines.
Of the remaining categories sampled,
no electrical insulating oils exhibited the
TC (0%) and only 17 percent of the
metalworking oils exhibited the TC.
Diesel engine crankcase oils from
trucks, buses, heavy equipment, and
railroad engines were not generally
found to be TC hazardous for metals.
However, adulteration of used oil with
other materials or more contaminated
oils was found by comparing samples
taken at the point of generation to
samples taken from on-site used oil
storage tanks. Approximately 70% of
used oils from diesel storage tanks
exhibited the TC. This may be
attributable to mixing of used diesel oil
with lubricant cleaners in storage tanks.
D. Used Oil Stratification Based on
Hazardousness and Listing Options
On November 29,1985 (50 FR 9258),
EPA proposed to list all used oils as-
hazardous waste, including petroleum-
derived and synthetic oils, based on the
presence of toxic constituents at levels
of concern from, adulteration during and
subsequent to use. This proposal and the
comments received in response are still
under consideration by the Agency. The
Agency continues to be concerned about
the adulteration of used oil because the
resulting used oil/hazardous waste
mixtures may present a potential
environmental and human health threat.
It is appropriate to consider adulteration
in deciding whether and how to regulate
used oil. It may not be necessary to list
used oil as hazardous waste to control
adulteration. Further, an across the
board listing would penalize generators
of "clean" used oils who are careful not
to mix other materials into the oil. The
Agency has, therefore, developed
alternatives to an across the board
listing of all used oil based on the
adulteration concern.
Given the compositional and TC data
for used oil provided by the 1989
sampling and analysis effort, the Agency
has revised the tentative conclusions it
reached based on the data collected for
the 1985 proposal. EPA now recognizes
the variability of constituent
concentrations between different used
oil streams and now believes that it may
not be appropriate to list all used oils as
a hazardous waste.
As discussed in the previous section,
the results of TCLP analyses of used oil
indicate that some categories of used oil
(;'.e., automobile crankcase oil, piston-
engine aircraft oil, and gasoline-
powered marine craft oil) frequently
exhibit the TC. The remaining categories
of used oil occasionally exhibit the TC;
however, they do not consistently fail
the test.
EPA recognizes that those used oils
that fail the TC clearly are hazardous,
but also acknowledges that those used
oils that do not exhibit the TC may be
appropriate for listing.
The Agency closely evaluated the
results of the compositional analyses of
the various used oil categories in
addition to TC analyses to ensure that
any listing decision for the categories
met the criteria for listing contained in
40 CFR 261.11. As shown earlier,
compositional data, when compared to
the corresponding health-based
numbers, correlates very closely to the
TC findings. That is, in samples where
the constituent concentration exceeds
the health based number by a factor of
1,000 or more, the sample generally
exhibits the TC for that constituent. In
addition to the TC constituents,
automotive crankcase. oils exceeded the
health-based numbers for PAHs by a
factor of more than 1,000, and piston-
engine aircraft exceeded the health-
based numbers for lead by a factor of
greater than 10,000. In used oil
categories that did not exhibit the TG,
PAH analytes generally were not -
detected. This finding leads the Agency
to tentatively conclude that used oil may
be divided into segments for listing
consideration. This is discussed next.
1. Listing Options Overview
Table III.D.l presents three options for
listing or identifying used oil as
hazardous. First, EPA may continue to
rely on the 1985 proposal to list all used
oil based on adulteration concerns. The
-------
48020
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991-f Proposed Rules
November 1985 proposal to list used oil
as hazardous has the advantage of
clearly defining the scope of the listing
(i.e., all used oils generated in the
United States). Further, the 1985
proposal would capture used oils that
are adulterated subsequent to use and
would ensure regulation of used oils
collected in storage tanks that becom0
contaminated with solvents and otner
fluids. However, the 1985 proposal to list
all used oil as hazardous may capture
within the scope of the listing used oils
that are not hazardous at the point of
the generation and that may or may not
be adulterated subsequent to use.
TABLE III.D.1.—LISTING OPTIONS
Option One:
Adulteration
Approach.
Option Two: As-
Generated Approach.
Option Three: No list;
Rely on Management
Standards.
List all used oils as pro-
posed on November 29,
1985 based on the po-
tential (of adulteration
and environmental
damage when misman-
List used oils from gaso-
line-powered engines
(i.e., automotive crank-
case, gasoline powered
marine craft, and piston-
engine aircraft) based
on the presence of con-
stituents of concern at
> 1,000 times the hearth
based level and sam-
pling data that show
these used oils exhibit
the TC in >50% of
samples. Other used
oils and mixtures remain
subject to hazard deter-
mination for all charac-
teristics and rebuttable
presumption and mixture
rule for hazardous
wastes.
List no used oils and rely
on section 3014 man-
agement standards -to
regulate used oils and
mixtures.
Alternately, EPA may decide to make
a listing determination,only on those
categories of used oil that are typically
and frequently hazardous based on their
toxicity at the point of generation, and
rely on other mechanisms such as the
hazardous waste characteristics, the
mixture rule, the rebuttable
presumption, and the used oil
management standards (all of which are
discussed in detail in today's proposal)
to regulate used oils that are not listed.
Listing used oils at the point of
generation may capture only those used
oil categories that are typically and
frequently hazardous. It would not list
those that are typically and frequently
non-hazardous, but non-listed used oils
wpuld continue to remain subject to the
hazardous waste characteristics [e.g.,
ignitability, toxicity). Further, under the
mixture rule, any mixture of a listed
hazardous waste (including listed used
oil) and a solid waste becomes subject
to regulation as a listed hazardous
waste (unless specifically exempted
from the rule). Thus, mixtures of non-
listed used oil and hazardous waste
would be regulated a& hazardous waste.
Also, the rebuttable presumption, as
explained in today's proposal, would
regulate as hazardous any used oil
containing 1,000 ppm or more total
halogens, based on the presumption that
the oil has been mixed with a listed
halogenated solvent. While generators
of such mixtures may rebut the
presumption by showing that the source
of the halogens is not a listed solvent,
the Agency believes that used oil that is
adulterated with solvents subsequent to
use will be captured by the rebuttabie
presumption. Finally, the used oil
management standards contained in this
and previous proposals will encourage
good management practices for used oil,
which the Agency believes will result in
less adulteration of used oil subsequent
to use.
2. Analysis of New Options
Option One was fully discussed in the
1985 proposal and is not discussed here.
Two alternatives are discussed.
Commenters should address these new
options at this time.
Under Option Two, categories of used
oil that were found to be "typically and
frequently" hazardous would be listed
as hazardous waste because of the
presence of lead, PAHs, and other toxic
constituents including arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, and benzene (see
§ 281.llf.aH3) and (b) of the Agency's
listing criteria). To define "typically and
frequently," the Agency is proposing
that when 50 percent of more of the
samples in a used oil category exceed
the levels of concern, the used oil
category is deemed to be "typically and
frequently" hazardous. Under Option
Two, EPA is considering both TCLP data
and compositional data in determining
those "as generated" categories of used
oil that are "typically and frequently"
hazardous. Under this option, if greater
than 50 percent of the samples in a given
used oil category were found to exhibit
the TC and, based on compositional
analysis, exceed the health-based
number for TC constituents or PAHs by
a factor of greater than 1,000, the used
oil category is deemed to be "typically
and frequently" hazardous. The Agency
requests comment on the 50 percent
cutoff for determining if a waste is
"typically and frequently" hazardous.
Under this approach, "used oil from
gasoline powered engines", which
includes automotive crankcase, gasoline
powered marine engine oils, and pistorj-
engine aircraft oils way be listed as
hazardous waste. Compositional data
for these categories indicate they are
high in PAHs. Furthermore, analytical
data from 17 samples of these kinds of
engine oils indicate that more than 75
percent of the samples exhibit the
toxicity characteristic, primarily for
lead. Table III.C.6 identifies the
proposed hazardous waste code and
waste description.
TABLE lll.C.6.—USED OILS PROPOSED
FOR LISTING
Waste description
Used oils from gasoline-powered ert; '
gines (e.g.. automotive crankcase,
marine, and piston-engine aircraft)
Proposed
hazardous
waste code
F030
Based on the Agency's data and data
submitted by commenters, EPA believes
the remaining used oils are not typically
and frequently TC hazardous as
generated and do not contain high levels
of PAHs. Thus, under this option, they
would not be listed as hazardous. Those
used oils that are not listed would, of
course, remain subject to the
characteristics for the purpose of waste
identification.
There are several advantages and
disadvantages to this option. Listing of
specific used oil categories may allow
for easier implementation at generator
sites and may increase certainty for
industry and EPA as to the
hazardousness of categories of used oil.
Further, this option may institute a
greater degree of national uniformity in
the regulation of used oil. Some states
currently regulate used oil as a
hazardous waste, and EPA has become
aware of Cases where used oil has been
shipped for disposal from States in
which it is regulated as a hazardous
waste into States in which it is not. ,
Further, this option may reduce the
cost and time of analytical testing of the
three categories of used oil listed and
may present enforcement advantages in
terms of testing and administration. As
previously discussed, listing of the three
used oil categories may capture those
used oils that are typically and
frequently hazardous; however, listings
may capture individual used oils within
each category that are not hazardous as
generated (such aa a single automotive
used oil sample ihat does not contain
high levels of lead or PAHs). Generators
of a partipuJar, used oil that aoes not
meet the criteria for listing as a
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48021
hazardous waste may petition for
delisting under 40 CFR 260.22, but we
recognize this option is not very feasible
for such a large, diverse universe as
used oil generators.
A third option being proposed is a
"No List" option for used oils, based on
the technical criteria under 40 CFR
261.11(a)(3). 40 CFR 261.11(a){3) provides
that EPA may take a number of factors
into account in making.a listing decision.
Those factors relate to the hazards
posed by the waste in question. In some
circumstances, even though a waste
contains toxic constituents, it may not
pose a substantial hazard if improperly
managed.
Section 3014(a] allows the Agency to
develop management standards under
subtitle C independent of whether used
oil is listed or identified as a hazardous
waste. Section 3014(a) does not require
EPA to list or identify used oils as
hazardous wastes prior to setting
management standards for recycled
used oil, but it does authorize EPA to
develop regulatory standards for
recycling of all used oils, both
hazardous and nonhazardous. The
management standards proposed in 1985
and today control improper disposal
such as road oiling, dumping, and land
disposal. (See discussion in VTH.B of this
notice.) Today's notice discusses
changes to the 1985 proposal, including
the possibility of adopting these
standards without listing used oil.
If EPA does promulgate management
standards for used oil under section
3014(a), then the Agency's consideration
of the listing factors in 40 CFR
261.11(a)(3) would be significantly
different than if no management
standards were issued. Specifically,
since the management standards
address the types of mismanagement
that historically have occurred with
used oil (i.e., adulteration with
hazardous waste, road oiling with
contaminated used oil, spillage, etc.) the
need to list used oil to attain
environmental control may be greatly
reduced.
Of course, EPA must consider 40 CFR
261.11(a)(3) in its entirety. The other
listing factors (i-vi and viii-x) may
largely be unaffected by imposition of
management standards; EPA would,
however, give significant weight to the
factors in 40 CFR 281.11[3)(vii) and
(3)(x), since in this case, the standards
would not only address typical
mismanagement scenarios but, equally
important, would be enforceable under
RCRA Section 3008, to the same extent
as if the material was listed as
hazardous waste. EPA believes that the
types of mismanagement historically
associated with used oil may no longer
be plausible if subject to Federal
enforcement. Furthermore, the
regulation issued under RCRA 3014(a)
must be "consistent with protection of
human health and the environment,"
which parallels the standards for
regulation issued under RCRA 3002-
3004, to which hazardous used oil would
be subject. Under this approach, EPA,
considering 40 CFR 261.11(a)(3) as a
whole, might find that listing used oil as
hazardous waste is not necessary to
achieve adequate control, given the
implementation and enforcement of
management standards for recycled oil,
since the likelihood of mismanagement
and resultant consequences greatly
would be reduced. (See discussion in
sections VIII and IX of the notice.)
Therefore, listing or identification of
used oil as hazardous waste may not be
necessary to meet the statutory
requirements of RCRA sections 3001 and
3014(b).
Should EPA decide to undertake this
approach, used oil would not be listed
as a hazardous waste, but generators of
used oil would continue to be required
to determine if the used oil exhibited
any characteristics of hazardous waste
if they chose to dispose of the used oil.
Used oil that exhibits any characteristic
and is recycled would be subject to the
RCRA section 3014 management
standards being proposed in lieu of
regular subtitle C requirements, so a
characteristic determination would not
be required. However, used oil destined
for disposal that exhibits any
characteristic must be disposed in
accordance with all applicable subtitle
C requirements and this way generators
would have to determine—as is
presently the case—whether the used oil
exhibits a characteristic. EPA requests
comments on whether a specific test
(using the TCLP) should be required
every time used oil would be disposed
or whether the generator knowledge
would be adequate to make the disposal
decision.
EPA recognizes that this option is not
completely comprehensive because EPA
lacks the authority to impose Federally-
enforceable regulations on the disposal
of nonhazardous used oil. Therefore, a
- suboption that the Agency is considering
would combine aspects.of Options Two
and Three to list used gasoline-powered
engine crankcase oil when disposed.
This might be accomplished in one of
two ways. First, the listing description in
Table IILC.6 might be modified to refer
only to crankcase oil "being disposed
of". As an alternative, EPA might
promulgate the listing description as
shown in Table III.C.6, but would then
exclude recycled oil from the definition
of hazardous waste in 40 CFR 261.4(b).
As discussed below in this notice, the
Agency is considering a presumption
that used oil is to be recycled, so the
listing would only come into effect if a
person took some action, i.e., placing
used oil is a disposal unit, indicating
intent of disposal. The listing would
effectively control crankcase oil
disposal, since it would be in
compliance with subtitle C
requirements. Comments are requested
on both the general "No List" options
and the sub-option of listing used oil
when disposed, based on the factors
discussed above.
EPA requests comments on the three
options presented here. EPA specifically
requests comment on the advantages
and disadvantages of making a listing
determination for those used oils that
consistently fail the TC.
EPA particularly is interested in the
views of States on the critical issue of
whether used oil should be listed as
hazardous waste. A number of States
currently list used oil as hazardous
waste or special waste, while most do
not. EPA is very interested in having
State governments comment on whether
a national listing (of some or all used
oils) may help or hinder effective
implementation of existing State used oil
regulatory programs and State or local
DIY collection programs.
Over the past 10-12 years, those
States who have regulated used oil as
hazardous or special wastes, those with
no specific used oil regulation but
certain requirements {e.g.,
recordkeeping, invoice, notification) for
used oil recycling, and those with no
State used oil regulation have
collectively experienced positive
impacts (increased recycling) and
negative impacts (greater
mismanagement) from used oil
regulation. EPA believes the
consideration of State experience is
crucial in developing a national used oil
regulation. In the interim between the
1985 proposal to list all used oils as
hazardous and the 1986 decision not to
list used oil, the Agency.contacted
various States to assess their
perspectives on the proposal to list all
used oils knd its impact on used oil
handlers within the respective States.
Based on State comments at the time,
EPA inferred that the listing could
produce negative impacts on used oil
recycling and increase mismanagement.
The main reason cited was the lack of
the availability of enforcement funds to
implement and enforce State regulation.
EP^fV is again interested in determining
the impact of listing alternatives
discussed in today's noticb on local used
oil 'markets in general.
-------
48022 Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 /Proposed Rules
IV. Oily Wastewaters
The Agency today is proposing to
amend the mixture rule to exclude those
non-hazardous wastewaters, at facilities
subject to Section 402 or 307(b) of the
Clean Water Act s, that are
contaminated with very small quantities
of listed used oil. In the November 29,
1985 rule, which proposed to list all used
oil as hazardous waste, EPA considered
exempting wastewaters contaminated
with de minimi's or very small quantities
of used oil from the mixture rule (40 CFR
261.3) (see 50 FR 49263-49264). EPA
continues to believe that the
concentrations of hazardous
constituents that may be present in such
mixtures will be so small as to pose no
significant hazard to human health and
the environment. The following
regulatory definition of the wastewater
to be excluded from the mixture rule if
mixed with de minimi's quantities of
used oil, as proposed in the November
29,1985, has not changed and is
repeated below for the convenience of
the reader.
(F) Used oil caused by a de minimis loss of
lubricating oil, hydraulic oil, metalworking
fluids, or insulating fluid or coolant. For
purposes of this paragraph, "de minimis"
losses include small spills, leaks, or drippings
from pumps, machinery, pipes, and other
similar equipment during normal operations
or when small amounts of oil are lost to the
wastewater treatment system during washing
or draining operations. This exception will
not apply if the used oil is discarded as a
result of abnormal manufacturing operations
resulting in substantial leaks, spills, or other
releases or to used oil recovered from
wastewater.
The Agency recognizes that an
exemption from the mixture rule will
only remove from RCRA Subtitle C
regulation non-hazardous wastewaters
contaminated with very small, non-
separable amounts of listed used oil. For
example, oily wastewaters can be
passed through an oil/water separator
or other device to remove excess oil.
Used oil that is recovered from
wastewater will be subject to the
section 3014 management standards for
recycled oil as proposed in section
IX.A.4 in today's notice. The remaining
wastewater will contain minimal
amounts of used oil, as described in the
proposed definition. Since these
mixtures present an insignificant
hazard, EPA also is proposing to exempt
such wastewater mixtures from RCRA
section 3014 management standards.
8 Section 402 of the Clean Water Act requires a
NPDES permit for direct discharges of pollutants to
waters of the U.S. Section 307(b) of the Clean Water
Act requires facilities discharging to Publicly
Owned Treatment Works (POTWa) to comply with
pre-treatment standards.
The exemption for mixtures of used
oil and non-hazardous wastewaters
would hot apply if the used oil is
discarded as a result of abnormal
manufacturing operations [e.g., plant
shutdowns or operation malfunctions
resulting in substantial spills, leaks, or
other releases). Such a mixture will be
considered a used oil and would be
subject to the RCRA section 3014
management standards. The exemption
also would not apply to non-hazardous
wastewaters contaminated with small
amounts of used oil that are mixed with
other hazardous waste. Such a mixture
is already subject to full regulation
under 40 CFR parts 262-265, and parts
268, 270, 271, and 124 via the 40 CFR
261.3 "mixture rule". This is discussed in
more detail next.
The practical effect of this proposed
exclusion for facilities discharging
wastewaters under the Clean Water Act
(CWA) will vary. If a facility discharges
wastewater (including oily wastewater}
to surface waters under section 402 of
the CWA, such wastewaters when
discharged are not solid wastes under
RCRA, and are not subject to any
subtitle C requirements (see 40 CFR
261.4(a)(2)). Similarly, wastewaters are
generally not solid or hazardous wastes
under RCRA when they are discharged
through sewers to publicly owned
treatment works (POTWs) under section
307(b) of the CWA (see 40 CFR
261.4(a)(lJ).
Wastewaters discharged to surface
waters or POTWs are considered to be
solid wastes under RCRA before
discharge, and are therefore, subject to
the generator requirements of 40 CFR
part 262 if they are listed or
characteristic hazardous wastes.
However, the wastewaters are not
subject to the standards of 40 CFR part
264 (e.g., permitting) if they are treated
in wastewater treatment tanks subject
to section 402 or 307(b) (see 40 CFR part
284.1(g)(6) and 40 CFR 260.10). If
wastewaters containing small amounts
of used oil are exempt from the used oil
mixture rule, the effect will therefore be
that these facilities no longer have to
comply with the generator requirements
of 40 CFR part 262. In addition, facilities
discharging to POTWs will no longer
have to comply with the hazardous
waste notification requirements of 40
CFR403.12(p).
Facilities which discharge to surface
waters or to POTWs and which employ
surface impoundments rather than
wastewater treatment tanks are
currently subject to the standards of 40
CFR part 264 if their wastewater is
hazardous. For these facilities, the effect
of today's proposal would be tp exempt
them from these standards, the
generator requirements of 40 CFR part
262, and (for facilities discharging to
POTWs), the notification requirements
of 40 CFR 403.12(p).
The Agency believes that these
exclusions are justified because the
wastewaters exempted under today's
proposal pose no significant threat to
human health and the environment and
because they are already subject to
Clean Water Act controls. EPA notes
that CWA pretreatment regulations
prohibit facilities from discharging
petroleum oil, non-biodegradable cutting
oil, or products of mineral oil origin to
POTWs in amount that will cause pass
through to surface water or interfere
with POTW operation (see 40 CFR
403.5(b)(6)). Similarly, oily wastewaters
discharged directly to surface waters
may be subject to technology-based
controls under Section 402 of the CWA
and must always comply with water
quality standards established under the
State programs.
V. Used Oil Mixtures To Be Evaluated
A. Mixtures of All Used Oils and
Hazardous Waste
Mixtures of used oil and hazardous
waste are classified as hazardous waste
under the mixture rule of 40 CFR 261.3
and are subject to the full subtitle C
regulation for hazardous waste. Under
40 CFR 266.40(c), used oil to be burned
for energy recovery that contains more
than 1,000 ppm of total halogens is
presumed to be a hazardous waste
because it has been mixed with
halogenated hazardous waste listed in
40 CFR part 261, subpart D. Currently,
the presumption may be rebutted by
showing that the used oil does not
contain significant concentrations of
halogenated hazardous constituents
listed in 40 CFR part 261, appendix VII!
or that the constituents are only from
hazardous waste generated by
conditionally exempt small quantity
generators subject to 40 CFR 261.5.
As proposed on November 29,1985 as
part of the used oil management
standards (50 FR 49219), EPA is
considering applying the "rebuttable
presumption" for used oil fuels that may
have been mixed with chlorinated
hazardous wastes (found at 40 CFR
266.40(c)) to all used oil that is recycled,
reused, or reclaimed. The only way to
rebut this presumption would be to
demonstrate ana document that the
halogenated compounds detected in the
mixture are not Mated solvents. Mixtures
of used oil and hazardous waste,
including mixtures of used oil and
hazardous waste from conditionally
exempt small quantity generators.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48023
w
-------
48024
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday. September 23. 1991 / Proposed Rules^
propose to regulate the used oil removal
process itself, but does propose to
require clean-up of any spills that occur
during draining or collecting of used oil.
The primary reason is that a possibility
exists for used oil drips, releases, and/or
spills while the free-flowing oil is
removed (generated) and collected. By
this Agency's action, such mishaps
would be minimized and associated
cleanups would be undertaken. Used oil
removed from a s.olid waste must be
collected into a unit {e.g., container or
tank) regulated under section 3014. If the
used oil is separated from wastewater,
the used oil must be directed to a unit
regulated under section 3014. This
approach would exclude only the
physical act of used oil removal.
Generators who failed to remove non-
free flowing used oil from an industrial
wiper may be required to dispose of the
wiper as hazardous waste, if the used oil
in the wiper were listed or if the wiper
exhibited a hazardous characteristic. If
recycled, the undrained wiper and oil
may be subject to the section 3014
standards prior to removal of the oil and
any used oil removed from an industrial
wiper would be subject to any listings,
characteristic determinations, or RCRA
section 3014 management standards that
may otherwise apply to used oil. While
the drained wiper is no longer subject to
the section 3014 standards, the removed
oil would continue to be subject to
section 3014 for recycling.
b. Sorptive Minerals: In comments
submitted relative to the November 1985
proposal, the Sorptive Minerals Institute
(SMI) provided information to support
their contention that sorptive minerals
[i.e., absorbent materials such as clays
and diatomaceous earths) do not release
hazardous constituents under pressure
and that significant quantities of oil or
hazardous constituents do not leach out
of sorptive minerals. This is important in
the determination as to whether
mixtures of used oil and sorptive
materials may be regulated under the
"mixture rule" (40 CFR 261.3), if any
used oils are listed. Results of SMI's
study (a copy of which is in the docket
for today's notice), using EPA's Liquid
Release Test, showed that the typical
sorptive material could hold more than
60 percent of its weight in oil, even at
high pressures. To test the assumption
that sorptive materials do not leach
constituents of concern, SMI allowed
several sorptive minerals to absorb a
pooled used motor oil sample. The
sample contained high levels of TC
constituents. Testing using the TCLP
showed that the constituents of concern
did not leach when exposed to
prolonged TCLP extraction, even at high
loading levels; thus, these mixtures are
unlikely to pose a hazard when
disposed. Based on the SMI data, EPA is
proposing an exemption for sorptive
minerals from the definition of
hazardous waste in 40 CFR 261.4(b).
In order to provide a means for
generators to qualify for the exemption,
the Agency proposes that generators
test sorptive minerals used to clean up
oil spills by using EPA's Liquid Release
Test (SW-846 proposed Method 9096)
(55 FR 22543, June 1,1990) to determine
the minerals' ability to desorb used oils.
The Liquid Release Test is designed to
determine whether or not liquids will be
released from sorbents when they are
subjected to overburden pressures in a
landfill.
Finally, the exemption is based on the
premise that the sorptive minerals may
be used, in appropriate amounts, only
when spills or leaks occur, and that
excess used oil may be removed from
the sorptive mineral through pressing or
squeezing. If the used oil so removed is
recycled, these activities would not be
subject to RCRA regulations for
hazardous waste treatment but would
be considered as used oil recycling
activities. As with industrial wipers,
EPA proposes not to regulate the
removal of free-flowing used oil from the
sorptive materials. However, any used
oil so removed may be subject to the
RCRA section 3014 management
standards, listings, or characteristic
determinations as appropriate. Any use
of sorptive materials (or other materials)
simply to dilute used oil prior to
disposal may be considered treatment,
potentially subject to hazardous waste
regulation and permitting.
C. Oil Filters
Under current RCRA subtitle C
regulations, if a generator is sending a
used oil filter for disposal, the generator
is required to determine whether the
used oil filter is a hazardous waste. This
can be accomplished either by use of the
generator's knowledge of the waste or
process that generated the waste or by
testing. In the case of the TC, testing
requires running the TCLP. EPA
guidance on this issue has stated that
the TCLP can be performed on oil filters
by crushing, grinding, or cutting the. filter
and its contents until the pieces are
smaller than one centimeter and will
pass through a 9.5 mm standard sieve. If
the oil filter exhibits the TC it is a
hazardous waste subject to RCRA
subtitle C regulations.
However, certain recycling activities
generally are exempt from subtitle C
regulation, and EPA encourages
generators to recycle used oil filters. To
accomplish this, generators or recycling
facilities may crush, dismantle, cut open,
spin, centrifuge, or drain the oil filter to
remove the used oil from the filter. The
following exemptions can then be
applied:
• If the used oil is recycled, then the
draining/crushing is considered an
unregulated used oil recycling activity,
not regulated treatment. (See discussion
in section VJ3.2.a for EPA's rationale for
not subjecting draining activities to the
section 3014 management standards.)
• Used oil that is recycled is exempt
from subtitle C regulation under the
used oil recycling exemptions in 40 CFR
261.6 (a)(2)(iii) and (a)(3)(iii), but may be
subject to RCRA section 3014
management standards when
promulgated.
• Crushed or drained oil filters that
are recycled are exempt from Subtitle C
regulation under the hazardous scrap
metal exemption in 40 CFR
261.6(a)(3)(iv).
As a best operating practice, based on
the information available to EPA, the
Agency recommends that the generator
or recycling facility both drain and crush
used oil filters to remove as much of the
oil as possible.
The Iowa Waste Reduction Center at
the University of Northern Iowa
conducted a study of over 1,200 used
automotive oil filters to determine
methods to reduce the potential
environmental damage from the filters.
The Iowa study, which is included in the
docket for today's notice, found that the
environmental impact could be
significantly reduced through draining
used oil filters to remove the free- -
flowing used oil, which removed
approximately one-half of the used oil.
The amount of used oil recovered
through draining was dependent upon
the drainage time, ranging from 44
percent in 4 hours to 55 percent in 12
hours. The study further found that
draining followed by compression in a
hydraulic press removed 88 percent of
the residual oil, with 12 percent (one
ounce) of used oil remaining in the filter
material.
Based on the results of the Iowa
study, it appears that insignificant
amounts of free-flowing used oil remain
in filters after crushing; therefore, EPA is
proposing an exclusion for used oil
filters that have been drained and
crushed from regulation as hazardous
waste under 40 CFR 261.4(b), which
defines those solid wastes that are not
hazardous wastes. Such an exclusion
would allow crushed and drained oil
filters to be managed as solid waste
-------
Federal Register ./ Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48025
under RCRA subtitle D "foy exempting
them from any listings or characteristics
of hazardous waste, including the TC.
Oil drained from the filter would still be
subject to any listings, characteristic
determinations, or RCRA section 3014
management standards as otherwise
applicable. (Refer to section IX.A.5 for
similar discussion as Part of Phase I
used oil management standards.) EPA
specifically requests comment on the
Iowa study and on what parameters, if
any, may be set in determining what
constitutes "crushing." EPA also
requests comment and supporting
analytical data on other methods that
may be used to remove free-flowing
used oil from spent oil filters.
D. Mixtures of Small Quantities of
Listed Used Oil and Solid Waste
If any used oils are listed, the strict
application of the mixture rule to
mixtures of "such oil with other materials
can result in the classification of many
materials as listed hazardous waste. As
discussed above, EPA is considering
specific exemptions for industrial
wipers, sorptive minerals, and oil filters
that have been drained of free-flowing
used oil. There are a number of other
such materials. The Agency believes
that many of these materials may not
pose a threat to human health and the
environment because of the very small
quantities of used oil involved. Because
a quantitative limit is difficult to
determine, the Agency sought a
qualitative limit. Such a limitation could
be qualitatively assessed by determining
whether or not free flowing used oil is
present in the mixture. If one drop of
listed used oil is capable of flowing from
the mixture, then the waste may be
considered hazardous.
If promulgated, the "one-drop"
philosophy may allow the disposal in
subtitle D facilities of solid
nonhazardous waste that does not
contain free flowing used oil. Under this
exemption, generators could drain scrap
metal, contaminated soil, or other
nonhazardous wastes of all free flowing
used oil and then dispose of the drained
material ia accordance with subtitle D.
If the used oil drained from the scrap
metal is to be recycled, these activities
would not be subject to RCRA
regulations for hazardous waste
treatment (see 40 CFR 261.6 (a)l(2)(iii)
and (a}(3)(iii)) or to the RCRA section
3014 management standards. (See
" EPA recognizes that some Stales are
considering banning used oil filters, even when
crushed And drained filters, from municipal
landfills. Individual States would, .of course, retain
authority for such controls even with the proposed
exclusion.
discussion in section V.B.2.a for EPA's
rationale for not subjecting draining
activities to the section 3014
management standards.) However, any
used oil so removed may be subject to
the RCRA section 3014 management
standards, listings, or characteristic
determinations as appropriate. EPA has
already recommended this approach
above, in the specific cases of industrial
wipers, sorptive materials, and oil
filters.
As previously discussed, the Agency
proposes that generators of test sorptive
minerals used to clean up oil spills test
those minerals using EPA's Liquid
Release Test (SW-846 proposed Method
9096) (55 FR 22543, June 1,1990) to
determine the minerals' ability to desorb
used oils. The Liquid Release Test is
designed to determine whether or not
liquids will be released from sorbents
when they are subjected to overburden
pressures in a landfill. EPA also is
proposing to require generators of other
used oil/solid waste mixtures to test
those mixtures using EPA's Paint Filter
Test (SW-846 Method 9095) to
determine that there is no additional
free-flowing used oil in the mixture.
These tests will verify that the used oil/
solid waste mixture meets the "one-
drop" philosophy criteria.
EPA also requests comment on other
test methods that are being or could be
used to determine whether all free-
flowing oil has been removed from used
oil laden solid waste. In addition, the
Agency would like to receive data that
would indicate the applicability of the
Paint Filter Test or new test methods to
used oil contaminated soils.
The Agency acknowledges the
advantages of an easily identifiable
mixture rule limit. Public comment is
requested on the efficacy of the "one-
drop" test in determining which
mixtures of used oil and solid waste
may be subject to subtitle C regulation
under the mixture rule. In the
alternative, EPA solicits comment on
whether a quantifiable level could be
established and what an appropriate
level might be,
E. Mixtures of Non-listed, Hazardous
Used Oil and Solid Waste
EPA is concerned that confusion may
exist for the regulated community on the
applicability of RCRA regulations to
mixtures of non-listed used oil that
exhibit one or more of the
characteristics of hazardous waste and
solid waste. The following discussion is
provided as a guideline for the regulated
community and responds to comments
provided in response to the November
1985 and March 1986 notices. This
discussion would only apply if EPA
chooses to list some used oils.
1. Shock Absorbers
Monroe Auto Equipment submitted
detailed analytical data on used oils in
shock absorbers, since, in their view,
shock absorbers may be considered
hazardous waste if the oil contained in
them were listed as hazardous. Data
were submitted from an independent
laboratory that analyzed several
samples of used shock absorber oil for
the presence of CERCLA Listed
Hazardous Substances (Table 302.4 of 40
CFR 302.4) and EP Toxic metals using
SW-846 methods 8240 and 8270. The
analyses demonstrated that the
constituents were not present at
concentrations of regulatory concern.
Under today's proposal, EPA is
considering listing only certain
categories of used oil. Oil in shock
absorbers is not among those proposed
for listing, but all solid waste
nonetheless remains subject to a hazard
determination for the characteristics of
hazardous waste. Spent shock absorbers
that are disposed of remain subject to a
characteristic determination, and any
applicable subtitle C requirements when
discarded. Generally, however, the oil in
spent shock absorbers is not removed.
Instead, the entire unit is recycled by
manufacturers. Shock absorbers sent for
recycling, and oil recovered from them
that is recycled, would be exempt from
hazardous waste regulation, but would
still be subject to section 3014
management standards (as discussed
below).
2. Request for Comment on Other
Mixtures
Commenters on the November, 1985
and March, 19S6 Federal Register
notices suggested that additional
mixture rule exemptions be considered
by the Agency prior to promulgation. In
particular, commenters sought
clarification on the application of the
mixture rule to several other mixtures,
including soil contaminated with used
oil and coal "treated" with used oil.
EPA requests comments on extending
the proposed one-drop philosophy to all
such mixtures. We note that facilities
applying or using used oil for purposes
such as coal treating are subject to part
266, subpart E, and would be subject to
the section 3014 management standards
discussed in today's notice since they
are producing used oil fuel. EPA
requests comment on whether coal
treated with small amounts of used oil
should be exempt from regulation, and
what conditions might be placed on
treated coal as part of an exemption.
-------
48026 Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
VI. Derived-From Rule
The existing "derived from" rule
contained in 40 CFR 261.3(c)(2) provides
that "any solid waste generated from
the treatment, storage, or disposal of a
hazardous waste, including any sludge,
spill residue, ash, emission control dust,
or leachate (but not including a
precipitation run-off) is a hazardous
waste." If any used oils are listed,
residues from their handling and
treatment may also be deemed listed
hazardous waste. EPA is, as discussed
below, separately proposing to list as
hazardous certain waste residuals from
used oil recycling and re-refining,
making the derived-from rule moot for
those particular residues.
A. Applicability to Used Oil Fuel
Residuals
While EPA is concerned about the
potential impacts of regulating burning
residuals (e.g., ash) as hazardous waste,
the Agency notes that the derived-from
rule is an important part of the current
hazardous waste definition. The rule, as
explained May 19,1980 (45 FR 33096)
was instituted to ensure that toxic
constituents that are likely to end up in
treatment residuals are properly
managed.
1. Residuals From the Burning of Off-
Specification and Specification Used Oil
Fuel
The Agency is contemplating the
applicability of the derived-from rule of
40 CFR 261.3(c)(2) to ash or pollution
control device-collected residuals from
burning off-specification used oil as a
fuel. Under the approach for listing only
certain used oil and the planned
management standards for all used oils
discussed today, off-specification used
oil fuel may or may not contain used oils
that are listed as hazardous waste.
However, under the derived-from rule as
currently written, any ash (or pollution
control residual, such as baghouse dust),
from burning listed used oil may itself
be hazardous waste. Thus, a
determination as to whether the
derived-from rule applies to a particular
residual may be difficult to make and
may tend to cause generators to treat all
used oil fuel residuals as derived-from
wastes. The regulation of burning
residuals as hazardous waste may raise
the expense involved in handling used
oil fuel and may likely discourage this
use.
EPA requests comment on the
composition of used oil fuel residuals
from burning of off-specification fuel. If
EPA receives sufficient data on
residuals generated by the burning of
used oil to show that it is not hazardous,
the Agency will consider amending the
derived-from rule to exclude residuals
produced from the burning of used oil
fuels. Under this approach, EPA may
only exclude residuals from the derived-
from rule. Residuals generated by the
burning of off-specification used oil fuel
may remain subject to the hazardous
waste characteristics, and any residual
exhibiting the characteristic of
hazardous waste may be subject to the
hazardous waste regulations. (Of course,
this amendment would not affect the
application of the derived-from rule to
residuals from burning fuels constituting
mixtures of used oil and hazardous
waste regulated under 40 CFR part 266,
subpart D.)
Further, EPA notes that under 40 CFR
266.43(b)(6)(i), provided all requirements
are met, "specification used oil fuel is
not subject to further regulation unless it
is subsequently mixed with hazardous
waste or unless it is mixed with used oil
so that it no longer meets the
specification." Thus, used oil fuel that
meets the specification is not subject to
the derived from rule if the appropriate
notices and fuel analyses have been
completed. In developing the
specification for used oil fuel, EPA's
rationale was to establish specification
levels that limited the toxic constituents
in the fuel. The specifications were set
at levels that may present a lower risk
in human exposure scenarios. When
burned, the limited levels of toxic
contaminants in specification used oil
fuel either will be destroyed or remain
in the burning residual. Ash and other
residuals from the burning of
specification used oil fuel are less likely
to be contaminated. EPA is not
proposing today to alter the used oil fuel
specification established under 40 CFR
part 266, subpart E.
2. Co-firing Specification Used Oil With
Fossil Fuels or Virgin Fuel Oils
In the November 29,1985 final rule
addressing burning of waste fuel and
used oil fuel in boilers and industrial
furnaces, combustion residuals excluded
from regulation under RCRA section
3001 were not subject to the burning rule
(50 FR 49190). As stated in that rule,
EPA has interpreted the RCRA section
3001 exclusions to include "fly ash,
bottom ash, boiler slag and1 flue gas
emission control waste resulting from (1)
the combustion solely of coal, oil, or
natural gas, (2) the combustion of any
mixture of these fossil fuels, or (3) the
combustion of any mixture of coal and
other fuels, including hazardous wastes
or used oil fuels, up to a 50 percent
mixture of such other fuels." Further,
residuals from the burning of these fossil
fuels and mixtures, including ash and
emission control dust, are not subject to
the hazardous waste characteristics.
Today's proposal continues those' '; ;l ;'
exclusions for the combustion of any
mixture of coal and up to 50 percent
used oil that is subject to RCRA section
3014 management standards, as
proposed.
EPA has received a request for
guidance on the co-firing of spepification
used oils with virgin oils at facilities
eligible for the exclusion noted above
because they burn virgin fuel oil only.
EPA believes that such a practice is
consistent with the intent of RCRA to
encourage the recycling and reuse of
used oils in an environmentally sound
manner. EPA, however, notes that under
the current regulatory provisions and
interpretations (as discussed above),
this particular mix of materials to be
burned for energy recovery may cause
the burning facility to lose their
exclusion under EPA's interpretation of
RCRA section 3001. Because of EPA's
desire not to discourage legitimate and
beneficial recycling practices, EPA is
proposing to consider specification used
oil fuel to be equivalent to a fossil fuel
for the purpose of the interpretation
discussed above. The effect of this
interpretation is to allow the burning of
a mix of virgin and specification used oil
fuels in utility boilers.
B. Applicability to Used Oil
Reintroducedin Petroleum Refinery
Processes
The Agency is considering exempting
petroleum-based products that include
listed used oil as a raw material from
the requirements of 40 CFR parts 262
through 266 and parts 268, 270, and 124,
as well as the notification requirements
of RCRA section 3010. The Agency has
already excluded fuels produced from
the refining of oily hazardous wastes
and oils reclaimed from hazardous
waste, both resulting from normal
petroleum refining practices, under 40
CFR 261.6(a)(3) (v) and (vi). The Agency
is today proposing to extend those
exclusions to fuels produced and oil
reclaimed from used oil.
It may be possible that, when
incorporated into a product that will
undergo extensive processing prior to
being offered for sale, the constituents
of concern in a used oil will be removed.
The Agency is considering exempting
used oil that is mixed with crude oil or
other oily materials and later used as a
raw material in a refining process from
subtitle C requirements by adding listed
used oil to the recyclable materials
contained in 40 CFR 261.6(a)(3). EPA
solicits data that may support such an
exemption. As discussed when EPA first
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48027
promulgated the exclusions under 40
CFR 261.6(a)(3J (v) and (vi), (see 50 FR
49169, November 29,1985), the
hazardous wastes that fall under these
exclusions must be introduced into the
process prior to distillation or catalytic
cracking. It was the Agency's
determination at the time of
promulgation of the exclusions that
these steps were essential to the
removal of contaminants in the refinery
process (see 50 FR 49169, November 29,
1985). EPA today proposes that the same
requirements apply to used oil; that is,
used oil must be introduced into the
process or pipeline prior to distillation
or catalytic cracking.
Because processes that involve only
cursory removal of constituents should
not be excluded from the derived-from
rule, the Agency requests comment on
requiring introduction of used oil prior to
distillation or catalytic cracking, on
. other refining processes that may be
included in the exemption, and on
defining those activities that involve
only cursory removal of contaminants.
Further, the Agency requests
information on the efficacy of
introducing used oils into the process
prior to catalytic cracking.
VII. Reprocessing and Re-refining
Residuals
A. Residuals as Related to Used OH
In the 1985 proposal to list used oil as
hazardous, EPA stated that used oil
residues or sludges resulting from the re-
refining or reprocessing of used oils may
be included in the definition of used oil,
even though these residuals are not
specifically mentioned in the statutory
definition of used oil. Over the past
several years, EPA has gathered
information on residuals from the re-
refining and reprocessing of used oil.
Between 1986 and 1988, EPA conducted
three separate sampling and analysis
studies to determine the composition
and characterization of re-refining and
reprocessing residuals. The results of
these studies are summarized below.
\s a result of the studies conducted,
EPA has now concluded that residuals
from the reprocessing and re-refining of
used oil constitute a waste stream
separate from used oil.12 The residuals
from reprocessing and re-refining are
distinctly different from used oil in
physical state, constituent
concentration, and potential hazard to
human health and the environment. The
residuals generally contain higher levels
of toxic constituents than their source
12 Distillation bottoms from the re-refining and
reprocessing of used oil used to produce asphalt
products would be regulated under the proposed
RCRA section 3014 management standards.
oils, primarily due to concentration of
contaminants in the reprocessing and re-
refining process. Such concentration of
contaminants, even when constituents
are present at low 'concentration in used
oil, can generate a waste more
hazardous than its source. Thus,
independent of whether the source oil is
hazardous or nonhazardous, it is the
Agency's belief that residuals from the
reprocessing and re-refining of used oil
are inherently hazardous.
For the reasons enumerated above,
the Agency is considering promulgating
separate listings for used oil residuals
based on our 1985 proposal to list all
used oil (and residuals) and the data
presented later in this section. Further,
EPA is interpreting the congressional
definition of used oil as laid out in
UORA and HSWA to include residuals
from the reprocessing and re-refining of
used oil, meaning that any residual
listing would be under HSWA and, thus,
would become effective in authorized
and non-authorized states at the same
time. EPA believes that HSWA provides
the authority to EPA to consider
whether to list or identify all used oils
as hazardous. If EPA were to list all
used oils, the residuals from the
reprocessing and re-refining of used oil
automatically would be HSWA-listed
hazardous waste pursuant to the
derived-from rule. Even if the Agency
may elect to list or identify portions of
the used oil universe, or not to list any
used oils, EPA believes that HSWA
authority extends to the residuals.
Among, the used oil processing and re-
refining residuals proposed to be listed
as hazardous waste in this notice,
distillation bottoms designated as RCRA
Waste Code,No. K154, may be regulated
under the section 3014 management
standards when recycled as feedstock to
manufacture asphalt products (e.g., road
paving and roofing material) rather than
as a listed hazardous waste. EPA
believes that distillation bottoms are not
substantially different from the virgin
raw material generally used to produce
asphalt products (e.g., road-paving
material or asphalt shingles). EPA
requests comment and supporting data
that may demonstrate that distillation
bottoms are or are not significantly
different than the virgin feedstock used
in asphalt products. In 1985, EPA
proposed to exempt from the hazardous
waste regulations the use of used oil
processing residues in asphalt products.
EPA may grant such an exemption if the
commenter-submitted data or EPA-
collected data supports the exemption.
(See discussion in IX.H. and X.C.4. for
distillation bottoms management
standards and cost analysis,
respectively.)
B. Re-refining and Reprocessing Waste
Streams
The specific waste products resulting
from re-refining and reprocessing
procedures are dependent upon the
specific steps used by the re-refiner or
reprocessor; however there are several
general waste types that are generated
within these industries. Unless
specifically noted, these wastes can be
generated at several points in the
process.
Gravity and Mechanical Separation
Waste Streams include filter residues,
tank bottoms, and pretreatment sludges
that may be generated by processes in
which solids, oil, and water are
separated at ambient temperature. Tank
Bottoms are thick, tar-like layers that
accumulate over time at the bottom of
storage tanks. Centrifuge sludges are
generated during centrifuge separation
of used oil fractions.
Lube Polishing Media usually
contains heavy metals, phenols, oil, and
other compounds. Polishing media
usually consists of clay compounds or
activated carbon used as adsorbents to
improve the color, odor, and stability of
re-refined lube oils.
Distillation Bottoms constitute the
heavy fraction produced by vacuum
distillation of filtered and dehydrated
used oil. Composition of still bottoms
varies with column operation and
feedstock.
Wastewater and Treatment Residues
may be generated from the separation of
water contamination in storage tanks,
from run-off that contains oil from spills
and process leakage, from process
cooling water, and as a byproduct
resulting from distillation procedures. .
Wastewater sludges may be generated
as residues from the wastewater
treatment procedures.
Each of these wastes has been further
characterized below and additional
background information is available in
the docket.
C. Re-refining and Reprocessing Data
Availability
Due to the distinct nature of these
residuals, the Agency has undertaken
specific steps to gather and develop up-
to-date data that adequately
characterize the wastes generated by
these processes. Agency efforts
continued following publication of the
1985 proposal, with independent efforts
by the Office of Water (OW) and the
Office of Solid Waste (OSW). Data and
site-specific information were obtained
from sampling activities and site visits
-------
48028
.Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
conducted by OSW in 1986-1987,
sampling activities conducted by OW in
1986-1987, and RCRA 3007
questionnaires for the reprocessing/re-
refining industry completed in 1987.
From November 1986 to January 1987,
11 facilities, including three re-refiners,
six reprocessors, and two collectors,
were visited by OSW to determine
current waste generation practices in
the industry. At four of these facilities,
including one re-refiner and three
reprocessors, a composite sample
representing all solid wastes generated
by the plant was collected and
analyzed. The feedstock for the facilitie
comprised mixed used oil (crankcase
and industrial) at two facilities,
industrial oils only at one facility, and
fuel oils at the remaining facility. Each
of these four samples were analyzed for
total constituent content and Toxicity
Characteristic (TC) leachable levels of
volatile erganic compounds, PCBs,
semivolatile organic compounds, and
metals. This data can be found in the
docket and is presented at this time for
public comment.
Four re-refiners were visited by OW
between September 1986 and January
1987. These facilities used a feedstock of
mixed crankcase and industrial oils. The
results of the sampling efforts, in which
a total of 48 samples were collected,
were published in a preliminary data
summary (EPA 440/1-89/014). The data
include analysis results of the following
samples obtained from two reprocessing
and two re-refining facilities:
Sample description
Gravitation and Mechanical Separation:
Filter cake .. .
Lube Polishing Media:
Spent clay
Spent activated carbon
Distillation Bottoms:
Still bottoms -
Wastewater Treatment Residues:
Final effluent .
DAF sludge ... .
No. of
samples
4
5
3
7
13
11
5
Samples were analyzed for total
constituent levels of the TC metals,
dioxins, and PCBs, as well as priority,
conventional, and nonconventional
pollutants (as defined by the Clean
Water Act). RCRA 3007 questionnaires
were sent to 80 facilities in the used oil
reprocessing and re-refining industry in
Fall 1987. Twelve facilities responding to
the questionnaires provided data on six
distinct waste streams. Data from 14
streams are available. In 1987,
additional sampling and analysis
activities were conducted at seven
facilities. A total of 17 samples were
collected, including seven samples of
untreated process wastewater, five
samples of filter solids, and one sample
each of filter clay, spent catalyst, caked
residue, storage tank bottoms, and
wastewater treatment sludge. The used
oil feedstock at these facilities was
either unspecified or a mix of crankcasp
lube oil, and industrial oil.
.Data from all of the sampling and
analysis activities as well as the RCRA
3007 questionnaire data collection
activity are summarized in Table
VII.C.l. While several TC organic
constituents were detected, only those
TC organic constituents exceeding the
TC threshold are shown. In addition, the
data reflected high concentrations of
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) in many of the samples,
particularly benzo(a)pyrene,
benzo(b)fluoranthene,
benzo(k)fluoranthene, and
phenanthrene. As discussed in the
background document for these wastes,
PAHs may present a significant danger
to human health if present in high
enough quantities. In many cases, one or
more of the PAHs were present at or
above the quantities that may present a
hazard to human health and the
environment.
BILLING CODE £560-50-11
-------
TAltiE VII.C.I Usea Oil Reprocessing/Rg-refining Data
Constituent
., .,.,-_„ , _
Aiwnte ....„
Barium .w;,;.v :. ;... ,
CadmluiTf ,.-..;:.„•;:.
Nlcfcle ;.. i:;....
Trtehloroetnylene
fetrachWroethylehe
JrftltyVMechanlcif SSpafitlonii-
Nlijjib»r of Sampffi
Ana-
tyied
•11
12
9
11
a
•l/s
1/5
Con-
tamlntnt
detect
•d
10"
g
11
g
1
Conwntratlon
Range
(ppm)
0 6*05 -4J2
$•066-224$
0 037- 110
6 29- 7*1536
78-280
35
sso
6:15-1706
^•Hy/M^arileal^^illon.-
'. jfffljli Bottom*
Numbe> of Sample*
don-:
Ana- tarnlharit
ryzed a.t*ct-
ed
9 3
23 JO
10 8
20 29
2 2
il/12 91
IS 12
Concsntraiton
Range
(ppm)
g-02 - £3?d
65
22- i309tf
70 = ittMJ
afavlry/MecNanleil SepiiraiidnB-
CAntrHugft Sludg*
^umbAr o1 Samptas
A^6-
ty,*d
io
10
o
3
3
Con-
taminant
detect-
ed
4
9
s
6
2
3
eoncintrntlofl
Range
(pprnl
21 -38^0
11 -218
1 - 11000
8=387
NA
166 - 1106
160-7006
Lube Policing -
Sp<«tClay „'...
Nurhber of Samplio
Gon-
Anc- tamlnant
lyied d.t*d-
ed
^2 9
12 9
12 12
12 8
4 4
1M 1
Conceritratiori
Range
(ppm)
6-4 - 24
58-794
OS- 16S
04- 1200
2-138
0812
8 ^7^
2.114
Lube Poltehlno
NumB»f ol Samplws
Goni
Ana- lamlnant
ryrtd detett-
«d
3 1
3 3
3 3
3 3
2 2
2 2
6/2 0
ore o
Goncenuailori
Range
6.0084-6.2
0.041 - 14
0.001-0.32
6.004-2
6.1 -»
0.43-6.8
6.47-73
6.-i2-3;4
3.29
Wa»t«*iit«r/Tteetm«nt SlUdge
Treatment Studge
Numb«t of SampkMi
Con-
Ana- tamlmm
ryxed . detect-
ed
5 3
S 6
i S
5 S
s e
4 3
3 3
33 2
2& 2
Concentration
^ajige
(ppm)
2.2-1.3
2&«-1£r3c
i.e'l-7i
93.9 -JOSO
0.16 -JMO
38.S-S76
2.8'- £2*8
2.8-81.6
S0:5 - 1453
IWmbtr of lamplei analyzed uneartaln tor
-------
48030 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday. September 23, 1991 Proposed Rules
Data submitted by Reynolds Metals
Company (see discussion in section
III.C.4 of today's notice) may indicate
that vacuum distillation of rolling oils
used in aluminum manufacturing may
not produce a hazardous sludge similar
to that proposed for listing today. As
discussed earlier in today's notice, the
data submitted by Reynolds for the
sludge was incomplete and sufficient
information was not provided to enable
EPA to identify the point in the process
where the waste was generated. As
stated previously, EPA encourages
Reynolds and other commenters with
similar processes to submit data on the
sludges generated.
D. Listing of Residuals
While analysis of these residuals by
TCLP may capture a large portion of the
wastes as hazardous, the Agency views
the high concentrations of lead and
chromium in these waste streams,
(which are 100-3,000 times the health
based number) as an indication that the
wastes are typically and frequently
hazardous. In addition, the TC does not
take into consideration the presence of
PAHs, which were found at levels
exceeding regulatory concern. Thus, the
Agency is considering adding four
wastes from the reprocessing and re-
refining of used oil to the list of
hazardous wastes from specific sources
(40 CFR 261.31). The four wastes are:
K152—Process residuals from the
gravitational or mechanical separation of
solids, water, and oil for the reprocessing
or re-refining of used oil, including filter
residues, tank bottoms, pretreatment
sludges, and centrifuge sludges.
K153—Spent polishing media from the
finishing of used oil in the reprocessing
or re-refining process, including spent
clay compounds and spent catalysts.
K154—Distillation bottoms from the
reprocessing or re-refining of used oil.
K155—Treatment residues from oil/water/
solids separation in the primary
treatment of wastewaters from the
reprocessing and re-refining of used oil.
1. Constituents of Concern
The primary basis for listing these
residuals from used oil reprocessing and
re-refining as a hazardous waste
concerns the presence of certain toxic
constituents. As previously discussed,
reprocessing arid re-refining residuals
typically contain a number of toxicants
listed in appendix VIII, including
arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium,
lead, nickel, benzene,
tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene,
benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene,
benzo(b)fluoranthene,
benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene,
dibenz(a,h)anthracene, and
fluoranthene.
Of the toxicants detected in
reprocessing and re-refining residuals,
three metals (lead, chromium, and
cadmium) consistently were found at
sufficiently high concentrations in all
four waste streams to warrant inclusion
in appendix VII as the basis of listing for
these wastes. In addition, K152 contains
benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene,
benzo(b) and (k)fluoranthene, chrysene,
dibenz(a,h)anthracene, and fluoranthene
at sufficiently high levels to warrant
their inclusion in appendix VII also as
the basis for listing this waste.
In relation to the residuals from re-
refining and reprocessing of used oil, the
Agency has evaluated the criteria for
listing a waste as hazardous that are
contained in 40 CFR 261.11(a)(3) and
that were presented earlier in this notice
in regard to used oil. EPA has found that
these wastes typically and frequently
contain toxic constituents, including
some that are carcinogenic, that, when
mismanaged, pose a substantial threat
to human health and the environment
and may, therefore, be listed. Further
discussion on the constituents of
concern and the potential hazards posed
by these wastes can be found in the
background document for today's notice.
2. Fate and Transport of Toxic
Constituents in the Environment
The Agency is evaluating the mobility
and persistence in the environment of
the constituents of concern present in
residuals from the reprocessing and re-
refining of used oil. Because some of the
constituents of concern are water
soluble to some extent, they can (1)
leach out of the wastes in a water-
soluble form, (2) be transported through
the subsurface environment from the
waste, (3) eventually reach ground-
water bodies, and (4) contaminate
drinking-water wells.
In order to conduct a qualitative
evaluation of fate and transport of re-
refining and reprocessing residuals, the
Agency is evaluating potential risks to
human health posed by exposure to a
drinking water/waste mixture. EPA
examined hypothetical ground-water
concentrations by assuming that,
through subsurface transport, dilution
and attenuation (DA) processes will
reduce the concentrations of the
hazardous constituents of concern by a
given factor. The Agency evaluated
three DA factors: 100,1,000, and 10,000.
These three values correspond to
drinking well water contaminant
concentrations a 1, 0.1, and 0.01 percent
of the contaminant's original
concentration in the waste.
The three DA factors used in this
analysis are intended to encompass a
broad range of possibilities. While the
DA factors were not selected to
represent any particular environmental
condition or range of environmental
conditions, they represent assumptions
varying from a moderate amount of
dilution and attenuation to a high degree
of dilution and attenuation. As shown in
Tables VII.C.2 through VII.C.5, the
wastes examined pose a potential threat
to human health and the environment
across this wide range of assumptions.
TABLE VII.C.2.—BASIS FOR LISTING: HEALTH EFFECTS OF THE CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN IN K152
Hazardous constituent
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
°AHs:
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b and kjfluoranthene
Chrysene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Average
waste cone.
detected 2
(ppm)
25
150
1570
115
150
270
150
33
490
Health-based
water
concentration
limit (pprn)
0.01
0.05
0.05
1x10
3x10'
2x10
2x10'
7x10'
1
Basis *
MCL
MCL
MCL
RSD (Class Ba)
RSD (Class B )
RSD (Class B2) . „
RSD (Class Bj)
Rfd
Estimated drinking well
concentrations '
DA 100
0.25
1.5
15.70
1.15
1.5
2.7
1.5
0.33
4.9
DA
1,000
0.025
0.15
1.57
0.115
0.15
0.27
0.15
0.033
0.49
DA 10,000
2.5X10'3
0.015
0.157
0.0115
0.015
0.027
0.015
3.3X10 3
0.049
Calculated concentration to
health-based limit ratios 3
DA 100
25
30
314
100000
500000
100000
8000
500000
5
DA
1,000
2.5
3.0
31.4
10000
50000
10000
800
50000
0.5
DA
10,000
0.25
0.30
3.14
1000
5000.
1000
80
5000
0.05
1 Calculated tor three dilution/attenuation (DA) levels.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48031
2 Average concentrations calculated from process residuals or process sludge data.
3 Ratio obtained by'dividing assumed drinking well concentration column by health-based water concentration limit column, for all three dilution/attenuation (DA)
•evels.
4 Reference Dose (Rfd), Risk Specific Dosa (RSD), and Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) are explained in the report, as are the classes of RSD-?. Class A, B.
and C carcinogens are based on exposure limits at a 10'" risk level.
TABLE VII.C.3.—BASIS FOR LISTING: HEALTH EFFECTS OF THE CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN IN K153
Hazardous constituent
Cadmium
Chromium „
Lead
Average
waste cone.
detected 2
(pprn)
45
160
200
Health-based
water
concentration
limit (ppm)
0.01
0.05
0.05
Basis4
MCL
MCL
MCL
Estimated drinking well
concentrations ' (ppm)
DA
100
0.45
1.60
2.0
DA
1,000
0.045
0.16
0.2
DA 10,000
4.5x10 -»
0.016
0.02
Calculated
concentration to health-
based limit ratios ~
DA
100
45
32
40
DA
1,000
4.5
3.2
4.0
DA
10,000
0.45
0.32
0.40
1 Calculated for three dilution/attenuation PA) levels.
3 Average concentrations calculated from process residuals or process sludge data.
3 Ratio obtained by dividing assumed drinking well concentration column by health-based water concentration iimit column, for all three dilution.'attenuation (DA)
levels.
4 Reference Dose (RfD), Risk Specific Dose (RSD), and Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) are explained in the report, as are the classes of RSDs. Class A, B,
and C carcinogens are based on exposure limits at a 10 ~" risk level.
TABLE V1I.C.4.—BASIS FOR LISTING: HEALTH EFFECTS OF THE CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN IN K154
Hazardous constituent
Hadrnium . , ,--.,,,--,,, -,r, ,.,-.-, „.„.,,,,.,„,,,,, ,..,,.,
Chromium ™. . „
Lead ,~
Average
waste cone.
detected 2
(ppm)
3.5
15
500
Health-based
water
concentration
limit (ppm)
0.01
0.05
0.05
Basis4
MCL
MCL
MCL
Estimated drinking well
concentrations ' (ppm)
DA 100
0.035
0.150
5
DA 1,000
3.5x10-'
0.015
0.5
DA 10,000
3.5X10-"
1.5x10~s
0.058
Calculated concentration
to health-based limit
ratios
DA
100
3.5
3.0
100
DA
1,000
0.35
0.3
10
DA
10,000
0.35
0.03
1
1 Calculated for three dilution/attenuation (DA) levels.
2 Average concentrations calculated from process residuals or process sludge data.
3 Ratio obtained by dividing assumed drinking well concentration column by health-based water concentration limit column, for all three dilution/attenuation (DA)
levels.
4 Reference Dose (RfD), Risk Specific Dose (RSD), and Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) are explained in the report, as are the classes of RSDs. Class A, B,
and C carcinogens are based on exposure limits at a 10 "6 risk level
TABLE VI I.C.5.—BASIS FOR LISTING: HEALTH EFFECTS OF THE CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN IN K155
Hazardous constituent
Cadmium — • — «... - •
Lead •• - -
Average
waste cone.
detected z
(ppm)
43
1070
1400
Health-based
water
concentration
limit (ppm)
0.01
0.05
0.05
Basis*
NCL
MCL
MCL
Estimated drinking well
concentrations ' (ppm)
DA 100
0.43
10.7
14.0
DA
1,000
0.043
1.07
14.0
DA 10,000
4.3X10-"
0.107
0.14
Calculated concentration
to health-based limit
ratios 3
DA
100
43
214
280
DA
1,000
4.3
21.4
28
DA
10,000
0.43
2.14
2.8
1 Calculated for three dilution/attenuation (DA) levels.
2 Average concentrations calculated from process residuals or process sludge data.
3 Ratio obtained by dividing assumed drinking well concentration column by health-based water concentration limit column, for all three dilution/attenuation (DA)
4 Reference Dose (RfD), Risk Specific Dose (RSD), and Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) are explained in the report, as are the classes of RSDs. Class A, B,
and C carcinogens are based on exposure limits at a 10"6 risk level.
The Agency believes that the DA
factors used in assessing the potential
migration of the constituents of concern
in re-refining and reprocessing residuals
are not unrealistic. In developing listings
for wood preserving wastes, which are
oily and can be expected to behave
similarly to used oil, EPA assessed the
impact of these wastes on land. To
assess the effectiveness of the
hypothetical concentrations (by
assuming a set of three, DA factors) in
representing the real-life leaching and
migration processes, the Agency
compared average concentration of
certain constituents (chromium,
fluoranthene, pyrene, anthracene, and
naphthalene) in wood preserving wastes
(oil-based) and the ground-water
contamination data from the damage
cases related to the wood preserving
industry. The Agency assumed that, in
the past wood preserving wastes
containing high concentrations (higher
than averages calculated for the
rulemaking activity) were disposed of on
land, which resulted in contaminated
ground water as evidenced by the
damage cases. The comparison provided
the Agency with a mechanism to
determine the potential migration of
toxic and hazardous constituents from
oily wastes in soil.
The results of the comparison
suggested that metals such as chromium
and semivolatile compounds such as
anthracene, fluoranthene, chrysene, and
pyrene are released from the oily wastes
and, hence, are capable of
contaminating ground water. The
calculated DA factors for these
semivolatile compounds in oily waste
range from 10 to 100,000. Based on this
preliminary comparison, the Agency
concludes that the constituents of
-------
48032 Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday,'September 23, 191-1 / Proposed Rules
concern in oily wastes can be carried
over to receptor points as aqueous
leachate at concentrations ranging from
10 to 0.001 percent and 1 to 0.01 percent
of the original concentration of
semivolatile compounds and metals,
respectively, in the oily wastes.
As shown in Tables VII.C.2 through
VII.C.5, the ratio of the drinking water
well concentrations to health based
levels is greater than 1 in most of the
cases. The Agency, therefore, believes
that the potential for human exposure is
significant and provides a basis for
listing these wastes as hazardous.
3. Potential for Environmental Hazard
The potential hazards of used oil are
presented later in today's notice. (See
discussion in section VIII.A of this
notice.) In addition, environmental
damage incidents from used oil
mismanagement are discussed in
"Environmental Damage From Used
Oil," which is included in the docket for
today's notice. EPA has identified five
Superfund sites and other environmental
damage incidents directly attributable to
the mismanagement of residuals from
used oil reprocessing and re-refining.
These damages include contamination
of ground water, surface water, and
soils as well as damage to fish and
water fowl in the surrounding area. The
clean up costs associated with the five
Superfund sites total well over $61
million.
VIII. The Agency's General Approach to
Used Oil Management Standards
In addition to the new data and issues
discussed above, EPA has been
evaluating used oil management
standards. On November 29,1985 (50 FR
49212), EPA proposed a comprehensive
set of management standards for
generators, transporters and recycling
facilities that handle and recycle used
oil. EPA received substantial public
comment on the proposed requirements.
The Agency has been re-evaluating the
proposed management standards in light
of public comments. EPA is now looking
at several potential approaches to the
management standards. EPA is
considering finalizing certain 1985
proposed management standards, but
the Agency is also considering
modifying some of the proposed
standards and dropping other standards
in light of public comment, additional
data, and/or additional regulatory
actions the Agency has taken since the
1985 proposal.
The intent of the management
standards alternatives identified and
discussed in this notice is not to replace
or withdraw the 1985 proposed
standards but to set forth options to (a)
clarify or modify certain 1985 proposed
standards, (b) defer selected standards
(e.g., financial responsibility), and (c)
add new requirements (e.g.,
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for certain generators and
transporters). The Agency is requesting
comments on specific approaches that
are under consideration and that are
discussed in this notice. EPA is not
seeking any additional comments on the
1985 proposal itself.
This notice outlines the basic
approach EPA is proposing for used oil
management standards. The following
sections describe in detail the need to
ensure the safe management of all used
oils, whether or not they are determined
to be hazardous and whether or not they
are recycled. The Agency is considering
an approach, described below, under
which one set of management standards
(with certain exemptions for used oil
mixtures that contain de minimis
quantities of used oil) may control
recycling and disposal of used oils and
therefore mitigate potential hazards
from all used oils (hazardous and
nonhazardous, and recyclable and
nonrecyclable). EPA has also considered
an approach under which only used oils
that are deemed hazardous waste may
be regulated under the management
standards. EPA is concerned that this
sort of approach, while focusing on the
most hazardous used oils, may be very
difficult to implement. For example,
adulteration of used oil with hazardous
waste has been a very serious problem,
and any used oil may be adulterated. A
system that regulated only certain used
oils may not effectively control
adulteration. EPA also believes that
irrespective of a listing determination,
all used oils pose some threat to human
health and the environment and
therefore all used oils need to be
handled in a safe manner. EPA requests
comment on this issue. Commenters may
also want to qualify comments on
specific management standards under
discussion by indicating whether the
standard should apply to all used oils, or
only to hazardous used oils, as
appropriate.
The Agency believes that the
mismanagement of used oil may pose
hazards to human health and the
environment. EPA believes that the
primary sources of used oil
mismanagement and potential hazards
include:
• Ground-water contamination from
disposal or storage in unlined
impoundments or landfills;
• Air emissions from improper
burning or the burning of used oil mixed
with other hazardous wastes;
• Soil, surface water and ground-
water contamination from improper
disposal of DIY-generated used oil (e.g.,
landfill, yard or sewer disposal);
Contamination from improper
storage practices at used oil generator
sites, transfer facilities and recycling
facilities; and
• Environmental contamination from
road oiling.
The Agency is considering
implementing these management
standards in a two-phased approach.
The approach is designed to reduce the
risks posed by used oil mismanagement
while imposing regulatory burdens upon
used oil recycling in a gradual,
considered manner.
The Phase I requirements proposed
today are designed to address the
potential hazards associated with
improper storage and disposal of used
oil by establishing basic requirements
applicable to used oil generators,
transporters, recyclers, and disposal
facilities. These requirements consist of
"basic" management standards-
including detection and cleanup of used
oil releases associated with storage and
transportation, recordkeeping
requirements (used oil tracking), and
reporting of used oil recycling and
disposal activities. The Phase I
requirements also address hazards
associated with road oiling and
improper disposal of some or all used
oils. The Agency is considering a ban on
road oiling of used oils given the
potential hazards to human health and
the environment from direct application
of used oil to land and given the fact
that used oils used for road oiling are
often mixed with hazardous wastes. The
Agency is also proposing a recycling
presumption, testing requirements for
non-recyclable used oils, and is
considering developing disposal
guidelines for non-hazardous used oils
to protect against potential hazards from
land disposal of used oils. These
provisions are discussed in more detail
below.13
The standards proposed in November,
1985 as revised and/or supplemented
today address each of the risks and
potential types of mismanagement listed
above, with the exception of air
emissions from improper or uncontrolled
burning of used oil fuels. Currently, the
40 CFR part 266 subpart E regulations
restrict residential burners from burning
used oils that do not meet the used oil
"> Used oils that are non-recyclabfe and
hazardous (i.e.. listed or characteristic hazardous]
will have to be disposed in compliance with the
current subtitle C requirements for disposal of
hazardous wastes.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
fuel specification. However, air
emissions from used oil industrial
burners are not yet controlled under
RCRA. EPA is still studying the need for
emissions standards for used oil burners
and the proper level of controls
necessary for used oil burning units.
EPA plans to add-ess emissions
standards for used oil burners at a later
date, possibly in "Phase II" of the
management standards.
As part of a comprehensive approach
to addressing used oil, EPA also wants
to promote the recycling of DIY-
generated used oil (including household-
generated used oils that may fall under
the household hazardous waste
exclusion]. Currently, DIY-generated
used oils (approximately 193 million
gallons annually) are not widely
recycled and in fact, are often
improperly disposed. Today's notice
discusses several options For regulatory
incentives, that may be included in
Phase II or developed under a separate
schedule. These options would be
developed to promote the recycling of
Degenerated used oils. As discussed
earlier in this notice, several non-
regulatory approaches are also under
consideration for increasing the
quantities of DIY-generated used oils
that are collected and recycled.
EPA has also undertaken several
efforts to provide outreach information
and develop non-regulatory incentives
for used oil recycling, Several of these
efforts focus on the collection and
recycling of DIY-generated used oil. EPA
has developed and distributed
publications educating households and
individuals on the hazards associated
with improper dumping of used oil and
encouraging DIY oil changers to recycle
used oil. EPA has published specific
step-by-step instructions on how to
change automobile crankcase oil and
how to dispose of the oil properly so
that it enters the used oil recycling
system. The Agency has also published
information on how to establish local
used oil recycling programs and how
service stations and other facilities can
establish used oil recycling programs.
At a later date, EPA may develop
additional regulatory and/or non-
regulatory incentives for encouraging
the collection and recycling of DIY-
generated used oils should the Agency
determine that additional incentives are
necessary. The need to establish
additional incentives will be based in
part on how effective today's
approaches (or those promulgated after
review and comment on. this proposal)
are in promoting used oil recycling and
ensuring, that such recycling is
conducted in a manner protective of
human health and the environment. If
significant quantities of DIY oil are still
not entering the used oil recycling
system and DIY oil management
practices have not altered, then
additional incentives may be
appropriate.
Under today's notice, EPA is
considering, as one option for used oil
generator standards, a revision to the
1985 proposed management standards
which would eliminate the small
quantity used oil generator category,
while also reducing the requirements
applicable to all used oil generators.
Under the approach discussed today, all
used oil generators may be subject to a
single, minimum set of requirements. By
eliminating the distinction between
categories of used oil generators, used
oil generators may be less reluctant to
collect DIY used oil since the collection
of these used oils will not subject the
generator to more stringent management
standards. Similarly, imposing minimum,
"good housekeeping", standards creates
the most conducive regulatory
environment possible for recycling given
EPA's mandate, by ensuring protection
of human health and the environment,
but taking into account the impacts on
recycling when devising the regulatory
schemes. If EPA determines that the
section 3014 management standards that
are promulgated in Phase I are
adequately implemented and enforced
across the board, then additional
standards may not be necessary.
The following section describes EPA's
proposed phased approach for the used
oil management standards. As
mentioned above, Phase I would contain
"basic" management standards,
including detection and cleanup of used
oil releases or leaks associated with
storage and transportation,
recordkeeping (used oil tracking)
requirements, and reporting of used oil
recycling and disposal activities. EPA
has also considered an alternative
approach in which no management
standards would be issued until the
Agency has developed a comprehensive,
risk-based management scheme for used
oil, which would address DIY-generated
oil, used oil burning by industrial
burners, etc. This approach may have
the advantage of avoiding piecemeal
regulation of the industry. However,
factors in favor of a phased approach
include providing, in the short term, at
least a minimum level of protection to
human health and the environment from
potential hazards from used oil and the
possibility of changing regulatory
provisions in Phase II based on
feedback from the implementation of
Phase I. In addition, much uncertainty
exists concerning certain key
components (e.g., to what extent current
participants in used oil recycling will
remain in the system under a regulatory
regime), and that actual implementation
of limited controls may be the best
manner of data collection. EPA believes
the phased approach described below is
flexible and may allow for adjustments
as problems of over- or under-regulation
are identified. EPA requests comment on
a phased versus a delayed/
comprehensive approach.
As explained in more detail below,
EPA believes that all used oils may
require some level of control to protect
human health and the environment.
Various authorities are available to the
Agency to effect this control. RCRA
section 3014 provides EPA with the
authority to regulate generators,
transporters and recycling facilities that
handle recycled used oil or used oils
that are to be recycled, regardless of
whether or not the used oils are
identified as hazardous waste. Section
3014 does not, however, provide the
Agency with regulatory authority over
used oils that are not recycled. Other
RCRA authorities, however, are
available and can be applied to used
oils that may be treated and/or disposed
in municipal solid waste landfills or
other facilities.
The next section briefly discusses the
potential hazards associated with used
oil. This is followed by a discussion of
the basic approach EPA is considering
for used oil management standards to
ensure the safe management of all used
oils, whether or not they are recycled.
The notice then describes the phased
regulatory approach that the Agency is
considering for used oil management
standards at this time. If the Agency is
convinced that only used oils
determined to be hazardous should be
regulated, EPA may draw on the 1985
proposal, as well as ideas described
here, to finalize management standards
for those hazardous used oils.
A. Potential Hazards of Used Oils
Past practices for used oil storage,
transportation, and disposal have
resulted in documented damages to
human health and the environment.
Human health and environmental
hazards associated with used oil stem
from both the potential uncontrolled
management of used oils that are mixed
with hazardous substances or wastes
such as PCBs and chlorinated solvents,
and the release of used oil itself to the
environment. Past mismanagement of
used oils has resulted in significant
environmental damage, which the
Agency has documented extensively. Of
-------
48034 Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
the 445 National Priorities List (NPL)
facilities having documented Records of
Decision, 185 (42%) have had used oils
co-disposed with other hazardous or
industrial solid waste. These oils
include used motor oil, cooling/cutting
oil, and transformer oil. Of the 185
facilities, 30 are used oil recyclers (6.7%
of the total number of facilities). At
several of these recycler sites,
contaminants other than those expected
to be in used oil were found, indicating
that mixing occurred either prior to
receipt of the used oil or at the facility.
In addition, the 1981 Report to
Congress on used oil includes damage
incidents and examples of severe
threats to human health and the
environment. As explained in that
Report, used oil mixed with hazardous
wastes has been shown to have toxic or
carcinogenic effects on humans. Also,
used oil that is mixed with solvents or
other hazardous wastes when burned
creates products of incomplete
combustion (PICs). These PICs are of
particular concern due to their
carcinogenic nature.
EPA has prepared a compilation of
information on the environmental
damages caused by improper
management activities (see Used Oil
Background Document, "Environmental
Damage from Used Oil
Mismanagement" draft report). This
effort was undertaken to provide more
recent data than was available in
November, 1985. The hazardous
constituents found in used oil damage
cases are those that are discussed in the
listing proposal above and in the
November 1985 proposal.
EPA believes that the used oil
management standards may need to
include provisions to ensure mixtures of
used oil and hazardous waste are
identified and properly managed. Even
used oils that have not been mixed or
co-disposed with hazardous waste may
contain toxic constituents that may be
released during improper management.
If used oil that is not classified as
hazardous is managed improperly, it can
reach and contaminate environmental
receptors such as surface water and
drinking water wells. Typically, an oily
sheen is formed on top of the water
surface making the water nonpotable for
human consumption and resulting in a
reduction of oxygen necessary to sustain
aquatic life.
Several potential pathways exist for
used oil to cause damage to the
environment. Used oil can be spilled or
leaked onto soil or entrained in airborne
dust particles. Further, ground and
surface waters can be contaminated by
run-off, leakage, or seepage of used oil.
Some activities that may release
constituents and pose potential threats
to human health and the environment
include land disposal in non-secured
units, improper or mismanaged storage
or over accumulation, and road oiling
for dust suppression. Potential hazards
are increased when other hazardous
substances are added to the oil, and
existing data show this has historically
been a common practice. 14
Improper management and landfill
disposal of both used oils and materials
contaminated with used oils creates
multiple hazards to human health and
the environment. Used oil that enters a
landfill has a potential to migrate away
from the source and has the potential to
form an oil plume that can directly reach
the ground water, float on the surface of
the water, and/or be carried in a plume
over the ground-water table, making the
ground water nonpotable. In addition,
used oil that enters a landfill in a solid
form or adsorbed to a solid may leach
and eventually contaminate ground
water.
Storage of used oil can also lead to
environmental damage, particularly due
to accidental releases. Used oils
generally are stored in underground
storage tanks (USTs), aboveground
storage tanks, and drums (containers).
The major risks associated with storage
and accumulation of used oil are fires
and loss of stored used oil through
surface run-off and seepage into the soil.
Both aboveground and underground
storage tanks can develop leaks in the
bottom of the tank that can go
unnoticed. Underground storage tank
leaks generally will go unnoticed until
visually apparent or until detected by
monitoring equipment (if the UST is so
equipped). A severe UST failure or the
rupture of an aboveground storage tank
can result in rapid ground-water
contamination, generally occurring in
less than an hour in sandy soil and just
over a week in silty soil. 15, ls The
storage of used oils in drums and
containers can lead to environmental
damage through catastrophic spills or
repeated small spills to the surrounding
area. 17
Used oils used for road oiling present
four pathways for contamination.
Evaporation, seepage, run-off, and dust
transport occur concurrently. The rate of
vaporization depends upon the
"Background Document: "Regulatory Support for
Used Oil Characterization."
"Franklin Associates and PEDCd Environmental,
Inc., "Waste Oil Storage: Final Draft Report,"
January, 1984, p. 3-16.
16Since the promulgation and Implementation of
the UST regulations (40 CFR part 280), these
hazards are controlled through effective monitoring
and leak detection procedures.
"Ibid, p. 3-17.
individual vapor pressure for the
components of the used oils, the
ambient temperature, and atmospheric
wind conditions. Seepage depends upon
the composition of the soil and may
occur very quickly in sandy or silty
soils. A portion of the used oil will
remain in the upper level of the soil and
will be subject to removal by dust
transport. Assuming an average daily
traffic flow of 100 vehicles, it has been
estimated that 100 tons of dust per mile
per year will be deposited along a 1,000-
foot wide area surrounding the road. 18
Finally, oils may be washed from the
road surface and carried with the
rainfall runoff as a surface film or
colloid or be removed by erosion.
An investigation of 25 Superfund sites
that involved the mismanagement of
used oil found used oil contamination of
surface and ground waters, soils, and
surrounding lands and crops. In several
cases wildlife damage or wildlife death
has been documented. Further, over 60
damage incident summaries indicate
contamination of surface water, while
over 30 incidents involve soil
contamination, and a few contain
evidence of air contamination.19
Used oil released to surface waters
produces a harmful effect on aquatic
organisms not only by physically
coating them but also by causing
adverse chemical changes within the
organism. Such damage includes the
inability of ducks to swim or dive for
food in the presence of oil films, loss of
insulating ability of feathers
contaminated with oil, reduced viability
of duck eggs due to the inability of oil-
soaked feathers to insulate the eggs, and
pneumonia and gastrointestinal
irritations in waterfowl following
preening of oil-coated feathers.20 Other
harmful effects upon aquatic habitats
include the inhibition of marsh grass
growth, increased susceptibility of sea
grasses to parasites, abnormal
development of herring larvae, and the
killing of various organisms, including
copepods, shrimp and white mullet.
In addition, contaminants in used oil
that is disposed on land often migrate to
surface water, ground water or soil
where they are taken up by plant roots
ana have been shown to damage
vegetation.21 These contaminants pose
18 Franklin Associates and PEDCo
Environmental, Inc., "Evaluation of Health and
Environmental Problems Associated With the Use
of Waste Oil as a Dust Suppressant," February 1984,
page 3-B.
19 Environmental Damage From Used Oil
Mismanagement, EPA used oil background
document.
so Listing Waste Oil as a Hazardous Waste:
Report to Congress, U.S. EPA, 1981, Pp. 16-20.
"Ibid., pp. 83-71-
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48035
a hazard to animals ingesting the plants
and to humans consuming crops that
have accumulated sufficient quantities
of these contaminants. Used oil
contaminants that volatilize or are
suspended in dust also can contaminate
and harm vegetation and enter the food
chairj. EPA notes that many of the
potential risks to human health and the
environment from the mismanagement
of used oil, as documented above, are
present regardless of the type of used oil
that is released to the environment,
particularly the contamination of ground
water and effects on plant and animal
life.
B. The Basic Approach
This section describes the basic
approach EPA is now considering to
ensure safe used oil management.
Comments are requested on the overall
approach as well as on specific issues
described below.
1. Some Level of Control May Be
Necessary for All Used Oils, Whether
They Are Identified as Hazardous
Waste or Not
Under the 1985 proposed listing
determination, EPA would have been
able to control the management (both
recycling and disposal) of all used oils.
Disposal would have been regulated
under 40 CFR parts 264, 265, and 270,
since all used oils were proposed to be
listed as hazardous waste. Recycling
would have been regulated under
special standards (40 CFR part 266,
subpart E) developed under § 3014
authority.
As noted in earlier sections covering
the listing approach, data collected by
EPA show that certain used oils are
characteristically hazardous and/or
contain appreciable quantities of 40 CFR
part 261, appendix VIII toxic
constituents. Further, as stated in
section VIII.A, the-presence of small
quantities of oil in surface water may
cause fish kills; can cause toxicological
effects in aquatic organisms, and can
make drinking water nonpotable for
human consumption. Finally, effective
implementation and enforcement of a
used oil program may require control
over all used oils, for example to control
adulteration of used oil with hazardous
waste. EPA, therefore, believes that
basic management standards may be
necessary for all used oils whether or
not EPA decides to list them as
hazardous wastes.
RCRA section 3014(a) does not require
EPA to list or identify used oils as
hazardous wastes prior to setting
management standards for recycled
used oil.22-23 RCRA section 3014 was
created under the authority defined by
the Used Oil Recycling Act of 1980 and
amended by the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA).
The HSWA amendments require that
the section 3014 standards be consistent
with RCRA's mandate of protection of
human health and the environment.
Legislative history indicates that
Congress anticipated EPA's potential
use of section 3014{a) to control both
hazardous and nonhazardous used oil
(House Conference Report No. 98-1133,
p. 113, October 3,1984). The House
Conference Report states that "EPA
retains authority under section 3014 to
regulate all used oil that is not identified
or listed as a hazardous waste." EPA
therefore believes that it is consistent
with both the goals of the statute and
with the Congressional intent for section
3014 that all used oils be regulated
under a single set of management
standards. The following RCRA
authorities can be used to control
recycling and disposal of used oil:
• Under RCRA sections 3001 through
3005, EPA has the authority to regulate
the disposal of used oils that are
hazardous (listed, characteristic, and
used oils mixed with hazardous waste).
• Section 3014(a) of RCRA authorizes
EPA to develop regulatory standards for
recycling of all used oils, both
hazardous and nonhazardous.
• The information and enforcement
authorities provided under RCRA
section 3007 and section 3013 can be
used to a limited extent by the Agency
to control used oil disposal through
inspection and monitoring.
• Under RCRA section 1008 and
section 4005, EPA has statutory
authority to develop subtitle D disposal
guidelines to prevent releases of used oil
from the site of disposal. Any disposal
of solid waste in a solid waste disposal
facility that is not in compliance with
part 257 criteria for solid waste facilities
constitutes "open dumping" of solid
wastes.
EPA requests comment on the
potential hazards of used oil, the need to
control all used oils, whether they are
determined to be hazardous waste or
not, and the use of section 3014(a) to
control the recycling of "nonhazardous"
used oils. Comments are also requested
on alternative approaches, such as
regulating used oil that is identified as
hazardous waste under one set of
requirements, and "nonhazardous" used
oils under different standards. EPA
requests comment on what specific
differences in such standards may be
appropriate. For example, for all used
oils, EPA could promulgate minimum
requirements (e.g., tracking,
recordkeeping, the rebuttable
presumption, analytical plans, etc.),
which may control adulteration of used
oils. For hazardous used oils, however,
EPA could also regulate storage and
spill cleanup. Under this kind of
approach, road oiling might be allowed
for nonhazardous used oils.
2. Used Oil Handlers Should Be
Regulated Under One Set of
Management Standards to the Extent
Possible
Data available to the Agency on used
oil generation practices suggest that
many used oil handlers (generators,
collectors, transporters, and some
recyclers including blenders, marketers,
and re-refiners) are small businesses. In
particular, EPA estimates that over
650,000 establishments, such as
privately owned and operated service
stations, automotive repair shops, and
metalworking shops, generate used
oil.24 Used oil collectors and processors
typically service a wide range of
generators. The generators themselves
are often unfamiliar with RCRA and, in
fact, are not extensively regulated under
Federal environmental programs.
One way to implement regulations
over such a vast and diverse universe of
used oil handlers may be to devise one
set of comprehensive management
standards designed to address all
aspects of used oil management. This
approach would cover all used oil
handlers under one set of requirements
and may incorporate provisions from
various RCRA authorities including
sections 1008, 3001 through 3005, 3007,
3013, 3014, and 4005. It may also
minimize regulation of the same parties
under numerous different regulatory
programs (e.g., some used oils under
subtitle C, some not, etc). In addition,
this may facilitate compliance, minimize
confusion within the used oil recycling
industry, and minimize cross-referencing
within different regulatory requirements
covered under 40 CFR parts 257, 264,
265, 270, and 280. An integrated
approach would also minimize the
possibility of adulteration and other
82 Although section 3014fb) does direct EPA to
propose whether to list or identity used oils as
hazardous wastes, this mandate is independent of
the mandate to develop management standards for
recycled used oils in section 3014(a).
23 Under RCRA section 3001. as implemented in
40 GFR part 281. EPA can (a), identify any solid
waste as hazardous if the waste exhibits a
characteristic of corrosivity, ignitability, reactivity,
or toxicity and (b) list any solid waste as hazardous
if the Agency can demonstrate that the solid waste
of concern may pose significant health and
environmental hazards.
"Temple, Barker, and Sloane, "Used Oil RIA
Briefing: Status Report," May IB, 1989.
-------
48036 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday. September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
mismanagement, particularly of non-
hazardous used oil.
EPA is, in fact, considering
establishing in title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) a separate
part, part 279, for all of the used oil
standards. Various subparts or sections
in part 279 may be promulgated under
the different RCRA authorities. EPA
usually places regulatory provisions
from different statutory authorities in
different CFR parts, (e.g. subtitle C rules
are in parts 260-270, subtitle I rules are
in part 280, etc.) To aid implementation
of the used oil rules, however, part 279
would contain most or all applicable
RCRA provisions related to used oil
management.
3. Used Oil Standards Should Be
Developed and Applied in a Manner
That Allows for Full Consideration of
Recycling Impacts
In enacting section 3014 of RCRA,
Congress recognized that certain used
oil recycling practices may pose
significant risks to human health and the
environment. Congress also recognized
that used oil, when properly recycled,
can be a valuable resource. As a result,
section 3014 requires EPA to develop
used oil regulations that protect public
health and the environment from the
hazards associated with used oil, yet do
not discourage the recovery or recycling
of used oil. Specifically, RCRA states
that "the Administrator shall promulgate
performance standards and other
requirements as may be necessary to
protect the public health and the
environment from hazards associated
with recycled oil * * * conduct an
analysis of the economic impact of the
regulations on the oil recycling industry
* * * ensure the regulations do not
discourage the recovery or recycling of
used oil, consistent with the protection
of human health and the environment."
The legislative history of HSWA
indicates that Congress' paramount
interest in regulating used oil was to
ensure protection of human health and
the environment. Where such protection
is assured, however, "the Administrator
should make every effort not to
discourage the recycling of used oil." M
Today's proposed rule attempts to
balance the interests of protective
regulation and the need to promote
recycling. EPA recognizes that properly
conducted used oil recycling reduces the
risks posed by mismanagement and
disposal of used oil, while conserving a
valuable non-renewable resource. The
Agency is attempting to impose
standards upon the used oil recycling
M House Report 9&-198. Part I., p.59.
industry that will ensure adequate
protection, while at the same time create
an overall framework that establishes
incentives for used oil recycling. This
approach is premised on EPA's
recognition of both objectives of section
3014, environmental protection and
resource conservation/recycling and its
belief that promotion of recycling will be
the most effective way of eliminating
improper disposal and thus protecting
human health and the environment.
EPA could attempt to assess impacts
and balance the competing interest of
requirements now being considered
through detailed studies of various
regulatory approaches without
implementing any of the controls. We
note, however, that much uncertainty
exists concerning certain key
components {e.g., to what extent current
participants in the used oil recycling
market will remain in the market after
the management standards are
promulgated), and that actual
implementation of limited controls may
be the best manner of data collection.
The approach described below is
iterative (in that EPA may propose the
management standards in two phases)
and may allow for adjustments as
problems of over- or under-regulation
are identified by EPA. EPA requests
comment on the basic approach for the
used oil management standards
described above and presented in detail
below.
C. Phased Regulatory Approach
EPA thinks that a sound way to
achieve the Congressional objectives of
section 3014 may be to develop used oil
management standards under a phased
regulatory approach. To do so, the
Agency initially may promulgate a basic
set of management standards ("Phase
I"), and then, at a later date, consider
additional management standards (e.g.,
emission standards for burning of
certain used oils, financial
responsibility, etc.) that may have
greater impacts on the used oil recycling
industry.
EPA believes that a two-phased
regulatory approach may allow the
Agency to assess the level of protection
provided by the Phase I standards and
the impacts of the Phase I program on
the used oil recycling market before
imposing more stringent controls. Also,
EPA would have additional time to
consider non-regulatory approaches or
market incentives for encouraging the
recycling of non-regulated used oil (e.g.,
do-it-yourself generated used crankcase
oils), that might reduce the need for
additional regulatory controls.
The Phase I standards, as envisaged
here, would cover all used oils, whether
they are a hazardous waste or not. The
premise is that fairly simple "good
housekeeping" requirements can be
implemented by used oil recyclers that
will alleviate potential used oil releases
without major capital expenditures. The
Phase I standards, by themselves, may
not prevent all hazards associated with
used oil. As discussed below, EPA may
select Phase I requirements (choosing
from the 1985 proposal and today's
notice) by taking into account the
potential impacts of the requirements on
used oil recycling as well as their
potential to protect human health and
the environment. This would mean that
certain requirements (e.g., financial
responsibility) that may well provide a
secondary measure of protection are
deferred to a later date, when additional
studies are completed to help the
Agency determine the appropriate
balance between protectiveness and
mitigating impacts on recycling. Certain
standards (e.g., standards for used oil
burners) that provide protection against
the releases of air toxics are deferred to
a later date, since data currently
available to the Agency are not
adequate to develop such standards at
this time.
Should the Agency adopt this phased
approach, EPA would issue the Phase I
controls, and then at a later date,
evaluate the protective nature of the
initial set of requirements and the
effects these standards will have had
upon the recycling market. EPA might
review data received from biennial
reports on used oil recycling and
disposal activities. In addition,, if
enforcement activities suggest that
substantial mismanagement is still
occurring and that releases have
contaminated ground and/or surface
water, EPA may impose additional
requirements. Furthermore, if releases
from storage tanks remain unattended
and uncontrolled, additional
requirements may be necessary to
ensure protection of human health and
the environment. These additional
standards (Phase II) may not apply to all
used oils, but rather may only apply to
used oils with high levels of toxic
constituents or used oils that otherwise
are found to pose high potential risk.
EPA may need to do additional studies
to determine which oils should be
subject to additional controls. (We may
subject oils that are listed or exhibit the
toxicity characteristic to additional
controls, or use other indicators of
higher toxicity or hazard.) EPA will also
carefully weigh the increase in potential
environmental benefits against
economic impacts that may result from
imposing these additional requirements
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23. 1991 / Proposed Rules 48037
prior to proposing any additional
standards, as required by RCRA section
3014(a). In addition, as discussed above, .
EPA may consider nonrregulatory
options or economic incentives to
maximize recycling of all used oils,
particularly DIY-generated used oils.
These nonregulatory controls might
mitigate the need for further regulatory
controls.
Section D. 3014(a) Used Oil
Management Standards Based on a
Presumption of Recycling
1. Use of Section 3014(a) Standards To
Control Used Oil Management,
In 1980, Congress took steps to
facilitate the recycling and reuse of used
oil by enacting the Used Oil Recycling
Act The intent of this Act was not only
to conserve energy and reduce virgin oil
demands through recycling of used oil,
but. also to limit "improper" disposal of
the recyclable resource (Pub.L. 96-463,
October 15,1980). Further, used oil
recycling will assist the country in
compensating for a fluctuating virgin oil
supply and in minimizing the nation's
dependence on virgin oil imports, 2S
Given this national policy, EPA is
considering disposal controls for both
hazardous and nonhazardous used oils
partly as a means to further promote
increased recycling of used oils.
Section 3014 of RCRA gives EPA
authority to develop management
standards for "recycled oil". "The
Agency interprets section 3014{c)
authority to cover all used oil
management practices preceding the
recycling of the used oil (50 FR 49216,
November 29,1985). At a recycling
facility or on the way to a transfer or
recycling facility, used oil could be
disposed improperly, either
unintentionally or intentionally. Health
and environmental hazards associated
with used oil in storage, in transit prior
to recycling, or being managed-prior to
its ultimate management (treatment or
disposal) are similar to the hazards
associated with the used oil when it is
handled at the recycling facility and
therefore also should be minimized.
Hence, management of used oil from the
point of generation through recycling
"One estimate suggests that in the U.S., if all "as
generated" used ofl (1.3 billion gallons per year) la
recycled then approximately 0,5 percent
(representing 30.000.000 barrels of the petroleum
supply] of the nation's petroleum need could be met.
{Source: Nolan J.J., C. Harris, and P.O. Cavanaugh.
1980. Used Oil: Disposal Options, Management
Practices and Potential Liability, Third Edition,
Published fay Government Institutes, Inc. Rockville
MD. pg.'3>)
" RCRA section 3014 does not provide EPA with
explicit authority to regulate the disposal of used
oils that are not listed as hazardous wastes.
and distribution to end users may need
to be regulated to protect human health
and the environment from potential
hazards.
Because RCRA does not provide EPA
with explicit authority to regulate the
disposal of used oil outside of a
hazardous waste listing, and due to the
fact that EPA wants to discourage
disposal and meet RCRA's mandate to
protect human health and the
environment, EPA is considering an
approach whereby all used oils would
be presumed to be destined for
recycling, and therefore subject to
section 3014 management standards,
unless the generator or handler can
show otherwise. This means that all
used oils would be presumptively
subject to the standards issued under
section 3014 for recycled used oils, from
the time the used oil is generated until it
is recycled or reused. If a person can
show that the used oil cannot be
recycled (discussed below), then the
section 3014 standards would not apply.
The Agency assumes that if used oil
cannot be recycled then it would be
disposed and disposal will be controlled
using other authorities, i.e., either
subtitle C or subtitle D, depending on
whether the used oil is hazardous waste
or not.
2. Basis for Presumption
EPA's current data on used oil support
the recycling presumption,*8 In 1988,
approximately 57% of the total amount
of used oil generated was collected for
recycling. An additional 12% was
recycled on-site.2B As shown in Table
H.B.1, at least nine types of used oils are
generated by various industrial and
nonindustrial sectors around the
country. The vast majority of these oils
are recycled as fuel oil but some of these
oils can also be recycled to manufacture
high quality lubricants. EPA recognizes
that at the generator level, especially in
the do-it-yourselfer (DIY) segment, some
used oil is not recycled, but rather
disposed. However, this used oil is
mainly automotive oil that can be
recycled. ^EPA believes that the
M In 1988. EPA collected information to revise the
used oil flow estimates used to support the 1985
proposed standards and to determine the
information needs for an RIA. The revised
information suggests that at the generator level 150
million gallons of used oil were recycled in 1988 as
fuel: In addition, of the 770 million gallons collected.
approximately 650 million gallons were recycled or
re-refined in 1988. (Source: Memo to F. Smith. EPA/
OSW from K. Dietly, P. Voorhees, and J. Hayde,
Temple, Barker, & Sloane, July 18,1989.}
™ Of the used oil generated by non-DIY
generators, in 1988, 68% was recycled off-site and an
additional 13% was recycled on-site at non-DIY
generator sites.
M EPA believes that through public education
and awareness programs developed by EPA (e.g.,
recycling presumption is well foundfH in
that a majority of used oils can be
recycled, and most currently are
recycled.
EPA requests comments on the
concept and basis of the recycling
presumption.
3. Rebuttal of Recycling Presumption
EPA is aware of certain categories of
used oils (e.g., watery metalworking oils,
oily bilge water) that may not be
recyclable. EPA, therefore, may provide
an opportunity for used oil handlers to
rebut the used oil recycling presumption
by showing that their used oil can not be
recycled. Under the approach being
considered, handlers of used oils could
rebut the recycling presumption by
showing that their used oil is not
recyclable in any manner. These used
oils may not be subject to the section
3014(a) standards upon a demonstration
of "nonrecyclability". Under this
approach, EPA is considering requiring
documentation of "nonrecyclability"
and records supporting the reasons for
disposal. The documentation may
include a demonstration that:
• The BTU content of the used oil is
less than 5,000 BTU/lb. (5,000 BTU is the
minimum value for legitimate energy
recovery, as discussed in the final
burning and blending rule, 50 FR 49166),
• The used oil has such a high
moisture content (>90% water) that it
would not be accepted by a processor or
re-refiner,
• The used oil is an emulsion and the
oil and water are inseparable,
• Technologies to treat such oils are
either not commercially or .regionally
available, or
• The used oil does not fall within the
acceptable range for viscosity (1 to 250
centipoises at 50 C).
According to industry sources,31 the
standard for "recyclability" of used oil
is universal, and most used oils can be
processed and treated to manufacture
either burner fuel, lube oil base stock, or
feedstock for refining. The extent of
used oil processing required and the
cost of processing are dependent upon
EPA publication: Used Oil Bulletin), local
governments, voluntary organizations (e.g.. Project
R.O.S.E.). and others (e.g., Amoco and Mobil have
instituted DIY oil collection programs at selected
gas stations in certain parts of the country), DIY
recycling could be significantly increased.
31 EPA contacted used oil recyclers and
rerefiners. They indicated that any used oil is
recyclable and the presence of water is not a
limiting factor. Recyclers and rerefiners are capable
of handling used oil containing any amount of water
and the cost to used oil generators is a function of
water content If used oil has low water content (2-
5%), under the "ideal" market conditions, recyclers/
rerefiners tend to pay used oil generators for a
batch of oil.
-------
48038 Federal,.Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 /Monday. September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rule s
the customer's needs. However.
available processing technologies are
capable of removing water, distilling
volatile solvents, modifying the viscosity
of used oil, and fractionating
components of used oil.
EPA may require the above-
mentioned documentation information
to be submitted to the Agency, or
instead may simply require handlers of
used oil claiming a rebuttal to maintain
records on-site for a period of time (e.g.,
3 years] with a subsequent survey of a
sample of facilities.
EPA requests comments on the
suggested procedures for rebutting the
recycling presumption and the
associated recordkeeping requirements.
EPA's proposed controls for the disposal
of (nonrecyclable) used oil are discussed
below.
E. Controls on the Disposal of Used Oil
When used oils must be disposed,
EPA wants to ensure that they are
disposed in an environmentally safe
manner (i.e., in a facility whereby
potential release and migration of the
used oil will be minimal and non-
threatening to the environment). The
disposal of hazardous used oils, either
listed or characteristic, is regulated
under the RCRA hazardous waste
regulations. Currently, used oil handlers
disposing of used oil must determine
whether the oil is hazardous (i.e.,
exhibits a characteristic) prior to
disposal. EPA is now considering, as
discussed earlier in this notice, listing
certain used oils as hazardous waste.
Further, EPA is considering imposing an
explicit testing requirement on used oil
handlers disposing of non-listed used oil
to determine whether or not the used oil
exhibits any of the characteristics. Non-
recyclable, hazardous used oils must be
disposed of in accordance with subtitle
C disposal standards. For the disposal of
nonhazardous used oils, EPA is
considering using RCRA sections 1008
and 4005 authorities to promulgate used
oil disposal guidelines. The specific
requirements that EPA is currently
considering are described in more detail
below. Even if EPA does not develop
additional sections 1008 and 4005
guidelines, the disposal of bulk or non-
containerized liquid hazardous waste
(those that fail the paint filter liquids
test) in any landfill is currently
prohibited under RCRA section 3004(cJ.
EPA is considering controlling the
disposal of used oil for three reasons.
First, as discussed above, small
quantities of even nonhazardous used
oil, when disposed in proximity to a
water body, can make that water
nonpotable for human consumption, can
reduce th-: oxygen content of water, and
can reduce light penetration in water by
forming an oily sheen on top of the
water. Second, there is evidence that
States that stringently regulate the
disposal of used oil have higher used oil
recycling rates than the national
average. Thus, such regulation is
consistent with the express objective of
section 3014 to promote used oil
recycling. Third, as shown in Table
III.C.5, significant fractions of used oil
are likely to exhibit the Toxicity
Characteristic (TC) and therefore, must
be handled as hazardous waste, if
disposed. Some used oils may also
exhibit the characteristic of ignitability
and therefore, must be managed as
hazardous waste, if disposed. As
discussed in previous FR notices (50 FR
49260 to 49267 and 50 FR 49176,
November 29,1985), used oil often
contains toxic constituents that may
indicate that the oil was mixed with
halogenated solvents. Therefore, EPA is
considering using, in addition to sections
1008 and 4005, its information gathering
authorities (RCRA section 3007) and
monitoring authorities (RCRA section
3013) to promulgate one or all of the
following regulatory options for used oil
disposal.32
EPA believes that certain used oils
may require disposal because they can
not be recycled. In cases where the used
oil is not recyclable and the disposal of
the used oil is not controlled under the
current subtitle C regulations, EPA
wants to ensure that disposal occurs in
an environmentally safe manner.33
Therefore, EPA is considering the
following three alternative regulatory
approaches to control the disposal of
nonrecyclable, nonhazardous used oil:
• Allow disposal of non-hazardous
used oil (in a Subtitle D permitted
disposal facility) only after a
demonstration that the used oil being
disposed is not hazardous and is not
recyclable; or
• Allow disposal of nonhazardous
used oil only if the disposal facility is in
compliance with disposal guidelines that
will be developed at a later date under
section 1008 authority; or
32 EPA notes that sections 3007 and 3013
authorities have been traditionally used on a case-
by-case basis for individual facilities. Today.
however, EPA is considering using these authorities
for the broad class of persons who dispose of used
oil, and therefore, we are considering promulgating
national regulations to ensure information is
collected concerning used oil disposal.
33 EPA notes that should the Agency go forward
with the 1985 proposal to list all used oils as
hazardous waste, this discussion would be moot.
However, as discussed earlier in this notice, listing
all used oils is not the only option the Agency is
currently considering.
• Ban disposal of nonhazardous used
oil using the open dumping prohibition
of RCRA section 4005.
1. Demonstration Before Disposal
a. Testing for hazardousness. To
ensure that used oils that are disposed
of in Subtitle D facilities, either
industrial solid waste management
facilities covered under 40 CFR part 257
or municipal solid waste landfills, are
not hazardous waste, EPA is considering
requiring used oil generators,
transporters, or recycling facilities that
are directing used oil toward subtitle D
disposal to comply with the section 3014
management standards prior to disposal,
and demonstrate that the used oil is not
a hazardous waste by testing the used
oil for halogen content, and the
hazardous waste characteristics. EPA
does not normally require parties to
demonstrate that solid wastes are not
hazardous, but used oil has a long
history of being a conduit for disposal of
hazardous waste via mixing, and
available data show that used oils in
storage tanks contain significant
amounts of hazardous constituents,
presumably due to mixing.34 Therefore,
EPA is considering requiring a
demonstration (testing and
recordkeeping) that used oil being
disposed either on- or off-site is not
hazardous because it:
• Is not a listed used oil (if any used
oils are listed),
• Does not exhibit a characteristic of
hazardous waste, and
• Is not a mixture of used oil and
hazardous waste (i.e., it meets the
rebuttable presumption requirements).
b. Control of nonhazardous used oil
disposal. Under the approach described
above, used oil would be subject to all
section 3014 standards unless a person
rebuts the presumption of recycling.
Once a party rebuts the presumption of
recycling, the party must comply with all
applicable section 3014 standards until
the used oil is shipped off-site for
disposal. To prevent environmental
harm that may result from used oil being
disposed (e.g., ground-water
contamination by oil itself), ana given
the need to conserve petroleum
resources, EPA is considering imposing
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements to monitor the disposal of
nonrecyclable, nonhazardous used oil.
As described below, EPA is also
considering banning the disposal of used
oil for these same reasons.
EPA may use RCRA section 3007
authority to require used oil generators
"* See Used Oil Characterization Sampling and
Analysis Program, EPA, February. 1991.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48039
who are disposing of used oil on-site or
shipping the used oil off-site for disposal
to keep, records, and possibly report, the
quantities of nonhazardous used oil
disposed, the mode of disposal, the
location of disposal, and the date of
disposal. The generator may also be
required to keep records of the analyses
performed to demonstrate that the used
oil being disposed is not hazardous. In
addition, any used oil handler who
successfully rebuts the recycling
presumption outlined in section D above
may be required to maintain the
necessary documentation.
EPA believes that such information
gathering and recordkeeping would
supplement the recycling presumption
discussed above. Current data shows
that most used oils are in fact
recyclable. The Agency may require
information from any person disposing
of used oil documenting that it is not
recyclable, and therefore not subject to
the section 3014 management standards.
In addition, EPA believes these
requirements may promote increased
recycling of used oils by increasing the
cost of disposal. EPA is considering
requiring parties wishing to dispose ,of
non-hazardous used oil to demonstrate
that the used oil is not hazardous and
not recyclable each time the party
disposes of used oil, or requiring a one-
time demonstration only. EPA requests
comment on the approach described
above for controlling the disposal of
used oils. EPA also requests comment
on the appropriate frequency for making
the demonstration (testing and
recordkeeping) that used oil is not
hazardous and not recyclable prior to
sending used oil for disposal.
2. Disposal Guidelines
As another alternative, EPA may
allow disposal of nonhazardous used oil
provided that owner/operators of
disposal facilities follow specific
disposal guidelines that may be
developed at a later date under RCRA
section 1008 authority. RCRA authorizes
EPA to provide technical descriptions of
the level of performance that provides
protection of human health arid the
environment and to provide minimum
criteria defining those practices which
constitute open dumping. Under RCRA,
states can prohibit disposal of solid
waste that is not in compliance with the
Federal technical .guidelines if the
disposal method is determined to be a
form of open dumping. The disposal
guidelines developed."by EPA could
establish design and operation steps for:
• Controlling down-gradient
migration of used oil or generation of oil
plumes that cou'd reach drinking-water
sources;
• Locating certain sites or
designating/dedicating other sites as
acceptable used oil disposal sites based
on:
—Simple site-specific factors such as
soil type, annual rainfall, proximity to
surface water and/or ground water
sources, proximity to the nearest
human population, and proximity to
ecologically sensitive habitats
(aquatic and terrestrial); or
—Other site-specific prevention and
detection measures.
Until such time that EPA develops and
publishes § 1008 disposal criteria,
parties disposing of non-hazardous used
oils will have to comply with the current
part 257 and part 258 disposal criteria.
EPA requests comment on the
appropriateness of developing disposal
guidelines specifically for used oil.
3. Banning All Used Oil Disposal on
Land
EPA has received comments
suggesting a total ban on the disposal of
used oil. EPA believes, however, that
this may not be feasible since some
kinds of nonrecyclable used oil must be
disposed. In addition, a total ban may
not be necessary because EPA is
currently developing part 258 criteria for
municipal solid waste landfills. These
criteria may set forth minimum
requirements governing facility location,
design, operation, ground water
monitoring, corrective action
requirements, financial assurance, and
closure and post-closure care. In
addition, a ban may be unnecessary
because the disposal of bulk or non-
containerized liquid hazardous wastes
(those that fail the paint filter liquids
test) in any landfill is prohibited by
RCRA section 3004(c).
Many states, in an effort to promote
recycling and to preserve landfill
capacity, have already banned disposal
of used oil in municipal landfills. The
current Federal guidelines for disposal
facilities do not specifically address
used oil. However, as with any solid
waste, disposal of used oil in facilities
that do not meet the 40 CFR part 257
criteria constitutes "open dumping" and
is prohibited (See RCRA section
4005(a)). Therefore, nonhazardous used
oil may have to be disposed only in
permitted municipal landfills that meet
the revised criteria, or in other solid
waste disposal facilities that meet the
part 257 criteria. EPA may place
regulatory language in the used oil
standards to reiterate this prohibition.
EPA requests comment on the
feasibility and desirability of a total ban
on disposal of all used oil.
F. Other General Changes from the 1985
Proposed Rule
The following sections describe some
of the other aspects of the proposed rule
that EPA is considering revising. The
final section of this notice describes the
specific requirements applicable to used
oil generators, transporters, recyclers,
burners, marketers, and disposal
facilities.
1. Modification of Current Exemption for
Characteristic Used Oil to be Recycled
Section 261.6(a)(2)(iii) of 40 CFR
exempts from full subtitle C regulation
used oils that exhibit one or more of the
characteristics of hazardous waste and
that are recycled by burning for energy
recovery in boilers, and industrial
furnaces. Instead, used oils that are
burned for energy recovery in boilers
and industrial furnaces are regulated
under 40 CFR part 266, subpart E
(regulations for used oil burned for
energy recovery). Additionally, 40 CFR
261.6{a)(3)(iii) exempts used oils
exhibiting one or more of the
characteristics and recycled in a manner
other than burning from regulation
under RCRA subtitle C.
If EPA determines that any used oils
are to be listed as hazardous waste,
EPA may revise the current part 261
exemptions to include in the exemptions
any used oils that are listed as
hazardous wastes and recycled. The
effect of revising the current exemptions
to include listed used oils will be to
subject all hazardous (either listed or
characteristic) used oils that are
recycled to the same set of recycling
requirements as nonhazardous used oils
under a separate part (i.e., part 279).
These requirements will be protective,
but different from those required for
most other hazardous wastes, as
provided by section 3014 (see the
discussion in the November 29,1985
proposal, 50 FR 49218, footnote 17).
EPA requests comments on expanding
the 40 CFR 261.6(a) exemptions to
include listed used oils, if any used oils
are listed as hazardous wastes.
2. Application of the 1,000 ppm Halogen
Rebuttable Presumption to All Used Oils
As proposed in 1985, EPA is
considering applying the 1,000 ppm
halogen rebuttable presumption,
currently required for used oils that are
recycled to recover energy (50 FR 49176,
November 29,1985), to all used oils that
are recycled in any manner. EPA
believes that used oils failing the 1,000
ppm halogen limit are probably
hazardous wastes due to the fact that
they may be mixed1 with chlorinated
solvents. These used oils must be
-------
48040 Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Radea
managed as hazardous wastes (and not
as hazardous used oils) unless ,the
mixing presumption can be successfully
rebutted [50 FR 49205, November 29,
1985], EPA stated in the proposal and
reiterates here that a mixture of used oil
and hazardous waste must be managed
as a hazardous waste under subtitle C,
regardless of whether it exceeds the
1000 ppm halogen limit. EPA is
considering requiring recyclers to test,
using the EPA approved SW-846 test
method 8010, every incoming shipment
of used oil to determine whether it
exceeds the 1000 ppm halogen limit, and
further, whether it contains listed
solvents. EPA may require
documentation that used oil has not
been mixed with listed solvents F001-
F005, Likewise, to successfully rebut the
presumption, if the used oil exceeds the
1,000 ppm halogens level, the generator
may be required to provide
documentation that the source of the
halogens is not a listed hazardous
waste.
EPA believes that the testing of used
oils for halogen content can be
performed either by a collector when
picking up a used oil shipment or by a
recycler when accepting used oil for
recycling. In some cases, testing may not
be necessary if, based upon the
generator's knowledge, the generator
certifies that the used oil shipment does
not contain any solvents. Both the
transporter and recycler would remain
responsible for ensuring that this
certification is correct
EPA requests comment on whether it
is appropriate to require recyclers to test
used oil. Comments are also solicited on
the frequency of testing suggested
above,
3. Options for Regulation of Used Oil
Generators
Available data show that more than
600,000 generators of used oil generate
between 0 and 1,000 kg/month of used
oil; these generators collectively
generate more than 430 million gallons
of used oil annually.35 They account for
approximately 40 percent of the total
used oil generated annually and account
for more than 90 percent of all used oil
generators {653,000 generators], On-site
used oil management practices of
generators generating less than 1000 kg
per month would have been essentially
uncontrolled under the 1985 proposal,
while generators of more than 1000 kg
per month of used oil would have been
more stringently regulated (50 FR 49251-
49254).
"Table 3 at SO FR 49224, NQVember 29,1985,
By exempting the small quantity
generators who recycle used oil foom
most substantive standards proposed in
1985, the Agency was trying to account
for both the economic impact and
protectiveness standards as mandated
by section 3014. EPA believed that the
generators producing over 1,000kg per -
month may be in a better position to
absorb the regulatory costs associated
with the rather complex regulatory
scheme proposed in 1985 (50 FR 49225).
As indicated in section X of today's
notice, the annual cost of complying
with the management standards is likely
to range between $100 and $650 per used
oil generator. The economic analysis
performed to support this notice
indicates that a small fraction of the
small businesses and small used oil
generators may face incremental costs
as great as $477 per year (see the
discussion in section XI of today's
notice).
EPA is now considering two
alternatives to the approach proposed in
1965. Under the first option, EPA is
considering eliminating the distinction
between small quantity (less than 1,000
kg/month) and large quantity generators
of used oil that was proposed in 1985 (50
FR 49222 through 49226, November 29,
1985), EPA believes that this option may
facilitate both the recycling of all used
oils (irrespective of who generates the
used oil and how it is generated) and the
implementation of one set of
management standards for all used oil
generators. Other reasons for
eliminating this distinction include: (a) It
minimizes complexity by placing all
used oil generators under uniform
regulatory requirements; (b) it eliminates
the need for measuring quantities of
hazardous used oils collected and stored
each month; (c) it eliminates the
concerns that generators could be
bumped into a more stringent regulatory
category if they collect DIY-generated
crankcase oil, and (d) above all, it
allows for a system whereby all used -oil
is collected, recycled, and managed in
an environmentally sound manner, thus
reducing hazards to human health and
the environment. The single set of used
oil management standards would
capture all used oil generators and
require them to comply with used oil
storage and inspection requirements,
cleanup requirements for releases,
tracking and recordkeeping
requirements, and limited reporting (e.g.,
reporting of used oil disposal). As
discussed below in section IX.B., this
single set of standards for all generators
may be less stringent than the standards
proposed for large quantity generators
in 1985 (50 FR 49227-49331).
In addition to the advantages already
enumerated today for regulating all
generators, this option would enable all
"service station dealers," as defined in
CERCLA section 101(37), to avail
themselves of an exemption from
CERCLA liability; As discussed later in
section !X.B.2,b. of this notice, (a) once
service station dealers comply with the
management standards promulgated
under section 3014 of RCRA, including
corrective action (i.e., spill response and
cleanup), and(b) they accept DIY-
generated used oil for the purpose of
recycling, these generators would be
exempt from CERCLA liability for off-
site releases of used oil. Under the
approach proposed in 1985, however,
service stations that are exempt SQGs
would not qualify for this exemption
from CERCLA liability.
Alternatively, EPA is considering
preserving some distinction between
small and large generators of used oil,
with certain conditions. EPA is
considering exempting small quantity
generators of used oil from the proposed
management standards if these
generators recycle the used oil they
generate. Under this second option, the
Agency is considering using the SPCC
aboveground storage capacity
exemption limit and the UST regulations
underground storage capacity
exemption limit as the regulatory
definition of a small quantity used oil
generator. Generators with total
aboveground storage capacity less than
or equal to 1,320gallons or underground
storage capacity less than 110 gallons
may be considered a small quantity
used oil generator and exempt from the
used oil management standards if they
recycle the used oil that they generate.
EPA estimates that approximately SS
percent of the estimated 650,000 used oil
generators would be exempted if the
Agency decides to exempt small
generators using the facility .storage
capacity as a discriminator. Industry
contacts suggest that ail non-industrial
generators of used oil are likely to have
an abwegronnd storage capacity of less
than 1320 gallons and all industrial
generators are likely to 'have an
aboveground storage capacity of greater
than 1,320 gallons per facility. EPA
requests comment on the number of
generators that may be exempted under
the used oil regulations {ive., those
generators storing used oil in
aboveground tanks or containers with a
total storage capacity less than or equal
to 1,320 gallons and/or storing in
underground tanks of a capacity less
Jfaan 110 gallons) if the Agency
establishes such a definition of smnH
quantity used oil generators. As
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday. September 23. 1991 / Proposed Rules 48041
discussed below, generators storing
used oil in underground storage tanks
may remain subject to the UST
standards in part 280, except for those
generators who may have underground
storage tanks of a capacity less than 110
gallons. The UST regulations do not
apply to UST systems whose capacity is
110 gallons or less (40 CFR 280.10(b)(4)},
and EPA is considering not regulating
generators with underground used oil
tanks of such a small capacity. Again,
EPA is only providing this small
quantity generator exemption to those
generators who meet the storage
capacity limits and who recycle the used
oil that they generate. If, in the future,
EPA assesses that SQG-generated used
oil is not recycled to the maximum
capacity, EPA may revisit this
exemption decision.
The advantages of basing the small
quantity used oil generator exemption
on the facility's total storage capacity
are the following:
• In many cases, a storage capacity-
based approach will allow small
businesses to accumulate a quantity of
used oil equivalent to their full storage
capacity (if less than 1,320 gallons) and
therefore may meet any similar required
minimum limit for used oil pickup set by
used oil collectors, without subjecting
the generator to section 3014 standards.
• Will not discourage used oil
generators from collecting DIY-
generated used oil. For example, with a
1,000 kg per month or 300 gallon per
month cutoff, EPA believes that a small
business may be reluctant to accept
DIY-generated oil.
• May address the concerns raised in
public comments related to the small
quantity used oil generator limit
proposed in 1985. Some commenters
were concerned that many small
businesses would be pushed into the
large quantity generator category due to
the relatively low generation rate
proposed for the small quantity used c il
generator exclusion and felt that some
small businesses, to avoid regulation,
may mismanage their used oil (e.g.,
throw it in the trash, dump it on the
ground or in the sewer).
The Agency requests comment on the
two options under consideration for
regulating used oil generators. However
the Agency is not soliciting further
comments on the 1985 proposed
exemption for generators of less than
1,000 kg/month at this time.
If the Agency decides to exempt small
businesses as discussed above, small
businesses meeting the exemption,.
many of whom can be classified as the
"service station dealers" (SSDs) as
defined under CERCLA section 114(c),
would not be eligible for the CERCLA
section 114(c) liability exemptions for
SSDs. To be eligible for the exemption;
service stations are required to (a)
comply with the section 3014 used oil
management standards and (b) accept
do-it-yourself generated used oil. The
small used oil generator exemption
under the section 3014 management
standards would be available to those
who recycle used oil, either on site or
send to the authorized used oil recyclers
for recycling. EPA is not considering any
notification requirement to ensure that
small businesses recycle used oil. If, a
"service station" meeting the small
generator exemption wants to be eligible
for the CERCLA section 114(c) liability
exemption then, at a minimum, EPA may
require the generator to (a) certify that
used oil is being recycled on-site in
compliance with the section 3014 used
oil management standards and 40 CFR
part 266, subpart E, and/or (b) have a
used oil recycling contract with an
authorized recycler stating that it would
be recycled as burner fuel or as lube oil
feedstock. The proposed paperwork
would have to be maintained at
generator's location and updated as
necessary (e.g., if a new recycling
contract is signed). These generators
would be exempted from section 3014
management standards such as,
corrective action (e.g., inspection and
used oil release/spill cleanup), used oil
tracking, and other requirements, that
are currently under consideration for all
regulated used oil generators. EPA
requests comment on the minimal
paperwork (recordkeeping) requirement
that may allow otherwise section 3014-
exempted small businesses to obtain the
CERCLA liability exemption. In
particular, is it appropriate not to
impose corrective action requirements
on small generators? (See CERCLA
section 114(c)(4)).
4. Dust Suppression/Road Oiling
On November 29,1985 (50 FR 49239),
EPA proposed to ban the use of used oil
as a dust suppressant (road oiling). On
that date, EPA also proposed to list all
used oils as hazardous waste (see 50 FR
49258). Both RCRA section 3004(1) and
40 CFR 266.23(b) prohibit using "a waste
or used oil * * * mixed with hazardous
waste" as a dust suppressant, EPA
interprets this prohibition to apply to all
solid wastes, including used oils, that
are themselves hazardous wastes,
whether mixed with other hazardous
wastes or not.36Thus, by proposing to
36 Except for wastes that are hazardous soieiy
because of ignitability; see RCRA Section 3004 (1)
and 40 CFR 266.23 (b).
list all used oils as hazardous waste,
EPA was also proposing to ban the
practice of using used oils as dust
suppressants. Even if EPA elects to list
only certain used oils as hazardous
waste or does not list any used oils as
hazardous waste, EPA may elect to
apply the dust suppression prohibition
to all used oils.
As discussed earlier in this notice,
EPA may determine that it is not
appropriate to list any or all used oils as
hazardous waste. However, given the
ability of all used oils, when applied to
the land for disposal or recycling, to
contaminate water and make it non-
potable, and given that used oil often
contains toxic constituents from a
variety of sources, the Agency is
currently considering a ban on using any
used oil as a dust suppressant,
regardless of whether the used oil is a
hazardous waste by definition.
Additionally, considering the fact that it
may be difficult to differentiate between
non-listed used oils and listed used oils,
that mixing of various types of used oils
is common and difficult to control, and
lhat mixing of hazardous waste into
used oil has occurred commonly prior to
land application as a dust suppressant
(causing serious damage at Times Beach
and other locations), EPA believes it
may be necessary to ban the use of used
oil for road oiling. EPA recognizes that
mixtures of used oil and hazardous
waste are currently brought under
regulation as hazardous waste via the
"mixture rule". However, used oils have
historically come to be contaminated
with toxic constituents that may or may
not originate with listed wastes. A ban
will effectively eliminate the potential
environmental damages that may result
from the migration of used oil and/or
hazardous constituents after road oiling.
Since road oiling is, in fact, a type of
"recycling," RCRA section 3014 provides
EPA the authority to control (or ban)
road oiling of all used oils. The use of
used oil for road oiling or dust
suppression may not be protective of
human health and the environment. The
Agency solicits comments on whether
any used oils may be used as a dust
suppressant without posing potential
environmental and human health risks.
As discussed in section IX.G., the
Agency may allow some level of road
oiling on a case-by-case basis. For that
purpose, however, the party intending to
appiy used oil for dust suppression may
have to demonstrate through analysis
that the used oil is nonhazardous and
that the land area on which it is to be
used meets certain site-specific criteria
Commenters who favor allowing road
oiling should specify how EPA can
-------
48042 Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
ensure that hazardous wastes are not
mixed with nonhazardous used oil, and
how the Agency can prevent the
contamination of ground waters and
surface waters from used oils that have
not been mixed with hazardous wastes.
The Agency also solicits comment on
environmentally safe alternatives to
applying used oil for dust suppression.
5. Proposed Exemption for Primary Oil
Refiners
In the November 29,1985 final rule
regulating hazardous wastes burned in
industrial furnaces and boilers, EPA
exempted from regulation hazardous
waste fuels derived from the refining of
oil-bearing hazardous wastes along with
normal process streams. EPA also
exempted oil reclaimed from hazardous
waste generated in normal petroleum
refining, production, and transportation,
if the oil was to be refined with the
normal process stream. These
exemptions were provided because most
hazardous waste constituents are
thought to be either removed in the
normal refining process or to contribute
insubstantial quantities of contaminants
to the final product {see the discussion
at 50 FR 49168). EPA is considering
extending the exclusion to fuels derived
from used oils that are reinserted as
feedstocks at primary petroleum
refineries. This exclusion would
effectively exempt the fuel from the
derived-from provision in section
261.3(c)(2). As with the existing
exclusion however, management
standards would apply to the waste
materials prior to reinsertion. Therefore,
EPA may apply the section 3014
management standards to the used oil
collected and stored prior to reinsertion
in the crude oil pipeline or directly into
the refining process. EPA requests
comment on the exclusion for fuels
derived from used oils that are used as
feedstocks at primary petroieum
refineries,
6. Underground Storage Tanks
Technical requirements for
underground storage tanks (USTs)
storing petroleum products and certain
hazardous substances have been
promulgated under RCRA subtitle I (see
40 CFR part 280) since the 1985 used oil
proposal. EPA included underground
storage tanks containing used oils in the
universe of tanks covered by the UST
standards promulgated in 1988. As tne
Agency stated in the preamble to the
1988 final rule for the UST technical
requirements (53 FR 37112; September
23,1988), EPA believes that used oil,
when stored in underground storage
tanks, presents risks similar to other
petroleum products stored in USTs. EPA.
stated in 1938, and the Agency reiterates
here, that releases from both used oil
USTs and other petroleum product USTs
can be prevented through the
implementation of sound management
practices. As a result, the Agency
determined that used oil USTs must
comply with the tank upgrading,
operation and maintenance, corrosion
protection, corrective action, closure
requirements, and financial
responsibility requirements promulgated
for other petroleum product USTs. EPA
believes that the subtitle I standards are
sufficient to protect human health and
the environment from potential releases
of used oil from underground storage
tanks (see Table VIII.F.2). EPA believes
it is also important to continue to
regulate used oils that are stored in
underground tanks under the subtitle I
regulations to avoid confusion on the
part of the regulated community and to
avoid dual enforcement and compliance
monitoring responsibilities at the same
generator or facility site.
Although not all underground tanks
are currently regulated under subtitle I
(i.e., those with a capacity of less than
110 gallons are exempt),87 the majority
of the used oil tanks that are
underground are currently regulated
under the RCRA 40 CFR part 280
regulations.
It was not clearly stated in the final
rule for the UST technical standards (53
FR 37082, September 23,1988) whether
EPA intended to include USTs
containing hazardous used oil under the
part 280 regulations. Although the
preamble discussion (53 FR 37112)
indicates that all used oils in USTs fall
within the purview of the subtitle I
program, § 280.10(b) excludes any UST
system holding hazardous waste listed
or identified under subtitle C from part
280 requirements. At this time, EPA
wishes to clarify that all USTs of a
capacity greater than 110 gallons
containing used oil (regardless of
whether the used oil is listed or
identified as hazardous waste), are
regulated under 40 CFR part 280
standards for underground storage
tanks. EP/ may further clarify this point
when the Agency promulgates section
3014 used oil management standards.
The clarification could be codified in the
new part 279, or in 40 CFR 280.10(b).
Again, the Agency is making this
37 The Agency chose under subtitle 1 to regulate
all USTs ot a capacity greater than 110 gallons
because 110-gallon level coincides with DOTs
definition for minimum portable tank for the
transportation of hazardous materials. In the
preamble to the final UST requirements EPA notes
that this tank size is probably below the smallest
petroleum tank routinely mass produced (275
gallons) and this level probably only excludes small
sumps and other "atypical" tanks.
clarification to avoid confusion on the
part of the regulated community and
avoid the administrative burden of
having two regulating agencies
responsible for enforcement and
compliance monitoring at a single
generator site or facility.
EPA has determined that since it is
not necessary to incorporate the part 280
UST standards verbatim into the section
3014 used oil management standards
regulations. Therefore, underground
tanks storing used oil will continue to be
regulated under the UST program (40
CFR part 280). Nonetheless, EPA
proposes to clarify that compliance with
part 280 will constitute compliance with
section 3014, and that part 280 may be
co-enforced against used oil USTs under
both RCRA section 3008 and RCRA
section 9006. EPA believes that a
compliance with the UST requirements
for the storage of used oil in
underground storage tanks would be
adequate to receive the CERCLA
liability exemption available to service
station dealers as defined in CERCLA
section 114(c). (See further discussion ot
the CERCLA section 114(c) requirements
in IX.B.2.b of the notice.) EPA requests
comment on whether the compliance
with the UST requirements would be
adequate to activate the applicability of
CERCLA liability exemption. Further,
EPA believes it is important to minimize
disruption in the current UST program,
and section 3014 standards would be
duplicative of those promulgated as part
280 requirements. Comments are
requested on the proposal to continue to
regulate the storage of used oil stored in
underground tanks under 40 CFR part
280.
Under the federal UST program, states
have the authority to implement and
enforce the UST regulations. In some
states used oil is a state-listed
hazardous waste, while in other states
used oil is regulated as a "special
waste". EPA has no knowledge of (a)
how these states apply the part 280 UST
requirements to underground tanks used
for the storage of used oil, or (b) whether
the part 264, subpart J requirements are
implemented and enforced for these
underground tanks. EPA requests
comment on this issue from states with
used oil regulations. EPA also wants to
know what difficulties may be
encountered in the states that regulate
used oil but do not enforce the part 280
UST requirements for underground used
oil storage tanks.
7. Applicability of SPCC Requirements
In 1985, EPA proposed to require used
oil handlers who were otherwise subject
to the Spill Prevention, Control anH
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48043
Countermeasure requirements (SPCC)
also to comply with the proposed
section 3014 used oil management
standards (50 FR 49245). Since 1985, EPA
has further evaluated the SPCC
regulations as they apply to used oil
storage tanks, and the Agency reiterates
here that the SPCC requirements would
continue to apply to facilities meeting
the SPCC applicability criteria, in
addition to the section 3014 management
standards. SPCC requirements apply to
owners or operators, of non-
transportation-related onshore and
offshore facilities engaged in drilling,
producing, gathering, storing, processing,
refining, transferring, distributing, or
consuming oil and oil products, and
which, due to their location, could
reasonably be expected to discharge oil
in harmful quantities into or upon the
navigable waters of the United States or
adjoining shorelines (40 CFR 112.1(b)).
More specifically, part 112 applies to
facilities with underground storage
capacity greater than 42,000 gallons and
aboveground storage capacity greater >
than 1,320 gallons of oil.
EPA is currently developing revisions
to the Federal SPCC requirements
pursuant to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990,
enacted in response to the 1988 Ashland
oil spill. In addition, a number of states
(e.g., ME, NY, NJ, FL) have programs
similar to the SPCC program while some
others (e.g., OR, AL, WA) are developing
similar regulations. EPA believes that
many of the large used oil handlers are
already in compliance with the SPCC
regulations. These used oil handlers
currently maintain approved SPCC
plans and are equipped to execute
specific requirements in the plan if used
oil is discharged in harmful quantities,
as defined in 40 CFR part 110. EPA is
considering requiring used oil handlers
who are subject to SPCC standards to
comply with both the SPCC
requirements and the used oil
management standards since the focus
of both sets of requirements, although
related, is different.
The section 3014 standards discussed
in today's notice cover routine operating
practices rather than the response and
countermeasure activities required by
the SPCC regulations. Some of the
differences between the SPCC
requirements and the aboveground
storage tank requirements under
consideration for used oil handlers as
discussed in this notice are the
following:
• Today's requirements would be
promulgated under RCRA rather than
the Clean Water Act authority,
• The tank standards and the
associated inspection and cleanup
requirements that are under
consideration would cover a wide
variety of tank sizes and visible
releases, leaks, or drips. The SPCC
program, on the other hand, primarily
covers large size tanks and the
associated spills that could reach
navigable waters, and
• The basic requirements to be
promulgated for aboveground tanks
used to store used oil would focus on
routine inspections and cleanup of
spills. The SPCC requirements identify
additional containment and
countermeasure guidelines such as
secondary containment (curbing and
diking), monitoring controls, integrity
testing and certification, and corrosion
protection.
Table VIII.F.1. summarizes in detail
the requirements of 40 CFR 112.7 and 40
CFR 264.193 and 265.193. The SPCC
requirements must be implemented in
the event of a spill or a massive release
of oils to navigable waters, while
RCRA's aboveground storage tank
regulations address standards for
operating, maintaining, and closing
tanks used to store hazardous wastes.
TABLE VIII.F.1.—COMPARISON OF SPCC REQUIREMENTS AND SUBTITLE C TANK REQUIREMENTS
SPCC requirements
Subtitle tank requirements
Authority....
Objectives.
Applicability.
Conditions..
The Clean Water Act and the Oil Pollution Control Act authorizes EPA
to regulate activities that may harm navigable surface waters.
The SPCC requirements in 40 CFR part 112 are designed to protect
surface water from oil contamination.
Each facility must keep the SPCC plan on file to be implemented in
response to a spill or leak that threatens to contaminate navigable
waters.
Non-transportation-related onshore and off-shore facilities engaged in
drilling, producing, gathering, storing, processing, refining, transfer-
ring, distributing, or consuming oil and oil products which, due to
their location, could potentially discharge oil into or upon navigable
U.S. waters or adjoining shorelines.
Facilite's with underground storage capacity less than or equal to
42,000 gallons and aboveground capacity less than or equal to
1,320 gallons, provided no single container has a capacity in excess
of 660 gallons.
Must develop and maintain a Spill Prevention Control and Counter-
measure Plan for oil spills, which includes: appropriate containment
or diversionary structures to prevent discharged oil from reaching
navigable surface waters.
Provides alternative minimum containment systems that should be
used, rather than requiring specific management standards. Contain-
ment options for onshore facilities include: dikes, berms or retaining
walls; curbing; culverting, gutters or drainage systems; weirs, booms
or other barriers; spill diversion ponds; retention ponds; and sorbent
materials. Options for off-shore facilities Include: curbing, drip pan;
and sumps and collection systems.
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act authorizes EPA to
develop management standards that are protective of human health
and the environment.
RCRA requirements in 40 CFH parts 264 and 265, subpart J are
applicable to tanks storing or treating hazardous waste and are
designed to prevent ground-water contamination and other releases
to the environment.
Each facility must comply with minimum management standards for the
containment and detection of hazardous wastes or constituents to
prevent leaks and spills.
Owners or operators of facilities that use tank systems for treating or
storing hazardous waste.
Assess the integrity ot existing tanks. If leaking remove from service,
empty, stop flow, contain visible releases, certify repair if applicable,
and report releases to the environment
Perform daily inspections of the tank system including: Monitoring leak
detection equipment, secondary containment system, and external
area, and documenting the inspection.
Secondary containment must be provided, and must: Prevent migra-
tion; detect and collect wastes or accumulated liquids until removal;
meet all design requirements; include at least an external liner or
double walled tank or vault or an equivalent device; and meet all
minimum management standards.
An external liner or vault system must be designed to contain 100
percent of the capacity of the largest tank within its boundary.
Double walled tanks must be capable of containing any release from
the inner tank.
-------
48044
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday. September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
TABLE VIII.F.1.—COMPARISON OF SPCC REQUIREMENTS AND SUBTITLE C TANK REQUIREMENTS—Continued
Enforcement
SPCC requirements
Failure to prepare a SPCC plan report discharges of over 1,000
gallons of oil, or revise a Plan as required is punishable by a civil
penalty of not more than $5,000 per day of violation. Failure to
implement a Plan may result in the discharge of oil to navigable
waters, which is prohibited under section 110.
Subtitle tank requirements
In order for a facility to operate, it must meet the minimum manage-
ment standard. Compliance is mandatory and facilities are subject to
strict enforcement penalties for violation of subtitle C provisions.
EPA is considering requiring the
SPCC-recommended secondary
containment options for controlling
releases and spills of used oil from
aboveground storage tanks at used oil
recycling facilities. EPA believes that
the majority of these facilities that store
used oil in aboveground tanks currently
have these areas designed and
constructed in a manner that would
meet the SPCC guidelines.38 Figure
\ III.F.l illustrates secondary
containment options that are available
under RCRA subtitle C and under the
SPCC regulations. As shown in the
Figure, berms, dikes, or retaining walls
along with an oil-impervious floor
appears to be protective against sudden
releases or accidental spills to contain
38 The cost calculations presented in section IX o
today's notice are based on the assumption that the
majority of used oil recycling facilities would
currently be in compliance with the SPCC
requirements (even those not close to navigable
waterways) and those that would not be in
compliance would be required to comply with the
SPCC secondary containment requirements, since
EPA may consider these standards as acceptable
section 3014 used oil management standards for
aboveground storage tanks.
used oil and to avoid significant
contamination of nearby surface and
ground water resources. EPA requests
comments on the assumption that the
majority of used oil facilities are
currently in compliance with the SPCC
aboveground tank requirements. EPA
also requests comments on the
adequacy of the SPCC secondary
containment requirements for
controlling used oil releases, and on the
type of material that can be used to
make storage area floors impervious to
used oil.
BILUMG CODE 6E60-50-M
-------
Figure VIII. F. 1 Secondary Containment Options
SUBTITLE C
Spill Prevention Containment
and Counter-Measures (SPCC)<
u
Impervious to Oil
Manual Valve
EXTERNAL LINER
H
*fc
CXI
Quick Drain
VAULT
U U
DOUBLE-WALLED TANK
LTo Storm Sewer
, ^
1] Q"
DIKES, BERMS, OR RETAINING WALLS
(Quick Drain is typically used for off-shore facilities,
urban facilities, loading and unloading)
•EPA is developing a proposal that would strengthen
the SPCC guidelines as required under the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 enacted following the
Ashland Oil Spill of 1988.
CD
2L
»
ED
a.
0)
o^
s
?
>-»
£
I
CO
CO
to
•a
ff
a-
CD
i-J
to
CO
CO
CO
3
91
at
D.
CD
CO
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
-------
48046
Federal Register / Vol. 53, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
As a result of the Oil Pollution Act
(OPA) of 1990, EPA is developing a
proposed rule that would strengthen the
existing 40 CFR part 112 requirements
and would require additional
prevention, containment, and control
measures at SPCC-regulated facilities.
EPA expects to publish the proposed
rule before the end of the year. The
OPA-mandated requirements, when
promulgated, would be independently
applicable to used oil facilities that store
used oil in aboveground tanks and are
located near navigable waterways (i.e.,
meet the applicable definition of a
SPCC-regulated facility).
8, Accumulation Limit for Used Oil
Storage
Table Vin.F.2. summarizes the main
components of the storage requirements
for all regulated used oil handlers that
are discussed in today's notice. EPA
believes that the storage requirements
discussed in this notice are adequate to
provide a level of protection necessary
to minimize risks associated with used
oil Leaks and releases that may occur
during storage at generator sites,
transfer facilities, and used oil recycling
facilities including used oil burners.
TABLE VIII.F.2.—PROPOSED CONTAINER AND TANK STORAGE STANDARDS FOR USED OIL
Container storage
Aboveground tank storage
Underground tank
storage
Generators and burners.
§265.171 (condition of containers), §265.173 (management of con-
tainers), §265.174 (inspections), §265.176 (special requirements
for ignitable wastes) and § 262.31 (labeling).
Accumulation period limited to 90 days. _
Transporters
§ 30 days: 40 CFR 262.30 Packaging Standards; DOT packaging and
transport requirements in 49 CFR parts 173, 178, and 179.
§30 days: 40 CFR 265 Supbart 1 _.._
Recycling facilities
40 CFR part 264 subpart I _
Essentially same as for generators, plus §264.177 (container/waste
compatibility requirements) and §264.175 (containment)..
May limit accumulation period to 35 days in lieu of secondary
containment.
Labeling; §265.194 (freeboard and overflow controls), §265.195
(daily inspections), §265.196 (response to leaks), and §265.197
(closure requirements)..
Accumulation period limited to 180 days.
Part 265, Subpart J (minus secondary containment)
Must ship used oil from generator to recycling facility within 35 days
of pickup.
Part 264, subpart J.
Subject to speculative accumulation provisions defined at 40 CFR
40 CFR part 280,
40 CFR part 280.
40 CFR part 280.
In the 1985 proposed rule, EPA
proposed the accumulation period for
used oil at regulated generator sites 39
to 90 days (same as for hazardous waste
generators). EPA received many
comments requesting a longer
accumulation period for used oil
generators. Commenters said that a
longer accumulation period is needed to
allow for sufficient quantities of used oil
to be accumulated to meet transporter
minimum pickup requirements (e.g.,
some transporters will only pickup after
the generator's storage tank or container
is full) or to allow for fluctuating market
conditions and seasonal changes in the
demand for the used oil. EPA is
therefore considering limiting the
accumulation period for used oil
generators to 180 days. EPA believes
that a 180-day accumulation period will
provide an adequate amount of time for
used oil generators to collect and
accumulate sufficient quantities of used
oil to meet any restrictions on minimum
collection quantities imposed by used oil
transporters (i.e., some transporters may
require that the generator accumulate a
minimum quantity of used oil prior to
collection or may set a fixed price for
picking up a shipment of used oil on a
38 EPA is considering regulating only used oil
generators that store used oil in underground tanks
or have a total aboveground capacity greater than
1,320 gallons.
minimum quantity) and will provide a
sufficient amount of time to account for
seasonal variations in used oil markets.
If a used oil generator accumulates used
oil on-site for a period exceeding 180
days, the generator becomes subject to
the permit-by-rule requirements
proposed for used oil storage in tanks
and containers at recycling facilities.
EPA is not proposing a specific
limitation on the accumulation of used
oils stored at transfer facilities that are
in compliance with the permit-by-rule
provisions as proposed in 1985.
However, EPA may require transporters
to deliver a shipment of used oil to a
recycling facility within 35 days of
accepting the shipment from the
generator. If the transporter fails to
deliver a shipment of used oil to a
recycler within 35 days of its pickup,
then he may be required to submit an
exception report (see discussion in
section IX.C.4 of today's notice). In
addition, thirty-five days may be
allowed for storage and/or transport of
the used oil from the generator to the
recycler. A 35-day limit on used oil
storage will ensure against over
accumulation of used oil at transfer
facilities, decrease the likelihood of
releases of used oil to the environment,
and will provide used oil generators
with a level of assurance that their used
oil is reaching a recycling facility in a
timely manner. Storage of used oil for a
period longer than 35 days at a transfer
facility may require secondary
containment for tanks and containers as
discussed for used oil recycling facilities
(see discussion in K.D.l of today's
notice).
EPA is not proposing to limit the
storage of used oil at used oil recycling
facilities and used oil burners that are in
compliance with the permit-by-rule
provisions (as proposed in 1985) beyond
the current speculative accumulation
provision of 40 CFR 261.1(c)(8) that is
applicable to all solid waste recycling
facilities.40
EPA requests comments on a 180-day
accumulation period for used oil
generators, EPA also requests comment
on the proposed 35-day limit on the
shipment period for used oil
transporters.
40 40 CFR 261.1(c)(8) defines a material as being
accumulated speculatively when it is accumulated
before being recycled. A material is not
accumulated speculatively, however, if the person
accumulating it can show that the material is
potentially recyclable and that, during the calendar
year, the amount of material that is recycled, or sent
off-site for recycling! equals at least 75% by weight
or volume of the amount of that material
accumulated at the beginning of the period.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday. September 23. 1991 / Proposed Rules 48047
IX. Other Specific Phase I Management
Standards
The standards and alternatives that
EPA is considering for the first phase of
the contemplated phased approach
include some of those proposed in 1985
and some new requirements that EPA
may deem to be necessary in light of the
analysis of .used ml characterization
data, review of the 1985 proposed
management standards and public
comments specific to the 1985 proposal,
and the promulgation of other EPA
regulations, particularly the
underground storage tank (UST)
regulations. The management standards
proposed in 1985 applied to all used oils;
as discussed above, EPA is considering
options that may apply the Phase I
standards to all recycled used oils or
only to used oils that are determined to
be hazardous. Commenters are asked to
clarify whether they believe the
standards discussed below should apply
to all used oils or only to a subset of the
universe.
EPA solicits comments on the specific
management practices and alternatives
discussed in greater detail below. The
reader should note that requirements
proposed in 1985 but not discussed in
this notice remain under active
consideration. A table listing each:
proposed regulatory provision and its
status as of today's notice (whether the
same as the proposal, modified from the
proposal, or a new provision) is
provided in appendix A of today's
notice. The table in appendix A is an
easy-reference guide that summarizes
the relationship between the
requirements proposed in today's notice
and the management standards
proposed in 1985.
A. Applicability
1. Rebuttable Presumption
EPA is considering applying the
rebuttable presumption for used oil fuels
(§ 266.40(c}) to all used oils. The
application of the 1,000 ppm halogen
limit helps ensure that used oil has not
been mixed with hazardous waste (see
discussion in VIII.F.2 of today's notice).
2. Mixtures of Used Oil and Absorbent
Materials
As discussed above, absorbent
materials (e.g., sawdust, kitty litter,
baled hay, absorbent socks, rags and
wipers, and sorptive minerals) are often
used in the cleanup of small releases
and leaks. Mixing TG hazardous used oil
with absorbent materials for the sole
purpose of evading RCRA regulation
will be considered to be impermissible
dilution under the land disposal
restrictions, once treatment standards
have been set for the TC wastes (40 CFR
268.3(a)).
The Agency is interested in knowing
whether (a) used oil can be drained or
separated from a saturated mixture of
absorbent material or (b) whether a
mixture of used oil and absorbents can
be safely burned. In addition, EPA
requests information on whether the
used oil recovered from such mixtures
can be recycled. Recently, EPA received
information from an entrepreneur
indicating that a procedure for
recovering used oil from used oil-
contaminated materials or mixtures of
used oil and other solid waste has been
developed and a patent application is
being processed. Based on this
information, EPA is considering
requiring used oil handlers that mix
used oils with absorbents to comply
with RCRA section 3014 management
standards when the used oil recovered
from mixtures is recycled. Other
mixtures are discussed in the section on
mixtures in the listing portion of this
notice.
Any disposal of mixtures of used oil
and absorbents may have to be done in
accordance with the final disposal
standards chosen from the options
discussed in this notice. The spent
absorbent materials would have to be
managed as any other solid waste. If the
material is mixed with a listed
hazardous waste or if the mixture
exhibits one of the hazardous waste
characteristics, it is subject to subtitle C
management (treatment and disposal)
requirements.
EPA requests comment on these
requirements for recycling used oil
recovered from mixtures.
3. Reclamation of Used Oils Containing
CFCs
EPA recently published an interim
final rule exempting from the Toxicity
Characteristic (TC) chlorofluorocarbon
(CFG) refrigerants that are reclaimed
(see discussion in 56 FR 5910, February
13,1991). This exclusion was provided
after EPA received information
indicating that application of the TC
may promote venting, rather than
recycling, of the CFCs, which are ozone-
depleting substances. EPA has received
additional information indicating that
lubricating oils in refrigeration units
often contain CFCs. EPA is currently
considering two options for the
regulation of used oils containing CFCs
that are to be reclaimed at CFC-
reclaiming facilities. The first option is
to regulate the used oil as generated
(and incidentally contaminated with
CFCs) under the section 3014
management standards. This option
does not provide any special exclusion
or exemption for used oils containing
CFCs. The second option is to apply
section 3014 standards to the used oil
only after the CFCs have been
reclaimed. This option may allow CFC
reclamation facilities to continue their
operations without becoming subject to
additional regulation, except for the
used oil generator standards for
accumulation of the "cleaned" used oil
prior to shipment off-site for used oil
recycling. EPA believes this option will
encourage the reclamation of CFCs,
preventing further releases into the
atmosphere. EPA requests comments on
the options presented for used oils from
which CFCs can be reclaimed.
EPA is aware of a research and
development effort underway to
formulate CFC substitutes for
refrigeration units. EPA believes that
used oils collected from refrigeration
units need to be managed in g.n
environmentally sound manner. EPA
requests comments on the types and
quantities of used oils that may be
associated with refrigeration units that
contain CFC substitutes in the future.
The lubricating oils generated while
servicing Heating, Ventilation, and Air
Conditioning (HVAC) systems are
covered under today's notice as well.
EPA believes that some of these oils are
likely to be processed to reclaim CFCs
and following the CFC recovery they are
recycled as burner fuel. In the case of
lubricating oils generated when
servicing refrigeration units located at
small commercial establishments and
homes, the used lubricating oils are
drained from refrigeration units by the
service company staff and the servicing
establishment, therefore, is the
generator of the used oil. Following the
collection of the used oil, the servicing
establishment, as a generator of used
oil, must comply with all applicable
standards when the used oil
management standards are promulgated.
EPA solicits comment on whether
HVAC trucks carry sufficient quantities
of used oils that may be mixed with
CFCs that the trucks should be regulated
as used oil containers or whether EPA
should only regulate the used oil after
the CFCs (or CFC substitutes] are
reclaimed from the mixture.
4. Oil/Water Mixtures
In 1985, EPA proposed to exempt oily
wastewaters containing de.minimis
losses of used oils from the mixture rule
(50 FR 49269). EPA is still considering
excluding such mixtures from the
mixture rule and the section 3014
management standards.
EPA is aware, however, that bilge
waters generated on ships may contain
-------
48048 Federal -Register / Vol. 56.No.lB4TMonday. September £3, l§9i / PTOffssed .Rules
significant quantities of oil and
hazardous constituents. EPA is,
therefore, considering applying .section
3014 management standards to 'bilge
waters prior to discharge to a publicly-
owned treatment works '(POTW). EPA is
also considering an "exemption for bilge
waters that have been treated in an oil/
water separator. Under MARPOL 73/78
provisions, ocean-going ships are
required to maintain oil/water
separators on board. Under this scheme,
bilge water upstream 'of an oil/water
separator may be •subject to 'section
3014; bilge water downstream may be
fBxempt.'The oil recovered in the oil/
water separator may-be subject to
section 3014 standards.The generator of
the bilge water may also be -allowed to
demonstrate that the quantity -of oil in
the bilge is insignificant and that the oil
cannot be practicably --separated. The
Agency requests comments en 'the
regulation of bilge -waters 'tairiing
used oil. In addition, the Agency
requests analytical data t»n .tire
composition of bilge'waters.
ERA is also aware nf certain
petroleum refineries that manage used
oil/water mixtures -on-site prior to the
disposal/treatment of the wafer .portion
of the .mixture in wastewafer treatment
plants. EPA's 'understanding of the
treatment of used oil/water mixtures is
as fallows: The mixture is passed
Ihraugh an oil/water separator to
remove oil The "oiUfree" water is -then.
sent to a wastewater treatment system
for further treatment prior to its
discharge. The used oil, that is 'recovered
and the used oil/ water -mixture
upstream of an oil/water .separator may
be subject to .section 3014 .management
standards. The refinery, in this case,
may demonstrate that the quantities &f
used oil in the mixture are sach that oil
is not .recoverable and hence adequately
treated and discharged at the on-site
wastewater treatment facilMy. ERA
•requests comment-on ihe used oil/water
mixtures handled by petroleum
refineries., on other used oil/petroleum
handling facilities, and on .the oil
.content of used oil/water .mixtures.
5. Used Oil filters
As explained above in the fisting
section, EPA is considering exempting
from regulation as .a (hazardous waste
under '§ 261.4(b], used oil filters
containing a listed used oil that have
been drained and crushed,(see section
V.C).. EPA is not proposing to regulate
the act of draining and crushing oil
filters. However, the used oil drained
from the filters will be subject to the
section 3014 management .standards. If .a
drained Filter casing exhibiting a
hazardous waste characteristic .is sent
for scrap metal reclamation, it is exempt
from regulation, per §.26L6(:ap,)i(dv).
Drained or crushed filters that are not
recycled can only be disposed of in
landfills that are la compliance with
state regulations .governing solid waste
landfills. The generator of the used
filters must demonstrate that the
drained and/or crushed filters do not
exhibit the toxicity characteristic (using
generator .knowledge or filter analysis
data;). Used filters not going for-recycling
that exhibit the TC must be handled as
hazardous wastes.
6. Used Oil Used as a Fuel in
Incinerators and Municipal Solid Waste
Cambustbrs
'Currently, the management or burning
of any material or solid waste in a unit
meeting the definition of an incinerator
in 40 CFR 260.10 is not considered to be
recycling. Also, "hazardous wastes,
including hazardous used oils, destined
for incineration '(not burning for energy
recovery) must go to a permitted facility
meeting the requirements of 40'CFR part
264 snbpart'O. Materials and solid
wastes that are not hazardous wastes
can be burned in any solid waste
combustor or incinerator that is in
compliance with the municipal
combustor standards.
EPA is considering allowing tfee ase of
used oil to enhance the combustion of
either hazardous wastes in a permitted
hazardous waste incinerator or of
municipal waste in a municipal waste
combustor. EPA may allow this use 'of
used oil (whether it is determined to be
hazardous or not) to be considered
recycling [i.e., a form of burning 'for
energy recovery) and therefore be
subject to -the proposed section 13014
tracking and storage standards, rather
"than Ihe hazarioius waste manifesting
and storage requirements, -EPA requests
comments am wk&tber med «il seraft to -a
permitted hazardous waste intcwieisater
to enhance combustion should be
subject to the hazardous waste -Storage-
and manifesting requirements or subject
to the proposed. section 3.014
requirements. ERA also requests
.corameiats on whether «r -not the Agency
should permit the burning of used .oils
that may -be listed or *ised «ls that
exhibit .one or m®i\e of the hazarefarus
waste ohaiaeterisiti'cs in anwiicipal was'te
combastors .ts 'enhance camfeuslioD
Also, if the Agency -deteraimes 'that this
practice is indeed a -form of T-ecydfeg,
the Agency requests !Grom»en'ts -an
whether tfce asedj®:ilsh'0riM fee sribfecl
-to it-he -proposed section 3014 -used oil
tracking and storage standards. The
Agency "believes that the 'section 30T4
standard's may provide an 'adequate
level of protection 'ins.fhis.case because
the used oil would be transported and
stored prior to recycling, -much as it
would be at a recycling facility thai
would be subject only to section 3014
y^fule standards.
EPA ipeqniests ownment sn the «se jat
used toil as a fael to enhance waste
combustion at perMtted .hamrfcus
waste incinerators and t
this activity as a focm of Teey
sukjiect to fc sectiora 3014 BterKfeFd'S,
Table IX.B.1. provides afcief
summary of th-e proposed -u'sed oil
generator requirements jinfler the
heading "all generators*, Hhat EPA is
considering adopting under fhase 1 a?
the used oil management standards.
Table IX.B.l. also compares the
requirements that the Agency fe n-ew '
considering with those proposed in 1985
A more detailed discussion of the
generator Eequbemertts is providBd
below. EPA believes 6hat If IheHiase.I
managemeTit Standards are Mlj
implemented and prscticedtiy
generatoTS, then addMonal generatpr
standards
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday. September: 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48049
TABLE IX.B.1.—PROPOSED USED OIL GENERATOR STANDARDS
1985
SQG's
LQG's
Today—all generators '
Storage
< 1,000 kg accumulated on-site in tanks;
corrosion protection; tank material com-
patibility requirements.
Containers; labeling; §265.171 (condition of containers),
§265.173 (management of containers, §265.174 .(in-
spections), § 265.176 (requirements for ignitable wastes).
Tanks: freeboard and overflow controls; daily inspections;
labeling; response to leaks; and closure requirements.
Secondary containment for new tanks
Corrective Action
None..
Containment of visible releases..
Closure
None..
Removal of oil and residues from tanks and discharge
control equipment
Containers: 40 CFR 265.171 (condition of containers),
265.173 (management of containers), 265.174 (inspec-
tions), and 265.176 (ignitable and reactive wastes).
Aboveground tanks: 40 CFR 265.195 (daily inspections),
• 265.196 (response to leaks), 265.197 (closure).
USTs: 40 CFR Part 280.
Also see Table VIII.F.2.
Containers: 40 CFR 265.171.
Aboveground tanks: 40 CFR 265.196 and 265.15(c).
USTs: 40 CFR Part 280, Subpart E & F.
Aboveground tanks: 40 CFR 265.197.
USTs: 40 CFR Part 280, Subpart G & H.
TABLE IX.B.1.—PROPOSED USED OIL GENERATOR STANDARDS
1985
SQG's
LOG'S
Today—all generators '
Preparedness and Prevention
None-
Tracking
None..
Recordkeeping
lone-
Reporting
Telephone, fire extinguishers, absorbents. Requirements
for emergency coordinator and arrangements with local
authorities; personnel training and emergency proce-
dures.
§ 265, Subpart B (hazardous waste manifest) and § 262.42
(exception reporting) or recycling contract with author-
ized recycling facility. Also pretransport. requirements:
§ 262.30 (packaging). § 262.31 (labeling), § 262.32
(marking), § 262.33 (placarding).
Operating record for each shipment. Including: name, ad-
dress, and EPA ID number of transporter; quantity of
used oil shipped; and date of shipment.
None..
No requirements..
Same as proposed for LQGs.
Collection log signed by generator and transporter, regard'
less of the existence of a recycling agreement. (Two
additional options under consideration).
Same as proposed for LQGs.
Reporting required only for disposal.
'The requirements shown under the "All Generators" column will be applicable either to all used oil generators or to all generators with underground tanks or
aboveground storage capacity greater than 1,320 gallons (or one abovegrouno tank of capacity less than 660 gallons), depending upon the regulatory option that EPA
promulgates.
As discussed previously in VIII.F.7
and VIII.F.8, EPA i» considering
exempting used oil generators that have
a total aboveground storage capacity
less than 1,320 gallons from the used oil
generator standards. EPA believes that
this is one way to exempt only the
smallest businesses from the used oil
management standards. If EPA
promulgates the proposed definition of
small quantity used oil generator
discussed above, generators meeting the
definition of a small quantity used oil
generator will be exempt from the
generator standards discussed below
and presented in Table IX.B.1. All
exempted generators, however, would
have to recycle the used oil they
generate, either by burning the used oil
on-site for energy .recovery or by
shipping it off-site, for recycling. The
proposed exemption for small quantity
generators of used oil wjll not be
applicable if used oil is not recycled.
1. Storage in Containers and Tanks
As evident throughout today's notice,
the storage standards that EPA is
considering for the different segments of
the used oil industry are customized to
fit the potential risks associated with
used oil handling. EPA believes that the
storage standards address the potential
hazards associated with used oil. They
are developed such that used oil storage
and associated leaks and spills are
monitored on an on-going basis (i.e.,
daily or weekly inspections) and
releases are cleaned up. EPA believes
that the specific requirements discussed
below for different categories of used oil
handlers are environmentally protective
and are very similar to those that are
currently practiced by reputable used oil
handlers.
Note that the Spill Prevention,
Control, and Counter-measure (SPCC)
requirements in 40 CFR part 112 and the-
underground storage tank (UST)
standards in 40 CFR part 280 also apply
to used oil handlers meeting the
applicability criteria for these
regulations. Also, regardless of whether
EPA promulgates a definition of small
quantity used oil generator, all used oil
generators storing used oil in
underground tanks with a capacity of
110 gallons or greater must comply with
the Part 280 UST standards. The
following section discusses the storage
requirements that EPA is currently
considering for used oil generators.
Specific storage requirements for other
types of used oil handlers are discussed
in later sections of today's notice.
a. Storage in Containers. Under the
1985 proposal, large quantity generators
would be required to comply with
selected 40 CFR part 265, subpart I
standards (50 FR 49252, November 29,
1985) for used oil container storage. EPA
may require all used oil generators to
-------
48050
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No, 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 /Proposed Rules
comply with the same container
standards proposed in 1985 for large
generators (see Table IX.B.l). These
basic "minimum technical"
requirements would ensure that
containers (a) remain closed and are not
damaged or leaking, (b) are properly
labeled, (c) are inspected for leaks and
releases on a routine basis (preferably
daily), and (d] immediate cleanup is
undertaken when a release occurs.
As discussed previously in sections
VIII.F.7 and VIII.F.8, EPA is considering
exempting used oil generators that have
a total aboveground storage capacity of
less than 1,320 gallons from the used oil
management standards. EPA believes
that this approach may exempt the
smallest businesses from the used oil
generator standards. EPA is considering
including the capacity of any containers
storing used oil on-site in the 1,320
gallon capacity limit for small quantity
used oil generators. For example, if a
generator has five containers with a
total capacity of 275 gallons (5x55
gallons) on-site and a single
aboveground tank with a capacity of 660
gallons, then the total storage capacity
at the site meets the exemption limit
since the total aboveground storage
capacity is less than 1,320 gallons- EPA
requests comment on whether container
storage capacity should be included as
part of the total aboveground storage
capacity for defining the small quantity
used oil generator exemption.
As discussed above, the Agency
presumes that all used oils are destined
for recycling, unless the presumption of
recycling can be rebutted. Therefore,
EPA will presume that any container of
used oil at a generator site is subject to
the proposed regulations as discussed
here.
EPA requests comment on the
container standards proposed for used
oil generators. EPA also requests
comment on the proposed exemption for
small quantity used oil generators and
on whether small quantity used oil
generators should be exempt from the
proposed container standards.
b. Storage in Aboveground Tanks. On
November 29,1985, EPA proposed a set
of standards for all tanks used to store
used oil (50 KR 49251 through 49254 and
49256). At the time, EPA proposed to
pattern the tank requirements after the
(then proposed) hazardous waste tank
standards. The storage requirements
outlined in the 1985 proposal are
summarized below. Since 1985,
additional technical requirements
(including design, installation, operating,
release response and detection,
secondary containment, closure, and
corrective action requirements) have
bt:en promulgated for tanks used to
store hazardous waste under 40 CFR
parts 264 and 265, subpart J. The 1985
proposal specified the following tank
storage standards:
• Small quantity generators (less than
1,000 kg/month of used oil) must store
used oil in tanks that meet the Subtitle I
"interim prohibition" on installing
unprotected tanks;
» Large quantity generators, owners
and operators of transfer facilities, and
owners and operators of recycling
facilities (including used oil burning
facilities) had to comply with the then
existing 40 CFR part 265, subpart J
standards. 41
The 1985 proposal requested comment
on secondary containment requirements
for new aboveground tanks located at
large quantity generators, and at
transfer and recycling facilities. The
1985 proposed aboveground tank
storage requirements were based on the
fact that all used oils would have been
designated as listed hazardous wastes.
The used oil management standards
that are being considered at present are
for all recycled used oils, only a portion
of which may or may not be listed or
identified as hazardous waste. With this
in mind, EPA re-evaluated the 1985-
proposed used oil storage standards and
concluded that the then proposed
storage requirements for large quantity
generators may be excessive and may
need to be modified or replaced with
requirements that are compatible with a
broad universe of used oil handlers- EPA
is therefore considering the following
approach for used oil storage
requirements.
First, EPA is considering the deferral
of any secondary containment
requirements for used oil storage tanks
at generator sites. Comments received
on the 1985 proposal indicate that the
costs of upgrading generators' tanks
may seriously affect used oil recycling
(i.e., API and NORA indicated that
secondary containment was too
expensive and does not provide
significant additional environmental
benefit). In addition., only a limited
number of used oil handlers have used
oil that may be identified or listed as
hazardous, and full secondary
containment may not be necessary for
the diverse universe of used oil
generators, particularly since EPA is
considering requiring daily inspection of
tanks and immediate cleanup of
releases. In addition, used oils are
"' Part 265, Subpan , nas Been amenaed since
the 1985 proposal by the addition of secondary
containment and other requirements (See 51 FR
25479, July 14,1986). The pre-existing tank
standards, however, remain in Section 265.201 for
generators of 100-1000 kg/mo of hazardous waste.
generally not corrosive and thus waste/
tank compatibility problems do not
arise.
Therefore, EPA may finalize selected
1985-proposed tank standards (minus
secondary containment) for
aboveground tank storage for used oil
generators (50 FR 49251). These are:
« Inspection of all tanks for tank
damage, tank rupture, tank condition,
and leaks;
• Cleanup of visible releases, leaks,
or drips around the storage units;
• Requirements for storage of
ignitable used oil;
• Labeling requirements for
aboveground tanks demonstrating "used
oil" storage;
• Freeboard controls for open tanks;
• Overflow controls (e.g., automatic,
cut-off) for continuously-fed tanks; and
« Closure (remove all used oil from
tanks, discharge control equipment, and
discharge confinement structures, if
present).
These requirements take into account
that many or most used oil generators
are small businesses and therefore, may
experience an undue economic burden.
The storage requirements under
consideration are similar to those
applicable to generators of between 100
and 1,000 kg/month accumulating
hazardous waste in tanks (40 CFR
265.201, 51 FR 25479, July 14,1986). EPA
believes that the requirements listed
above provide adequate control against
health and environmental hazards
associated with used oil storage. The
requirements identified above ensure
against releases and spills that may
occur during used oil handling and
storage in aboveground tanks. These
requirements are designed to minimize
potential risks to human health and the
environment
The proposed requirements are
similar to some of the controls many
facilities may have in place under the
Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasure (SPCC) program (40
CFR part 112, 38 FR 34165, December 1'.,
1973). It is important to note that the
SPCC standards are applicable only tc
facilities with a total underground
storage capacity of greater than 42,000
gallons, or an aboveground storage
capacity of greater than 1,320 gallons.
Furthermore, the SPCC requirements are
applicable only to those facilities which
reasonably have the potential to
discharge oil into or uoon the navigable
waters of the United States and
adjoining shorelines.
When used oil management standards
are promulgated, both the SPCC and the
used oil tank standards will apply
independently. EPA does not believe the
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48051
two programs contain conflicting
provisions. While the proposed
requirements in today's notice for
aboveground used oil storage tanks are
similar to those of the SPCC program,
some differences do exist as shown in
section VHI.F.7.
The special requirements proposed in
1985 for aboveground tank systems that
are leaking or otherwise unfit for use (50
FR 49253) may be promulgated as
proposed. New or replacement tanks
would be subject to the same standards
discussed above.
The Agency believes that the
requirements being considered for Phase
I can adequately minimize human health
and environmental risks associated with
routine storage procedures without
excessive economic burden on small
businesses at this time. These
requirements should be sufficient to
protect against spills and releases
associated with normal operations. They
may not, however, be adequate to
ensure against unforeseen events.
However, the probability of the
occurrence of such events is very
minimal. If, as discussed above, used oil
management standards are implemented
in two phases, and after the Phase I
requirements are in place, experience
suggests that additional controls (e.g.,
secondary containment, integrity testing
and certification, and monitoring
controls) are necessary to prevent spills
and releases of used oil into the
environment, then EPA may consider
such controls for all aboveground tanks
used to store used oil.
Comments are requested on the
approach discussed here for managing
used oils stored in aboveground tanks.
c. Storage in Underground Tanks. As
explained above, generators storing
used oil in underground storage tanks
must continue to comply with the 40
CFR Part 280 standards for underground
tanks as they were promulgated in 1988.
2. Release Detection and Cleanup
Response
a. Detection and Cleanup of Releases
and Leaks During Storage and Transfer.
Based on the potential for small
quantities of used oil to contaminate
water supplies, EPA believes that it is
necessary to control releases or leaks
(in addition to surface spills) that may
occur during routine used oil collection,
storage, and transfer operations.
Through inspection and cleanup
requirements, EPA believes that the
potential contamination associated with
storage and transfer could be effectively
controlled and mitigated.
The proposed requirements for
containers and tanks discussed above
specify inspection requirements for
detecting releases of used oil around the
storage units. In the case of containers
and aboveground tanks, these
requirements implicitly require cleanup
of releases. Spills and leaks not cleaned
up could be viewed as illegal disposal of
solid (or hazardous) waste. EPA
believes that specific, explicit
requirements for the detection and
cleanup of releases of used oil may be
appropriate, since they:
• Are likely to occur during normal
operation (i.e., pouring of used oil into
containers and tanks, transferring used
oil to collection trucks or to storage
tanks at recycling facilities), and •
• May remain undetected and
uncontrolled if tanks and containers are
not inspected regularly.
In addition, EPA believes that
inspections for detecting visible
releases, drips, and leaks and cleanup
using absorbent materials are "good
housekeeping" practices and is
proposing that all used oil generators
comply with these requirements. Many
large generators have instituted them as
part of employee training and site
maintenance programs. EPA believes
that such "good housekeeping"
measures are critical for employee
health and safety as well as public
health and environmental protection.
EPA requests comments on the
requirements under consideration to
address releases in areas around the
storage units. EPA also requests
comment on whether facility-based
employee training programs for
detection and cleanup of leaks and
small releases are needed and should be
required in the regulations.
b. Generator Spill Clean-up
Requirements and CERCLA Liability. A
separate issue that is related to the used
oil storage requirements is the issue of
off-site liability under the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) for generators of used oil.
Under CERCLA section 114, "service
station dealers" 42 who manage used oil
in accordance with conditions in
CERCLA section 114(c) are not liable,
under CERCLA section 107 (a)(3) or
(a)(4), for response costs or damages
resulting from threatened or actual off-
site used oil releases. One of the
conditions for relief from liability in
"Section 114 of CERCLA (as amended by SARA)
defines a "service station dealer" as "any person
* * * where a significant percentage of the gross
revenue of the establishment is derived from the
fueling, repairing, or servicing of motor vehicles"
and accepts DIY generated used oil. Section 114
also includes within the definition of service station
dealer, "any government agency that establishes a
facility solely for the purpose of accepting recycled
oil" from households and other DIY generators.
CERCLA section 114(c) is that the
service station dealer comply with
RCRA section 3014 management
standards, including "corrective action"
(which EPA interprets, in this context, to
mean simply release response and
remediation) requirements. The
CERCLA section 114(c) exemption will
be effective when the RCRA section
3014 regulations that include RCRA
Subtitle C or I requirements to conduct
corrective actions are promulgated. EPA
has concluded that the RCRA section
3014 generator standards must include
release cleanup requirements to activate
the CERCLA section 114(c) provision.
Generators storing in underground tanks
are subject to part 280 cleanup
requirements. Since EPA is today
considering in relying on the part 280
standards as being sufficiently
protective against the human health and
environment threats in lieu of different
standards under section 3014, EPA
believes that the 1988 promulgation of
the part 280 requirements should be
considered to have activated CERCLA
section 114(c) for generators with USTs
and no other tanks, containers, or other
storage units. EPA requests comment on
this point particularly whether the
section 114(c) exemption only should
take effect prospectively when the
Phase I management standards take
effect.
EPA is now considering what
requirements will activate the
provisions for used oil generators (and
"service stations") that store used oil in
either containers or aboveground tanks.
EPA is considering applying the basic
spill cleanup requirements proposed on
November 29,1985 (50.FR 49253) to used
oil generators that store used oil in
containers and tanks. These
requirements are essentially the same as
the cleanup requirements provided in
§ 265.196 and include removal of used
oil from the tank system, removal of the
tank from use, and containment of
visible releases. Such standards would
require generators, in the event of a
spill, to contain the flow of oil to the
extent possible and, as soon as
practical, to clean up the oil and any
contaminated materials, soils, ground
waters, and surface waters (see
proposed 40 CFR 266.41(c)(6)(v), 50 FR
49253, November 29,1985).
Other provisions proposed for used oil
generators in November 1985 entailed
routine inspection of containers and
tanks, and mitigation of any problems
discovered (e.g., leaking containers) (50
FR 49227 and 49229). Taken together,
EPA believes that, if promulgated, these
cleanup requirements may be adequate
to activate the CERCLA section 114(c)
-------
4RflPi2
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
liability exemption. Furthermore, the
regulations would specify that
compliance with part 280 corrective
action requirements for underground
storage tanks satisfies the section 3014
corrective action requirement, and that
service station dealers cleaning up
releases in compliance with the part 280
standards would be eligible for the
CERCLA section 114(cj liability
exemption.
If EPA chooses not to regulate used oil
generators who have a total on-site
aboveground storage capacity of less
than 1,320 gallons, or one aboveground
tank or container with a capacity less
than or equal to 680 gallons, service
station dealers meeting the definition of
an exempt small quantity used oil •
generator will not be eligible for the
CERCLA section 114 exemption, since
these generators may not have to
comply with the used oil management
standards, including spiil and release
cleanup requirements, promulgated
under section 3014.
EPA requests comments on the
proposed spill and release cleanup
requirements, and requests information
on any alternative ways to activate the
CERCLA section 114(c) liability
exemption for used oil generators.
3. Generator Identification (ID) Numbers
In 1985, EPA proposed to require all
generators of greater than 1,000 kg/
month of used oil to obtain an EPA ID
number {see proposed § 266.41(b), 51 FR
49252, November 29,1985). However,
EPA is now considering dropping this
requirement. EPA believes that
reviewing notification forms and
assigning ID numbers to all used oil
generators who store more than 1,320
gallons in above ground used oil tanks
and containers would be resource
intensive (based on the information
collected for the 1985 proposal]. EPA
believes that used oil generated by
regulated generators will be recycled
and monitored by a chain of used oil
handlers once it leaves the generator
site and, hence, notification and ID
numbers will not be necessary.
Since the Agency primarily uses ID
numbers to identify the regulated
universe of generators and collect
generator-specific information, and
since the Agency can obtain such
information (e.g., type of generator and
quantities of used oil generated) from
transporters and used oil recyclers. the
Agency believes that it may not be
necessary to require used oil generators
to obtain ID numbers. The tracking
alternatives discussed below may also
minimize the need for notification and
ID numbers. Therefore. EPA is
considering eliminating the notification
and EPA ID number requirements for all
used oil generators. As discussed below,
EPA is, however, considering requiring
all used oil generators to maintain
collection logs, as records of used oil
shipments, and keep them on file for at
least three years from the date of
shipment. In addition, a generator
shipping hazardous used oil off-site for
disposal must comply with the current
regulations for identification numbers in
§ 262.12 and the subpart B requirements
for manifesting.
EPA requests comment on the
possible elimination of the EPA
identification number and notification
requirement for used oil generators who
do not send hazardous used oils off-site
for disposal.
4, Generator Tracking of Used Oil
Shipments Off-site
The November 29,1985 proposal
included requirements to track or keep
records of all used oils sent off-site for
recycling {50 FR 49254, November 29,
1985). Generators were required to
comply with the pre-transport
requirements of 40 CFR 262.30 to 262.33
and the generator and transporter were
required to manifest the shipment using
the hazardous waste manifest, unless
the generator had a written recycling
agreement with an authorized used oil
recycling facility (50 FR 49253). The
proposed listing may have caused used
oil destined for disposal to be
manifested as a hazardous waste.
However, in contrast, if a generator had
a written agreement with a recycles
only recordkeeping and notification
requirements were required for off-site
shipments of used oil. " The Agency's
1985 proposal was an attempt to balance
the need for an adequate recordkeeping
and tracking system and comply with
the mandate of RCRA section 3014(c) to
minimize the regulatory burden on used
oil generators and transporters-
Comments were received following
the publication of the 1985 proposal that
indicated that EPA should provide
greater specificity on the proposed used
oil tracking system. As discussed above,
EPA is considering alternatives that
involve the maintenance of a collection
log by used oil generators and
transporters, regardless of the existence
of a recycling contract. The alternatives
that the Agency is currently considering
for used oil tracking from generators to
43 RCRA § 3014 prohibits EPA from requiring
generators to comply with manifest requirements X
a contract between the generator and an authorized
recyder is in place.
rgcyclers are discussed here and the
associated advantages and
disadvantages are discussed more fully
under the transporter requirements (see
section IX.C.3).
As discussed above, even though all
used oils may not be hazardous, some
level of control over their possible
mismanagement may be necessary. EPA
believes that such control can toe
exercised by tracking used oil from
generator to recycler to ensure that it
reaches authorized used oil recyciers in
a timely manner. EPA now believes that
the 1985-proposed manifest requirement
for large quantity generators that do not
have a recycling contract in place may
be excessive, especially since (a) all
used oils will be covered under the
recycling presumption and (b) the
universe of recycled used oil generators
may be expanded to include all
generators of used oil. EPA is, therefore,
considering requiring the tracking of
used oil shipments from generator to
recycler by use of a collection log
maintained by each generator in lieu of
the hazardous waste manifest, whether
or not a recycling contract exists
between a generator and the recycler,
The use of a collection log eliminates the
need for the manifesting requirement
proposed in 1985 for those cases where
a generator does not have a contract
with a used oil recycler. EPA solicits
comment on whether a collection log is
an adequate requirement or whether the
manifest and recycling contract option
proposed in 1985 should be allowed in
addition to the proposed collection log
requirement
Table IX.B.2. identifies the two
options EPA is considering to track used
oil from generators to recyclers via
transporters. Under Option 1, EPA could
require generators, regardless of any
written recycling agreements they have,
to keep records (a collection log signed
by the generator and transporter) that
document the intended destination of
the used oil. These records may include
documentation of the quantities of used
oil shipped, the shipment dates, names
and addresses of the generator and
transporter. EPA identification numbers
for used oil transporters, dated .___
signatures of the generator and
transporter, and EPA identification
numbers of the recycling £acility(ies).,.
Under Option 2, the generator is
required to maintain the same records
as required under Option 1. but a
transporter prepares a used oil tracking
form at the conclusion of a "milk run"
(for details see IX.C.3,).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48053
TABLE IX.B.2.— ALTERNATIVES FOR
TRACKING USED OIL
Tracking
Docu-
ment.
, 1985
proposal
Hazardous
waste
manifest.
Genera-
tors.
Trans-
porters.
Recy-
cling
Facili-
ties/
Dis-
posal
Facili-
ties.
Fills put
appropri-
ate
portion.
No
manifest
when
generator
has
contract
with
recycler.
Fills out
appropri-
ate
portion.
Fills out
appropri-
ate
portion
and
returns
copy to
generator
when no
contract
exists.
Option 1
Collection
log
main-
tained by
all
handlers.
Must record
quantities
of used
oil
shipped;
name,
address,
EPA ID
no. of
transport-
er; dated
signature
of
transport-
er.
Must record
quantities
of used
oil
delivered;
names,
address-
es. ID
nos., and
dated
signa-
tures of
recycling
or
disposal
facilities.
Must retain
copies of
collection
logs with
dated
signature
of
transport-
er.
Option 2
Collection
log
main-
tained by
all used
oil
handlers;
tracking
form
initiated
by
transport-
ers.
Same as
Option 1.
Tracking
form
must
contain
informa-
tion
required
under
Option 1.
Must retain
copies of
tracking
forms
signed by
transport-
ers.
5. Generator Recordkeeping and
Reporting Requirements
Under the 1985 proposal, large
quantity used oil generators were
required to obtain EPA identification
numbers (50 FR 49252) and to maintain
operating records of all used oil
shipments sent off-site (50 FR 49253 and
49254). Each off-site shipment was to be
recorded with the name, address, and
EPA ID number of the transporter; the
quantity of used oil shipped; and the
date of the shipment. These records
were required to be maintained for three
years from the date of shipment. Used
oil generators with a recycling
agreement were required to maintain a
copy of the agreement as long as it was
in effect, and to obtain a one-time
signed notice from the recycler
certifying that the facility is authorized
to recycle used oil. EPA sees no need to
change these requirements from the 1985
proposal with the exception of the
possible elimination of the generator
EPA ID number as discussed above.
No recordkeeping and reporting
requirements were proposed for small
quantity used oil generators (generators
of less than 1000 kg of used oil per
month) in 1985. As discussed earlier,
EPA is considering an option that may
include eliminating the small quantity
used oil generator category. Under this
approach, all generators would be
subject to the same recordkeeping
requirements proposed in 1985 for large
generators. EPA solicits comments on
whether the recordkeeping requirements
discussed above should be applicable to
small quantity generators, which may be
defined as generators with total
aboveground storage capacity less than
1,320 gallons. The Agency is also
interested in receiving comments on
whether a modified set of requirements
might be appropriate.
In 1985, EPA proposed no reporting
requirements for used oil generators
who had recycling contracts, although
generators using the manifests would
have been subject to exception
reporting. EPA does not see a need for
generator reporting when the used oil is
recycled on- or off-site, because
recycling facilities will provide this
information in their biennial report.
However, EPA is considering imposing
new recordkeeping or reporting
requirements under Sections 3014 and
3007 authorities for generators who can
rebut the recycling presumption (see
.discussion in VIH.D.3.) and who dispose
of used oil. (Generators disposing of
hazardous used oil on-site, however, are
subject to other recordkeeping and
reporting requirements as a hazardous
waste treatment, storage, or disposal
facility.) Generators who dispose of
used oil would have to comply with the
recordkeeping or reporting requirements
associated with the recycling
presumption rebuttal prior to the
disposal of used oils. EPA believes that
reporting of disposal practices may
allow the Agency to determine whether
additional controls may be necessary to
control used oil disposal in the future.
EPA requests comment on reporting of
generator-based disposal activities.
C. Transporter Requirements
Table IX.C.l provides a brief summary
of the used oil transporter requirements
that EPA is currently considering. Table
IX.C.l also compares the requirements
that the Agency is now considering with
those proposed in 1985 for used oil
transporters. A more detailed discussion
of the proposed transporter
requirements is provided below.
TABLE IX.C.L—USED OIL TRANSPORTERS
1985
Today
Storage
For 10 days or less at a transfer lacility: DOT requirements in 49 CFR Parts 173
'(shipments and packaging), 178 (shipping containers), and 179 (tank cars);
secondary containment standards for tanks.
Corrective Action
40 CFR Part 263 Subpart C—Discharges in transit. Permitby-rule facilities:
remove leaking tanks from use; replace leaking containers; remedy releases.
Containers: (storage <30 days) 40 CFR §262.30 (packaging), 49 CFR 173
(shipments ,and packaging), 178 (shipping containers), and 179 (tankcars).
(storage >30 days) 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart I.
Aboveground tanks: 40 CFR § 264.195 (dairy inspections), § 264.196 (response to
leaks), §264.197 (closure).
USTs: 40 CFR Part 280.
Also, see Table IX.F.2.
Same as proposed for discharges in transit Permit-by-rule facilities; 40 CF1
§ 264.101 and Subpart F for aboveground tanks.
40 CFR § 280, Subparts E and F for USTs.
-------
48054 Federal Register / Vol 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
TABLE IX.C.1.—USED OIL TRANSPORTERS—Continued
1985
Today
Closure
Remove oil and residues from tanks.
Preparedness and Prevention
40 CFR Part 264, Subparts C and D
Tracking
40 CFH Part 263, Subpart B Hazardous Waste Manifests or Records of Accept-
ance and Delivery where generator has contract with authorized recycler.
Recordkeeping
Records of Acceptance and Delivery, including: name, address, end EPA fD
number of facilities offering or accepting the shipment; quantity of used oil
shipped; and date of acceptance or delivery.
Reporting
No requirements ~ —
Permit-by-Rule
For storage of used oil for a period exceeding 10 days
Aboveground tanks: 40 CFR 264, Subpart G. USTs: 40 CFR Part 280, Subparts G
and H.
Same as proposed.
Collection log signed by generator and recycling facility. (Two additional options
under consideration.)
Various recordkeeping and reporting requirements under consideration. (See
preamble, Section IX.C.)
See Recordkeeping (above).
For storage of used oil in containers for a period exceeding 35 days or for any
tank storage.
Even though some used oils may not
be identified as hazardous EPA believes
controls on activities associated with
the transportation of used oil may be
appropriate. As discussed previously,
used oil that is not classified as
hazardous may render drinking water
nonpotable if released to surface or
ground waters. In addition, storage and
consolidation during transportation are
possible entry points for hazardous
waste being mixed with used oil.
Therefore, EPA believes il may be
necessary to regulate the transportation
of all used oils, whether any are listed
as hazardous waste or not.
EPA is proposing that owners and
operators of used oil transfer facilities
storing used oil in tanks or in containers
for a period greater than 35 days comply
with the permit-by-rule requirements
proposed in 1985 for used oil recyclers.
The 35-day storage period at transfer
facilities is the equivalent period of time
proposed for delivering used oil to a
recycler after receipt of the used oil from
the generator. Transfer facilities storing
used oil on-site for a period of time
greater than 35 days may have to
comply with permit-by-rule
requirements similar to those proposed
in 1985, except the Agency is no longer
proposing secondary containment
requirements for tank storage.
EPA is not considering secondary
containment requirements for used oil
storage tanks at transfer facilities at this
time because, based on the economic
analysis data presented in section X of
this notice, EPA believes that collectors
may not be able to absorb the costs
associated with secondary containment.
For example, an independent collector/
transporter of average size, with three
aboveground storage tanks and a
storage capacity of 22,000 gallons is
likely to face a total capital cost of
$14,000 and an annual operating cost of
$2,500, EPA may defer any secondary
containment for collection/storage
facilities until a later date, or may
require secondary containment only for
some transfer facilities, i.e, those that
handle hazardous (listed or
characteristic] used oil, or have a
storage capacity in excess of some limit,
i.e, 25,000 gallons. Comments are
requested on these alternatives.
1. Transporter Storage Requirements
a. Storage in Containers. In 1985, EPA
proposed to require transporters to
comply with the 40 CFR part 264,
subpart I (50 FR 49256, November 29,
1985) requirements for used oil container
storage. However, storage of used oil at
a transfer facility for less than 10 days
was exempt from these requirements
provided the containers met applicable
packaging requirements of the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT]
under 49 CFR parts 173,178, and 179.
Storage in containers for greater than
ten days was subject to the standards of
part 264, aubpart I and the used oil
permit-by-rule requirements of proposed
part 270. EPA is now considering
increasing the 10 day storage provision
for container storage to 30 days and
requiring transporters storing used oil in
containers at transfer facilities to
comply with part 265, subpart I. In the
1985 proposal, EPA meant to propose
that transporters comply with 40 CFR
part 265, subpart I, rather than part 264,
subpart I. Compliance with the part 264
standards, therefore, may only be
necessary if an individual subtitle C
permit is required.
Following the 1985 proposal, EPA
received several comments requesting
that the 10-day storage period at
transfer facilities be extended to allow
for sufficient accumulation of a
marketable quantity of used oil.
Alternatively, to accommodate this
concern, EPA is considering extending
the exempt storage period for container
storage at used oil transfer facilities to
35 days. The Agency requests comments
on whether an extended period of 35
days is appropriate for transfer facilities
storing used oil in containers. (See
discussion on Accumulation Limit in
section VHI.F.8 of this notice)
b. Storage in Aboveground and
Underground Tanks. In 1985, EPA
proposed that transporters storing used
oil in tanks for more than 10 days be
subject to the requirements of 40 CFR
part 265, subpart J, including secondary
containment (50 F8 49254, November 25,
1985). The Agency is now considering
adopting the tank standards proposed in
the 1985 rule (40 CFR part 265, subpart
J), minus secondary containment for
aboveground tank storage at used oil
transfer facilities and eliminating the 10-
day storage exemption for tank storage.
These standards are the same as those
currently applicable to small quantity
hazardous waste generators [40 CFR
265.201).
EPA is considering adopting the tank
storage standards without the
requirement for secondary containment
due to the Agency's concern that many
independent transporters are small
businesses and therefore the viability of
these operations may be put in jeopardy
by the secondary containment provision
proposed in 1985.
Since the Agency may eliminate the
proposed requirement for secondary
containment, EPA is proposing that
owners and operators of transfer -
facilities conduct inspections of
aboveground tanks for releases and
spills of used oil and conduct
appropriate spill response to cleanup
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48055
and mitigate the contamination of the .
surrounding area. This will provide
alternate assurance of protection of
human health and the environment. EPA
requests comment on the aboveground
storage tank standards presented here
and on their potential impact on the
used oil recycling business.
As noted in the preamble to the
proposed rule, there is presently no
permitting exemption for tank storage at
transfer facilities in the hazardous
waste regulations (50 FR 49233). Under
subtitle C, hazardous waste transfer
facilities with tank storage are required
to obtain a storage permit and comply
with all applicable standards in 40 CFR
parts 264 and 265. The Agency is now
considering eliminating the 10-day
permitting exemption for tank storage at
transfer facilities. The Agency is
concerned that the storage exemption
period allowed for containers is not
protective for tank storage since the
tanks remain at the facility and may
always contain used oil. In the case of
containers, the container is removed
from the facility when the used oil is
-shipped off-site.
To assure that adequate protection of
human health and the environment is
provided, EPA believes that a level of
protection beyond the technical
standards alone may be necessary for
used oil tank storage at transfer
facilities. EPA is therefore proposing
that transfer facilities storing used oil in
tanks or in containers for a period
longer than 35 days comply with the
permit-by-rule provisions. The Agency
believes that requiring facilities to
comply with the permit-by-rule
provisions will facilitate compliance
with the technical standards since
noncompliance could lead to the
requirement to obtain an individual
subtitle C permit. Therefore, the Agency,
in addition to requiring transfer facilities
storing used oil in tanks to meet the 40
CFR part 265, subpart J (minus
secondary containment) and 40 CFR
part 280 UST requirements, is
considering requiring used oil transfer
facilities with storage tanks to comply
with the used oil facility and permit-by-
rule standards.44
The Subtitle I requirements (40 CFR
part 280) for underground storage tanks
apply to USTs at transfer facilities.
Transfer facilities storing used oil in
USTs that are in compliance with the
part 280 standards will be in compliance
" Note that the 10 day permitting exemption
proposed for container storage is not applicable to
tank storage. EPA is proposing that all tank storage
at used oil transfer facilities be In compliance with
the permit-by-rule requirements and the
. accumulation of used oil will be limited to 35 days. -
with the permit-by-rule provisions for
tank storage.
The Agency requests comment on the
regulatory restrictions proposed for tank
and container storage at used oil
transfer facilities, including the
proposed permit-by-rule requirements
for all tank storage at used oil transfer
facilities. EPA reiterates that transfer
facilities storing used oil in tanks would
also be required to comply with the
SPCC standards, if applicable.
2. Transporter Discharge Cleanup
Today, EPA is considering applying
provisions similar to those proposed in
1985 for cleanup of releases during
transport. Used oil transporters may be
required to comply with the 40 CFR part
263, subpart C standards. These
provisions require that discharges of
hazardous wastes during transportation
be reported to DOT and cleaned up
immediately. Reference to the part 263
requirements was made in the 1985
proposal because EPA was proposing to
list all used oils as hazardous. The
provisions contemplated today are
essentially the same as those proposed,
but would apply to all used oils,
regardless of whether or not they are
identified as hazardous. Additionally,
transporters storing used oil in
containers at transfer facilities for a
period longer than 35 days, may be
subject to the same corrective action
standards (release detection and
cleanup) being proposed today for
recycling facilities (see section IX.D.3).
Transfer facilities storing used oil in
aboveground tanks may be subject to
permit-by-rule requirements and lo the
corrective action standards of part 265,
subpart J and the general inspection
requirements of § 265.15(Q). Transfer
facilities storing used oil in USTs may
have to comply with the used oil perrnit-
by-rule requirements, but would remain
subject to the corrective action
requirements of 40 CFR part 280,
subparts E and F (standards for release
response and corrective action for
underground storage tank systems
containing petroleum or hazardous
substances).
3. Transporter Tracking of Used Oil
EPA is considering two alternatives
for tracking used oils. Both alternatives
involve the maintenance of a collection
log by used oil transporters. Table
1X.B.2. (above) provides a summary of
the .two options under consideration for
used oil tracking.
Option 1: Transporters would keep
records in a collection log to document
all pickups. Used oil transporters would
be required to keep a. copy of the
recycling facility owner or operator's
dated signature acknowledging receipt.
The recycling facility owner or operator
would have to keep a copy of the
transporter's collection log. In lieu of
keeping the collection log, transporters
may elect to use the hazardous waste
manifest (see discussion in IX.B.4. of
today's notice).
Option 2 is to have generators keep
the same records described above, with
the transporter responsible for initiating
a used oil tracking form at the
conclusion of a "milk run" and prior to
delivering the full shipment to a used oil
recycling facility. Under this approach,
the transporter would complete the
"generator" portion of the tracking form.
Transporters and recyclers would be
required to keep copies of the signed
forms. This approach is consistent with
RCRA section 3014(c) in that generators
with recycling agreements in place need
not fill out a manifest or similar tracking
document. This approach provides a
single tracking document that records
the oil's movement. In addition,
problems with multiple tracking forms
originated by different generators are
minimized under this approach.
The advantages of tracking records
and/or collection logs compared to
manifest reports for used oil handlers
are as follows: A generator does not
have to (a) prepare a tracking form
every time he/she ships a batch of used
oil off-site, (b) maintain a separate
accounting system for quantities and
types (i.e., hazardous and
nonhazardous) of used oil generated,
quantities and types of used oil stored in
a particular storage device, and
quantities and types of used oil picked
up by a transporter. The generator
merely has to maintain one document
with multiple entries. Every time a
shipment of used oil is picked up, the
transporter acknowledges the pickup on
the generator's log with a dated
signature. Similarly, a transporter
maintains a collection log that identifies
the quantities of used oil picked up per
generator along with the name and
address of each used oil generator he is
serving. A used oil generator
acknowledges the pickup of used oil
with a dated signature on the
transporter's log. The transporter, when
delivering, used oil to a recycler, submits
a copy of his collection log to the facility
owner or operator. Both transporter and
recycler must sign the collection log to
acknowledge delivery and acceptance of
used oil. Each party would maintain a
copy of the record of the used oil
transaction on file for three years.
As discussed above, EPA is
considering promulgating a presumption
of recycling for all used oils. Under this
-------
48056
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, IflQl? / Proposed Rules
approach, all used oils would be subject
to the tracking system outlined,here,
unless the person successfully rebuts the
presumption. Procedures for rebutting
the recycling presumption were
discussed above.
4. Transporter Recordkeeping and
Reporting Requirements
In 1985, EPA required transporters to
document all records of acceptance and
delivery of recycled used oil by
identifying the name, address, and ID
number of the generator or recycling
facility; the quantity of used oil received
or delivered; and the date of acceptance
or delivery (50 FR 49254), Transporters
were required to maintain these records
for three years from the date of
acceptance or delivery. No reporting
requirements for transporters were
proposed in 1985.
As stated in VIII.F.8.; EPA is
considering limiting the transport period
for used oil (period of time from
transporter pickup at generator to
acceptance at a recycling facility) to 35
days. This storage limit of 35 days is
similar to the 35-day limit applicable to
the transport of hazardous waste
{§§ 262.42(aj and 263.21). The initial day
of the 35-day period will begin when the
used oil is collected from a used oil
generator. Transporters and recycling
facilities can document that used oil is
delivered to the recycler within the 35-
day period through the use of collection
logs or tracking forms, as discussed
below. In the event a transporter is
unable to deliver a shipment of used oil
to a recycling facility within the 35-day
period, the transporter will be required
to file an exception report with the
Regional Administrator explaining the
reasons for the delay. EPA requests
comment on the 35-day shipment period
being proposed today,
D. Used Oil Recycling Facilities
Table IX.D.l provides a brief
summary of the used oil recycling
facility requirements that EPA is
considering adopting under Phase I of
the used oil management standards (if
the Agency decides to promulgate the
management standards in two phases).
Table IXiD.l also compares the
requirements that the Agency is
considering now with those proposed in
1985. In addition to the requirements
discussed below, all used oil recyclers
must comply with all applicable
generator and transporter requirements
discussed in previous sections of today's
proposal. A more detailed discussion of
the specific recycling facility
requirements is provided below.
1. Recycler Storage
EPA believes that there is a need to
assure that the storage practices at used
oil recycling facilities are protective of
human health and the environment. EPA
may regulate used oil storage in the
manner described below regardless :of
whether the used oil is determined tp be
a hazardous waste or not, since EPA
believes that the potential for used oil to
be released into the environment and
the potential damages from such leaks is
not necessarily dependent upon whether
the used oil is a hazardous waste, but is
dependent upon the way in which the
used oil is managed.
i ABLE IX.D.L—PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS FOR USED OIL RECYCLING FACILITIES
1985
Today
Storage
Container Storage: 40 CFR Part 284. Subpart I
Aboveground Tanks: 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart J
Underground Storage Tanks: 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart J .
Corrective Action
Remove leaking tanks from use; releases must be remedied..
Replace leaking container(s) and stop leaks
Closure
Remove all tank systems' wastes, and meet all various technical and financial
requirements of Subparts G and H of Part 265.
Preparedness and Prevention
40 CFR Part 264, Subparts C and D
Tracking
Recordkesping if a contract is in place with the generator, Hazardous Waste
Manifest requirements, Including exception reporting when there is no contract.
Recordkeeping and Reporting
Analysis records, manifests, operating record, retention and accessibility, biennial
and additional reports.
Hazardous Waste Mixtures
Rebuttable presumption—used oil containing more than 1,000 ppm total halogens
is presumed to have been mixed with hazardous waste. Mixtures of oil and
hazardous waste must be managed as hazardous waste.
40 CFR 266.40(c) '.
Permitting
Permit-by-rule unless excluded and require Individual permlx (surface impound-
ments); or modify existing Subtitle C permit to handle used oil for co-
management facilities.
Container Storge: 40 CFR Part 264, Subpart I. (same as proposed).
Aboveground Tanks: 40 CFR Part 264, Subpart J (or SPCC).
Underground Storage Tanks: 40 GFR Part 280.
See Table IX.B.2.
Containers: §264.171.
Aboveground tanks: § 264.197.
USTs: 40 CFR Part 280, Subparts E and F.
Aboveground tanks: Same as proposed for closure, defer financial responsibility.
USTs: 40 CFR Part 280, Subparts G and H.'
40 CFR Part 264, Subparts C and D.
Sign Transporter's Collection Log and maintain separate log at the facility.
(Two additional options under consideration:)
Maintain copies of collection logs; prepare and submit Used Oil Management
Report • i
Same as proposed, but extend application of rebuttabte presumption to all used
oils. Test alt used oils for halogen content
Same as proposed in 1985.
EPA is proposing that used oil
recycling facilities storing used oil ori-
site prior to recycling it be in compliance
with the technical requirements listed
below, the permit-by-rule provisions
proposed in 1985, and in addition, EPA
is considering requiring compliance with
the speculative accumulation provision
of § 261.1 (c)(8). To ensure that used oils
are being accumulated for the purpose
of recycling them and not being stored
indefinitely, used oil recycling facilities
may have to demonstrate that 75 percent
of the used oil accumulated at the
beginning of a one-year period is
recycled within the one-year period.'
a. Container Storage, EPA is retaining
the container standards proposed in
1985 for used oil recycling facilities. EPA
is proposing that used oil recycling
facilities comply with 40 CFR part 264.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48057
subpart I standards when storing used
oil in containers (50 FR 49256). EPA is
retaining this provision, which requires
a containment system around the
containers, for used oil recycling
facilities to assure adequate protection
of human health and the environment
from potential leaks and releases of
used oil.
b. Aboveground Tank Storage. In 1985,
EPA proposed to require recycling
facilities storing used oil in aboveground
tanks to comply with part 265 subpart J
standards (50 FR 49256). At that time,
modifications to the subpart J standards
to add full secondary containment had
been proposed and since then have been
promulgated. EPA is now proposing to
require used oil aboveground tank
systems at recycling facilities to meet
the current requirements of part 265
subpart J, including secondary
containment These standards include
freeboard and overflow controls for
uncovered and continuously-fed tanks,
inspections, secondary containment,
response to leaks, and closure
requirements. As explained earlier in
this notice, EPA is considering allowing
used oil recycling facilities to comply
with the SPCC requirements for
aboveground storage tank areas in lieu
of the part 265 secondary containment
requirements.
The Agency requests comment on the
proposed requirements for aboveground
tank and container storage at used oil
recycling facilities.
c. Underground Tank Storage. In the
1985 proposal, EPA indicated that all
used oil storage tanks at recycling
facilities would be subject to the
proposed part 265, subpart J storage
requirements for hazardous wastes
stored in tanks. The subpart} standards
for hazardous waste storage tanks have
since been promulgated (51 FR 25422)
and require secondary containment for
both aboveground and underground
tanks. Today, however, EPA is
proposing that used oil recycling
facilities storing used oil in underground
tanks be subject to the UST regulations,
including the corrective action
requirements for leaking underground
tanks, that were promulgated in 1988 at
40 CFR part 280. EPA will not be
proposing additional section 3014 tank
standards for used oils stored in
underground tanks.
EPA requests comment on the tank
and container storage requirements
under consideration for used oil
recycling facilities.
d. Storage in Surface Impoundments.
In the November 29,1985 proposal, EPA
specified management standards and
required permits for surface •
impoundments used by recycling
facilities (50 FR 49255). Even though, as
discussed above, all used oils may not
be listed or identified as hazardous
wastes, their storage can pose health
and environmental hazards associated
with the release of oil and its toxic
constituents. In fact, many of the
damage cases cited earlier in this notice
involved impoundments. It is EPA's
understanding that surface
impoundment storage is very unusual at
modern used oil recycling facilities. To
the extent impoundments are used, EPA
is very concerned about the potential for
ground-water contamination.
EPA is considering three ways to
control the use of surface impoundments
for storing used oil. First, as proposed in
1985, EPA could use section 3014
authorities to require surface
impoundment standards similar to or
identical to those found in 40 CFR part
264 or 265 subpart K for hazardous
wastes and require the facility to obtain
a subtitle C permit for their use (as
proposed in 1985) whether or not the
used oil being stored or recycled is
hazardous. In addition, the Agency
requests comment on two alternatives
for regulating surface impoundments
used to store used oils. EPA could ban
the use of surface impoundments under
sections 1008, 3014, and 4005 authorities
since the Agency believes that the
placement of used oils in unlined
surface impoundments is not
environmentally protective and may
constitute open dumping. If EPA decides
to ban the use of surface impoundments
for used oil storage, those surface
impoundments currently used to store
used oil will have to close prior to the
effective date of the section 3014
management standards. After the
effective date of the used oil
management standards, any surface
impoundments still in use for used oil
storage will have to be closed in
compliance with 40 CFR subparts K and
G.
Finally, EPA could require used oil
recyclers to obtain a subtitle C permit,
but allow used oil recyclers to petition
the Regional Administrator for an
exclusion to the permitting requirements
upon demonstrating that the facility's
site-specific conditions allow for safe
storage and/or treatment in surface
impoundments.45 A facility filing a
petition for a permitting exclusion may
have to demonstrate that the used oil
will not migrate from the unit and will
not contaminate, ground-water or
surface water receptors.
48 In the case of listed or characteristic hazardous
used oils, the used oil recycler will have to comply
with all applicable LDR and BOAT standards prior
to placing the used oils in a surface impoundment.
EPA requests comments on the
options presented for the regulation of
surface impoundments at used oil
recycling facilities. In particular, EPA
requests comments regarding whether or
not used oil can be safely managed in
surface impoundments, and if so, unrlpr
what conditions.
2. Recycler Tracking of Used Oil
In the 1985 proposal, used oil
recycling facilities were required to
comply with the hazardous waste
manifest system for shipments of used
oil when a recycling agreement was not
in place between a generator and the
recycler (50 FR 49255). In lieu of the
requirements proposed in 1985, EPA is
considering two options for tracking
mechanisms for used oil shipments (see
Table IX.B.2). These options are
explained in detail in section IX.C.3. in
the discussion of transporter
requirements. Used oil recyclers would
have to acknowledge the receipt of each
used oil shipment by signing and dating
the transporters log or the
accompanying manifest. If EPA chooses
to promulgate Option 1 of the tracking
requirements described above, used oil
recyclers may have to provide
documentation to confirm receipt of
used oil shipments within the proposed
35-day shipment period, if a generator
requests such documentation. If the
'Agency chooses to promulgate Option 2
of the tracking requirements described
above, the transporter would retain a
copy of the signed used oil tracking form
and would provide a copy of the signed
tracking form to the recycling facility
(and generator, if requested). The
recycling facility would use this
information to prepare the necessary
reports discussed later and maintain a
copy for recordkeeping purposes.
3. Recycler Release Response and
Cleanup
Under the 1985 proposed rule, used oil
recycling facilities would be subject to
release response requirements for
containers and tanks (50 FR 49256). EPA
is considering requiring the same
corrective action/release response
standards as proposed in 1985 for
recycling facilities that store used oil in
aboveground tanks and containers.
Leaking containers would be required to
be replaced and visible releases from
containers and tanks "immediately"
contained. An owner/operator may also
be required to remedy any deterioration
or malfunction discovered during an
inspection of a tank system. However,
due to the promulgation of the UST
standards in 1988 (53 FR 37173 and
37189), underground tanks storing used
-------
48058
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
oil at recycling facilities are subject to
the corrective action requirements for
USTs in part 280, subpari F EPA is not
proposing, at this time, that used oil
recycling facilities undertake full facility
corrective action, unless required to
obtain a full Subtitle C permit. Instead,
used oil recycling facilities may be
required to clean up ail visible and
detected releases of used oil in
accordance with either the cleanup
requirements proposed in 1985 (in the
case of containers and aboveground
tanks) or those provided in 40 CFR part
280 subpart F {in the case of
underground storage tanks). Due to the
fact that the UST regulations were not
promulgated until 1988, the approach
proposed today for response and
cleanup of releases from underground
tanks storing used oil are different than
the requirements proposed in 1985. EPA
requests comment on the
appropriateness of retaining the UST
release response and clean up
requirements for used oil recycling
facilities storing used oils in
underground tanks. The Agency also
requests comment on the release
response requirements being considered
for aboveground tank and container
storage at used oil recycling facilities.
4. Recycler Closure and Financial
Responsibility
In the 1985 proposed rule, used oil
recycling facilities were subject to the
closure and post-closure and financial
responsibility requirements of subparts
G and H of part 265 (50 FR 49256). EPA
believes that all units used for used oil
storage, treatment, and in certain cases,
disposal (e.g., surface impoundments) at
these recycling facilities must be closed
in a manner that will minimize risk to
human health and the environment. EPA
is retaining the proposed requirements
for closure and post-closure for
aboveground tanks. However, facilities
storing used oil in underground tanks
will be subject to the UST closure
requirements in part 280 in lieu of the
closure requirements proposed in 1985.
EPA requests comment on the closure
requirements described above for used
oil recycling facilities.
EPA is considering deferring financial
responsibility requirements for
aboveground tanks until a later date.
Comments were received after the 1985
proposed rule was published, claiming
that financial responsibility is not
needed for recycling facilities and tha'
most recyclers may not be able to ob iin
coverage and may therefore go out of
business if the Agency promulgated the
financial responsibility requirements
proposed in 1985. Commenters claimed
that financial responsibility
requirements would have serious
detrimental effects on the used oil
recycling market, and that recycling
facilities should be subject to less
rigorous financial responsibility
requirements than treatment, storage,
and disposal facilities. One commenter
also questioned how financial
responsibility requirements would be
implemented at permit-by-rule facilities.
EPA is now proposing to require used
oil recycling facilities to comply with the
speculative accumulation provision
applicable to hazardous waste recycling
facilities (§ 261.1(c){8)}. EPA believes
that the speculative accumulation
provision will reduce the potential for
releases associated with long-term
storage and therefore may minimize the
need for financial assurance at used oil
recycling facilities. The Agency will,
however, continue to evaluate the need
for financial responsibility requirements
at used oil recycling facilities and may
propose financial requirements at a later
date. The Agency is concerned that
financial responsibility requirements
may place a significant economic
burden on used oil recycling facilities
and may result in a decrease in the
quantity of used oil that is recycled. The
financial responsibility requirements
given in subpart H of part 280
concerning underground tanks are
applicable, however, to facilities storing
used oil in underground tanks.
EPA requests comments on the
deferral of financial responsibility
requirements for facilities storing used
oil in aboveground tanks and containers.
5. Recycler Recordkeeping and
Reporting Requirements
Used oil recyclers engaged in
marketing or burning used oil fuel are
required to comply with the 40 CFR part
266, subpart E recordkeeping
requirements. EPA is now considering
modifying these requirements. In 1985,
EPA proposed additional recordkeeping
and reporting requirements, beyond
those required by 40 CFR part 266,
subpart E, for recycling facilities (40
CFR 266.43(f), 50 FR 49256). These
requirements were more extensive than
those proposed for used oil generators
and transporters and were similar to
those established for hazardous waste
management facilities. These included
the following:
—Operating records (§ 264.73)
—Availability, retention, and
disposition of records (§ 264.74)
—Biennial reports (§ 264.75)
—Additional reports (§ 264.77;).
a. Recordkeeping. As discussed
above, EPA is considering several
options for used oil tracking (see Table
IX.B.2.). Under each option, the
maintenance of collection logs by
transporters and recycling facilities is
required to confirm the receipt of used
oil shipments from a used oil generator
at a recycling facility. The log
maintained by recyclers would fulfill a
portion of the operating record
requirements that EPA proposed in 1985.
Information recorded in the used oil
tracking log would not have to be
duplicated in a facility's operating
record (the log will be considered to be
a part of the operating record).
b. Reporting. EPA has re-evaluated
the biennial reporting requirements
proposed in 1985 for used oil recycling
facilities (50 FR 49258) and determined
that some elements of the biennial
report are not appropriate for used oil
recyclers, particularly in light of the fact
that all used oils may not be identified
as hazardous wastes and EPA may
defer other requirements (e.g., facility
financial responsibility requirements).
EPA is therefore considering, in lieu of
the use of the biennial report designed
for hazardous waste TSD facilities, a
separate reporting system for used oil
recycling facilities that would parallel
the hazardous waste biennial report.
The used oil recycling report may have
data elements more applicable to used
oil recycling activities. The used oil
recycling report would have to be
prepared and submitted to EPA
biennially using the same schedule as
that established for the hazardous waste
biennial reporting requirements,
however, EPA may consider changing
the required submission date. Under this
approach, EPA may develop a form with
reporting requirements for used oil
recycling facilities that may include:
• The average quantity of used oil
typically stored on-site prior to
recycling;
• The quantity of used oil recycled as
lube oils or petroleum fractions
annually;
• The annual quantity of used oil
shipped off-site as specification fuel1,
• The annual quantity of used oil
marketed as off-spec used oil;
• The annual quantity of used burned
as off-specification used oil fuel burned;
• The annual quantity of used oil
disposed on-site;
• The quantity of used oil sent off-site
for subtitle C disposal annually; and1
• The quantity of used oil sent offrsite
for subtitle D disposal annually.
EPA may require used oil recyclers to»
report annual quantities of used oil
handled by category of used oil
generator (if EPA promulgates Tracking
Option 1). EPA may use the generator-
specific information obtained from
recyclers' biennial reports to evaluate
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48059
the impacts of the Phase I management
standards on used oil generators and to
assess the need for EPA to develop non-
regulatory incentives to encourage used
oil-recycling. EPA may also use this
information to determine what
percentage of the total quantity of used
oil generated annually enters the used
oil management system, is used to
produce burner fuel, and is used as
feedstock for lube oil.
EPA requests comment on the
suggested reporting alternatives to the
proposed requirement for biennial
reports discussed above.
6. Analytical Requirements
In 1985, under proposed § 264.73, EPA
required analysis of used oil to
determine halogen content, ignitability,
fuel specification, and additional
parameter testing for used oil recycling
facilities that also manage hazardous
wastes. EPA still believes that testing
for indicator parameters (e.g., part 261,
appendix VIII constituents) is necessary
to ensure used oil and other hazardous
wastes are not mixed. EPA believes that
the indicator parameter testing
requirement, in addition to the halogen
content analysis, will discourage mixing
at co-management facilities. Therefore,
the analytical requirements proposed in
1985 will remain unchanged.
In addition, used oil that is mixed with
hazardous waste is a hazardous waste
by virtue of the "mixture rule" (40 CFR
261.3(a)). Such mixtures of used oil and
hazardous waste would have to be
managed in compliance with 40 CFR
part 266, subpart D. To ensure that used
oil and hazardous waste mixtures are
not either sold as blended used oil fuels
or rerefined to manufacture lube oil
feedstock, EPA is considering requiring
recycling facilities to test each shipment
of used oil for halogen content and, in
the case of co-management facilities,
test for part 261, appendix VIII
constituents (indicator parameters),
prior to shipment of the recycled product
to end users.
EPA requests comment on the testing
requirements discussed here.
7. Recycler Permits
In the 1985 proposed rule, EPA used
the authority of RCRA section 3014 to
propose permitting requirements for
used oil recycling facilities (50 FR 49255,
49257). RCRA section 3014(d) provides
that owners and operators of used oil
recycling facilities are deemed to have a
permit for their recycling activities and
associated tank and •container storage,
provided they comply with the used oil
management standards promulgated by
EPA. Under the. 1985 proposal,.used oil,
recycling facilities would qualify for
permits-by-rule by complying with 40
CFR 266.43 and 266.44, the proposed
requirements for used oil recyclers and
burners. The Agency is considering
retaining the 1985 proposed permit-by-
rule requirements. Although EPA
proposed financial responsibility
requirements for used oil recyclers in
1985, EPA is not including such
requirements for aboveground tank and
container storage in today's proposed
standards. Financial responsibility
standards for these used oil recycling
facilities are being deferred until the
Phase II management standards are
promulgated.
EPA believes that the permit-by-rule
.requirements proposed in 1985 are
appropriate for all used recycling
facilities, even if some used oils are
determined not be hazardous wastes. As
discussed earlier in today's notice,
potential hazards to human health and
the environment exist regardless of
whether or not the used oil is a
hazardous waste.
Certain types of used oil recycling
facilities were excluded from permit-by-
rule eligibility in the 1985 proposal.
These include facilities that recycle or
store used oil in surface impoundments
and facilities that manage other
hazardous wastes in addition to used oil
(co-management facilities). These types
of facilities may be required to obtain an
individual subtitle C permit or modify
their existing permit, in the case of co-
management facilities. In addition, as
proposed, the Regional Administrator or
the director of an approved state
program may have the discretion to
require individual permits for other
facilities that could pose a substantial
potential or present hazard. The Agency
will also require used oil recycling
facilities that accumulate used oil
speculatively (i.e., are not in compliance
with the speculative accumulation
provision of § 261.1(c)(8)) to obtain a full
subtitle C permit. These facilities would
be subject to the § 3004(u) corrective
action provisions for permitted facilities.
EPA is not proposing any changes to the
exclusions to permit-by-rule eligibility
proposed in 1985.
If EPA promulgates used oil
management standards in two phases,
used oil recycling facilities that are
eligible for a permit-by-rule will be
deemed to have a permit-by-rule when
the owner or operator is in compliance
with all of the Phase I management
standards. Then later, when EPA
promulgates any Phase II management
standards, the owner or operator will
have to be in compliance with both the
Phase I and Phase II management . ,
standards on the effective date :of the
Phase II standards to keep the facility's
permit-by-rule status.
E. Used Oil Marketers
In 1985, EPA proposed to replace the
existing Part 266 Subpart E requirements
with the proposed generator and
transporter requirements (50 FR 49239
November 25,1985). Under the proposed
scheme, marketers were intended to
become subject to the generator
standards. That proposed requirement
remains unchanged in the case of
generators who market specification
fuel. Recyclers who market specification
used oil fuel must be in compliance with
the recycling facility standards
,(including the permit-by-rule provisions)
included in today's notice and those
proposed in 1985.
The 1985 proposed regulations were
unclear as to the status of the marketer
notification requirements and the
requirements relating to one-time
notices to be received from the burners
to which the marketer sells used oil.
EPA wishes to clarify in this notice that
the final requirements in § 266.43(b)(3),
relating to notification to EPA of used oil
marketing activities and in
§ 266.43(b)(5), requiring that marketers
obtain a one-time written and signed
notice from burners that the off-
specification used oil fuel will be burned
only in industrial boilers or furnaces,
will still apply to marketers. These
regulations will be moved to the newly-
created section on used oil, part 279.
As proposed in 1985, marketers will
become subject to the generator and
transporter regulations, including the
provision relating to maintaining records
of shipments in a logbook. Marketers
will also be required to comply with
whatever tracking option is selected.
EPA believes that since used oil
marketers are the first party to
determine the disposition of used oil and
since marketers generally store used oil
prior to shipping it to burners, used oil
marketers may be required to comply
with all applicable generator and
transporter standards proposed today
and/or discussed in the 1985 proposal.
In addition, marketers are responsible
for conducting analytical tests to
document that used oil being sold as
specification fuel does not exceed any of
the specification parameters.
EPA requests comments on the
appropriateness of subjecting marketers
to the generator and transporter
standards proposed for Part 279.
Readers should note that, as proposed in
1985, marketers blending used oil fuel
would be subject to the recycling facility
standards.
-------
48060 Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / M on day, September 23, 1991 / Proposed
F. Burners of Specification Used Oil
In 1985, EPA promulgated a
specification for used oil fuel (50 FR
49205, 40 CFR 266.40 and 266.43(b)(l)
and (6)). Used oil fuel meeting these
specifications can be burned without
regulation in non-industrial boilers such
as those in apartment or office buildings,
provided an analysis is conducted and
records are kept by the first person who
claims that the fuel meets the
specification (i.e., the marketer). The
specification was intended to be
protective under virtually all
circumstances. EPA believed that used
oil fuels meeting the specification would
not pose hazards significantly greater
than virgin fuel oil when burned. In fact,
the specification levels for arsenic,
cadmium and chromium were selected
to be equivalent to virgin fuel levels. The
specification for lead was set at 100
ppm, which was about 10 times greater
than lead levels found in virgin fuel oils,
and was intended as an interim measure
until the Phase II burning rules were
promulgated.
When EPA developed the used oil fuel
specification levels in 1985, the Agency
based the constituent levels for the
specification on the possible human
health effects from an urban burning
scenario (50 FR 49180). EPA performed a
risk assessment to identify constituents
, that may pose increased risks to human
health given that used oil could be
burned in highly populated urban areas.
When the constituents of concern were
typically found in used oil at levels
greater than in virgin fuel oils, they were
included in the specification at their 95th
percentile levels in virgin fuel oils. EPA
reasoned that higher levels could pose
substantial risk, and levels lower than
those found for the same constituents in
virgin fuel oils would not provide
protection of human health and the
environment given that used oil fuels
could replace virgin oil fuels.48
EPA continues to believe that there is
little protection to be gained by
regulating processed used oil fuels that
meet the specification levels any more
stringently than virgin oil fuels, since
these used oil fuels essentially present
no greater risk to human health and the
environment than virgin oil fuels. Also,
the Agency believes that the costs
associated with the regulation of used
oil fuels that meet the specification
limits (that are essentially the same as
the virgin oil fuel specification) may
result in burners substituting virgin oil
fuels, which are unregulated, for used oil
46 See PEDCo Environmental Inc., A Risk
Asse88me.it of Waste Oil Burning In Botlers and
Space Heaters, August 1984.
fuels. Therefore, EPA is considering
providing a regulatory exemption from
the used oil management standards for
those used oil fuels that meet the used
oil fuel specification in 40 CFR 266.40(e).
As explained above, the specification
was developed to provide virtually the
same level of protection from the
burning of used oil fuels as that
exhibited by the burning of virgin oil
fuels. Therefore, EPA sees no reason to
regulate used oil fuels that meet the
specification levels beyond requiring the
marketer to test the fuel and document
that it meets the specification levels for
each constituent and comply with the
recordkeeping requirements of 40 CFR
286.43.
In 1985, EPA set the specification limit
for total halogens at 4,000 ppin (based
upon emission standards modelling).
EPA also promulgated a rebuttable
presumption for mixtures of used oil and
hazardous wastes in 1985. The
rebuttable presumption limit for halogen
content was set at 1,000 ppm (based
upon probable mixing scenarios). The
Agency believes (due to enforcement
experience) that used oils exhibiting a
total halogen level greater than 1,000
ppm have most likely been mixed with
chlorinated hazardous wastes.
The Agency wants to discourage all
mixing of used oils and hazardous
wastes. However, EPA understands that
some used oils (e.g., metalworking oils
with chlorinated additives) may exceed
the 1,000 ppm total halogen limit without
having been mixed with hazardous
waste. In these cases, the generator can
rebut the presumption of mixing and the
used oil would be regulated under the
§ 3014 management standards and not
as a hazardous waste. However, even if
the presumption of mixing is rebutted, if
the total halogen level in the used oil
exceeds 4,000 ppm, the used oil will not
meet the used oil specification limit for
halogens. Therefore, if the used oil is to
be burned for energy recovery, the used
oil will have to undergo further
processing to meet the used oil fuel
specification (to lower the total halogen
level) or the used oil must be burned as
off-specification used oil fuel (in which
case the marketer of the used oil fuel
must be in compliance with the current
part 266 subpart E requirements).
However, EPA is considering
eliminating the total halogen level of
4,000 ppm from the used oil fuel
specification. The deletion of the total
halogen level in the specification criteria
may eliminate any current confusion
regarding the difference in the 4,000 ppm
level of the used oil specification and
the 1,000 ppm level of the rebuttable
presumption. The result of establishing
only one limit for total halogen content
would be that the specification level for
used oil fuels would contain only
concentration limits for metals and the
halogen limit for the presumption of
mixing would remain at 1,000 ppm total
halogens. EPA believes that industry
currently complies with the 1,000 ppm
total halogen limit for used oil fuels.
Therefore, it may be unnecessary to
include a total halogen limit in the used
oil fuel specification. The Agency
requests comment on the need for and
consequences of eliminating the total
halogen limit in the used oil fuel
specification.
Used oil recyclers commonly test used
oil samples prior to accepting used oil to
determine whether the used oil was
mixed with hazardous waste or not
Many times recyclers, if the presence of
halogens is detected, perform additional
testing (e.g., EPA SW-846 test method
8010) to determine the quantity and the
type of hazardous waste that may have
been mixed with the used oil. If mixing
is confirmed, then the shipment is many
times rejected or the generator is
advised to send the contaminated used
oil to a hazardous waste incinerator. On
occasion, the quantities of used oil
rejected, and therefore required to be
incinerated (or otherwise burned as a
hazardous waste fuel), are not large
enough to warrant the handling and
transportation costs associated with
sending them to an incinerator. In these
cases, the generator may consider
handling the mixture differently than
sending it to an incinerator or other
permitted hazardous waste burner
facility. To discourage mismanagement
of such mixtures, EPA is considering
allowing recyclers to accept this mixture
if it is accompanied by proper manifest
forms and provided the recycler agrees
to ship the used oil mixture to a
permitted hazardous waste burner to be
burned as a hazardous waste fuel. EPA
requests comment on what additional
requirements may be necessary to
ensure that a recycler does not conduct
any mixing with other unadulterated
used oils to lower the halogen content
and market the mixture as a used oil
fuel.
EPA solicits comment on the Agency's
proposal to allow used oil fuels meeting
the specification levels to be burned
without regulation under the section
3014 management standards.
EPA received a correspondence from *
the National Oil Recyclers Association
(NORA) requesting an interpretation of
the current regulations concerning
mixtures of used oil and characteristic
hazardous waste (in this case mineral
spirits that exhibit the characteristic of
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48061
ig.iitaL,.,,v/) •' Mineral spirits, when
mixed with «»sed oil, no longer exhibit
the characteristic of ignitability and the
resultant mixture is subsequently
burned for energy recovery. Since the
mixture no longer exhibits the
characteristic of ignitability, the burning
of-such a mixture for energy recovery is
subject to part 266, subpart E as a used
oil fuel, and is not subjeat to part 266
subpart D as a hazardous waste fuel.
G. Burners of Off-Specification Used Oil
In November 1985, EPA proposed that
burners of off-specification used oil fuel
would be subject to regulation as
recycling facilities, and as such would
have to comply with the proposed
storage and other management
requirements (see proposed
§ 266.43(a)(l) and 50 FR 49239).
Comments were received indicating that
these requirements would be too costly,
and would discourage the use of used oil
fuel. This section discusses some
possible changes to the proposal for off-
specification used oil burners. If not
discussed here, provisions proposed
under § 266.43 and § 266.44 are still
under consideration for used oil burners.
Table IX.G.l provides a brief
summary of the used oil burner
requirements that EPA is currently
considering for promulgation. These
standards will be included under Phase I
if the used oil management standards
are promulgated in two phases. Table
IX.G.l also compares the requirements
that the Agency is now considering with
those proposed in 1985. A more detailed
discussion of the proposed used oil
burner requirements is provided below.
TABLE IX.G.L—USED OIL BURNERS
1985
Today
Storage
Container Storage: 40 CFR Part 264 Subpart I..
Aboveground Tanks: 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart J _
Underground Storage Tanks: 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart J....
Corrective Action
Remove leaking tanks from use; releases must be remedied _
Replace leaking containers) and stop teaks. „ ;
Closure
Remove aH tank systems' wastes, and meet all various technical and financial
requirements of Subparts G and H of Part 265.
Tracking
Shipment of off-spec used oil to receiving facility accompanied by invoice giving
identification numbers and addresses of marketer and facility and quantity and
dates of shipment
Container Storage: 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart L Coverage same as generators
(container condition and management, inspections for releases and cleanup,
etc.).
Aboveground Tanks: Same as generators (tank condition, inspections for releases
and cleanup, closure requirements, etc.).
Underground Storage Tanks: 40 CFR Part 280.
Storage time: Limited to 180 days.
Same as proposed for containers and aboveground tanks.
USTs: 40 CFR Part 280, Subparts E and F.
Aboveground tanks: 40 CFR Part 265, Subpart J; defer financial responsibility.
USTs: 40 CFR Part 280, Subparts G and H.
Burners may be required to sign a transporters collection log.
Existing invoice system.
1. Burner Storage
In 1985, EPA proposed specific
requirements for tank and container
storage, and accompanying
preparedness and prevention and
emergency procedures. EPA is
concerned that the 1985 proposed
storage requirements (which were
similar to those proposed for used oil
recycling facilities) may be too stringent
and unnecessarily expensive for used oil
burners. EPA believes that used oil
burners store used oil merely to meet
fheir fuel needs and generally not to
stockpile used oils for an extended
period of time. Therefore, in lieu of the
storage requirements proposed, EPA is
now considering requiring the same on-
site storage requirements for burners as
those outlined above for generators.
These provisions are essentially the
same as those proposed in 1985 for
aboveground tanks and containers,
except for the secondary containment
requirement, and include inspection of
tanks for corrosion and leaks, closure,
special provisions for ignitable.oil.
cleanup of visible releases, leaks, and
drips, labelling of tanks and containers
used for storage, and overflow and
freeboard controls. In the case of
underground tanks used to store used oil
fuels, EPA is proposing to retain the
current 40 CFR part 280 requirements for
used oil burners. Also, to ensure against
potential hazards from extensive
accumulation and storage of used oil at
burning facilities, EPA is considering
limiting the storage period at burning
facilities to 180 days. Burners storing
used oil for a period longer than 180
days may have to comply with the
recycling facility storage and permit-by-
rule requirements. EPA requests
comments on the proposed storage
standajds for burners of non-
specification used oil fuels. As
discussed above, the SPCC regulations
would continue to apply independently
to the section 3014 standards for used oil
burners.
2. Burner Analysis Requirements
EPA proposed that all recycling
facilities, including burners, analyze the
used oil managed at the facility for total
halogens, ignitability, and indicator
parameters (when other hazardous
wastes are also managed at the facility),
Commenters stated that the analysis
requirements were duplicative since
such a determination has already been
made by a used oil recycler or marketer.
As one commenter pointed out,
marketers have already performed
analyses to determine if the used oil
meets the specification and to determine
if the oil has been mixed with hazardous
waste. EPA is aware that, at a minimum,
most reputable used oil handlers
conduct relatively simple analyses using
test kits to determine if the used oil has
been mixed with hazardous waste.
EPA is considering allowing burners
to use information provided by
marketers (e.g., certification or
analytical results) in lieu of requiring the
burner to perform analyses for halogen
"Letter to Mr, David Bussard, Director,
Characterization and Assessment Division of EPA's
Office of Solid Waste, from Mr. Chris Harris,
National Oil Recyclers Association of June 5,1991.
-------
48062 Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
content and ignitability. Where
information is not available from the
marketer, however, the burner would
still be required to perform the analyses.
EPA believes that when the oil is
provided by a non-marketer (i.e.,
generator or transporter transporting
directly from the generator's site(s)),
there is a potential for contamination of
the used oil prior to delivery to the
burner. Therefore, in such cases, EPA
believes the only way that a burner can
ensure that the oil has not been mixed
with hazardous waste (or the oil meets
the specification, if the burner wishes to
burn specification fuel) is to perform an
analysis for halogens and ignitability (or
specification parameters). The burner
would have to keep records of the fuel
specification certification on-site as pait
of the operating record. EPA requests
comments on the analytical
requirements proposed for used oil
burners.
3. Space Heaters
EPA's proposal in November, 1985
inadvertently omitted the conditions on
space heaters currently required in part
266, subpart E. When the used oil
management standards are promulgated,
EPA will clarify that continued use of
used oil-fired space heaters under the
conditions specified in § 266.41(b](2)(iii)
is still allowed (even if, used oil is listed
as a hazardous waste.)
4. Burner Permitting and Corrective
Action
The 1985 proposal required off-
specification used oil burners to comply
with the permit-by-rule provisions
proposed for used oil recycling facilities.
Many commenters stated that the
permitting requirements were too
burdensome for burners and would
discourage the recycling of used oil as
fuel. EPA is hence concerned that such a
large outlet for used oil may be
restricted. At the same time, EPA
recognizes the need to provide for the
safe handling of used oil and to control
against possible releases during the
storage of used oil. Therefore, EPA is
proposing a limited set of requirements
for used oil burners that will provide a
necessary level of protection while
minimizing the adverse impacts on the
used oil fuel market.
In light of the fact that all used oils
may not be classified as hazardous, EPA
is proposing to apply the permit-by-rule
provisions to burners, but with a
reduced set of standards. These
standards are as follows: (a) The tank
storage standards would be the same as
those discussed above for generators;
(b) the burner would not be required to
perform analyses for halogen content
and ignitability if that information is
provided by the marketer; (c) EPA may
require that a log indicating the dates,
quantities, and types of used oil
accepted for burning be maintained (as
required for other types of recycling
facilities); (d) reduced closure
requirements, the unit specific closure
requirements in part 265, subpart J
would apply to burners, rather than the
closure requirements proposed for the
other types of recyclers; and (e) EPA
may require biennial reporting for
burners as discussed above for recycling
facilities, especially when used oil fuel
is accepted directly from used oil
generators. Burners may also be subject
to the same unit-specific corrective
action/release response requirements as
other recycling facilities. Therefore,
requirements for burners relating to tank
storage, analysis (if analytical results
are provided by the marketer), and
closure are less stringent than those
requirements for other types of used oil
recycling facilities.
To date, EPA has Dot proposed
regulations covering technical burning
requirements for used oil burners. Also,
today's proposal does not add emission
standards for devices that burn used oil
for energy recovery. EPA requests
comments and supporting data on
emissions from used oil burners and the
need for development of emission
standards for burners as part of the
Phase II requirements.
EPA requests comments 6n the
reduced permitting standards including
storage, analytical, and recordkeeping
and reporting requirements for used oil
burners of off-sp'ecification oil.
H. Facilities Using Distillation Bottoms
or Baghouse Dust to Produce Asphalt
Products i , i
EPA does not generally view the
residues from processing and re-refining
of used oil as within the scope of section
3014. As discussed earlier in this notice,
these residues may be subject to listings,
characteristic determinations, and the
hazardous waste management
regulations under subtitle C. An
exception, however, may be the use of
distillation bottoms and baghouse dust
to make asphalt products (e.g., road-
paving material, roofing tiles, etc.). Re-
refineries produce substantial amounts
of distillation bottoms (approximately 21
million gallons annually) and EPA has
been told that the revenues from the
sale of these residues are important to
the viability of re-refineries. To meet the
statutory goal of a protective and viable
used oil recycling system, EPA considers
the use of distillation bottoms as an
ingredient in asphalt products, where
the starting material is used oil and it
becomes an integral part !of the asphalt,
to be within the scope of the universe of
recycled used oils governed by RCRA
section 3014. (See discussion in VILA, of
the notice.) Similarly, asphalt plants
burning used oil as a fuel may
incorporate baghouse dust from air
pollution control devices used to control
emissions from used oil combustion into
asphalt products. This process also
seems to be closely related to used oil
recycling (i.e., it may be integral to the
use of used oil as a fuel at asphalt
plants) and so it may also be within the
scope of section 3014 authority.
In 1985, EPA proposed a special
exemption from the proposed used oil
management standards for asphalt
paving materials containing distillation
bottoms from used oil re-refining or
baghouse dusts from air pollution
control devices used to control
emissions from recycled used oil
combustion. Persons using the
distillation bottoms orbaghouse dusts
into the asphalt would have been
regulated as used oil recycling facilities.
EPA asked for comments on the hazards
associated with these residuals and the
need for controls over asphalt products
made from used oil residues in the 1985
proposal. Very little information was
received in answer to this request.
EPA may propose regulations for
hazardous waste-derived products that
are placed on the land (e.g, aggregates,
asphalt, cement). Under such proposal,
producers of hazardous waste-derived
products may have to demonstrate that
their products are no less protective
than non-waste-derived products, EPA
requests comment on whether such an
approach is applicable to asphalt
products derived from used oil residuals,
or as an alternative, whether other
means (i.e., a limit on the percentage of
used oil that the asphalt can contain, or
a leach test such as the TCLP, etc.) could
ensure the safety of such products.
Finally, EPA is proposing a change i
from the 1985 proposal for the facilities
that make asphalt using used oil
residuals. Instead of regulating asphalt
plants as used oil recycling facilities,
EPA is considering regulating such
facilities in a manner identical to ;that
outlined above for burners of off-;
specification used oil fuels. EPA is
considering regulating asphalt plants in-
the same manner as burners of off-
specification used oil fuel because the
Agency believes that the used oil is, hi
both cases, being used for its inherent
characteristics (e.g., BTU value); These
facilities would be subject to:
• Inspection and spill response for
aboveground tank storage; '
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56> No. 184 / Monday. September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules 48063
• The 40 CFR part 280 requirements
for underground tank storage;
• Analysis and documentation of no
mixing with hazardous waste (which the
marketer of the residues may provide];
and
• .Recordkeeping associated with a
.collection log or invoice system.
These requirements would help
ensure proper management of the used
oil residuals prior to their incorporation
into the asphalt. Facilities making such
products would also have to obtain a
permit by rule (i.e., as proposed for used
oil burners).
Comments are requested on the
appropriateness of including these
jesidues in the scope of the section 3014
regulations and on the approach
outlined above for regulating this type of
recycling activity.
/. Road Oilers
In 1985, EPA proposed a ban on the
use of used oil for dust suppression
based on the premise that all used oils
would be listed'as hazardous waste.
RCRA section 3004(1) prohibits the use
of materials containing hazardous waste
for dust suppression. As discussed
previously in this notice (Section
Vni.F.4), EPA is still considering using
section 3014 authority to ban road oiling.
Alternatively, EPA may allow some
road oiling under certain conditions
(e.g., when used oil is applied to land in
compliance with the LDR standards and
the disposal guidelines that EPA may
develop in the future). If that is the case,
EPA may subject road oilers to
analytical requirements to document
that the oil is safe for road application
(e.g., testing each batch prior to use). In
addition, EPA may regulate road oilers
the same as recycling facilities, requiring
compliance with the permit-by-rule
.provisions (including storage, closure,
release response requirements, and
recordkeeping and reporting) for their
storage units. EPA requests comment on
this alternative regulatory scheme to
allow for limited road oiling. EPA also
requests comments on what analyses
will demonstrate that the used oil is safe
fcr road application.
/. Disposal Facilities
. In 1985, because EPA proposed to list
all used oils, the disposal of used oils
would have been regulated ;under
Subtitle C.48 The approach currently
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
industry. On balance, however, the
Agency does not believe that today's
proposed rule constitutes a major rule as
defined by E.0.12291,
Several elements of EPA's cost
screening are, however, subject to
unceitainty due to insufficient data. In
addition, the Agency has not been able
to evaluate fully the costs and recycle
market implications of certain of the
used oil listing options related to boiler
and furnace markets for "derived from"
used oil fuels or the listing of distillation
bottoms on rerefiners' distillation
asphalt product markets. The Agency
therefore solicits additional data and
comments pertinent to any aspects of
this cost screening analysis, and, in
particular, on the effects of the "derived-
from rule" on processor fuel markets
and effects of listing distillation bottoms
on rerefiner asphalt markets and their
implications for used oil recycling.
As stated above, based on work to
date the Agency does not believe that
any combination of today's proposed
listing alternatives and/or management
standard options would constitute a
major rule requiring a Regulatory Impact
Assessment under E.0.12291. However,
if EPA's further work or public review
comments lead to substantial
reassessment of this position, and
depending on the options selected in the
final nilemaking, the Agency will
appropriately update the 1985 RIA in
support of the final rulemaking.
The following paragraphs of this
section lay out in greater detail the
Agency's approach and findings from
the economic impact screening analysis,
as well as some background on the
assumptions made to arrive at the cost
estimates. For further detail, the reader
is referred to the supporting technical
background document "Cost and
Economic Impact Screening Analysis for
the 1991 Used Oil Proposal" available in
the docket.
A. Scope and Approach for Impact
Screening
1. Overview of Used Oil Generation and
Management
Used crankcase oils and other used
oils are a very common and pervasive
byproduct of a highly mobile, industrial
society. Every mode of transportation,
every machine, and virtually every
industrial process which relies on oil for
lubrication, hydraulic fluid, insulation,
or other processing generates used oil.
For 1988 the Agency estimates that
about 1.35 billion gallons of used oil was
generated in the United States by
households, and industrial and non-
industrial generators.1 The Agency has
also estimated that approximately
640,000 industrial and non-industrial
generators, and several thousand
collectors, handlers, processors,
rerefiners, marketers and burners could
potentially be regulated under various
options included in this Notice.
Household generators would not be
regulated under any of the used oil
regulatory proposals. Table X.A.I
presents in greater detail the variety of
business sectors potentially subject to
these regulatory options, including the
total number of facilities estimated to be
operating in each sector. The number of
facilities in each sector potentially
affected by various options discussed in
today's Notice is discussed below.
TABLE X.A.1.—TOTAL NON-HOUSEHOLD
FACILITIES HANDLING USED OIL IN 1990
Facility type
Service Stations
Repair Shops
New & Used Dealers
Fleets
Non-sarvice Retailers
Air/Marine/RR
Public Collection Centers
industrial Subtotal
Collectors/Transporters Total
< — 1 0 Days
> 1 0 Days
Processors and Rerefiners Total
Minor Processors
Re-refiners
Subtotal Facilities
Marketers not already counted l .
Burners2
Off-Spec
Space Heaters
On-Spec
Total No,
of
facilities
640413
282413
45,000
100,000
56,000
72,500
400
7,513
1 000
358 000
383
345
38
186
112
70
4
640982
?
1 121
60000
?
1 According to the Hazardous Waste Data Man-
agement System (HWDMS), 1,567 facilities market-
ing off-specification used oil nave notified EPA of
this practice. However, this figure includes collectors,
processors, rerefiners and some generators. The
total number of marketers not already counted re-
mains unclear. Marketers of on-specification used oil
may include any general fuel oil dealers, and are not
regulated under this proposal.
2 According to HWDMS, 1,121 off-specification
burners of used oil have notified EPA of this prac-
tice. An additional fO.OOO facilities are estimated to
burn used oil for fuel in space heaters; however,
used oil burned for this use is exempted from regula-
tion under this proposal. Burners of on-spec used oil
include general fuel oil customers, and are also not
regulated under this proposal.
Used oil is currently managed to a
substantial degree by an established
recycling and reuse system of oil
accumulation, collection, transportation,
processing, rerefining and marketing to
end users. In 1988, 70 percent or 949
million gallons of the used oil generated
were recycled through the used oil
management system of collectors,
processors, and end users, or were
reused on-site by the generators
themselves; approximately 34 million
gallons were reused for the purpose of
road oiling. Of the 1.35 billion gallons
generated in 1988, 58 percent or 784
million gallons were burned for energy
recovery, either on site by the generator
space heaters or in industrial boilers, or
off-site in boilers and furnaces, cement
kilns, and diesel engines. At each stage
of the process, used oil is accumulated
and stored and may be subject to
mismanagement in handling or storage.
The Phase I management standards seek
to safeguard against mismanagement of
the used oil at each step in the process.
B. Section 3014 Management Standards
for Recycled Used Oil
1. Background Assumptions and
Regulatory Options Analyzed for Phase
I Management Standards
The regulatory options analyzed for
this cost screening analysis are those
described previously in the preamble.
For the purpose of conducting this
screening analysis, the costs attributable
to the alternative management
standards are understood to apply to
generators and handlers of used oil
regardless of the decision to list all used
oil or any subcategory of used oil as a
hazardous waste. All used oils except
those generated by households are
presumed to be bound for recycling, and
all non-household generators and other
facilities could be subject to the Phase I
Standards. However, most generators
would be exempted under the small
quantity generator exemption option
discussed in sections VIII and IX of
today's notice. Used oil not bound for
recycling would have to be tested to
demonstrate noa-recyclability due to its
physical characteristics (e.g., low heat
content or high water content).
The Phase I alternative management
standards for generators, handlers,
processors and end users of used oil, as
described earlier in today's preamble,
would describe basic management
practices for used oil storage,
preparedness and spill prevention, spill
response and cleanup, recordkeeping
and reporting, and testing (for those
facilities that want to dispose of their
used oil). The individual requirements
vary by facility type. In general,
however, compliance costs for the
affected facilities relate primarily to
additional labor hours required to
provide regular tank inspections,
provide training, maintain records or
compile reports.
Specific assumptions and features
significant to the cost analysis are
described briefly below:
• Storage requirements for drums and
containers, above-ground tanks,
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday, September 23. 1991 / Proposed Rules 48065
underground tanks, and surface
impoundments apply uniformly to all
non-household generators, collectors
and transporters, processors, rerefiners,
marketers,, and burners. All such
facilities are assumed to be required to
apply "good housekeeping" standards of
regular inspection of the tanks to ensure
tank integrity, and clean up all drips and
small leaks as soon as they are detected.
In addition, all storage facilities are
assumed to be required to label tanks as
"used oil storage." Based on interviews
with association and other industry
representatives of each of the categories
of facilities affected, we estimate that
approximately 10 percent of generators
and burners would require additional
measures to comply with the storage
and spill response requirements.
However, used oil storage identification
labels may be required at every facility
and OH every tank and storage
container, since these labels are not
common among either generators, or
used oil processing or management
facilities. Secondary containment for
used oil collector and processor
facilities has not been explicitly
included at this time, but because of the
Spill Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasures program (SPCC),
incremental costs are likely to be
minimal.
• Spill response and cleanup standards
would apply to all facility types in order to
ensure that, in the event that a spill occurs,
the spill be contained and cleaned up as
rapidly as possible. It is assumed that any
failed tank, container, or equipment would
have to be drained of remaining oil and either
repaired or replaced. With the exception
noted below, costs for spill response and
cleanup materials are assumed to be already
accounted for at all or most facilities in the
used oil generating and handling sectors as a
matter of common business practice due to
local fire code regulations and insurance ,
requirements. Major spills that could involve
the cleanup and removal of contaminated
soils, pumping or treating of groundwater, or
surface water oil containment are not
addressed by today's proposal.
• Preparedness and prevention standards
also apply to all facilities and are the same as
those contained in 40 CFR subpart C and
subpart D, including installation of an
internal communications or alarm system,
fire extinguishers, adequate water supply,
and emergency training plans and
procedures. We have assumed, based on
interviews with industry representatives, that
facilities in only two generator; subcategories
(nonservice retailers and,publi;c collection
centers] comprising less than one percent of
all generators, will requiria additional
measures for preparedness and prevention.
• Used oil tracking, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements. All facilities,
" including generators, would be required to
keep a record of used oil shipments :and/or
deliveries for a period of three year.s in the
form of a log. In addition, transporters would
be required to initiate a separate paper
tracking system of the used oil they handle,
with information on both the origin and
destination of the used oil. Transporters, fuel
processors and rerefiners, and burners of
used oil which fails to meet the fuel oil
specification would be required to report
biennially on the volumes of recycled
products handled, by categories. We have
assumed that all industrial generators and
handlers and 97 percent of non-industrial
generators already have standard business
recordkeeping systems in place which could
be supplemented or revised at no measurable
incremental cost. For biennial reporting, we
have assumed that all collectors/
transporters, processors, and rerefiners
would incur modest additional costs.
• Testing for generators (for BTU content,
viscosity, total halogens, or water content)
would be necessary only for that subset of
generators who choose to utilize disposal
options instead of recycling their used oil. We
believe that only a very small portion of
facilities would generate used oil that is
characteristically non-recyclable.
Accordingly, we have estimated that only 5
percent of industrial generators and an
additional 5 percent of the air/marine/
railroad non-industrial subcategory would be
required to test for non-recyclability. No
additional testing requirements are assumed
for used oil management facilities.
• Permitting requirements are assumed to
apply to all transporters, processors and
rerefiners, as well as to marketers and
burners of used oil fuel which fails to meet
the existing used oil fuel specification
standards, with such permits to be issued by
rule at no cost. Hazardous waste co-
management facilities, however, would be
required to file for a modification of their
existing Subtitle C permit, and would
therefore incur a modest one-time cost.
2. Existing (Baseline) Regulations and
Practices That Limit Incremental
Impacts of Phase I Management
Standards
The Agency estimates that only a
small fraction of facilities storing,
handling, and burning used oil will incur
additional costs attributable to the
Phase I Management Standard
alternatives, because the administrative
and other facility standards are already
substantially in place due to other
federal. State, and local requirements,
and standard industry practices. The
alternative management standards that
are under consideration and described
in today's Phase I proposal were
developed to ensure that used oil is
adequately stored and handled to
protect public health and the
environment while imposing a minimal
burden on the existing used oil
collection and -recycling system. Since
the storage, handling,; and management
of all wastes has .become a major issue,
many used oil facilities
incorporated protective measures in
response.
The alternative management
standards proposed today incorporate
or overlap with portions of three federal
statutes already promulgated: The
Underground Storage Tank rule (UST, 40
CFR part 280), the Spill Prevention,
Control, and Countermeasures program
(SPCC, 40 CFR part 112), and regulations
and guidelines promulgated under the
Occupational Safety and Health Act (29
CFR part 1910). Since the UST
regulations have been incorporated in
today's rulemaking to cover all
underground used oil storage
requirements for leak detection,
containment, and spill response, today's
rule imposes no additional requirements
or costs attributable to underground
storage.
In addition, the federal SPCC
aboveground tank inspection and
containment requirements substantially
overlap today's storage regulations and
effectively preclude additional burdens
for large generators as well as
collectors, processors, rerefiners,
marketers, and burners that store oil
above ground in tanks larger than 660
gallons or combinations of tanks and
containers with aggregate capacity of
greater than 1,320 gallons. SPCC is
designed to protect against petroleum
spills into navigable waterways;
however, the statute has been broadly
interpreted by the federal government as
well as by the regulated sectors to apply
to virtually all large facilities, regardless
of geographic location. These
requirements, described earlier in the
preamble, stipulate management
practices for storing and monitoring of
oil in aboveground tanks, spill response
and cleanup, and preparedness and
prevention to an extent which we
believe would require no additional
compliance cost.
Finally, the requirements for worker
training and protection against hazards
in the workplace issued by OSHA,
require training for workers engaged in
the handling of hazardous materials,
although the requirements are not
specific to used oil facilities. Even if
many or all categories of used oil are
non-hazardous, used oil is typically
generated in facilities where other
hazardous materials such as degreasers,
paint thinners, and other solvents are
handled. We believe that preexisting
OSHA-mandated training programs for
other materials handled at used oil
facilities can be expanded to include
used oil handling considerations at no
additional cost.
At the State level, seven States
regulate used oil as a hazardous waste,
-------
48066 Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, ^p'teimber:2a, 1:591 ,/ Proposed fortes
controlling the storage, handling and
management of used oil. Four States
(California, Missouri, Rhode Island and
Vermont] have set the small quantity
generator exception threshold low
enough that hazardous waste
management regulations cover even
very small generators such as small
service stations and community
collection facilities. The other three
States (Massachusetts, New Jersey,
Oklahoma), have SQG thresholds high
enough to exempt small generators, but
do regulate other used oil management
facilities. Depending on the States in
question, we have assumed that no
additional compliance costs for
management standards are incurred by
the covered facilities in these States.
At the local level, fire code
regulations typically mandate
equivalent physical preparedness and
prevention equipment such as alarm or
communications systems and spill
absorbent materials. Also, on an
individual facility basis, management
guidelines stipulating "good
housekeeping" management standards
imposed by insurers are common among
processors, marketers, and burners.
One additional factor may limit the
incremental costs below what is
presented here. As mentioned earlier,
the majority of costs estimated for the
management standards are labor- -rather
than capital- dependent. Some of the
labor requirements are so low (e.g. daily
inspection time for storage) that the cost
may be absorbed into the amount of
"down time" of unallocated flexible time
available in most businesses. They can
also be absorbed by providing proper
training and education to workers and
emphasizing the need for inspection and
cleanup to minimize the potential
hazards to human health and the
environment associated with used oil
releases and spills and improper
disposal.
3. Summary of Potentially Affected
Activities and Facilities Under Phase I
Management Standards With no Small
Business Generator Exemption
After accounting for existing
requirements and standard industry
practices dictating storage, monitoring,
and handling of used oil compelled by
the provisions of UST regulations, SPCC
program requirements, OSHA
requirements and guidelines, existing
state regulations, and local fire codes,
and insurance requirements., only a
much smaller subset of the total number
of potentially affected facilities remains.
Table X.B.I shows that, of the total
population of approximately '642,000
facilities potentially affected by Phase I
management standards, approximately
60,000 will bear additional costs for
storage measures, 1,200 for
preparedness and prevention, 9,400 for
tracking, recordkeepimg and/or
reporting, amd ijust ower 18,000 for
testing. The wast majority C co-
managemeot facilities.
The numbers of facilities -shown in
ta'ble X.B.I assumed to incur additional
costs are 'those facilities which liave
non-standardized regular storage'
inspections, have no 'OSHA training
programs because no other hazardous
materials are 'handled -on site (as in the
case of public collection centers and
non-service retailers), do not 'keep
records of the used oil transported off
site, or are nsed -oil generators,
processors, or rerefiners who are
required to test used oil before disposing
of it (i.e. if the -oil is not recyclable).
Although collectors, transporters, and
processors all have in place invoice and
tracking systems as a matter of standard
industry accounting and billing practice,
they are not currently required to report
the volumes of used oil picked up from
generators, accwmufeted and processed
on site, and delivered to end users.
TABLE X.B.1 .—NUMBER -OF FACILITIES ASSUMED TO INCUR INCREMENTAL COST WITH SMALL QUANTITY GENERATOR EXEMPTION
.Facilities
Generators
Transportation „ _
—with SQG Exemption _
— without SQG Exemption
Industrial
— with SQG .Exemption I
— without SQG Exemption „
Collectors/Transporters - „ „ '
Processors/Re-Refiners „„ „.. . .
Marketers ' „
Burners * _ „ . j
Total With SQG Exemption
Total Without SQG Exemption
Total No.
640413
282413
358 '000
383
186
7
1 121
Storage
standards
i
I
60238
2400
26861
'0 <
33 377 i
n
0
'0
ill 2
2Sit2 1
60 350 '
Prepared-
ness and
prevention
standards
1 200
1 200
1 200
0!
'0
0 i
'0 *
0 '
•0 I
il 200 i
1 POO '
Spill '
cleanup
response :
standards ,
i
0 1
i
•o]
0
o1
o1
o
•o1
<0 i
(0 !
0 !
fleoord- •
keeping i
tracking and
reporting '
standards
8868
'8868
8,868
0 '
0 ':
383 !
T86
'0
0
'9,437
S437
Permitting !
standards ;
0 '
0 I
0
0 '
rj '
' 1*9
'0^
D
119 !
19
Disposal
{presumption
'testing
standards
1'8,276
376
376
1 21,5
1/7 900
0
0
0
'0
1.S91
$®,276
11 Marketers .include .genera) fuel 'dealers assumed to handle only specification 'fuel which are -exempt 'from the Section 3014 Management Standaltds under today's
2 Burners of off-specification -used oil
3 Permitted hazardous waste TO-management facilities will incur additional costs for modifying their Subtitle C permit.
For the facilities that do incur
inaremental coats, Table X,B.2 presents
the annual -cost per facility for each 'of
the 'Components of the management
standairds. Gemeraitors .are subject to &B
highest unit cost for these requirements.
Additional detail on the numbers of
affected facilities and unit
-------
Federal Register /Vol. 56. No. 1«4 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48067
TABLE X.-B.2:—NATIONWIDE INCREMENTAL ANNUAL COSTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO SECTION 3014 MANAGEMENT STANDARDS
Sectors
Gener a tors .„„ ._ „ „ _..
Non-Industrial _.. " "
Service Stations
Repair Shops.
New & Used Dealers.
Fleets . .._.
Non-Service Retailers... , „
Air/Marine/Railroad
Public Collection Centers .'.
Industrial ._ _.
Collectors/Transporters „ „
Processors/Re-Refiners _ .
Marketers _
Burners ...„ . __„- „. „
Total8 ,
Storage '
$18.071,280
8 058 1 80
2 966 580
2,197,500
246000
2 360 400
o
137700
150,000
10 013 100
g
o
0
33,600
18 100000
Spill
prepared-
ness and
prevention
$154,440
0
51 480
Q
102,960
o
Q
Q
0
154 000
SpilD
response
$0
0
Q
0
0
Q
Q
0
o
Tracking/
recordkeep-
Ing and
reporting
$422,028
0
n
38,072
99 275
02 870
Q
0
614 000
Permitting
SO
0
0
Q
s 50 000
Q
0
50 000
Testing
$5,555,904
0
0
0
o
o
Q
0
5 560 000
Overall cost
$24,200,000
2,200,000
51 500
262 000
291,000
1 5 500 000
99 300
1 43 000
0
33,600
24 500 000
1 Storage costs for labels will be borne by all facilities. Annualized at approximately 50 cents per year, tables add approximately $300,000 to the total cost
1 Permitted hazardous waste co-management facilities will incur additional costs for modifying the Subtitle C permit
• Totals are rounded to three significant digits.
Table X.B.3 provides the Agency's
best present estimates of the total
national costs, by sector, for, each of the
Phase I Management Standards
discussed in relation to today's
proposed rule. In the absence of a small
business generator exemption, the
Agency's best estimate is that today's
proposed Section 3014 Management
Standards would result in a total annual
compliance ;cost of approximately $25
million.
TABLE X.B.3.—ANNUAL COSTS PER FACILITY FOR FACILITIES ASSUMED TO INCUR COSTS AS A RESULT OF SECTION 3014
MANAGEMENT STANDARDS
[Dollars per year]
Sectors
Generators:
Transportation . .
Industrial.. .. . _ __ '....
Collectors/transDorters . -
Processors/re-refiners .— ™..~......
Marketers . _ . . _
Storage
$300
300
0
0
0
300
Preparedness &
prevention
$129
0
0
0
0
0
Tracking/
recordkeeping &
reporting
$48
0
259
407-555
0
0
Permitting
', $Q
0
0
'0
0
0
Testing
$304
304
0
0
0
0
' Approximately 20 already permitted hazardous waste co-management facilities will Incur a one-time permit modification cost for modifying their Subtitle C permit
This could amount to as much as e lew thousand dollars per year on an annualized basis.
The greatest part of this cost is
attributable to additional inspection
requirements for used oil storage at
generator facilities. The next highest
cost is for testing used oil for the small
percentage of industrial facilities that
would test to be able to dispose of their
used oil under the rebuttable
presumption for disposal, estimated at
approximately $5.6 million. As a sector,
Industrial generators are estimated to
. bear the greatest costs, with an annual
cost of $15.4 million. Together, industrial
and non-industrial generators combined
-beat over 90 percent of the total cost of
compliance with (he proposed
management standards.
Allowing a small quantity generator
exemption changes both the total cost
and the distribution of the cost of Phaas
I of the management standards
significantly- As Table X.B.3 shows.
total compliance costs for the
management standards drops from $24.5
million to $2.1 million when a SQG
exemption is included.
4. Summary of Potentially Affected
Facilities Given a Small Business
Generator Exemption
The original 1985 proposal included an
exemption from management standards
for small quantity generators (SQG).
Today's proposal also discusses two
SQG options, based either on oil
generation of less than 1,000 kg/month
(about 280 gallons) or based on storage
capacity equivalent to the SPCC
minimum for above ground storage.
Because of data limitations, we were
able to analyze only the 1,000 kg limit.
The net effect of exempting facilities
generating less than lOOO.kg/month of
used oil would be to significantly reduce
the number of industrial and non-
industrial generators affected by the
management standard requirements.
The Agency believes that 91 percent of
the non-industrial generators and all of
the industrial generators that would
bear additional storage requirements
(shown in Table X.B.I) would be
eliminated, leaving only about 2,400
generators and 112 used oil fuel burners
with additional storage costs.
The Agency estimates conservatively
that the generator facilities bearing
additional compliance costs for
preparedness and prevention, tracking,
and recordkeeping would remain
unchanged, as would the number of non-
industrial generators required to test.
The number of industrial facilities that
would be exempted from testing
requirements is also significant. The
Agency estimates that 93 percent of
otherwise affected industrial facilities
-------
48068
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday. September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
would be exempt, leaving about 1,200
industrial facilities with additional
testing requirements, and reducing total
compliance costs for generators to about
$1.2 million per year from over $24
million per year.
C. Listing and Related Land Disposal
Options
Today's Notice discusses several
listing and related land disposal
regulatory options. These proposals
range from listing all used oil as a RCRA
hazardous waste (the 1985 proposal) to
listing specific waste oi! type/sources
(internal combustion crankcase, for
example), to not listing any used oils
(and relying on section 3014
management standards and the Toxicity
Characteristics Rule to assure proper
management). Related to these is the
possibility of imposing a ban on any
direct land applications of used oil (road
oiling, landfill, surface impoundment,
land farming). In addition, and separate
from the above, is a proposal to list four
categories of used oil processing
residuals as RCRA hazardous wastes,
including a sub-option to regulate
rerefiner distillation bottoms sold as an
asphalt extender as a section 3014
recycled used oil product, similar to off-
specification used oil fuel, rather than as
a listed hazardous waste.
All of these options and alternatives
involve various and complex
implications for direct compliance costs
of waste management as well as '
potential indirect market repercussions
on the oil recycling sectors. The Agency
has not evaluated all the individual
options separately in detail. However,
we have evaluated what we believe to
be the major economic cost aspects of
these options under the following 5
headings:
• Road oiling ban effects
• Land ban effects
• Effects of listing processing
residuals (excluding the special case of
distillation bottoms)
• Effects of regulating distillation
bottoms, either as a hazardous waste or
as a recycled used oil product.
• Combustion residuals "derived-
from" burning listed used oil fuels.
The Agency has estimated the direct
costs of each of these possible
regulatory approaches, as discussed in
the following paragraphs.
1. Ban on Road Oiling
For the purpose of this cost screening
analysis, we have assumed the extreme
case that spreading used oil on roads for
the purpose of dust suppression or for
any other purpose would be totally
banned, either as an outcome of listing
all used oil as a hazardous waste or as a
separate banned activity. EPA has
previously estimated that 33 million
gallons of used oil was used as a dust
suppressant in 1988. At the time, 18
states prohibited this practice. Since
then, the number of states prohibiting its
use has climbed to 28 and these states
include 60 percent of the population. An
additional 15 states regulate this
application of used oil. Given this
change, EPA now believes only 24
million gallons of used oil is used for
road oiling. Thirteen million gallons are
used by firms that are paid to provide
this service (i.e., commercial road
oilers). The remaining 11 million gallons
are used on-site by generators.
EPA believes that much of the
generator road oiling is designed to
provide an inexpensive disposal option
for the generator. It is likely that if road
oiling were banned, these generators
would simply divert the oil into the used
oil management system and pay
collectors (if necessary) to pick-up the
oil.
Commercial road oilers, however, will
still be called upon to provide their
services and will utilize alternative dust
suppression materials. Based on
discussions with highway departments,
public works officials, and general
contractors around the country» EPA
believes that the most common
alternative to used oil would be water.
In some places, salts such as calcium
chloride may be applied, particularly in
cold weather, but this is a relatively
expensive alternative.
To estimate total costs associated
with a ban on road oiling, we have
assumed that generators or collectors
simply divert the oil from road oiling
into the used oil recycling system and
incur no incremental costs for dust
suppression. Currently, prices paid for
used oil for recycling are very close to
$0 (i.e., the generator neither pays nor is
paid for used oil), although considerable
regional variation exists. Therefore, as a
national average, we have assumed no
incremental management costs, either.
As a best estimate, commercial or public
sector road oilers that continue to
provide dust suppression services are
assumed to replace half of their used oil
with calcium chloride and half with
water. At this substitution rate, the total
Nationwide annual cost would be $7.4
million per year for 13 million gallons
per year of diverted used oil. To show
the sensitivity of the estimate to this
assumption, the annual cost would
range between $3.7 million and $11.1
million if the replacement fraction were
25 percent salts or 75 percent salts,
respectively. Again, these estimates
assume no incremental cost for
generators, who divert their oil into the
used oil management system at an
average price of $0.
2. Ban on Land Disposal
Today's notice also discusses the
possibility of banning the land disposal
of any used oil (equivalent to listing at
the point of disposal). Since residuals
from fuel processing and rerefining
would be separately listed as hazardous
wastes (discussed below), only oil land
disposed by industrial and other non-
household generators would be directly
affected by this provision. In 1988, 71
million gallons of used oil was land
disposed by industrial generators and 6
million gallons by non-industrial
generators. Used oil illegally dumped by
generators or collectors was assumed to
be unaffected by this provision. Some of
the legally-disposed oil was disposed in
States that have listed used oil as a
hazardous waste. Based on populations
residing in those seven States, 16 million
gallons (21 percent of the used oil)
would thus already be precluded from
land disposal because of State
regulations. In addition, some of the oil
is hazardous under the Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure
(TCLP) and would already be legally
required to be managed as a hazardpus
waste. Based on sampling data provided
earlier in the preamble, about 20 percent
of industrial samples, and 50 percent of
transportation engine samples- tested . .
exhibited the toxicity characteristic.
Allowing for these two, factors, the
Agency estimated the adjusted total ,
quantity of land disposed oil that would,
be newly subject to Subtitle C disposal
by the proposed land disposal ban (or as
a result of hazardous waste listing) at
about 48 million gallons (175 thousand
tons).
We can approximate the current
disposal cost for this oil based on
typical subtitle D disposal costs of
approximately $30 per ton or $0.12 per
gallon. If the oil were recyclable, we
assumed that collectors would charge
$0.30 per gallon to pick it up (a high
current price for collection for recycled
used oils, to allow for possible smaller
quantities and/or longer haul distances).
This would result in an incremental cost
of $0.18 per gallon to recycle the oil
instead of dispose of it. Alternatively,
some fraction of this oil may not be
recyclable by used oil processors using
conventional oil cleaning technologies
and would have to be sent to a
hazardous waste treatment facility such
as a cement kiln, at an average price of
$1.00 per gallon ($240 per ton drummed
waste). The latter alternative implies an
incremental disposal cost of $0.88 per
gallon over the current baseline.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48069
To compute a range of total National
compliance costs for the ban on land
disposal of used oil, the Agency
assumed three scenarios. For the lower
bound, all 46 million gallons are
assumed directly recyclable at an :
incremental cost of $0.18 per gallon over
current subtitle D practices, for a total of
$8.3 million per year. As a reasonable
upper bound, we assumed that half of
the oil was recyclable (at $0.18) and half
was sent to hazardous waste treatment
or recovery at an incremental cost of
$0.88 per gallon, yielding a cost per year
of $24.4 million. For a more reasonable
scenario, we assumed that only 25
percent of the disposed oil was sent to a
cement kiln for energy recovery, and 75
percent to the recycling system, for a
best estimate of incremental national
cost of $16.3 million per year.
3. Listing Processing and Rerefming
Residuals
This Supplemental Notice identifies
four waste streams resulting from used
oil processing that are proposed to be
listed as hazardous wastes. These
include residuals from separation
processes (K152), spent polishing media
(K153), distillation bottoms (K154), and
residues from oil/water/solids
separation in wastewater treatment
(K155). To the extent that these
residuals are not reused onsite or
already recycled or disposed of as
hazardous wastes, the processors or
•rerefiners would incur incremental
management costs as a result of the
listing. This section considers all of
these residuals except distillation
bottoms which are addressed separately
in the next section.
The quantity of residuals produced by
facilities in the used oil management
system varies dramatically with the type
of oil handled and the processes used.
Many facilities report generating no
residuals since their tanks are routinely
pumped dry and any settled material is
blended with the oiland is ultimately
burned as fuel. At the same time,
processors of certain types of industrial
oil may extract and dispose of a
substantial amount of solids (3 to 5
percent of dry oil weight) from the oil
they process. Also, based on the
literature and interviews with
companies arid industry associations,
many facilities already manage or
-market these residuals as hazardous
waste, even in states where used oil is
not already listed as a hazardous waste.
To estimate the total quantity of
processing residuals (other than
distillation bottoms), we applied an
average residuals generation rate to the
flow of oil into the used oil management
system. According to EPA estimates, 770
million gallons of used oil was handled
in the system in 1988; 21 percent was
handled in states where used oil is
already a hazardous waste, leaving 608
million gallons. We applied a range of
average residual content estimates of
between 0.5 percent and 1 percent of the
oil based on currently reported actual
experience at used oil management
facilities. The resulting range of
estimated national residual generation is
3.0 million gallons to 6.1 million gallons
per year. As a final adjustment, we
eliminated from consideration the share
of estimated residuals attributable to the
Breslube plant in Ontario, which
rerefines approximately 4 percent of all
oil entering the used oil management
system and which would not be subject
to U.S. regulations. After the 4 percent
reduction the estimated range of
residuals is 2.9 million gallons to 5.9
million gallons per year, not including
distillation bottoms.
For the lower bound cost, we assumed
that 75 percent of these residuals are
currently managed as hazardous wastes
and would thus have no incremental
compliance cost attributable to the
proposed option. Incremental costs
would apply to only 0.73 million gallons
of residuals (25 percent of 2.9 million
gallons). Virtually all of the processors
and rerefiners contacted reported that
their residuals were already handled in
cement kilns or hazardous waste
landfills. For the upper bound cost, we
assumed that only 25 percent of the
residuals are already managed as
hazardous waste, so incremental costs
are based on the remaining 75 percent of
5.9 million gallons (the upper bound
volume), or 4.4 million gallons of
residuals per year.
The waste management options for
these residuals are assumed to be used
as fuel in a cement kiln or disposal in a
hazardous waste landfill depending on
waste heat value characteristics. The
price for drummed material at cement
kilns is set at $1.00 per gallon (see note
5); taking away the cost of Subtitle D
land disposal leaves an incremental cost
of $0.88 per gallon. This price is applied
to the total estimated quantity of
residuals in the lower bound for a
national cost of $0.64 million (0.73
million gallons at $0.88 per gallon).
For the upper bound cost, we assumed
that only half of the residuals would be
sent to cement kilns with the remainder
going to hazardous waste landfills.
Based on estimates received'from
several used oil processors, we used a
disposal price of $200 per drum or about
$3.60 per gallon for disposal in
hazardous waste landfills. Subtracting
the baseline disposal cost of $0:12 per
gallon leaves an incremental cost of
$3.48 per gallon. The average
management cost for the upper bound is
therefore $2.18 per gallon (the average of
$0.88 and $3.48). Applying this average
price to the upper bound residuals
estimate of 4.4 million gallons yields an
upper bound annual cost of $9.6 million.
The midpoint and best estimate is $5.1
million per year. The wide range of costs
reflects uncertainty over the quantity of
residuals generated, the costs of current
management practices, and the costs of
alternative, hazardous waste
management.
4. Regulation of Used Oil Distillation
Bottoms
One of the residuals proposed for
listing is distillation bottoms from used
oil rerefining. The proposal also
discusses regulating distillation bottoms
used in asphalt production as recycled
used oil. Because of the substantial
revenue value of these distillation
bottoms to used oil rerefiners, any
regulation on the uses of these bottoms
will have economic consequences.
Through phone interviews with
industry members, we identified five
rerefining facilities that currently
process used oil originating in the U.S.,
using distillation technology and
marketing the distillation bottoms as
asphalt flux. Based on current practices,
these five rerefineries produce about 26
million gallons of asphalt flux per year
from 114 million gallons of dry used
oil.49 One rerefiner is a Canadian
operation, Breslube, which would not be
subject to these restrictions if the
asphalt were sold in Canada. As it
produces about 20 percent of this
asphalt flux, the cost estimates are
based on only 21 million gallons of
distillation bottoms.
The facilities interviewed estimated
the average price received for these
bottoms at about $0.30 per gallon, as
sold to paving and roofing asphalt
plants near the rerefineries. The asphalt
flux from used oil is sold at a price
discount relative to primary refinery
asphalt, and it could be easily replaced
with virgin materials by the market.
a. Option 1: Distillation Bottoms
Listed As Hazardous Waste. Under the
first option, if the distillation bottoms
were subject to hazardous waste
management (either through listing or
regulation of waste-derived products),
rerefiners would be adversely affected.
<9 Four of the five plants produce an average of Ib
percent asphalt, emphasizing the production of base
lube stock. The fifth facility uses a slightly less
complex distillation process and produces just over
50 percent asphalt flux and very little base lube.
-------
48070
Federal Register /Vol. 56, N6i 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed
To estimate worst-case, short-run
impacts, we assumed that the residuals
would all shift from a revenue
generating product to a waste burned as
fuel in cement kilns. As an asphalt
extender product, rerefiners currently
receive about $0.30 per gallon. The price
for bulk shipments of this type of
material as a hazardous waste at
cement kilns is approximately $0.30 per
gallon. The net price differential to
rerefiners under this worst-case
scenario would thus be approximately
$0.60 per gallon, or an annual revenue
loss of about $13 million across these
four domestic rerefiners.
This estimate overstates the real
resource cost associated with this
option, however, because the material
still has substantial fuel value: The
cement kilns would be receiving a
valuable fuel source and would be paid
to take it. Most of the $0.60 per gallon
price swing would thus represent a
transfer of wealth from the rerefiners to
the cement kilns, but not a real resource
cost. Whether rerefiners could continue
to survive under this extreme case is
questionable.
The low-cost scenario assumes that
the asphalt plants that purchase the
distillation bottoms continue to accept
them, but do so as hazardous waste
recycling facilities. This would require
these companies to incur permitting and
other costs to bring them into
compliance with subtitle C standards.
We estimated that these four
rerefineries might serve, at most, 30
asphalt plants. At a compliance cost of
about $30,000 per year per asphalt
facility, the total cost for this option
would be approximately $1 million,50
This scenario assumes that this $1
million would be passed back to
rerefiners as a lower price received for
the bottoms, although rerefiners could
experience a market price reduction
greater than the costs incurred by the
asphalt plants.
The most likely estimate falls
somewhere between these two
boundary scenarios. Since asphalt
plants have a ready substitute for
distillation bottoms (virgin asphalt), they
could easily shift away from these
materials, although at a slightly higher
cost. Because the distillation bottoms
from rerefiners account for such a small
share of total supply, however, the effect
on the paving or roofing markets would
60 This estimate is very rough and was developed
for illustrative purposes only. It assumes initial
Subtitle C treatment facl'lry permitting costs of
$100,000 for a previously unpermitted asphalt plant
and annual costs for financial responsibility,
reporting, and other requirements of about $15,000
per year for an annualized total cost of $30,000 per
facility.
be negligible. Some rerefiners could
make arrangements with cement kilns or
other facilities permitted to burn
hazardous waste and still earn
something for the residuals (i.e., instead
of facing a loss of $0.60 per gallon,
reduce the loss to $0.20 or $0.30). Finally,
rerefiners could alter their processes
somewhat to produce fewer bottoms
and change the characteristics of their
other products. As a most likely cost
estimate for this option, we chose the
midpoint between the bounds: an annual
cost of $7 million. The midpoint still
represents a relatively high cost—about
8 cents per gallon of dry oil throughput
at the four rerefineries, on average.
b. Option 2; Distillation Bottoms
Regulated as Recycled Used Oil. Under
this option distillation bottoms would be
regulated as a recycled used oil product.
The bottoms could still be sold if the
asphalt purchasers complied with the
Phase I management standards
appropriate for other purchasers of
recycled used oil products (i.e.,
purchasers of off-specification used oil
fuel). This option would impose lower
costs than Option 1 and would not result
in the large transfer payments from
rerefiners to hazardous waste
management facilities.
To estimate costs under this option,
we used compliance costs for burners of
off-specification used oil fuel as a proxy
for asphalt plant compliance costs. As
shown in the facility cost summary in
chapter IV (Table IV-1) the annual cost
for burners would be no higher than
$1,200 per facility. With approximately
30 asphalt plants affected, the
incremental national cost would likely
be less than $40,000. (If each rerefiner
marketed to only one or two asphalt
plants, aggregate nationwide costs
would be less than $10,000 per year on
an annualized basis).
5, Residuals Derived From Burning Used
Oil
EPA has proposed several options for
listing all or some categories of used oil.
If any used oil were listed as hazardous
waste, any other oil mixed with it and
any residual "derived from" treating or
burning it would also be a hazardous
waste (40 CFR 261.3(c)(2)). The
economic consequence of this issue is its
effect on burning, the major end use of
recycled used oil. Any air pollution
control or other ash or sludge produced
from the combustion of this oil (and all
fuels mixed with it) would become
hazardous waste.
The total quantity of used oil fuel and
resulting ash that might be subject to
incremental costs as a result of the
derived from rule is difficult to estimate.
EPA has estimated that in 1988 about
680 million gallons was burned in
boilers and furnaces which would
produce ash. Much of this oil meets the
fuel specification described in 40 CFR
part 266 and would therefore be exempt.,
from any further regulation as long as>
current part 266 requirements were
observed. Further, some of this oil is
burned in States where used oil is a
hazardous waste already, so no
incremental cost would be attributable
to this proposal in those States. Finally,
some of the ash may fail the TCLP and
be subject to hazardous waste
regulations because of its characteristic
toxicity, although we have not factored
this into an quantitative estimates.
Bas.ed on the best available
information, we calculated a rough
estimate of the oil and residuals that
might incur additional cost as a result of
listing. Overall, 79 percent of the 682
million gallons burned (or 539 million
gallons) was burned in.States where
used oil is not already a hazardous
waste. At most, 36 percent of this oil
would fail the specification or a total of
194 million gallons, based on earlier ,
1985 estimates of average specification
levels. The ash from this quantity of oil
would be about 9,900 tons per year (51
tons per million gallons burned times
194 million gallons of off-specification
used oil burned) which is certainly an
overestimate for three reasons:
« A far smaller fraction of used oil
fuel would fail the specification today
because of lower lead levels and
improved process or quality control.
• All ash is assumed to be captured.
A more reasonable estimate would be
that only 54 million gallons (10 percent
of the 539 million gallons) currently fails
the specification, producing 2,800 tons of
ash per year (51 tons per million gallons
tiroes 54 million gallons). For a lower
bound, we assumed all fuel could meet
the specification so that no residuals
would be handled as hazardous wastes.
Given that additional blending with ,
virgin fuel oils might be required to
achieve this, some small cost would be
incurred by marketers or burners, but
we have assumed this cost to be
negligible.
As a hazardous solid waste, the ash
would require stabilization and
landfilling in a subtitle C landfill. A
typical commercial price for
stabilization and disposal is $400 per
ton. The current disposal in subtitle D
landfills is assumed to cost $30 per ton,
so the incremental cost would be $370
per ton.
The annual national cost of managing
this ash as hazardous waste would be
approximately $1.0 million in the most
-------
Federal Register / Vol, 56, No. 184 ;/ Monday; September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules1 48071
likely scenario, iyhich assumes that 10
percent of used oil fuel would fail the
fuel specification (2,800 tons of ash: at
$370 per ton). The upper bound annual
cost would be $3.7 million (9,900 tons at
$370 per ton] and the lower bound
would be approximately $0. Of course, if
no used oils were listed as hazardous
wastes or if residuals were exempt from
the derived from rule, all costs would be
eliminated.
Several other factors could also
reduce the incremental cost associated
with this option. First, burners may be
exempt from hazardous waste
management costs for ash as a result of
the small quantity generator exemption.
Given an ash generation rate of 51 tons
. per million gallons of used oil burned (at
an average blending rate of 60 percent
virgin oil to 40 percent used oil), a
facility would have to burn about 50,000
gallons of blended fuel per month to
generate 1,000 kilograms (one ton) of
ash. Second, fly ash from use of used oil
fuel recycled at asphalt plants may also
be exempt from hazardous waste
regulation under another option in this
proposal. If this were the case, asphalt
plants, which account for a substantial
share of off-specification fuel use, might
incur no incremental cost from this
provision. Third, a significant fraction of
used oil fuel may be burned at facilities
that also burn hazardous waste already,
so the ash would already be subject to
hazardous waste management. Fourth
and finally, the Bevill Amendment to
RCRA (56 FR 7196 et seq.) allows for
exemption from hazardous waste
regulation certain ash from boilers and
furnaces burning fossil fuels. Cement
kilns, industrial furnaces, and coal-fired
boilers that use virgin fuel for more than
half of their fuel can self-exempt their
ash from hazardous waste management
subject to testing of the ash. All of these
factors would reduce the costs
attributable to this option.
D, Summary of Costs and Economic
Impacts
The total national cost estimates for
each of the components of the proposal
and the proposal in aggregate, including
all listing options, indicate the proposal
is not likely to constitute a major rule.
Similarly, the results of a screening
analysis of economic impacts on specific
industry sectors indicate that per-facility
costs will be $0 for most facilities. For
the majority of facilities that do incur
costs, they will typically pay on the
order of several hundred dollars per
year, with a small number of larger,
more complex, facilities experiencing
compliance costs of up to several • :
thousand dollars per year, depending oh
regulatory option scenarios. The
principal exception is the possibility of
larger effects on at least some narrow
segments of the used oil processing and1
rerefining sectors under the proposals to
list various processing residuals.
1, National Costs
Table X.D.I presents the Agency's
total national cost estimates for each of
the component parts of the cost
screening analysis: the Phase I
management standards, road oiling and
land disposal bans, and costs associated
with listing processing residuals,
distillation bottoms, and residuals
derived from burning used oil. Using the
"most likely" cost estimates from
previous sections, the Table shows the
costs for each component part of the
proposal with and without a small
quantity generator exemption for the
3014 management standards, and
arranges the cost components into three
possible regulatory scenarios for the
supplemental proposal as a whole.
TABLE X.D.1.—TOTAL ANNUAL COST OF
PHASE I MANAGEMENT STANDARDS AND
LISTING OPTIONS
[Dollars in millions]
(1) Phase I Mgmt. Stand-
ards
Listing/ Ban Options
(2) Road Oiling. Ban
(3) Land Disposal Ban
Subtotal' Bans
Olrter Listing Costs
(4) Listing Residuals (K152,
K163 K155)
(5) Listing Asphalt Distilla-
tion Bottoms (K154)
Subtotal: Residuals List-
ing
(6) Listing "Derived-from"
Fuel Combustion Residu-
Subtotal: Other Listing
Costs
A. Alternative Scenario A
All Options (1) thru (6)....
B. Alternative Scenario B
Phase I + Bans + List
3 Process Residuals
(1) thru (4)
C. Alternative Scenario C.
Phase I + List 3 Proc-
ess Residuals (1)
With
SQG
exemp-
tion —
best
estimate
2 1
7 A'
163
237
5 1
70
12 1
1 0
13 1
38.9
•30.9
7.2
Without
SQG
exemp-
tion —
best
estimate
245
7.4
16.3
23.7
5.1
7.0
12.1
1.0
13.1
61.3
53.3
29.6
If the most stringent scenario for the
rule were adopted (Scenario A),
imposing Phase I management
standards, banning land disposal and ,
ro'acf oiliiig, listing process residuals, '
distillation bottoms, and1 residuals
derived from burning used oil, with no
exemption for small quantity generators^
we estimate the total annual cost for the
proposal would be $61.3 million.
Exempting small quantity generators
would reduce the annual cost by more
than one third, to a total of $38.9 million.
The least comprehensive combination
of these options (Scenario C) would
involve promulgation of only the Phase I
management standards and listing of
processing residuals (except distillation
bottoms). In this case, the incremental
cost per year would b'e $29.6 million
with no small quantity generator
exemption and $7.2 million with the
exemption.
The actual costs will be determined
by the mix of options selected for
promulgation. Several assumptions that
affect the magnitude of the estimates are
important to reiterate at this time. First,
the options that involve land disposal
(listing processing residuals, distillation
bottoms, and derived-from ash) were
costed out assuming compliance with
BDAT for the disposed materials, even
though BDAT is not yet established for
these wastes. Some other form of
hazardous waste disposal that is less
expensive may be appropriate for some
of these residuals, so our cost estimates
may be overstated somewhat. Similarly,
some of the costs, especially for
distillation-bottoms, reflect private, not
social, costs. Transfer payments
between rerefiners and hazardous waste
management facilities do not represent
social costs, but rather a redistribution
of income.
2. Facility- and Sector-Specific Costs
Table X.D.2 summarizes the incidence
of section 3014 management standard
costs as well as the listing and related
land disposal options discussed in the
previous sections. Because typical
facilities handle relatively small
volumes, the generator sectof1 may
include a small proportion of facilities
that would incur high costs. First,
however, we should reiterate that over
90 percent of the generators would incur
no incremental costs as a result of the
management standards. (If generators
smaller than 1,000 kilograms per month
were exempt from the regulation,
approximately 99 percent of the
generators would incur no incremental
costs.) For those generators that do
incur costs, the annual facility costs for
management standards range from $129
to $652. The transportation-related
generators that face the maximum cost
of $652 for management standards
include larger transportation
installations, such as aircraft/marine/
railroad facilities, that incur costs for
storage inspections, recordkeeping, and
testing to allow disposal of some used
-------
48072 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday. September 23. 1991 / Proposed Rules
oil. These are large facilities that would
not be significantly affected by costs of
this magnitude.
All other affected generators (mostly
automotive services] incur management
standard costs of less than $500 per
facility per year, and over two-thirds of
these incur costs for storage inspections
and labeling only ($300 per year). Given
the diversity of the generator population,
it is difficult to assess the impact of a
$300 cost. For transportation-related
generators such as an automobile
dealership or a fleet operator, the costs
would likely be insignificant For a small
machine shop, however, the costs could
be.somewhat more important. The
incidence of these impacts is very,
infrequent, however, relative to the size
of the overall population.
TABLE X.D.2.—INDIVIDUAL FACILITY COMPLIANCE COST RANGES PER FACILITY AND PER GALLON
Generators:
Transportation -
Industrial
Indep.Collectors/Transporters...
Processors:
Minor
Major
Rerefiners - „
Burners (Off-Spec) ..-
Total
facilities
282,400
358,000
383
70
112
4
1,121
Total
affected <•>
facilities
28,400
58,700
383
70
112
4
1,121
Range of Annual Cost Per Affected Facility
Manage-
ment
standards
S129-$652
300-604
259
407-2,907
555-3,055
555-3,055
300
Ban land
disposal
$830
$550
0
0
0
0
0
Ust
process
residuals
NA
NA
$1,700
S,700
29,000
120,000
0
Regulate distillation
bottoms
Option A
NA
NA
NA
$0
0
1,700,000
0
Option B
NA
NA
NA
$0
0
8,000
0
Burning
residuals
NA
NA
NA
$0
0
0
900
Total Range
across an
affected
facilities
$129-$1,480
300-1,150
1,960
6,100-8,600
29,600-
32,100
129,000-
1,820,000
300-1,200
Worst-
case cost
per
gallon
$0.630
0.737
0.007
0.009
0.006
0.087
?
Notes:
'•' Facilities may be affected by one or more cost elements.
1 Estimates refer to most-likely scenarios for listing and related options.
8 Management standard range for processors and rerefiners assumes annualized cost of permit modification of $2,500 for 10 percent of these facilities.
3 Rerefinar estimates exclude Breslube facility in Ontario.
Two categories of used oil generators
may also bear additional costs for
disposal with the imposition of a ban on
land disposal of used oil: Air/marine/
railroad facilities and industrial
facilities who test and dispose of the oil
due to non-recyclability. If a ban on land
disposal is included as a part of the final
rule, those air/marine/railroad facilities
testing and disposing the oil on land
would face additional costs of up to $830
per facility; industrial facilities testing
and disposing of the oil on land would
face additional costs of up to $550. Since
both of these facility types are
characteristically large facilities, the
additional cost is not expected to have a
significant impact on operations.
For the independent collector/
transporters, fuel processors, rerefiners,
and burners, the incremental costs of the
management standards are very small
given the scale of the operations. The
most significant costs result from costs
to modify permits at 10 percent of the
processors and rerefiners that co-
manage hazardous waste with used oil.
The other facilities all face very low
compliance costs for these management
requirements. The regulatory options to
list or regulate processing and rerefining
residuals may in certain instances have
larger impacts, especially under the
listing option for distillation bottoms
(Option A). The annual facility costs
range from $1,700 for collectors (if
process residuals are listed) to $1.7
million per rerefiner if all residuals
including distillation bottoms are listed
as hazardous wastes.
In general, the impacts on most
individual used oil management
facilities are limited since they typically
handle between 300,000 gallons of used
oil per year (independent collectors) up
to a few million gallons (most fuel
processors). The facility costs in the
Table imply costs of less than 0.1 cents
per gallon of used oil handled by
collectors and fuel processors. If
distillation bottoms are regulated as a
hazardous waste (Option A), rerefiners
(which typically handle 10 to 40 million
gallons per year of used oil and produce
1 to 10 million gallons distillate bottoms)
could face a significant loss of revenue
from the sale of these materials (nearly
9 cents per gallon of used oil throughput,
worst case). (As noted above these lost
revenues largely represent private
transfer payments from rerefiners to
hazardous waste management facilities
rather than direct social costs of
compliance.) This increase would be
large enough to affect the rerefiners1
operating margins and their ability to
compete for used oil in the marketplace.
Burners of off-specification fuel also
handle large quantities of used oil. A
typical asphalt plant burning oil might
use 150,000 gallons of used oil as fuel
each year, so an incremental fuel cost of
up to $1,200 would be insignificant
compared to the total fuel bill. The
$1,200 cost would be less than $0.01 per
gallon of used oil purchased. Given that
the used oil is blended with other fuels,
the cost per gallon of fuel would be still
lower.
Even though direct social costs may
be somewhat overstated in Table X.D.2,
these transfer payments and other costs
imposed on used oil recyclers and end
users may have indirect effects on the
markets for used oil. In the case of
rerefiners in particular, the cost of
compliance with the Option A listing
scenario for distillation bottoms could
adversely affect the rerefining sector
compared to other end-use markets (e.g.,
burning). Any requirements which
increase operating costs for used oil
recycling facilities, whether they are
collectors, processors, burners, or
rerefiners, have the potential to raise the
price that generators must pay to have
their used oil collected.
Therefore, this proposal has the
potential to alter the mix of end-use
markets to which used oil flows by
affecting rerefiners more than
processors. It may also change the
quantity of oil that is recycled, by
raising prices paid by generators for
collection. As shown in Table X.D.2, *
however, the overall costs are quite low
for most facilities so the effect on the
overall market for used oil is expected
to be minimal.
-------
Federal Register / VoL 56, No. 184 / Monday, September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
48073
XI. Regulatory 'Flexibility Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
of 1980 (Pub. L. 95-345), which amends
the Administrative Procedures Act,
requires Federal agencies to consider
"small entities" throughout the
regulatory process. The RFA requires, in
Section 603, an initial screening analysis
to be performed to determine whether a
substantial number of small entities will
be significantly affected by the
regulation. If so, regulatory alternatives
which eliminate or mitigate the impacts
must be considered.
Based on employment or sales, the
vast majority of all used oil generators,
collectors, and processors are small
businesses; rerefiners and burners are
rather less likely to be small businesses.
Overall, the economic analysis indicates
that impacts are not significant for well
over 90 percent of the generators and all
of the other facility types affected, with
the possible exception of rerefiners
under^certain options.
A small fraction of the small business
used oil generators may face
incremental costs up to $477 per year for
storage and recordkeeping,
preparedness and prevention. We
believe this-is not an unreasonable cost
burden borne only by a very small
: fraction of affected small businesses.
The small quantity generator exemption
would virtually eliminate significant
impacts for any small business sectors.
:pther generators may incur higher costs
!if they dispose of their used oil and that
;practice is banned. While we generally
expect these facilities to be large, we
have no basis for characterizing the
i types of facilities that dispose of their
oil.
Most rerefiners, who stand to face *he
•greatest impacts under the distillation
•bottom listing option, are not small
^businesses and if the full listing option is
not chosen, any potential for significant
impacts disappears.
... In general, given the large population
of small businesses subject to various
provisions of this proposal, only a very
'small fraction of these business will
incur any compliance costs and those
that do will typically face relatively
small costs. Therefore the Agency
certifies that the supplemental proposal
will not have significant economic
impacts on substantial numbers of small
businesses or entities.
XII, Paperwork Reduction Act
'.Therinformation collection
requirements in this proposed rule have
.been submitted for approval to the
Office of Management andBudget
[OMB] under the Paper Reduction Act, ~
44JJ.S.C.3501 etseq. An information •-•
Collection Request document has been
prepared by EPA (ICR No. 1286) and a
;opy may be obtained from Sandy
Farmer, Information Policy Branch, EPA,
401M Street, S.W.
Public reporting burden for this
collection of information averages from
B to 54 hours annually per respondent,
including time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding the burden
estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden, to
Chief, Information Policy Branch, PM-
223Y, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20460; and to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget,
Washington, DC 20503, marked
"Attention: Desk Officer for EPA." The
final rule will respond to any OMB or
public comments on the information
collection requirements contained in this
proposal.
Dated: September 3,1991.
William K. Reilly,
Administrator.
Appendix A—Status of Proposed
Provisions
Note: Federal Register citations refer to the
November 29,1985 Proposed Rule, unless
otherwise indicated. Section citations refer to
today's notice.
Proposed
provisions
General:
Recycling
Presump-
tion.
Controls on
Used Oil
Disposal.
Amendment
to Current
Exemption
for
Character-
istic
Recycled
Oil.
Application of
the 1,000
ppm
Halogen
Rebuttable
Presump-
tion to All
Used Oils.
Ban on Road
Oiling;
.Conditional ,
Exemption
for Primary
Oil Refiners.
Status as of
today's notice
New
New
Modified
As Proposed
In 1985.
As Proposed
in 1985.
New..
Citations
Section Vlll.p.
Section VIII.E.
Section VIII.F.1.
Section VIII.F.2;
(50 FR
49217).
Section VIII.F.4
(50/7?
49239).
Section VIII.F.5.
Proposed
provisions
Regulation of
Used Oil
Stored in
Under-
ground
Tanks.
Mixtures of
Used Oil
and
Absorbent
Materials.
Management
of CFC-
contaminat-
edUsed
Oils.
Regulation of
Oil/Water
Mixtures.
Regulation of
Used Oil
Filters.
Used oil used
as fuel in
incinerators
and
combustors.
Generators:
EPA ID
Numbers.
Storage
Provisions
(tank and
container
standards).
Corrective
Action.
Preparedness
and
Prevention.
Shipments
Off-site
(tracking).
Recordkeep-
ing.
Reporting
Used Oil
Disposal,
Exemption
from
CERCLA
Liability.
Transporters:
Storage
Closure
Permitting
Discharge
Cleanup.
Tracking
Recordkeep-
ing.
Exception
reports.
EPA ID
Numbers.
Recyclers:
EPA ID
Number
and
General
Facility
Standards.
Analysis
Require-
ments.
Status as of
today's notice
Modified
New __
*JQW .......
Modified
"Jew .«..
New..—
Modified
Modified
Modified
As Proposed
in 1985.
Modified
Modified....,
*
New
New ,
Modified
As Proposed
in 1985.
As Proposed
In 1985.
Modified
Modified
Modified
New
As Proposed
in 1985.
As Proposed
in 1985.
Modified
Citations
Section VIII.F.6.
Section IXAZ
Section IXA3.
Section IX.A.4.
Section IX.A.5.
Section IXA6.
Section IX.B.3.
Section IX.B.1.
Section IX.B.2.
(50 FR 49253).
Section IXB.4.
Section IX.B.S.a.
Section IX.B.5.D.
Section IX.B.2.b.
Section IX.C.1
(50 FR
49254).
(50 FR 49254).
(50 FR 49254).
Section IX.C.2.
Section IX.C.3.
Section IX.C.4.
Section IX.C.4.
(50 FR 4925*,).
|
(50 FR 4J255).
Section IX.D.6
(50 FR
49255).
-------
48074 Federal Register / Vol. 56. No. 184 / Monday. September 23, 1991 / Proposed Rules
Proposed
provisions
Written
Analysis
Plan.
Preparedness
and
Prevention.
Tracking
Recordkeep-
ing/
Reporting.
Storage in
Containers.
Storage in
Above-
ground
Tanks.
Storage in
Under-
ground
Tanks.
Storage in
Surface
Impound-
ments.
Corrective
Action.
Closure/Post-
Closure.
Financial
Responsi-
bility.
Status as of
today's notice
As Proposed
in 1985.
As Proposed
in 1985.
Modified
Modified
Modified
Modified
Modified for
underground
tanks.
As Proposed
in 1985.
Deferred
Citations
(50 FR 49255).
(50 FR 49255)
Section IX D 2
Sect'on IX D 5
Ssction IXD.I.a.
Section IX D.1 b
Section IX D 1 c
Section IX.D.1.d.
Section IX.D.3.
(50 FR 49256).
Section IX D 4
Proposed
provisions
Permitting
Marketers:
Replacement
of 266
Subpart E
with
Section
3014
Generator
and
Transporter
Standards.
Burners:
Storage in
Tanks and
Containers.
EPA ID
Number.
Analysis
Require-
ments.
Space Heater
Require-
ments.
Corrective
Action.
Status as of
today's notice
As Proposed
in 1985.
As Proposed
in 1985.
Modified
As Proposed
in 1985.
Modified
As Proposed
in 1985.
Modified for
USTS.
Citations
Section IX.D.7;
(50 FR
49256-58).
(50 FR 49239).
Section IX.G.1.
(50 FR 49255).
Section IX.G.2.
(50 FR 49205;
final burning
& blending
rule).
Section IX.G.4;
(BOFR
49256).
; Proposed
provisions
Permitting .
Tracking . . .
Closure
Recordkeep-
ing/
Reporting.
Hazardous
Waste
Mixtures.
Road Oilers
Disposal
Facilities:
Listed or
characteris-
tic used oil.
Nonhazar-
dous used
oil and
disposal
guidelines.
Status as of
today's notice
in 1985.
Modified
Modified
Modified
As Proposed
in 1985.
Modified
As proposed in
1985.
New
Citations
Section IX.G.4;
(50 FR
49256).
Section IX G 2
Section IX G 2
Section IX G 2
(50 FR 49205;
final burning
& blending
rule).
Section IX H-
Section :
VIII.F.4.
(50 FR 49239):
Section IX !•
Section VIII.E.
[FR Doc. 91-22482 Filed 9-20-91: 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE SS60-50-M
-------
fWday
ftovwnlber 29, 1985
EPA/530-SW-35-034
Part Jl
Environmental
Protection Agency
40 CFR Parts 260, 261, 264, 265, 266,
270, 271, and 302
Hazardous Waste Management System;
Used OU; Final Rule and Proposed Rules
Recycled/Recyclable
Printed with Soy/Canola InK on paper that
contains at least 50% recycled fiber
-------
49164 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985. / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 261, 264, 265, 266, and
271
[SWH-FRL 2910-1J
Hazardous Wast* Management
System; Burning of Waste Fuel and
Used Oil Fuel In Boners and Industrial
Furnaces
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: On January 11.1985, EPA
proposed under Subtitle C of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) to begin regulation of
hazardous waste and used oil burned
for energy recovery in boilers and
industrial furnaces. The proposal
provided administrative controls for
those persons who market and burn
hazardous waste and used oil fuels.
Most of the requirements are being
finalized as proposed, but some
modifications have been made is
response to comment
The final rule prohibits the burning in
nonindusthal boilers of both hazardous
waste fuel and of used oil that does not
meet specification levels for certain
hazardous contaminants and flash point
It also provides administrative controls
to keep track of marketing and burning
activities. These controls include
notification to EPA of waste-as-fuel
activities, use of s manifest or, for used
oil. an invoice system for shipments, and
recordkeeping. Hazardous waste fuels.
including processed or blended
hazardous waste fuels, are also subject
to storage requirements.
DATES: Effective Datee: The effective
dates for the regulations are:
1. Prohibitions. The prohibitions on
marketing and burning of hazardous
waste fuel and off-specification used oil
fuel in nonindustrial boilers in
Si 266.31(a) (2) and (b). and 266.41 (a)
(2} and (b) are effective on December 9.
1985. To implement and enforce the
prohibitions, the following provisions
are also effective on December 9,1985:
(a) The used oil fuel specification in
S266.40(e), except for the specification
level for lead which is effective May 29,
1986.
(b) The rebuttable presumption of
mixing hazardous halogenated wastes
with used oil in }256.40(c); and
(c) The used oil analysis requirements
and attendant record keeping
requirements in §§286.43(b) (1) and (6),
and 266.44 (d) and (e):
2. Storage Controls. The storage
controls for hazardous waste fuels in
S§266.34(c) and 286.35(c) are effective
on May 29 1986; and
3. All Other Provisions. The effective
date for all other provisions of these
regulations (e.g., manifests and. for off-
specification used oil fuel, invoice
requirements for shipments; certification
notices to suppliers; and recordkeeping
of manifests or invoices, and
certification notices] is March 31,1986.
At that time, the manifest or invoice
requirements supersede and apply in
lieu of the warning label requirements of
RCRA section -3004{r).
Compliance Dates: The compliance
dates for the regulation are:
1. Notification. Marketers and burners
of hazardous waste fuel and off-
specification used oil fuel are required
to notify EPA regarding their waste-as-
fuel activities under Si 266.34(b).
266.35(b). 266.43(b)(3). and 266.44(b).
These persons must so notify either EPA
or States authorized by EPA to operate
the hazardous waste program by
January 29,1986; and
2. Submission of Part A Permit
Applications. All existing marketers and
burners (see provisions in 40 CFR 270.2
and 270.70(a)) who store hazardous
waste fuels and who are not currently
operating pursuant to interim status
(section 3005(e) of RCRA], must file a
notification of their storage activities
with EPA by January 29.1986 and
submit a Part A permit application to
EPA by May 29,1986.
In addition, marketers and burners
already operating pursuant to interim
status, but who operate existing
hazardous waste fuel storage facilities
newly subject to regulation by today's
rule, must file a notification of their
storage activities with EPA by January
29.1986 and submit an amended Part A
permit application to EPA (with aa
informational copy to the authorized
State] by May 29.1986.
Explanation for these effective dates
and compliance dates is provided in
Part Five, section in of this preamble.
ADDRESSES: The official record for this
rolemaldng is in Room S-212, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401M
St. SW., Washington, DC 20460. The
record may be viewed from 9:00 ajn. to
4:00 pjru Monday through Friday,
excluding holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
RCRA Hotline, toll free, at.(BOO) 424-
9346 or (202) 382-3000. For Technical
information, contact Robert Holloway.
Waste Combustion Program, Waste
Management and Economics Division,
Office of Solid Waste, WH-565A, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401M
St SW.. Washington. DC 20460.
Telephone: (202] 382-7917. Single copies
of the final rule can be obtained by
calling the RCRA Hotline number above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preamble Outline
PART ONE BACKGROUND
L Legal Authority
0. Overview of the Final Rule
m, Nonregulatory Alternative*
PART TWO: MATERIALS THAT ARE
REGULATED
L Overview
IL Determining When • Waste ia Burned for
Energy Recovery
IQ. Hazardous Waste Subject to Regulation
A. Definition of Hazardous Waste Fuel
R Consideration of Exemption for
Ignitable-Only Hazardoui Waste
C Regulation of Products Derived from
Petroleum Refinery Wastes
1. Petroleum Refineries that Reinboduce
Hazardoui Watte* from Petroleum
Refining. Production, and Transportation
to the Refining Process
2. Oil Reclaimed from Petroleum Refining
Hazardoui Waste* that is Returned to
the Refining Process
3. Statutory. Conditioned Exemption of
Coke Derived from Indigenous Petroleum
Refinery Waste*
D. Exemption of Coke and Coal Tar
Produced from Coal Tar Decanter Sludge
by the Iron and Steel Industry
E. Status of Ga* Recovered from l-nnrlf!ll«
F. Request for Exclusion of Cadence
Product 312
IV. Used Oil Subject-to Regulation •
A. Definition of U*ed Oil Fuel
B. Distinguishing Between Used OS and
Hazardous Waste
1. Used Oil Containing Halogenated
Wiite*
2. Used Oil Generated by Small Quantity
Generator*
3. U*ed Oil That Exhibit* a
Characteristic of Hazardous Waste
C The Specification for Used Oil Burned in
Noniadustrial Boiler*
1. Comment* on EPA'* Ri*k Assessment
2. Specification Parameter*
3. Specification Levels
D. Comments on Allowing Blending to
Meet the Specification
E. Consideration of Total Ban on Burning
Used Oil in Nonindustrial Boilers
F. Analytical Testing to Demonstrate
Compliance with Specification Levels
IV. Regulation of Combustion Residuals
V. Consideration of Special Requirements for
De Minimis Quantities Burned On-Site
PART THREE: COMBUSTION DEVICES
THAT ARE REGULATED
L Overview
0. Regulation of Boilers
A. Basis for Regulating Boiler* by Boiler
U*e
1. Conditional Exemption of
Nonindu*trial Boiler* Burning Hazardou*
Wute Fuel
2, Consideration of Other Criteria for
Identifying Boilers Subject to the
Prohibitions
B. Definition of Industrial Boiler
C Definition of Utility Boiler
D. Nonindustrial Boiler
-------
Federal Jtegister / VoL SO, No. 280 / friday. November 29. 1965 / Rules and Regulations 49165
E. Marine vnd Diesel Engine*
TO. Regulation of Industrial Furnaces
W. Regulation of Uied Oil Space Heater*
VAKT POUR: ADMINISTRATIVE AND
STORAGE STANDARDS
L Admini«tT»tiir« Siaqdnrdu
A. Overview
B. Notification Requirement*
•C. Transportation Control*
D. Notice and Certification Requirement!
E. Used Oil Analyiis Requirement* tot
Marketers
F. Reeordkeeping Requirement*
IL Storage Requirement* far Hazardous
Waste Fuel
m. Examples of How These ftagalaaons
Operate
TART .FIVE: ADMINISTRATIVE,
ECONOMIC. AND ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS, AND LIST OF SUBJECTS
i State Authority
A. Applicability ol Rules "m Authorized
State*
«. Effect oa State Authorization*
B. Regulatory Impact*
A. Results of Regulatory Impacts Studies
1. 'Economic Impacts on the Regulated
2. Regulatory Flexibility Act
». Paperwork Redaction Act
B. Impacts oa the Uaed Oil Recycling
Industry
rn Explanation of CV^Trpl'iTHT Dates
IV. List of Subjects ... ~"
Today's preamble is organized into
five major sections. Part I contains
background information that
summarizes major provisions of the rule.
It also describes how the rule fits into
the Agency's strategy for regulating
other types of used oil recycling and
disposal and for regulating the actual
burning of hazardous waste and off-
specification Used oil in industrial
boilers and industrial furnaces. In
addition, this section discusses
nonregulatory approaches to the
problems considered by EPA,
Part n describes when a waste is
burned for energy recovery and
identifies those hazardous wastes and
osed oils subject to this regulation. It
also discusses the basis for exempting a
number of waste-derived fuels and for
not exempting others. In addition, it
describes the test for distinguishing
between used oil and hazardous waste
fuels. Further, this section defends the
risk assessment used to identify used oil
constituents included in the
specification, and explains the basis for
the final specification. Finally, this
section responds to a number of
comments regarding allowing the
blending of used oil fuel to meet the
specification, availability of analytical
procedures for used oil, and the
regulatory status of combustion
residuals.
Part in identifies those boilers and
industrial furnaces subject to this
regulation and explains the basis for
segulating nonmdustrial boilers
immediately. It also discusses now
-nonindustrial boilers can continue to
bum hazardous waste under permit
standards for hazardous waste
incinerators. Finally, mis section
discusses controls for used oil space
•^waters and EPA's intent to provide
additional controls for these devices in
future rulemaldngs.
Part IV discusses the administrative
controls on marketers and burners that
provide a tracking system for shipments
•and otherwise provide for
implementation and enforcement of the
prohibitions. This section also discusses
the basis for applying the storage
-standards to all hazardous waste fuels
and general permit procedures. Finally,
this section provides examples of how
the rule operates.
Part V discusses how the rules
operate immediately, -even in states
authorized to operate the hazardous
waste pro grant. This section also
discusses the economic impacts on the
regulated community, and particularly,
the used oil recycling industry.
PART ONE: BACKGROUND
L Legal Authority
These regulations are promulgated
today under the authority of sections
1006, 2002(a), 3001. 3002, 3003, 3004, 3005,
3007,3010, and 3014 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act as amended by the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act of 1976, the Quiet Communities Act
of 1978, the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Amendments of 1380, the Used Oil
Recycling Act of I960, and the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1964.42 US.C. 6905,
6912(a). 6921.6922, 6923,6924,6925,4927,
6930, and 6932.
IL Overview of me Final Rule
With today's rulemaking, EPA begins
to regulate those hazardous wastes and
used oil that are marketed and burned
for energy recovery. The chief purpose
of these rules is to prohibit the burning
of hazardous waste and contaminated
used oil in nonindustrial boilers. The
prohibitions are implemented and
enforced by placing administrative
controls on marketers and homers
of these fuels.
Today's rule also establishes a
rebuttable presumption that used oil
that contains more than 1000 ppm total
haJagens is mixed with halogenated
hazardous waste and, therefore, is a
hazardous waste. The presumption may
be rebutted by showing the used oil has
not been mixed with hazardous wastes
(e.g., by showing it does not contain
significant levels of halogenated
KayaMjpqMi constituents). Used oil
presumed to be mixed with hazardous
waste is subject to regulation as
hazardous waste fuel when burned for
energy recovery.
Jn addition, the rule establishes a
specification for used oil fuel (i.e., used
oil not mixed with hazadous waste] that
is-essentially exempt from all regulation
and may be burned in nonindustrial
boilers. The specification sets allowable
levels for designated toxic constituents,
flash point and total halogens.
Burning of hazardous waste fuel and
off-specification used oil fuel in
industrial and utility boilers and
industrial furnaces continues to be
exempt from regulation. The Agency
intends to regulate such burning under ,
permit standards to be proposed in 1986,
as discussed below.
Administrative requirements such as
notification, receipt of identification
number, and compliance with manifest
or invoice (for off-specification used oil
fyel) systems are being promulgated
today to enforce the prohibitions on
burning of hazardous waste fuel and
offspetification used oil in nonindustrial
boilers.
Today's rule also applies RCRA
.hazardous waste storage standards to
faculties storing hazardous waste fuels.
Such waste-derived fuels have
heretofore been exempt (on an interim
basis) from storage standards when
produced by a person other than the
generator. See 8$ 266JO(a) and
286.34(c), 50 FR at 667 (January 4,1985).
Several modifications have been
made to the proposed rule in response to
comments. These include: the rebuttable
presumption of Tnjyino hazardous
halogenated solvents with used oil is
based on a total halogen level of 1000
ppm rather than a total chlorine level of
4000 ppm; a specification for total
halogens is added to the used oil fuel
specification at a level of 4000 ppm; and
the effective date of the lead
specification level (set at 100 ppm) is
deferred for six months, while the other
specification parameters are effective
ten days after promulgation.
The Agency is also developing two
other rulemaldngs that will regulate the
blending and burning of used oil and
hazardous waste for energy recovery.
EPA will soon be proposing a rule that
would list used oil as hazardous waste
and establish special management
standards for recycled oil, including oil
burned for energy recovery. Those rules
would go beyond today's final rule by
providing standards for used oil
generators and collectors, and by
regulating the transportation and
storage of used oil. Today's final rule
-------
49166 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1965 / Rules and Regulations
places administrative controls only on
marketers and burners of used oil
burned for energy recovery, and doec
not regulate the transportation and
storage of used oil.
In 1986, we are scheduled to propose
permit standards for the actual burning
of hazardous waste and used oil in
boilers and industrial furnaces. Under
those permit standards, hazardous
waste could be burned in any boiler or
industrial furnace, irrespective of
purpose (i.e., hazardous waste could be
burned for energy recovery, material
recovery, or destruction).1 Burning of
contaminated (i.e., off-specification}
used oil would be permitted under
special permit-by-rule standards.
IE. Nonngulatory Alternatives
EPA carefully examined a number of
nonregulatory strategies for managing
used oil, but failed to identify any that
would be as protective as these
regulations. See 50 FR at 1667 (January
11,1985). The most promising approach
considered was a tax rebate system.
Under this system, a tax on virgin lube
oil would be rebated to "acceptable"
users of used oil (e.g.. rerefiners,
"acceptable" burners). We explained in
the proposal, how ever, why a tax rebate
system would be ineffective in
protecting human health, and the
environment and impractical to
implement
In response to EPA's discussion on
nonregulatory alternatives, ona
commenter suggested a program
whereby "do-it-yourself1 oil changers •
would voluntarily bring their ased oil to
gas stations to be sold to rerefiners.
While the Agency is strongly in favor of
of rerefining. EPA's objective in
promulgating today's regulations is to
begin to regulate used oil management
to ensure that it is managed in an
environmentally acceptable manner. See
RCRA section 3014. This provision does
not authorize EPA to determine
preferential recycling approaches and to
direct used oil to those approaches,
provided alternative types of recycling
are conducted in a manner that protects
human health and the environment8
1 Hazardous waste may be burned for
uestruction. previously end under today'* nil*, only
under RCRA hazardoui watte incinerator standard*
found in 40 CFR Parti 264 and 285.
* We believe that today'i regulation* will in fact
result in a lubstantial increase in ua«d oil rerefuung.
Uaed oil that doe< not meet the ipecification and
that ia currently burned for energy recovery In
noninduatrial boilers muat either be blended to meet
the specification or diverted to industrial or utility
boilers or industrial furnaces. We expect that a
substantial amount of this oil will find Its way lo
rerefiners. We note also that EPA anticipates
proposing in Spring 1986 Federal procurement
PART TWO: MATERIALS THAT ARE
REGULATED
L Overview
Today's rales apply to hazardous
waste and used oil burned for energy
recovery. When so recycled, these
wastes, and materials that are produced
from or otherwise contain these wastes
as a result of blending, processing, or
other treatment are termed hazardous
waste fuel or used oil fuel. These terms
are defined in this section. We also
discuss how to determine when a waste
is burned for energy recovery and the
applicability of these rales to burning for
materials recovery. la addition, we
discuss when combustion residuals from
boilers and industrial furnaces burning
hazardous waste and used oil are
subject, to regulation as hazardous
waste. Finally, we discuss, in response
to comments, our plans to give special
consideration to regulating the on-site
burning of de minimi's quantities of
hazardous waste fuel and off-
specification used oil in the
development of permit standards for
boilers and industrial furnaces
scheduled to be proposed in early 1986.
In defining "hazardous waste fuel".
we discuss the basis for exempting
certain hazardous waste fuels from
these regulations—petroleum refinery
fuel products derived from hazardous
waste produced by refining «nd
ancillary operations, and coke and coal
tar derived from hazardous waste
produced by coal coking operations in
the iron and steel industry—and why we
are rejecting arguments by some
' commentera to exempt or exclude other
hazardous waste fuels.
In defining "used oil fuel", we define
used oil and explain the difference
between used oil and "oily waste." b
addition, we discuss the specification
for used oil that may be burned in
nonindustrial boilers, and explain why
we added total halogens to the proposed
specification at a level of 4,000 ppm and
why PGBe were deleted from the
proposed specification. We also respond
to comments regarding why other
parameters were not added to the
specification and why certain
specification levels were selected. We
also discuss how to distinguish between
hazardous waste fuel and used oil when
the used oil may have been mixed with
hazardous halogenated solvents, when
used oil may be mixed with small
quantity generator hazardous waste,
and when used oil exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste.
Finally, we respond to comments on
allowing blending of used oil to meet the
specification, banning all burning of
. used oil in nonindustrial boilers, and the
availability of analytical testing
procedures to determine conformance
with the specification..
IL Determining When * Waste is Burned
for Energy Recovery
Today's regulatidns apply to
hazardous waste and used oil burned
for "energy recovery." This limitation
raises two questions: how to distinguish
burning for energy recovery from
burning for destruction, and determining
how to regulate if burning is conducted
to recover materials.
In the January 11,1989 proposal (see
SO FR at 1690), we explained that the
Agency had already addressed what is
meant by burning for legitimate energy
recovery. We explained that burning of
low energy hazardous waste as alleged
fuel it not considered to be burning for
legitimate energy recovery, even if the
low energy hazardous waste is blended
with high energy materials and then
burned. Thus, boilers and industrial
furnaces burning low energy wastes (i.e..
having less than 5,000-8,000 Btu/lb
heating value, as generated) * could be
considered to be incinerating them, and
so be subject to regulation as hazardous
waste incinerators.
Although today's role prohibits the
burning of hazardous waste fuel and off-
specification used oil fuel in
nonindustrial boilers, the principles of
the statement remain in force. We have
indicated, however, that if we wen to
apply the Enforcement Policy Statement
to industrial (and utility) boilers and
industrial furnaces, we would seek to
enforce in situations where low energy
hazardous waste adulteration was
deliberate and massive. This is because
we have said that larger industrial
boilen are more efficient at recovering
energy and so could be deemed, more
often, to be burning lower energy wastes
legitimately. (See 48 FR at 11159 (March
16,1983).)
A second question is the scope of
these regulations when burning involves
material recovery. Normally, the
purpose for which a material is burned
makes no difference in environmental
effect Hence, EPA envisions an ultimate
regulatory scheme where regulation of
burning applies (as may be necessary to
protect human health and the
environment) regardless of purpose in
all situations within the Agency's
jurisdiction. We now address this
guidelines under authority of RCRA Section 9002
regarding procurement of recycled lubricating oils.
• Sac Statement of Enforcement Policy Issued
January 18,1983 (printed at 48 FR 11157 (March 16.
1963)).
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49167
question as it applies to burning in
.boilers, burning for a dual purpose in
industrial furnaces, and burning in
industrial furnaces solely for material
recovery.
We explained in the January 11,1985
preamble that since boilers, by
definition, have as their primary purpose
the recovery of energy, if materials are
also recovered, this recovery is ancillary
to the purpose of the unit, and so does
not alter the regulatory status of the
activity. (See also definition of "boiler"
in 50 FR at 661 (January 4,1985).) We
also explained that the regulations apply
when an industrial furnace bums the
same material for both energy and
material recovery (e.g., when blast
furnaces burn organic wastes to recover
both energy and carbon values).
Today's regulations, however, do not
apply to hazardous wastes burned in
industrial furnaces solely for material
recovery. In large part, this is because
the primary focus of today's regulations
is on waste burning in nonindustrial
settings (apartment buildings, hospitals,
etc.). In addition, as discussed in die
January 4,1985 preamble to the
definition of solid waste and the
preamble to the proposed rule in this
proceeding, there are certain situations
where control of burning for material
recovery in industrial furnaces could
lead to an impermissible intrusion into
the production process and so be
beyond EPA's authority under RCRA.
See 50 FR 630,1690. These situations are
limited, and involve circumstances
where the secondary material being
burned is indigenous to the process in
which the industrial furnace is used, for
example, because the secondary
material contains the same types and
concentrations of constituents
(particularly hazardous constituents
listed in Appendix VHI of Part 261) as
the raw materials normally burned in
the industrial furnace. Id.* In EPA's
forthcoming regulations establishing
permit standards for burning in boilers
and industrial furnaces, EPA will
establish permit standards for industrial
furnaces burning for material recovery
(as well as for energy recovery or
destruction) in all situations not beyond
EPA's regulatory authority.
« An example could be a melting furnace
rwmelting one of ill own lilted protest residues, b
•ucb situations, the secondary material would not
be a (olid waate at the time of binning in the
industrial furnace even though it to classified a* •
•olid waste for purposes of storage prior to burning.
Note further that the derived-from rule
(1281 J(c)(2)(l)( thus would not apply to wastes
generated by the burning.
m. Hazardous Waste Subject to
Regulation
A Definition of Hazardous Waste Fuel
1. Hazardous Waste Fuel. With
certain exceptions discussed below,
these rules apply to hazardous wastes
(and fuels that are produced from or
otherwise contain hazardous waste as a
result of processing, blending, or other
treatment), that are burned for energy
recovery m a boiler or industrial furnace
that is not operating under RCRA
standards for hazardous waste
Incinerators.* Such fuel is termed
"hazardous waste fuel".*
Certain commenters questioned
whether these rules (and by extension
RCRA section 3004(q)) would apply
when energy recovery from burning
hazardous wastes is merely incidental.
or when energy recovery is not the
principal purpose of burning. Today's
rules apply where energy recovery is
significant or purposeful. The Agency
stated as long ago as 1983 in a
Statement of Enforcement Policy (48 FR
11159 (March 16,1983)) that ordinarily
burning low energy (lew than 5,000 Btu
Ib.) hazardous waste is not considered
to involve energy recovery, in spite of
incidental energy release. See also 50 FR
at 630 (January 4.1985), and 50 FR 1690
'• If a waste that to hazardous only because tt
exhibits a characteristic to used as an Ingredient in
• fuel and the waste-derived fuel does not exhibit •
characteristic, the waste-derived fuel would not be
considered to be • hazardous waste. (See
• Several cunuoenters suggested that Hazardous
waate fuel'* to an Inappropriate term to use to
describe these fuels since it creates • stigma that
will discourage the use of the foal because of the
perceived Increased risks associated with
hazardous waste. Coaunentars believed that the
negative association of hazardous waate with the
foe) would cause many users to atop burning such
fuels and. therefore, depress the bustness of those
marketing these fuels, particularly used oil mixed
with hazardous waste. Several commenters
suggested mat the Agency use a different term with
less negative connotation (e.g, "regulated" or
-RCRA-regulated fuel").
We acknowledge that we-have previously (see
1 281 AsJtlJ. SO FR BBS (January «• IMS)) termed
hazardous wastes that are recycled as "recyclable
materials". We continue to believe, however, that
hazardous waste burned for energy iecu>ery should
be termed "hazardous waste fuel" for a number of
reasons. Hie warning label provision of section
SOM(r) of the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) requires that an
invoice or bill of sale for hazardous waste fuel bear
a statement that the fuel contains hazardous waste.
Although that provision to superseded by the
manifest requirement promulgated today, we
believe that Congress Intended that EPA controls
Cor such fuels make It clear that the fuels are, or
contain, hazardous waste, m addition, although the
January 4. 1885 promulgation termed recycled
hazardous waste as "recyclable materials", that
rale also provided basic controls for hazardous
waste burned for energy recovery (expanded by
today's rule) and. m fact first defined such waste as
"hazardous waate fuel". See Subpart D of Part 288,
SOFR887.
(January 11,1985) reiterating this
principle. Thus, if boilers or industrial
furnaces bum hazardous wastes
containing organic constituents these
rules would not invariably apply.
These rules do apply, however, if
hazardous wastes (viz. any hazardous
secondary material (see { 261.2(c)(2),
January 4.1985 and August 20,1985]) are
burned in industrial furnaces or boilers
both to recover energy (i.e., to provide
substantial, useful heat energy) and for
some other recycling purpose, even if
energy recovery is not the predominant
' purpose of the burning. EPA already has
taken this position in the rules codifying
section 3004(q) of RCRA. 50 FR 28724
(July 15.1985). In addition, as noted
above, the Agency is moving away from
tests based on purpose because the
purpose of burning normally is unrelated
to its environmental effect Indeed, the
argument that these rules (as well as
RCRA section 3004(qJ) should apply
only where energy recovery is the
principal purpose of burning would
resurrect the discredited "primary
purpose" test formerly used by EPA to
distinguish recycling from incineration. -
As both the Agency and the Congress
have stated, this standard was largely
irrelevant for evaluating environmental
effects of burning, and proved
exceedingly difficult to administer. See
48 FR 14483 (April 4,1983); S. Rep. No.
284.98th Cong. 1st Sess. at 36 (1983). Nor
is section 3004(q) of RCRA limited to
situations where energy is the principal
purpose of burning, the plain language of
the statute applying to hazardous waste
burned "for purposes of energy
recovery" (RCRA section 3004(q)(l)(B)),
or "burned to recover useful energy"
(RCRA section 3004(q)(2)(B)). The
statute also classifies hazardous waste-
derived petroleum coke as a section
3004(q) fuel (see RCRA section.
3004(q)(2)(AJ), even though petroleum
coke is burned for several purposes,
only one of which (and not necessarily
the most important) is energy recovery.
See S. Rep. No. 284, supra at 39.T.
Consequently, these rules apply
where hazardous wastes are buraeo. in
boilers or industrial furnaces and
provide substantial, useful heat energy.
Such burning is considered to involve a
hazardous waste fuel within the
meaning of RCRA section 3004(q).
2. Eliminating Certain Existing
Regulatory Exemptions for Hazardous
Waste Fuels. These rules expand the
' Section JOW(q) also appliu on Its face to
cement kilns burning hazardous waste eveu though
these Industrial furnace do not burn wastes for the
sole purpose of energy recovery. RCRA section -
-------
49168 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
universe of hazardous waste subject to
RCRA regulation when burned for
energy recovery by removing two
exemptions. Although the Agency has
jurisdiction to regulate under RCRA al)
spent materials, sludges, by-products,
and S 261.33 commercial chemical
products, all fuels to which these
materials are added, and all fuels
derived from or otherwise containing
these materials when they are
transported, stored and burned for . -
energy recovery (see SO PR 030 (January
4,1985), and 50 FR 33541 (August 20.
1985)). EPA currently regulates the
storage and transportation of hazardous
waste burned for energy recovery only
on a limited basis. Thus, the following
hazardous waste fuels are provisionally
exempt (1) Spent materials and by-
products exhibiting a characteristic of
hazardous waste; and (2) hazardous
waste fuels produced from hazardous
waste by blending or other treatment by
a person who neither generated the
waste nor burns the fuel (See ti 266.30
and 266.36 in 50 FR 667 (January 4.
1985).) Under the first exemption, only
listed wastes and sludges (both listed
and characteristic) are currently
regulated.* Thus, nonaludge,
characteristic-only wastes an currently
exempt Under the second exemption,
waste-derived fuels produced by off-
site, third-party marketers are currently
exempt Today's rules remove both of
these exemptions so that the
transportation, storage, and other
controls apply to all hazardous wast*
fuels.
We have also explained why neither
exemption is environmentally
justifiable. See 50 FR 1705 (January 11.
1985). There is no general distinction
between potential adverse effects of
burning listed or characteristic
hazardous wastes. Nor is there any
general distinction between hazardous:
waste fuels marketed directly by
generators or by marketers unrelated to
those generators. These exemptions, in
fact have always been provisional, and
exist because of the Agency's initial
uncertainty (in 1980) about an
appropriate regulatory regime for
recycled wastes. Id. Although the
Agency promulgated a regulatory regime
for many recycling activities on January
4,1985, we decided to remove these
exemptions in today's rulemaking
dealing solely with burning for energy
• Lilted commercial chemical product*, tunmec
•re not wild wulet (or hazardou* wailn) when
burned for energy recovery If they are UiameelMea
fuel* or normal component* of commercial fuel*.
See 40 CFR 281J3, SO FR 28744 (July IS. 1905). An
example I* pipeline interface generated from the
transport of toluene, when the mtmiace ia- burned
for energy recovery.
recovery rather than in the January 4.
rulemaking to avoid confusion or
disruption that would result from
extensive, piecemeal changes of the
current (le.. May 19.1980) rules. See 50
FR 632 (January 4,1985).
B. Consideration of Exemption for
Ignitab!e-Only Hazardous Waste
In the proposed rule, we solicited
comments OB whether wastes that em
hazardous only because of their
ignitability should be exempted from th«
prohibition on burning in nonindustrial
, boilers. (See 50 FR 1701 (January "•
1985.) We also asked if these "ignitabte-
only" wastes should be exempt from dl
controls (including storage end
transportation), or just the prohibition
on burning in nonindustrial boilers.
We reasoned that burning such
wastes would not pose any greater
danger of fires or explosions than
commercial fuel oils if me minimum
flash point was limited to 100* F.
However, we also noted that ignitable-
only wastes may actually contain
significant levels of toxic compounds
because the Agency has not completed
its listing of wastes that are hazardous
because of their toxidty. Therefore, we
indicated that as a part of any
exemption scheme those toxic
compounds of concern must be
identified, acceptable concentration*
must be determined, analysis
procedures must be prescribed, and
recordkeeping procedures must be
required.
For a number of reasons, today's rule
does not provide an exemption for
ignitable-only hazardous waste.
Although commenters acknowledged the
need to ensure that the waste does not
contain significant levels of toxic
constituents, they were not helpful in
suggesting a rational approach foe
setting safe levels for the constituents or
an implementation scheme that would
avoid the expense of analyzing
shipments for virtually every compound
on Appendix VIE of Part 261. Several
commenters suggested that the presence
of Appendix VTH compounds that occur
naturally in virgin fuel (e.g., toluene.
xylene, benzene, metals) should ba
considered hi setting acceptable level*
for an exemption. For "non-fuel"
compounds, several commenters
suggested a maximum level of 100 ppns
while one commenter suggested 1 ppm;
and another suggested that acceptable
levels be based on assessment of risk,
As we indicated in the proposal. 100
ppm may be an appropriate level for
some constituents while a lower level.
perhaps 1 ppm. would be appropriate for
the more toxic constituents.
Commenters provided nj insight on how
acceptable levels would be assigned to
the various compounds of concern.
Moreover, even if it were assumed that
acceptable levels for all Appendix Vm
compounds could be determined.
commenters did not focuc on the
analytical burden they would face to
endure that shipments met the
conditional exemption.
We have concluded that a conditional
exemption would be very difficult to
develop and very expensive to the
regulated community to implement
Moreover, it is not clear that a
substantial amount of hazardous waste
would even be eligible for an exemption
conditioned on the presence of only very
low levels of the Appendix Vm
constituents not normally present in
virgin fuel olL
We note, however, that we are
considering whether special permit
standards would be appropriate for
Ignitable-only wastes under the Phase U
permit standards for boilers and
industrial furnaces to be proposed in
1986. Such special standards could be
fashioned after the current standards for
burning ignitable-only waste in
incinerators. See |* 294JJ40(b) and (c).
Under the incinerator standards, site-
specific factors such as quantity of
waste and location of the facility may
be used to determine if measurable, but
low, levels of Appendix Vm compounds
may pose « hazard to public health or
the environment Wastes found to be
ignitable-only With tnaignjReant level*
of Appendix Vm compounds are exempt
from the performance and operating
standards for incinerators. Although
waste analysis is required, the analytic
burden is minimized by considering only
the Appendix Vm compounds that could
reasonably be expected to be found hi
the waste. Thus, consideration of an
exemption on a case-by-case basis as
part of a permit proceeding provides a
rational approach to consider the
significance of low levels of Appendix
Vm compounds and allows for cost-
effective (Le, limited) waste analyse*.
C Regulation of Fuels Derived From
Petroleum Refinery Waste
1. Petroleum Refineries that
Reintroduce Hazardous Wastes From
Petroleum Refining, Production, and
Transportation to the Refining Process,
EPA solicited comment on the status of
fuels from petroleum refineries that
reintroduced oil-bearing hazardous
wastes from petroleum refining,
production and transportation to the
refining process. See 50 FR 1689-1690.
Although we proposed to define these
materials as hazardous waste fuei we
-------
Federal Register / VoL 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49169
solicited comment on the extent to
which the hazardous waste
contaminants are removed by the
refining process, or are so diluted by the
process that they do not significantly
increase the level of contaminants
present in fuel. Id. If this is the case,
EPA believes it has the ultimate
authority to exclude the derived fuels
from being solid wastes, since the more
waste-derived fuels from a.process are
like products from the same process
produced by virgin materials, the less
likely EPA is to classify the waste-
derived fuel as a waste. (It is dear,
however, that EPA possesses
Jurisdiction under RCRA to make these
determinations. See RCRA section
3004(r).) The American Petroleum
Institute (API] submitted relevant data
on these points which EPA noticed for
public comment on June 26,1985.50 FR
26389.
These data, though limited, seem to
indicate that at large, sophisticated
refineries, these recycling practices do
not significantly contribute to metals
levels in the refined fuels. However,
EPA cannot as yet determine whether
this is due to the refining process itself,
or whether the amounts of waste
reihtroduced into the process are so low
as to be diluted. In particular, API's data
indicated that less than one percent of
hazardous waste (/.a, chiefly oil
reclaimed from hazardous wastes) is
reintroduced into the refining stream at
a crude petroleum refinery. Based on
these data, they show that the increase
in metals content in the final product is
minimal For example, Cadmium levels
increased from 0.11 ppm to 0.12 ppm
while lead levels increased from 0.89
ppm to 0.91 ppm. (Sec Table 3, p. 48 of
API's submission on comments on
reopening of comment period dated June
12,1985.) Thus, when only a small
percentage of waste is reintroduced
back into the refining process, it does
.not appear to appreciably effect metals
'levels in the final refined products.
However, the Agency is concerned that
if contaminants are simply being diluted,
then if there were a significant increase
in the amount of hazardous waste feed,
resulting fuels could be significantly
contaminated since the wastes being
reintroduced contain concentrations of
toxic metals far greater than those in
most crude oils. In fact, the Agency has
some preliminary data from its
petroleum refining industry study which
indicates that for at least some metals—
arsenic and cadmium—the distillation
process does not necessarily remove the
metals from the fuels.
The Agency is considering an
approach which would indicate* that if
the amount of hazardous waste that was
reintroduced back into the petroleum
refinery was minimal (i.e., less than one
percent), the fuel produced at the
refinery would be excluded (i.e.. would
not be a solid waste). In the short term
there are certain implementation
difficulties with this idea, particularly
the difficulties of determining
compliance for each batch since refining
is a continuous process. The Agency is
continuing to evaluate this possibility,
however.
Rather. EPA believes that more time is
needed to study these questions. In
particular, EPA intends to examine
further the question of whether removal
.actually occurs as a result of refining.
This would have bearing not only on the
question of whether regulation is
justified, but also on the question of
whether resulting fuels should be
classified as products or as wastes. EPA
particularly wishes to examine the
extent to which these wastes can
influence the composition of fuels from
smaller, less sophisticated refineries
which may remove fewer metals from
the wastes, and also may use a higher
percentage of wastes as feed-stocks.
At present, however, since there is no
persuasive evidence that reintroduction
of these indigenous hazardous wastes
into the refining process actually
contributes significant concentrations of
metals to the resulting fuels, EPA is
leaving in place the existing exemption
for such fuels contained hi
i 261.6(a)(3)(v).»See 50 FR 33542
(August 20,1985). Another factor
influencing continuation of the
exemption is that fuels produced only
from virgin crude oil can have higher
levels of toxic metals than fuels partially
produced from these hazardous
wastes. '• See 50 FR 1895 (January 11,
1985).
Thus, fuels produced from refining of
indigenous, oil-bearing hazardous
wastes at a petroleum refining facility
will continue to be exempt By
"petroleum refining facility" EPA means
to include any facility that produces
hydrocarbon products (e.g. gasoline,
kerosene, distillate fuel oils, residual
fuel oil, etc.) from crude oil or its
•A* explained In detail in the preamble to the
propoMd rule, this proviiion does nor exempt the
hazardous watte* before they are reintroduced Into
the refining proem* (SO FR at 1689).
"EPA (bo considers these wests-derived fuels to*
remain petroleum, rsther than hazardous
substances, for purposes of the comprehensive
Environmental Response. Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA). See CERCLA section
101(14) (excluding petroleum from definition of
hazardous substances). In light of the widespread
nature of these recycling practices, to do otherwise
would potentially read the exclusion for petroleum
out of CERCLA. In addition, there la no indication
that Congress meant for these waste-derived fuel*
to be considered hazardous substance* when It
added section* 3004(r) (2) and (3) to RCRA (which
provisions Indicate that such fuels remain
hazardous wastes).
immediate fractionation products
through straight distillation of crude oil
or other intermediate products (e.g., gas
oils, naphtha, etc.) (This is the definition
of the Petroleum Refining Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC 2911).). For
these hazardous wastes to be
considered to be refined they must be
inserted into a part of the process
designed to remove contaminants in the
normal operation of the refining process.
See 50 FR 28725 (July 15,1985). As we
explained there, this would mean
insertion of the wastes prior to
distillation or catalytic cracking. (The
distillation process is used to split the
feedstock into fractions based on the
various boiling points of the feedstock
components. The data submitted by API .
indicates that most of the metals
concentrate in the heavier (high boiling
point) fractions. Many times these
fractions are not used for fuels but
rather to produce asphalt or petroleum
coke. Therefore, there is a significant
probability of contaminant removal from
many fuel fractions if there is distillation
in the process.) In addition, without
distillation or insertion of the wastes
into another part of the process
designed to remove contaminants, there
will be no removal of contaminants at
•11. and Congress regarded some
removal as one of the prerequisites for
exemption. See RCRA sections 3004
(r)(2)(B) and (r)(3)(A). and 50 FR at 28725
(July 15,1985). Consequently, if a facility
takes an oil-bearing hazardous waste
and processes it without distillation to
produce a fuel, the resulting fuel is not
covered by this exemption and so could
be subject to regulation. Similarly, if a
refinery inserts the waste into a part of
the process after distillation or catalytic
cracking (as explained above), resulting
fuels are not automatically exempt11
Under EPA's proposal, such fuels (i.e.,
fuels derived from petroleum refining
wastes which fuels are produced by
processes not using distillation, or the
fuels resulting when petroleum refining
waste are inserted into the refining
process after points at which any
contaminant removal can occur) were
classified as hazardous waste fuel
(assuming they were derived from listed
refinery wastes, or exhibit a hazardous
"Incidentally, certain used oil-based processes
produce used oil fuel from processes that use
distillation. These processes are not refining
operations (In spile of the use of distillation)
because they do not produce fuel* front crude oil.
Fuels from such a process thus are not
automatically exempt from regulation, but would be
If they meet the specification for used oil fuel If this
type of processor should also us* oilbearing
petroleum refining hazardous waste a* a feed
material, the resulting fuel* would be exempt if they
meet the used oil fuel specification, since the
operation is comparable to those described in the
following paragraph m the text
-------
49170 Federal Register / VoL 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations
waste characteristic) subject to ail the
regulatory requirements for such fuels.
EPA has modified this position in the
final rule so that such fuels are not
subject to regulation if they meet the
same specification applied to fuels
produced from processing used oil—*
very similar operation. (In fact, the
Agency is aware of operations that
blend petroleum refining hazardous
wastes and used oil.) We have added an
exemption to §261.6(a)(3) to make this
point This will ensure that the resulting,
fuels will pose no greater environmental
hazard than the virgin fuels that would
be burned in their place.18 IS EPA thui
believes this is the proper means of
controlling this potential problem. If the
waste-derived fuel should exceed the
fuel specification, it would be subject to
all of the rules applicable to hazardous
waste fuels. (As a hazardous waste fuel
which is not completely derived from
used oil, the fuel is not eligible to be
regulated under the special standards
reserved for used oil See RCRA section
3014. This position is consistent with the
one taken in the proposed rule.)
2. Oil Recovered from Petroleum
Refining Hazardous Wastes Shot is
Returned to the Refining Process. A
related question is the status of oil that
is recovered from hazardous wastes
generated during normal petroleum
refining, production, or transportation
practices. The recovered "oil is usually
returned to the refining process as a
substitute for crude oil but can also b*
burned directly as a fuel Under
amended i 261 3(c)(2) {see 50 FR 664
(January 4.1985) and 50 FR (August 20.
1985)), such oil remains in the hazardous
waste system (if it is to be used to
produce fuel or is burned for energy
recovery). EPA solicited additional
comment on this issue on May 13,1985
(50 FR 19956).
EPA is not yet able to amend the rules
to state under what circumstances-
reclaimed oil might not be considered to
be a waste. This is largely because
" See preamble nctioo IV-C of Put Two for
ditcuision on bating the need oil fuel specification
levels for metals on leveli found in virgin fuel oil*. It
•hould be noted that the specification level for lead
it higher than level* found in virgin fuel. EPA U
subjecting nonexempt fuels derived from petroleum
industry wastes to toe higher lead specification, at
least as an interim measure, because many of the
facilities potentially affected also process used oil.
For the moment therefore. EPA will apply all of the
used oil fuel specification to the resulting fuels. The-
Agency, however, i* studying this question further
in preparing its Phase D rules.
'« EPA could not normally apply thia logic to fuel*
derived from hazardous wastes because the type* of
hazardous constituents potentially present are much)
more numerous, and could be uieaejat hi •mitrf
higher concentrations, than tfaoa* found tat oik-
bearing wastM from petroleum refining, production.
and transportation (or in used oil). See 60 PR 1891
n.14. Hazardous constitutents in other waste* also-
would not correspond to hazardou* ««">»••"•••••*• ia>
virgin fuels.
available data (which are limited) show
that the oil can contain higher metals
levels than virgin fuel oil14 EPA thus
needs to study further the particular
means of oil recovery from these
wastes, and the composition of the
resulting oils in relation to composition
of virgin fuels.1*
EPA is prepared, however, to continue
the existing exemption (in
{ 261.6(a)(3)(vi)) for these recovered oils,
and for fuels from petroleum refining
which are partially produced from these
recovered oils. The data submitted by
API appear to show that the recovered
oil does not contribute significant levels
of metals to the refined fuels. (The
Agency is continuing to investigate
whether this is due to dilution or
removal incident to refining.) Nor does
the Agency believe it appropriate at this
time to regulate the recovered oil prior
to reintroduction to the refining process
in light of the incomplete
characterization of the oil's compositions
the likelihood of similar handling
practices for recovered oil as for crude
oil. and the possibility of
disproportionate impact of such
regulation on off-site facilities
recovering oil from these wastes vis-a-
vis refineries recovering oil from their
own wastes (which recovered oil is
almost invariably piped directly back to
the refining process and so would not be
regulated under current EPA rules. *• .
However, if the recovered oil is to be
burned directly as a fuel EPA has
determined that the oil should be
regulated as a hazardous waste fuel
unless the oil meets the specification for
used oil fuel The situation is exactly
analogous to hazardous waste fuels
14 See comments from American Petroleum
Institute (Table 3. p. IB) dated June 12. IMS.
'• EPA solicited comment on the applicability of
the variance for closed-loop process** contained IB
amended 12flOJi(b). It 1* possible that a pamllal
variance (to be applied on an industry-wide basis It
appropriate) for material* that en reclaimed but
muat b* reclaimed further before final recovery
(I 2BO31(c)) I* appropriate. The Agency also i*
continuing to assess the relationship of these
situations to RCRA (action 3004(r) (2) and (31 Other
comment* to the Agency's notice (particniarty thoao
on the existing regulatory status of recovered oil
and on whether there 1* any difference In fuel*
"produced from" or "containing" hazardous waste)
were answered In the Agency's August 20 notice.
See 80 PR 33541.
'• A* noted (bore, hazardous wastes from which-
oil Is recovered are regulated until the point of oil
recovery. Distinguishing between recovered oil one)
listed hazardous wastes (I.e., API Separator Sludge.
Slop Oil Emulsion Solids, etc.) will not always b* ear
aaiy decision. In making thre distinction, the
Agency will consider a number of factors. Indudlaf
water content solids content, and. In some ceaeet
metal* content Thin, wastes with high water or
solid* content will generally be perceived ••
hazardous waste* subject to regulation and not a*
recovered oiL For example. If an oily w**tir to«an*
off-slt* to be dewetered. this *«^^.?£*!
considered . recoverd oil (exempt from r**"™?1*
but • waate subject to regulation, if thi. nmeterie*
were also hazardous.
produced by processing (rather than
refining) these oil-bearing wastes. We
have explained above why it is
appropriate to apply the fuel
specification to these waste-derived
fuels, rather than (as at proposal) to
regulate them as hazardous waste fuels
regardless of composition. We also are
including an exemption in S 261.6(a)(3)
for recovered oil burned directly that
meets the used oil fuel specification.
4. Statatory, Conditioned Exemption
•of Coke Derived from Indigenous
Petroleum Refinery Wastes. The
petroleum refining industry also
produces coke from refinery process
wastes. If the coke is produced from or
contains listed hazardous waste, the
coke produced from such wastes is a
hazardous waste. The Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of
1984. however, exempted from
regulation as hazardous waste fuel such-
derived coke provided: (1) The
Hazardous waste used to produce the
coke is indigenous to petroleum refining;
(2) the coke is produced at the same
facility that generated the hazardous
waste; and (3) the coke does not exhibit
a characteristic of hazardous waste.
(See section 3004(q][2)(A). This statutory
exemption is codified at § 28rl31(b)(2) "
and is redesignated in today's rale as
§ 266.1(a)(3)(ix).
D. Exemption of Coke and Coal Tar
Produced From Coal Tar Decanter
Sludge by the Iron and Steel Industry
EPA indicated hi the proposed rule
that it would consider granting an
exemption to coke produced from coal
tar decanter sludge [EPA Hazardous
Waste K087] if commenters provided
data that demonstrate that hazardous
contaminant levels in the coke are not
appreciably increased by recycling the
tar sludge. (See 50 FR 1690.) Today's rule
exempts such waste-derived coke (a
hazardous waste fuel even though not
burned exclusively or necessarily
primarily for energy recovery (see
section IILA.1 above)) from regulation
as hazardous waste and also exclude*
coal tar produced from coal tar decanter
sludge.
Tar decanter sludge is generated
during the recovery of a coal tar by-
product produced during the production
of coke from coal The sludge is listed as
hazardous waste because of high levels
(about 1%) of phenol and naphthalene.
The § lodge is frequently recycled by
mixing it with coal before it is charged
to a coke oven to produce coke. The
coke product Is typically used as a fuel
in steel blast furnaces. In addition, the
sludge Is sometimes, mixed back into the
coal tar by-product which is also
» S*« M FH 28731 (July IS, 1985}.
-------
federal Kegfater 1 Vol. W. No. 130 if Friday. November 29. 1985 / Kulet and Regulations 49171
frequently used as « fuel Both of these
waste-derived fuels on-exempted from
today's antes for ths -reasons discussed
feeiow.
The American Iron and Steel Institute
(AISI) and Koppers Company. lac.
provided comments •*ypJH'p'T\g **M>
•frJHTig Operation -""d OOW iBI 'n^'' in ^**
coal.Tbese volatile compounds are
candenaed to recover a oaaliar'by-
product The tar decanter sludge is
produced during recovery of the coal tar
and consists of coal tar and "inert
carbonaceous material carried overlrom
the coking operation". ISee AISI
comments, page 3 J AISI and Koppera
provided analyses of me waste-derived
coke product indicating that phenol and
naphthalene were not detected in the
coke at detectable levels ranging from
less than 1 ppm to as nigh as 20ppm.
We conclude that phenol and
naphthalene are not present in such
obke at levels that would pose
substantial risk to Iranian health and the
•environment;particularly considering
that the coke is burned BS fuel and that
ahytraoe levels of these compounds
would be readily combustible.
AISI also indicates mat the same
principle {i.e., if recycling a -waste does
not increase levels of toxic constituents
la a waste-derived product the product
should be exempt from regulation)
should be applied to coal tar mixed with
tar decanter sludge. AISI states that
when tar decanter stodge is mixed back
into the coal tar (after passing through a
ball mill to produce a uniform material),
the phenol and naphthalene content -of
the coal tar by-product is not
.significantly affected. AISI argues that
coal tar itself contains significant levels
of ihese hazardous compounds
^typically 1% phenol and 10%
naphthalene), and that tar decanter
sludge 4s simply a mixture of coal tar
and carbonaceous material. Further, the
sludge is mixed with the-coal tar in
small volumes representing about IS of
ihe coal tar by-product We, therefore,
conclude that such recycling does not
increase levels of phenol end
napthalene to the coal tar by-product
and the coal tar should be exempt from
today's rules when burned lor energy
recovery.
These exemptions apply only to the
waste-derived products, and tmly when
derived from tar decanter .sludge. Thus,
tar decanter aludge is subject 4o JuD
RCRA regulation prior to recycling, and
the exemption does not extend to coke
•r coal 4ar -derived from iuuardous
waste feg, spent solvents) omer man
tar decanter sludge designated as EPA
Hazardous Waste KQBZ.
JS. Status OfGas Recovered from
Landfill
We are indicating that today's final
rules on hazardous waste fuels do not
apply to fas recovered from landfills
that is burned for «oergy eecovery in
•boilers or industrial furnaces. Although
it is dear that EPA has authority to
Mtjulate gaseous ^•""•Mma from
hazardous wastes {see, 04. RCRA
Section M04(n)). EPA lias net yet
addressed whether there are any limits
on Ibis authority, and, if Jhere are limits,
what the extent might be. Nor has the
Ajeacy teceived comment on these
questions sufficient to make a
considered decision. In light of the
absence of a record and the potential
•difficulty of the question, we are not
deciding die question in today's rule but
instead are indicating that recovered
landfill gas is not regulated under
today's rules.
F.Jteoveft far Exclusion of-Cadence
Product 112
Several commenten requested EPA to
exclude Cadence product 312 from
regulation as a hazardous waste fuel
Cadence product 312, better known
under its former trademark name of
"CHEM-FUEL" {hereinafter termed
"Cadence product"), is a blend of
•hazardous spent solvent recovery still
bottoms and other hydrocarbon-based
hazardous waste that is patented for use
in blast furnaces by Cadence Chemical
Resources, inc. (hereinafter termed
"Cadence").
Cadence product is produced by
licensees of the Cadence process who
blend spent solvents generated by
others as well as solvent recovery still
bottoms that they generate by "their
reclamation activities. The licensees
ensure that the blend meets
specifications set by furnace operators
lot parameters including heating value
(JOSOO-14,000 Btu/lb) and chlorine
content (1-5%). Thus, the mix can
contain up to 5% chlorinated spent
solvents, .most of which are
carcinogenic. The entire mix is then sent
claim thai the chlodna from the
praduct react* with ".alkali compound* to prevail
'their deleterloui action on iht coke and .ore
particle*" and to prevent furnace wall •cale. See
atatementfegr John Elliot dated March 11,1865 (pp.
S-O attached to Cadence Tajmmenti dated March
1118S5. Although not relevant to EPA'i argument
that Cadence product I* burned partially for energy
•nuureiy. EPA qomtion* whether vuch chlorine
faaulUJiiOTbetarmalinrorovaiDantin furnace
operation* and, thua. oonatltutee a banajide .(I.a,
Beoaaaary) Ingredient jl van that it i* not common
•prectio* to Inject cnhjTtoe-bearing materiabi in a
bleat furnace.
-------
49172 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations
product, in fact release* substantial,
useful heat energy to a blast furnace
and, thus, is burned partially for energy
recovery within all reasonable
understanding of the term. Although we
agree that energy recovery is not the
sole purpose for burning Cadence
product in a blast furnace, the fact that
substantial, useful energy is recovered
subjects Cadence product to regulation
as hazardous waste fuel (See discussion
above in section IIIJV.1 where we
explain that regulation of burning for
energy recovery does not turn on the
sole or primary purpose of burning.)
a. General Description of Blast
Furnace Operations. Iron blast furnaces
are used to smelt iron ores to produce
crude iron (pig iron) suitable for
steelmaking. The iron blast furnace is a
large, shaft (vertical) reactor. Iron ores
along with coke and fluxes such as
limestone and dolomite are charged Into
the top of the reactor. A large volume of
air preheated to 2000 *F (termed "hot
blast") is injected into the bottom of the
furnace to burn the coke to produce the
heal and reducing gas needed to drive
furnace reactions. Temperatures in the
combustion zone at the bottom of the
furnace range from 3700-3900 *F. The
coke provide* both the primary source
of heat and the primary source of carbon
used to produce the reducing gas carbon
monoxide. The-carbon monoxide
reduces the iron ore by (net) energy
absorbing reactions to produce pig iron.
About 1000 Ibs of coke are required to
produce a ton ofpig iron. Gases drawn
off the top of the furnace contain excess
carbon monoxide to give the gas a
heating value of about BO Btu/ft1. About
one third of this furnace gas is used as a
fuel in stoves to preheat the combustion
air (i.e.. the hot blast). The remainder of
the furnace top gas is used as a fuel in a
boiler plant or in other heating
applications within the steel plant
Melted iron and liquid slag are drawn
off from the bottom of the furnace.
b. Modern Methods of Reducing Coke
Rates. Coke has become increasingly
expensive since the early 1960's because
of the rising price of metallurgical coals
needed to produce suitable coke and the
rising cost of coking operations because
of environmental and other concerns.
Reducing coke rates is also
advantageous because furnace
productivity ia increased by increasing
the iron ore to coke volume ratio
charged to the furnace (i.e., coke can be
replaced by iron ore, thus increasing
iron output).
The two principle methods of reducing
coke rates are to increase hot blast
temperatures and to Inject fuels1*
through tuyeres (i.e.. Bring nozzles) into
the combustion zone at the base of the
furnace. Both approaches generally are
employed together because fuel
injection enables operators to control
flame temperatures in the combustion
zone (raised by increasing hot blast
temperatures) to optimum levels. In
addition, the injection of hydrocarbon
fuels replaces the carbon in the
displaced coke and ensures that
appropriate furnace gas composition
conducive to iron ore reduction is
maintained. The heat energy of the
hydrocarbon fuels also replaces the heat
energy of the displaced coke. Given that
coke is both the primary fuel and the
primary source of reducing gas (carbon
in the coke is converted to the reducing
gas carbon monoxide), when the coke
rate is decreased substantially (i.e.. by
increasing hot blast temperature and
using fuel injectants) the heat energy
and source of reducing gas supplied by
the displaced coke must be provided by
some other source.*0 ** This source is
the tuyere-injected fuels like the
Cadence product
c. Although Fuel Injectants Cool
Flame Temperatures, They Provide
Substantial, Useful Heat Energy. Before
we explain how liquid fuel injectants
with substantial heating value like No. 0
fuel oil or Cadence product contribute
substantial heat energy to • blast
furnace, we will explain how they, at the
same time, actually cool flame
temperatures in the combustion zone.
Combustion zone temperatures are
maintained at 3700-3900 * F by the
combustion of coke in the presence of
the 2000 * F hot blast (i.e., preheated
combustion air). The net reaction of
injected fuels is endothermic (heat
absorbing) in this zone. Injected liquid
fuels first undergo endothermic
vaporization, then exothermic
combustion to (ideally) carbon dioxide
and water where sensible heat is
released, and finally, endothermic
dissociation* * and raductipn in the
•• Cadence's terminology notwithstanding.
hryere-lnlected materials with substantial heating
value are invariably termed fuels In the technical
literatim. :
" "The HUH •tomi of carbon are Involved In
reaction! thai generate the beat for tha furoaot ai
ere Involved aa tha reducing agent (as carbon
monoxide) to convert tha ore to metallic Iran."
Statement by John Elliot In reference to his review
of an EPA Internal, deliberative, draft document
Mr. Elliot's comment! are contained In
correepondence from counael to Cadence, to
Winston Porter. Assistant Administrator for the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
dated October 31.1965. (Release of this internal
poet comment period EPA document wes not
Intended.)
•• Steam bad been a popular (nonfuel) Mectant In
the IBof/s because II wes relatively cheap end
presence of excess carbon provided by
the coke to form the reducing gases
carbon monoxide and hydrogen.
Cadence argues that these liquid fuel
Injectants are not burned for energy
recovery because tuyere-injected fuels
undergo net endothermic (i.e., heat-
absorbing) reactions in the combustion
zone which reactions actually cool
flame temperatures, and that any heat
energy released from subsequent
reactions is Incidental and unavoidable.
Cadence's argument ignores the fact that
fuel injectants first behave as bona fide
fuels by combusting to (ideally) carbon
dioxide and water. The amount of
sensible heat released during this
combustion phase is measured by a fuel
injectant's heating value in Btu/lb.
Immediately after the fuel is combusted,
the combustion products act as
Ingredients to furnace reactions by being
converted to the reducing gases carbon
monoxide and hydrogen during
endothermic reactions. The fact that fuel
injectants release substantial heat
energy while providing hydrocarbons for
reactions enables operators to reduce
coke rates.** (As noted above, coke is
both the primary fuel and primary
source of carbon to the blast furnace.)
The haat energy released from
subsequent (i.e., outside tha combustion
zone) reactions of fuel injectant
hydrocarbons is in fact substantial.
intentional, and useful contrary to
Cadence's claim that it is incidental and
unavoidable. As discussed above,
furnace top gas is used as fuel in stoves
to heat the hot blast, in a boiler plant, or
in other heating applications within the
steel plant The excess reducing gas
contained in the top gas that was not
used to reduce the iron ore gives the top
gas substantial heating value. The
excess reducing gas is contributed by
readily available, and It Introduced hydrogen for
reduction. [Hydrogen supplements carbon monoxide
ea a reducing gas In the furnace.) The use of (team
as an Injectant. however, eonsumea coke In the
combustion zone thereby reducing the overall
effectiveness of any Increase In blast temperature.
Fuel oil Injection, however, not only ecu aa a
coolant, allowing the use of higher blest
temperature*, but also replaces e portion of the
coke. .Source." "Fuel-Oil Infection Into Bleat
Furnaces: A Literature Review". Journal of the
Institute of Fuel vol.«. n MB. June 107B, p. 73.
•• At the 3700-4000 ' F temperatures In th,
combustion ions, a fraction of the carbon dioxide
and water vapor Is thermally dissociated to form
carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and oxygen. See
Bebcock and WUcox, Steam. II* Generation and
•"Infection of hydrocarbons through the tuyeres
of s blest furnace Is cerried out (e) to replace coke
by cheeper sources of fuel and reductions; (b) to
Increase (by lowering the proportion of coke in the
charge) the amount or Iron ore in the furnace shaft."
Soiree? Peacey, J.& and Davenport. W.G, The /nui
B/att nrmot. p. 140. Included in comments
submitted by Cadence on October ZS, 1886.
-------
JFodgral Eegirter / Vol. SO, No. 230 / Friday. November 2fl. 1985 / ttulet and Regulations 49173
Ihe coke and fuel injactants, roughly in
proportion to the Amount of
hydrocarbon* each provides to the
fcimaoe. A* shown in the table below.
furnace top gas 1» a substantial fuel
•ource in that onjy «boul one-third of
the fuel go* i* used to heat the hot blast
while two-third* Is Available for other
Empirical demonstration that burning
feiel injectsmts supplies substantial
energy to blast furnaces is provided by
standard literature references. The table
below shows an energy balance for •
-modern 2S-Ioot diameter hearth furnace
•Derating at a hot blast temperature of
2000 ' F with a coke rate of 870 Ib/ton of
bxrt metal (Le.. pig iron] and using fuel
oil injected at a rate of 170 Ib/ton of hot
metal. The fuel injectant provides about
32* of the heat input to the furnace. The
ajxtout of coke needed to -supply this
energy (and neductantsj to a furnace
producing 4,000 tons per day of hot
metal would be more than 300 tons per
.day. Thus, it is dear that fuel injeotant*
provide substantial, useful heat to the
furnace.
BLAST Fuwuice €NEROV BALANCE
CttM*E<
B.1
•4JB
r. » 1S.VV Mi rtSei
Injectants that liave no heating value
like steam, or minima] heating value,*4
provide no or minimal heat energy to the
furnace and, thus, are not considered Jo
be fuel injectants. Thus. injectanU with
no or minimal heating value are not
considered to be burned for energy
recovery.
Cadence's argument in fact proves too
much. It is clear that net furnace
reactions are endothermic—heat from
the coke and fuel in)eciants is required
to drive reactions that reduce iron ore to
metallic iron. Under Cadence's logic that
M material involved in an endothermic
reaction is .not a fuel irrespective of hs
heating value, the coke would not be a
fuel. Yet it is the primary fuel source to
the furnace. The fact is that both coke
and fuel injeotants like the Cadence
product serve a dual purpose of
providing substantial needed energy and
redactants.
d. Use of Cadence Product at a Fuel
tnjectanL Cadence product is blended
with No. U fuel oil in a volume ratio of
•about SO/50 for use as a fuel injectant
Cadence-product is a fuel in)octant,
rather than a vonfuel injectant [e.g.,
steam), because it has a heating value
fcy «pecfflcation of 10.500 to 14,000 Bra/
lb. -which is comparable to the heating
value of coke and coal. Cadence
product like-other liquid fuel infectants,
cools flame temperatures in the
combostion sane, it also provides
hydrocarbons for conversion to the
•educing gases carbon monoxide and
•hydrogen, provides substantial, useful
heat energy to the blast furnace, and
thus enables operators to reduce the
coke rate.**
IB addition, we note that Cadence
itself lias informed the Agency, the
Congress, and the public on many
occasions that Cadenoe product is
burned by blast furnace* (at least
partially) as a fuel Cadence's President
Mr. Reese so stated hi testimony to
Congress. Cadence's comments to the
Agency In the definition of solid waste
rulemaking {Cadence comments dated
August 1.1983, p. IB) refer to the product
•m "CHEM-FUEL" and stressed this
point:
.. .TCHSM-fUEL. tike coJte. & both a TOW
material ami an vnargy muurue •when raeW fli
the bleat furnace. It* principal component*
en hydrocarbon* which provide the
essential carbon and hydfoganjar art
reduction and energy generation. fEmpk««l«
original]
Cadence's licensees also stressed this
awint when dealing with EPA's
enforcement officials, making the
emphatic point that high Btu hazardous
wastes were utilised so that the .burning
legitimately recovered energy.
Cadence's patent application states (hat
the material is used to support
combustion in "blast furnaces. Even in
the present rulemaking, a number of
Cadence's suppliers indicated that the
•Cadence product [to which their
.hazardous wastes contributed] "is used
as a fuel by steel producers . . ,".
(Comments of Detroit Edison, March 11,
1885: to the same effect see comment!
37.73. and 87 to this rulemaking.)
Indeed, the Cadence material was
marketed for years under the tradename
"CHEM-FUEL". The Agency thus
• minimum h«tm« veJUie at \O3O-*JXX> Btu/lb to tw
• tono fide tuel &** Mction 0 In the text.
•*• Thare to oo
-------
49174 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations
to meet a specification. Thus, the
blending of wastes to produce Cadence
product is similar to other waste-derived
fuel operations.
Cadence's operations thus raise the
troubling question of what degree of
processing can transform a waste into a
product The Cadence process involves
relatively minimal processing. No
significant resources are recovered from
the Cadence product until it actually is
burned. The Agency always has been
leery of the notion that minimal
processing of hazardous wastes prior to
recovery of resources from them (in this
case, energy) transforms wastes into
products. It was for this reason that EPA
amended 5 261.3(c) (2) on January 4,
1985 to state that materials reclaimed
from hazardous wastes remain
hazardous wastes when burned for
energy recovery, and indicated in the
same rule that hazardous wastes that
are partially but not fully reclaimed
remain hazardous wastes (see
§ 26030(c).) These provisions illustrate
the general principle that minimal
processing before final recovery does
not ordinarily transform a hazardous
waste into a product Cadence's process
appears to raise-analogous problems of
using a relatively minii^ processing
step as a means of insulating hazardous
waste recycling from RCRA jurisdiction.
When this fact is coupled with the fact
that the form of-end recycling of the
Cadence product closely resembles
incineration (in the sense that hazardous
wastes are burned by controlled flame
combustion), it is apparent to the
Agency that RCRA jurisdiction over the
burning exists.
Even more fundamentally, EPA does
not believe that the-question of
jurisdiction over the Cadence product
(or other similar waste-derived
materials) need turn narrowly on the
question of whether it is burned
partially for energy recovery. Cadence
product is composed of toxic chlorinated
solvent still bottoms which (on a
nationwide basis) are typically disposed
of or incinerated. These still bottoms are
not similar to raw materials customarily
used in the iron-making process (le.,
toxic chlorinated solvents are not a
typical feed or energy source to the iron-
making process). The recycling practice,
as well as prior transportation and
storage has the potential to cause
substantial harm to human health and
the environment if conducted
improperly.16
EPA believes that recycling of
hazardous secondary materials that are
so different from the raw materials
customarily utilized in the process is a
prototypical situation it is empowered to
control under RCRA Subtitle C This is
particularly true in this case because the
recycling involves burning (viz.
controlled flame combustion), and so
resembles incineration. The recycling
activity also is not part of a continuous
industrial process, but rather involves
unrelated parties and processes (Le, the
hazardous waste generators who
generate spent solvents and hazardous
still bottoms, intervening processors
(who not only process but add
additional hazardous still bottoms to the
mixture), and the steel mill), in addition
to involving secondary material*
normally unrelated to the ironmaking
process. For these reasons, EPA is
prepared to exercise its authority to
designate Cadence product and all
similar materials, as solid wastes
pursuant to { 261.2(d) when recycled via
controlled thermal combustion in
processes not customarily utilizing
chlorinated toxicants as a fuel or raw
material should this ever prove
necessary. In light of the Agency's
judgment that Cadence product is
burned partially for energy recovery and
so is subject to regulation as hazardous
waste fuel, it is unnecessary to exercise
this authority at the present time."
'• Preliminary retult* of EPA'i emiwioiu tmt far
• blut furnace burning Cadence material Indicate
that the*e device* may be able to deitroy 88.99* at
toxic organic conitiruent* In the material If
confirmed, thif meant that the*e device* may be
able to H/ely born toxic organic wattet under
appropriate condition*. Thia doe* not mean,
however, that the** device* could alway* be
expected to achieve 98.99% dutruction efficiency,
abient regulatory control* on operating condition*.
Storage of Cadence Product alao ha* the potential to
cant* rabttantial harm. A* di*ciu**d in th« text In
•action D of Part Poor, the fact that a haxardon*
watt* fuel la being ttond aa a. commodity la
intuffident to prevent tnbatantial riak,
•' Them la another point In Cadence'*
proentation that i* deeply troubling to the Agency.
Cadence la arguing that when they blend and
proee** chlorinated haxardou* waite*. th* mulUng
proceaaed material la a product excluded from
RCRA to long a* then an tpedficationt (each aa
for total chlorine) on the end "product" and to long
a* all component* of that "product" an pat to
beneficial at* when burned. Thit argument applic*
with equal force if the chlorinated haxardon*
waatet being pracewed wen dloxin or
chlorophenoxy peitldde wait** (rather than
carcinogenic tolvent*): the blended product would
•till be uted a* a reducing agent in iron-making,
toxic organic compound* would provide
hydrocarbon* to the iron-nuking proce**, and
chlorine would remove accumulated wall *cal«
within the furnace. Although the*e type* of
bazardou* waite* an not blended into Cadence
product to our knowledge, the point I* that their
argument doe* not preclude *uch u*e. Cadence *
argument would in fact be Identical. It thu* »e*m» to
the Agency th«t Cadence'* argument Prov«Vf"™0
muchTand *eek* to preclude EPA from exerd»lng
authority well within the Agency1* purview.
3. Conclusion. In dosing on this issue,
EPA stresses that it is not finding that
Cadence is engaging in an unsafe or
undesirable recycling practice. Quite the
opposite—Cadence has found a means
of utilizing resources in wastes, coupled
with destruction of the wastes toxic
constituents, that appears to be
environmentally beneficial What EPA is
finding in this proceeding is that the
Agency is empowered—that is, has the
jurisdiction—to evaluate the potential
risks posed by this recycling activity
and to prescribe regulatory standards if
the Cadence product managed
improperly (see RCRA section 1004(5]),
could pose a substantial hazard to
human health and the environment This
is how EPA always has read its
overriding statutory duty to regulate
hazardous waste management "as may
be necessary to protect human health
and the environment" It may be that
due to the mechanics of blast furnace
operation, substantially tailored (or
even no standards) are needed to ensure
waste destruction. EPA is investigating
this question as part of its Phase n
rulemaking on burning hazardous
wastes. EPA is asserting here that it has
jurisdiction to make this evaluation.
IV. Used Oil Subject to Regulation
A Definition of Used Oil Fuel
These rules apply to used oil and
fuels produced by processing, blending,
or other treatment of used oU, that are
burned for energy recovery in a boiler or
industrial furnace that is not operating
under RCRA standards for hazardous
waste incinerators. "Used oil" means
any oil that has been refined from crude
oil used, and. as a result of such use,
contaminated by physical or chemical
impurities. See RCRA section 1004(36)."
Used oils include the following: (1)
Spent automotive lubricating oils
(including car and truck engine oil),
transmission fluid, brake fluid, and off-
road engine oil; (2) spent industrial oils,
including compressor, turbine, and
bearing oils, hydraulic oils,
metalworldng oils, gear oils, electrical
oils, refrigerator oils, and railroad
draining*; and (3) spent industrial
process oils.
These rules apply only to used oil and
not necessarily to "oily waste". Oily
wastes, such as bottom clean-out waste
from virgin fuel oil storage tanks, or
virgin fuel oil spill clean-up, are not used
oils because the oil was never "used"
for its intended purpose. Thus, oily
waste is not subject to these rules
" The Agency will *oon be proposing to modify
the definition of u**d oil in the U*ed Oil Uering and
Management Standard* rulemaking.
-------
Federal Register / Vol SO, No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1965 / Rules and Regulations 19175
(provided it is not mixed with used oil
and that it it not a hazardous waste).
Today's rule marks the first time the
' Agency has used the regulatory
authorities created by the Used Oil
Recycling Act of 1980 (UORA). (UORA
is codified substantially as sections 1( 04
(36H39) and 3014 of RCRA.) UORA
requires the Agency to establish
"performance standards and other
requirements as may be necessary to
protect public health and the
environment from hazards associated
with recycled oil" See RCRA section
3014(a). Burning used oil for energy
recovery—the subject of this rule—4s an
example of recycling. See RCRA, section
1004 (37).
The regulation of used oil fuels raises
the legal question of how the provisions
of UORA are to be integrated with other
RCRA provisions. As we stated at
proposal, EPA believe* that UORA
authorities may be used independent of.
or as a supplement to. Subtitle C of
RCRA. If recycled used oil (called
"recycled oil" under RCRA section 1004
(37)) is not also a hazardous waste, it is
subject to regulation under the
provisions of section 3014 rather than
sections 3001-3008,3008. and 3010. As
noted at proposal this has significant
implications. For example, permits are
not necessarily required to manage
recycled oil. the criminal enforcement
provisions of section 3008(d) do not
apply, and the :?pulatory program
cannot be dele?; ed to the States under
section 3006.1 sr* Part Five of this
preamble for t discussion of the impact
of this rule on authorization of State
programs.)
If recycled o-: is also a hazardous
waste, many i-f -he Subtitle C
regulations for c i.ner hazardous wastes
(40 CFR Parts 262-266) may apply.
•Section 3014, as amended by the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984. provides detailed
guidance on re:bating recycled oil that
is s hazardous waste.
Today's ruJt establishes a
specification for used oil that is
substantially excluded from •
regulation *• fard that may be burned
without restriction in nonindustrial
boilers or any other boiler or industrial
fumace.Used oil exceeding any of the
specification levels for toxic metals,
flash point or total halogens is termed
"off-specification used oil" and is
subject to regulatory controls. The
" The person who fint claim* need oil burned for
energy recovery meet* the epedflcation I* tubjecl to
notification, nted oil analytic, and recordkeeping
requirement*. In addition, be mutt keep record* of
the Dame and addrett of the facility receiving each
shipment the date of delivery, and quantity
delivered. See i 28M3(b) (1) and (6).
specification and issues pertaining to
implementing the specification are
discussed below.
Of major importance is how to
distinguish between used oil and
hazardous waste given that used oil has
been frequently found to contain
hazardous halogenated spent solvents
and given that hazardous waste fuel is
regulated differently than used oil under '
today's rule (as weU as under the RCRA
statutory scheme). For example.
hazardous waste fuel is not subject to
the-specification and so may not be
burned in nonindustrial boilers (unless
the boiler operates under RCRA
hazardous waste incinerator standards),
and hazardous waste fuel is subject
under today's rules to storage
controls.10
Issues pertaining to distinguishing
between used oil and hazardous waste
are discussed below.
B. Distinguishing Between Used Oil and
Hazardous Wastes
A number of commenters took issue
with EPA's discussion of how it intends
to distinguish between hazardous waste
and used oil (or if used oil is listed as a
hazardous waste, between used oil and
other hazardous wastes). See 50 FR
1690-1693. EPA indicated that there are
situations where it is difficult to tell if a
waste is used oil or a hazardous waste.
The difficulty is in determining whether
a used oil was mixed with a hazardous
waste, or whether the oil became
contaminated during its (the oil's) use.
The legislative history of the Used Oil
Recycling Act indicates clearly that
used oil that is contaminated during use
is to be classified as used oil and. if
recycled, be subject to regulation under
section 3014. See HJL Rep. No. 96-1415
ate.
We noted in the proposed rule that the
Agency is delegated discretion hi
determining how to classify these
situations, and set out the general
principles that will guide the Agency's
exercise of discretion. These are: (1)
Where possible, clear, objective tests
should be used to classify hazardous
waste and used oil: (2) the Agency
should not adopt a scheme whereby
most used oil is classified as a
hazardous waste ineligible for
regulation under the Section 3014
standards; and (3) any objective test
should ensure that massively
adulterated used oils are classified as
hazardous waste. See 50 FR 1691.
The Agency adheres to this analysis
hi today's final rule, and indeed, this
position had the support of most of the
commentersr Several commenters
argued, however, that EPA's approach
showed an unwarranted bias against
regulating used oil as hazardous waste,
and so would lead to situations where
used oil is not regulated adequately to
protect human health and the
environment because most of the RCRA
Subtitle C standards would not apply.
One commenter even went so far as to
suggest that the Agency was misreading
its legal mandate under the HSWA to
regulate used oil as a hazardous waste.
These commenters misapprehend both
the law and EPA's stated approach. In
the first place, RCRA as amended draws
clear distinctions between hazardous
waste and used oil The statute contains
a separate provision dealing with used
oil as a distinct class and authorizes
separate standards for its management
(See RCRA section 3014.) Nor does the
statutory directive that EPA decide
whether to list used oil as a hazardous
waste (RCRA section 3014[b)) obliterate
this distinction. Even if EPA lists used
oil as a hazardous waste (and the
Agency intends to propose such action
later this year), used oil would still be
subject to regulation under different
standards than apply to other hazardous
wastes. See RCRA sections 3004(a) and
3014(c), (d). Thus, it remains necessary
to distinguish between used oil and
other hazardous waste.
It also is clear that EPA has discretion
on how to make these distinctions. The
legislative history to the 1984
amendments is explicit on this point
See S. Rep. No. 98-284,98th Cong. 1st
Sess. at 36, 38; see also the Conference
Report H. Rep. No. 98-1133,98th Cong.
2d Sess., which speaks of used oil
contaminated with hazardous waste as
used oil to be regulated under Section
3014 (i.e., as a used oil, not as a
hazardous waste).*1
EPA takes sharp issue with the
commenters' assumption that its
proposed (and now final) exercise of
discretion in classifying used oil leads to
a reduction in environmental protection.
With respect to During used oil the rule
promulgated today establishes a used
oil fuel specification that regulates as
necessary to protect human health and
the environment within the meaning of
RCRA section 3014, when the used oil is
burned in nonindustrial boilers. (See
M At noted at proposal, a naxaraout watte fuel
ipedfication it not a featible option beciiue of the
hundred* of hazardout constituent* that would have
to be addretted and the difficultiet of analysing for
all of thete constituent*.
" Specific comment* that EPA exerdted 1U
discretion Improperly with regard to uted oil
containing halogenated hazardous tubitance* and
need oil from unall quantity generator* are
addreued in the preamble section* dealing with
thete istuet.
-------
49176 Federal Register / VoL 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
section IV.C above.} With respect to
other management standards for
recycled used oil. EPA will soon be
proposing cradle to grave management
standards for such oil consistent with
Section 3014. EPA is not doing so in this
rulemaking because the Agency wishes
to avoid piecemeal regulation of the
used oil management community
wherever possible." The commenters
are incorrect however, that this
temporary deferral will lead to an
ultimate reduction in environmental
protection.
We discuss below how we apply the
principles for distinguishing between
used oil and hazardous waste to: Used
oil containing halogenated wastesfused
oil containing hazardous waste
generated by small quantity generators;
and used oil that exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste.
1. Used Oil Containing Halogenated
Wastes. Today'* rule, like the proposed
rule, reiterates the principle found is
S 261.3(a)(2) of the existing regulation*
that a hazardous waste mixed with a
solid waste is a hazardous waste. Thus.
• under this rule, mixtures of hazardous
waste and used oil ordinarily are
classified as hazardous waste. It is not
always possible, however, to prove—or
even to be sure—that such mixing has
occurred, particularly when no one hat
observed the act of mixing. Used oil
containing small amounts of hazardous
halogenated compounds is an example
where there may be uncertainty.
Since hazardous halogenated
compounds—many of them hazardous
waste—are frequently found in used oil
(see Table 1 in the proposal (50 FR
1686)), the Agency believes (and
virtually all commenters agreed) that a
simple, objective test is needed to
determine when used oil has been
mixed with hazardous spent
halogenated solvents (or other
halogenated hazardous waste) in order
to avoid case-by-case confusion as to
when mixing has occurred, and to aid in
consistent enforcement of the regulation.
To this end. EPA proposed, and i»
adopting today a rebuttable
presumption as to when mixing with
hazardous wastes has occurred.
a. The Rebuttable Presumption: The
Standard and Means of Rebutted.
Today's rule establishes a rebuttable
presumption that used, oil containing
more than 1.000 ppm total halogens ha*
been mixed with hazardous spent
halogenated solvents (i.e., EPA
Hazardous Waste No's. F001 and F002)
or other hazardous halogenated wastes
and, therefore, is a hazardous waste^
under provision of the "mixture rule" of
40 CFR 281.3 (i.e.. a mixture of a listed
hazardous waste and other material ii a
hazardous waste unless delisted under
provisions of 40 CFR 260.20).
In response to comment that EPA
clarify the available means of rebutting
this presumption, the final rule states
that the presumption can be rebutted by
demonstrating to enforcement officials
that the oil is not mixed with hazardous
waste. One such approach in making
this demonstration is to show that the
used oil does not contain significant
levels of halogenated hazardous
constituents. See S 266.40(c). Thus, the
presumption can be rebutted
successfully even if some hazardous
halogenated compounds are present in
the oil We believe that oil containing
less than on the order of 100 ppm of any
individual hazardous halogenated
compound listed as a hazardous spent
solvent (i.e.. EPA Hazardous Waste
Numbers FOOT and F002) should not be
presumed to be mixed with spent
solvent As the Agency stated at
proposal (50 FR 1681] and as confirmed
by a number of comments, when these
compounds are present at such low
levels, it is difficult or impossible to
pinpoint the source of the
contamination. Such low levels found at
the generator's site certainly do not
indicate deliberate mixing with
solvents.3* Both used ofl and hazardous
halogenated solvents are frequently
generated by the same facility, and
some incidental contamination im-
probably inevitable. It should be noted
that burning used oil with such levels of
solvent will not pose significant risk
from emissions of either incompletely
burned solvents or hydrochloric acid.14
Presence of a compound listed as a
hazardous halogenated spent solvent at
levels between 100 and 1000 ppm may
indicate mixing with spent solvent
depending on. circumstances specific to
individual cases. For example, if the
used oil in question is from a large tank
at a processing facility where oil from a
number of generators has been mixed.
•' EPA it adopting the uaed oil fuel specification
for noiundtutrial boilen In advance of other rules
for recycled oil to meet the aunt preuing
environmental concern with reipect to recycled off
management and became the prohibffioni on
hazardous waite burning would have little practical
significance nnleu coupled with controU on burning,
recycled oil*
11 For example. If 100 ppm of a solvent to delected.
In 200 gallon* of ueed oil (the quantity frequently
generated over a month bye service itabon.. prior to
pick up by a collector), only 0.002 gallon*, or OJS
ounce* of lolvent have been mixed. Such •D1«u
amount! could not pouibly represent the monuuj
quantity of (pent ulvent from degreadng
operation! at the tervice itatton.
" PEDCO. Environmental Inc. A Riik
Aaenmmt of Watt, Oil Burning in Boihn a*
Soac, Heat,*. Augu.t 1964. pp. «-l **
even low solvent levels may be
indicative of adulieralive mixing. Used
oil mixed with significant levels of
solvent by a generator may have been
diluted with unadulterated oil from
other generators, or spent solvent
collected from a generator may have
been mixed (illegally) into the used oil
by a collector or the processor.
Mixing of used oil with nonsolvent
halogenated hazardous waste, however.
could be indicated by the presence of
hazardous constituents at levels lower
than 100 ppm. For example, if a waste is
not typically cogenerated with used oil,
incidental contamination is not likely.
Other factors include whether the
hazardous constituents could be added
01 formed during use of the oil Thus, if a
used oil contains greater than 1000 ppm
total halogens, and some of the halogen*
are (for example) chlorophenoxy
pesticides, the presumption of mixing
would not necessarily be overcome by
showing that the pesticide is present at
levels less than 100 ppm.
b. Explanation of Changes in the
Rebuttable Presumption Between
Proposal and Final Rule. The rebuttable
presumption of mining hazardous
halogenated solvents with used oil
promulgated today differ* from the
proposal in two respects: total halogens
rather than total chlorine is used as the
basic indicator, and the indicator level
has been lowered from 4000 ppm to 1000
ppm. Total halogens are used as the
indicator because commenten noted
that common chlorine tests actually
measure total halogens reported as tola)
chlorine. The change, thus, is essentially
a technical correction because the used
oil analyses available to the Agency and
used to support the rule already
reported presence of total halogens as
total chlorine.
We lowered the Indicator level front
4000 ppm to 1000 ppm because many
commenters argued that the higher level
would allow and even encourage
significant mixing of hazardous
halogenated solvents with used oif
(contravening one of EPA's enumerated
principles). More importantly, this level
correlates sufficiently well with
presence of significant levels of
hazardous halogenated spent solvents
as to justify use of a presumption, as
discussed below. The 1000 ppm total
halogen level was in fact recommended'
by a number of commenters, including
the State of New York which ha»
substantial experience with this issue.
We have reviewed the more than
eleven hundred used oil analyse*
available in the record for the proposed
nJe and the additional data submitted
by commenters and conclvded that used
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49177
qil will generally contain lest than 1000
ppm of total halogen* unless it is mixed
with hazardous chlorinated solvents or
fa metalworking oil containing
chlorinated additives.11 Eighty-seven
percent (87%) of the samples from a
wide range of sources—generators,
processors, distributors, burners—that
contain more than 1000 ppm total
chlorine (halogens) also contained
significant levels of hazardous
chlorinated solvents (e.g.. more than 100
ppm of any particular solvent).'*' "
Some of the 13% of the samples
containing more-than 1000 ppm total
chlorine but no chlorinated solvents are
known to be metal-working oils (either
because they were obtained from
generators known to be involved in
metal-working or because of their
extremely high chlorine content)
containing nonhazardous chlorinated
additives. Others may be mixed with
these highly chlorinated metalworking
oils such that chlorine levels are greater
than 1000 ppm but lower than typical for
metalworking oils, or the chlorine may
be from some other source.** Based on
"Some metalworking oil* contain extreme
preaaure additive* that are nonhaxardou* highly
chlorinated parafBnic compound*. Thu*, u*ed
melalworking oil* may contain halogen level*
higher tbmn 1000 ppm even though they era not
mixed with baxardou* halogenated •olvenl*. Set
diccumioa ta text regarding application of the
nrbuttable presumption to theee metalworking oil*.
"Baaed on review of anatyee* in Franklin
A**ociaie* Ltd- Compau'lian of Uffd Oil, Appendix
A. Of the more than 1100 uaed oil analy***. 311
•ample* contained more than 1000 ppm of halogen*
and were analyzed for halogenated ealvent*. Eighly-
•even percent of tho*a temple* contained
eignificanl level* of *olvent We preeuined thai
•ampin with high lead level*, no halogeaated
eolvenl*. and low halogen level* (but more than
1OOO ppm of halogen*) would contain le** than 1000
ppm halogen* when lead i* pha*ed out of g»*olin*.
became chlorine or bromine t* added to ga*aUne
only to ecavenge lead from engine component*.
Thu*. halogen level* will fall a* trad i* pha*ed out
of (acoline. Thu*. J8 Rich umple* are excluded
tram the •ample* containing more than 1000 ppm of
halogen*.
The Texa* Air Control Board auhmitted
comment* on the propoeed rulemaking thai included
a report entitled. AaaJyxii of Fit*I Oil* and Watte
Oi'lt for Sulfur. Orgaaochlaiicfff, and Lfod. Augu*t
ISM. Data in Table VI of that report indicate that
77% of u*ed otU [27 of 3* umple*) containing more
than 1000 ppm total halogen* al*o contained
significant levei* of baxardou* balogenaled
eol vent*.
"Although need oil aample* have been found to
contain haxmrdou* balogenated compound! Lifted in
Appendix VUI of Part XI (»j~ dichloroelhane.
tetrachloroethanel that arc are not lifted a* FVXJ1 or
FOCI haxardou* halogenated »olvenl», tbeee
•ample* invariably al»o contain *ipilficanl Icveli of
the F001 or FOO2 tolvwiu. See T*bk VI of th« Texa*
Air Control Board report referenced in note 27. and
data in CCA Corporation, TVw fate ofHatardout
and JVanAaxanfouf Waxtft in Uted Oil Dftpatal
artd kecycjinf. October 1083. p, *S.
these data showing a high percentage of
correlation, and on the supporting
comments, it is EPA's opinion that the
1000 ppm total halogen level is a valid
indicator for-presence of mixing with
listed halogenated hazardous waste.
EPA expressed concern at proposal
that certain used oils might contain
levels of inorganic halogens greater than
1000 ppm, and therefore, that a higher
level was appropriate for the
presumption. The Agency no longer
believes this to be a valid concern. The
Agency stated at proposal that used oil,
particularly crankcase oil from leaded
gasoline engines, could occasionally
contain up to 3000 ppm inorganic
chlorine (or bromine) levels ** *• and
that the higher level of 4000 ppm would
indicate mixing with chlorinated
solvents. Chlorine or bromine are added
to leaded gasoline to "scavenge" lead
from engine components and, thus,
reduce wear and improve engine
performance. The chlorine or bromine
form inorganic lead compounds, some of
which end up in crankcase oil from
engine blow-by. Commenters suggested,
however, that little used oil has levels of
these inorganic halogens exceeding 1000
ppm. As further corroboration, EPA's
own data on used oil sampled at
generators' sites (including both
crankcase and industrial oil, but
excluding highly chlorinated
metalworking oil or oil adulterated with
hazardous halogenated solvents)
indicates that the oil contained less than
1000 ppm total halogens in 32 of 36
cases.'1- "In addition, as lead is phased
out of gasoline, chlorine and bromine
additives also will be lowered, thus
reducing inorganic halogen levels. EPA
consequently believes that very few
used oils will trip the presumption due
"NBS Technical Note 1130— T**t Prnxduret for
fbcyclfd Oil Ut*d at Burner Futt Augiut 1080,
p. 51.
•Franklin Aeaodate*. Ltd. Composition of Ured
Oil. Appendix A,
•' Baaed on review of u*ed oil analyea* in
Franklin Auociate*. Ltd. Competition of Ut*d Oil
Appendix A. We thould not* that 3 crankcan oil
•ample* contained 1000 to 1800 ppm total halogen*
(and no hatogeoated aolvent*}. We pre*ume the
halogen* were attributable to leaded faeoline
•dditlve* becaoee thoee oil* had high lead level*—
1000 to MOO ppm. Wi preiume that thoee oill would
in the future contain I*** than 1000 ppm total
halogen* a* lead 1* pha*ed out of gatollna
(beginning )uly 1985), and. concurrently and
Beceeaarlly. halogen ga*olin« additive* are alto
reduced. Therefore, we believe it 1* reatonabl* to
exclude the** 3 »amp!e* form the total halogen* *o
thai SS of 58 unadulterated, nonmetaj working
umple* conbanlnt more than 100 ppm total
halogen*.
* Data in CCA Co.rparatlo.ri. TTw Fetg of
Nasardotu and NanfHaantoof Watut in Uttd Oil
DftpoteJ and KecyrJing, October 1083, p. 43, aUo
Indicate that u»ed oil generally contain* lew than
1000 pro total halogen*.
to inorganic halogen content of over
1000 ppm. Moreover, as just discussed,
there Is a strong correlation between
halogen levffls of 1000 ppm and high
levels of hazardous halogenated
solvents, even in EPA's present data
base which does not reflect the lead
phasedown.
Nor do most used oils contain high
levels of organic halogens without also
containing high levels of halogenated
spent solvents. The only used oils that
might are metalworking oils, which
comprise a small segment of the used oil
fuel market. See 50 FR at 1692 (January
11,1985). Metalworking oils can contain
extreme pressure additives that are
nonhazardous chlorinated paraffinic
compounds that can result in organic
chlorine levels of several percent These.
organic chlorinated compounds are not
toxic (i.e., they are not listed as
constituents of hazardous waste in
Appendix VIII of Part 261), and. thus, the
hazard from incomplete combustion of
these compounds is not of concern.4'
The issue here is application of the
presumption to these oils.
We believe that the rebuttable
presumption of mixing halogenated
solvents, with used oil should still apply
to persons who manage highly
chlorinated metalworking oils. In the
first place, these oils can still be mixed
with hazardous halogenated solvents (as
confirmed both by data and by
comments on the proposed rule).
Metalworking operations often use large
quantities of degreasing solvents.
Second, metalworking oils also can be
adulterated with halogenated hazardous
wastes after leaving the site of
generation. Finally, persons managing
used metalworking oils that are not
. adulterated should have readily
available means of rebutting the
presumption.44
c. Additional Response to Comment
on the Rebuttable Presumption. (1)
Basil for Not Setting the Halogen
Indicator Lewi on Risk. Some
commenters maintained that the
chlorine level for the presumption of
mixing should be based on risk posed by
the solvent/oil mixture, rather than on
the basis of mixing, per se. These
41 We are. however, concerned about the add-
forming potential of tneee compound* when
oombuiled. and the militant emi»«.km» of
hydrochloric acid and the effect* of accelerated
oojTcxion on boiler parti and my eminio.n control
equipment Thete oil* will fail the n*ed oil fuel
fpecificiUan tor total halogen* and are lubfect to
regulation a* ofT-»p*cif]c*tion u*ed oil (>ec tecUon
IV.C of text),
** A* noted earlier, the final rule Indicate! th«[
one way the preiumptioo may be rebutted it by
•howirvg that the oil doe* not contain ligaificant
level* of halogenated haxardotu coaitiruentt.
-------
49178 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
comments mistake the Agency's
purpose: to distinguish used oil from
hazardous waste. As EPA pointed out in
the preamble to the proposed rule, the
basis of the presumption is not a new
concept. Section 261.3(b) says that when
a solid waste is mixed with a hazardous
waste, the mixture is a hazardous waste"
unless it does not exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste, or, if
the hazardous waste was a listed waste
(like many halogenated solvents), unless
the mixture is delisted under petitioning
provisions of 4fi CFR 260.20 and 260.22.
The rebuttable presumption merely
provides a simple, objective test for
when the Agency will presume such
mixing has occurred. The risks posed by
burning both hazardous waste
(including adulterated used oil) and off-
specification used oil are addressed in
today's rule with respect to burning in
nonindustrial boilers and will be
addressed further by the permit
standards for burning such fuels in
industrial boilers and industrial
furnaces.
We note further that a number of
commenters erred by considering the
rebuttable presumption level for total
halogens to fix the level at which used
oil containing halogens would be subject
to regulation (assuming no other source
of adulteration): The rebuttable
presumption is not a measure of when
regulation is necessary, but a measure of
when mixing can be presumed to have
occurred. Used oil containing halogens.
at less than the presumption level could
still be regulated as hazardous waste,
but the burden would be on EPA to
prove that such used oil is a hazardous
waste by virtue of mixing with a listed
hazardous waste. See 50 FR1692, n. 22.
EPA's burden would not automatically
be satisfied by showing evidence of
halogen levels in the used oil.
(2) Organic Versus Total Halogens as
the Indicator Level. Several commenters
suggested that organically-bound
chlorine (or, more correctly, halogens)
rather than total chlorine should be used
for the presumption of mixing because it
avoids the problems with inorganic
\ alogens discussed above (i.e., some oils
with insignificant hazardous
I alogenated solvent levels may contain
more than 1000 ppm total halogens
because of presence of inorganic
chlorine). After serious consideration.
we have decided to base the
presumption on total halogen levels due
to the problems of implementing a
standard based on organic halogens.
We know of no quick, simple method
for determining organicallyrbound
halogen levels in used oil. The sample
n ust be "washed" to remove inorganic
halogens before determining organic
halogen levels. Moreover, we have only
just recently Investigated techniques for
washing to remove inorganic halogens
from used oil and are not yet ready to
recommend a procedure. Even if an
acceptable technique were available,
washing would add substantially to the
time required to determine halogen
levels. (See discussion of analytical
procedures in section IV-F of Part Two
of this preamble.) The need for washing
also would raise analytical costs
unnecessarily.
In addition, organic halogens would
be a more accurate measure of presence
of hazardous halogenated solvents than
total halogens only if used oil often
contains more than 1000 ppm of
inorganic halogens. We have discussed
above, however, that the data indicate
that inorganic halogen levels are
generally lower than 1000 ppm. finally,
use of organic halogens rather than total
halogens does not avoid the problem of
occasional false-positives caused by
nonhazardous organic chlorine additives
found in metalworking oils.
In summary, a presumption based on
organic halogen levels offers few
advantages and has serious problems.
2. Used Oil Containing Hazardous
Waste Generated by Small Quantity
Generators. EPA proposed that used oil
containing hazardous waste generated -
by small quantity generators be
regulated as used oiL 50 FR 1682. The
Agency reasoned that in exercising its
discretion as to how to classify used oil
(i.e., as used oil or as hazardous waste J*
EPA should avoid a scheme whereby
most used oil was classified as
hazardous waste ineligible for
regulation under the special standards
for used oiL EPA was concerned that
this might result if small quantity
generator hazardous waste-used oil
mixtures were classified as hazardous
waste. Id. At the same time, EPA
solicited comments on alternative
approaches, including regulating such
niixtures as hazardous waste or
classifying only automotive oQ
containing small quantity generator
waste as used oil Id. at n. 24.
Comments were divided. Although
some commenters supported the
Agency, others were critical,
maintaining that EPA's proposal could
encourage adulteration of used oil, and
lead to significant enforcement
problems.
EPA has decided to modify its
proposal, in part due to the public
comments. More importantly, however.
oui re-evaluation of available date
indicates that few small quantity
generators are presently mixing
hazardous waste with used oil.
Analyses indicate that fewer than 15%
of the generators of crankcase oil (who
are presumed to be small quantity
generators), and fewer than 12% of the
generators of industrial oils (some of
whom may have been small quantity
generators), generate used oil that is
mixed with significant levels of
halogenated hazardous solvents.4* In
addition, the average vehicle
maintenance shop or service station,
according to EPA's data, ** produces an
average of 50 kg/month of hazardous
waste in the form of spent solvents, and
500 kg/month of used oiL Intentional
mixing would yield a contamination rate
of 10%, or 100,000 ppm. The data in the
following table show that actual
contamination at the generator site, with
few exceptions, is orders of magnitude
lower and so probably results from
inadvertent and perhaps unavoidable,
contamination during use of the oil or
handling of used oiL47
44 Analysis of 21 sample* of crankcase oil known
to be obtained from the generator (e.g™ service
stations, auto repair shops, truck dealer,
construction equipment facility), and that not
adulterated with solvents by collectors or
processors, reveal* that only 3 cantata significant
level* of hazardous halogenated solvents. Analysis,
of 28 samples of Industrial oil known to be obtained
from the generator. Indicate only 3 contain
significant levels of hazardous halogenated
solvent*. Analysis of data in Franklin Associates,
Ltd, Composition of Used Oil Appendix A.
•« Industrial Economics. Inr... Draft Regulatory
Analysis for Proposed Regulations Under RCRA for
Small Quantity Generators of Hazardous Waste.
February 1985, Draft Report Exhibit 3-1.
«' Several commenton mistakenly criticized
EPA's statement at proposal (50 FR 1692) that small
quantity generators do not massively adulterate
their used oil They reasoned that because most
used oil come* from small quantity geimatum. and
much is adulterated, that the generators are doing
the adulteration. In net all data indicate thai
collectors and processors are the principal source of
hazardous waste contamination. Comparison of
used oil sampling data from generators and from
processing facilities in the table below shows a
dramatic increa*e in halogenated solvent levels at
wad oil processing facilities.
Sotvant Concentration* lucres** Damatfcally as
Used. Oil More* From la*
fafFacUlUw
Ofl MOtpl-rf •! imorator §H*r
Induvtri-4 off-.
Ott H0pM « prao-Minf fa-
cility:
8oi**« ConcutratlM*
PP» l«th nananiite
tovrii)
SolYMt
A'
n
n
SUDD-
uoo
Solnat
B»
n
is
SOD
400
Sohoa
C«
as
SB
&QOO
U»
'MJ-Trlehloioemepa,
•TMehkmthytaii*.
Source Franklin Anarlnm. Lj*. Ctmpatitiaa
OXpp.»-Mlo»-o«. powna,
-------
Federal Register / Vol. SO. No, 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49179
TABLE 1.—SOLVENT CONCENTRATIONS m USED
OIL AT GENERATOR FACJUTIES
• 1.1.1-TncMoroeaian*
* TricNorotthylm
Some FrtnUn
pp 3-33 to 3-36,
Ufl, Cminnaaon of tfrerf Q(
Consequently, it does not appear that
classifying small quantity generator
waste-used oil mixtures as hazardous
waste would result in classifying large
percentages of used oil ai ordinary
hazardous waste. As a factual matter,
EPA's stated concern at proposal thus
does not appear to be present
The final rule thus states that this type
of mixture is to be classified as a
hazardous waste. [But as explained
below, at least for purposes of this
rulemaking. these mixtures are subject
to regulation as used oil fuel when
burned for energy recovery.) We have
decided, however, at least for the time
being to regulate-this (usually exempt)
small quantity generator waste
regardless of the quantity generated
when it is mixed with used oil as part of
a waste-derived fuel. EPA is taking this
step, for a number of reasons. To do
otherwise would create the very
situation feared by the commenters
whereby the rules would create an
incentive to adulterate and be much
more difficult to enforce. This is because
if small quantity generator waste could
be mixed with otherwise-regulated used
oil and the mixture was exempt from
regulation, people undoubtedly would
take advantage of the opportunity to
escape regulation, or raise the issue of
mixing as a defense in enforcement
actions. Potentially large volumes and
percentages of recycled used oil could
go unregulated, in derogation of
Congressional intent.4* Thus, the final
«• The Agency Is also of the Initial view that If
lurd oil ii lifted as • hazardous waste then
unmixed recycled Died oil should continue to be
regained regardless of quantity generated.
(Regulation probably would begin once used oQ U
aggregated.) EPA't reasoning for regulating thti type
of hazardous wmsle differently from other mull
quantity generator hazardous wastes will be aet out
more fully in the eoon-to-be-propoied regulation*
litting uaed oil at a hazardous watte and propoeing
management standards for recycled oil but in
summary;
• Exempting tmall quantity generator uaed oil
(uaed oil generated in quantities of 0-100 kg per
»anth! would exempt approximately 9 per cent of
all uaed oil genera laid. In contrast the exemption for
•mall quantity generator hazardous wat*c
[hazardous waste generated in monthly quantities
of 0-100 kg per month) examplt only O.«r porcenl
of all hazardous waste. EPA doet not btiifve such a
rule contains an amendment to $ 261.5
indicating that small quantity generator
hazardous waste-used oil mixtures are
not exempt from regulation when
burned for energy recovery but are
•object to Subpart E of Part 266.
This means that at least on an interim
basis, such mixtures can be burned in
aonindustrial boilers if they meet the
fuel specification. These mixtures also
are subject to the administrative
controls for off-specification used oil
fuels should they fail to meet the fuel
specification. Generators of these
mixtures would not be subject to
regulation unless they are also
marketers of used oil fuel (See Part Four
below.)
EPA has not reached a final decision
on which controls should apply to this
type of hazardous waste. We also wish
to examine further, and seek comment
on, the impacts on small businesses
should all of these hazardous wastes be
regulated at various levels of control.
See RCRA section 3001(d). Because we
believe further comment on an ultimate
regulatory regime is appropriate, we
have decided to retain as an interim
.measure the regulatory scheme initially
proposed whereby this type of small
quantity generator waste remains
subject to all of the controls applicable
to used oil fuel This will ensure that
there is no outright exemption while the
Agency evaluates an ultimate resolution
in its consideration of comment on the
comprehensive rules for recycled oil
soon to be proposed.
3. Used Oil that Exhibits a
Characteristic of Hazardous Waste.
Used oil itself might be a hazardous
waste if it exhibits a characteristic of
hazardous waste. The most likely
result consistent with Congressional intent mat
recycled oil be regulated as necessary to protect
human health and the environment particularly in
light of statements of evident legislative inlent that
crankeaae oil (which is generated by small quantity
generators) be regulated. See RCRA section 3014(b):
HJt Rep. S8-14U it 6.
• The total volume of recycled used oil generated
by small quantity generator! is significantly greater
than that of all other small quantity generator
hazardous wastes combined: 540.000 tons/year vs.
1B&000 tons/year
• Unregulated small quantity generator used afl
could have greater potential for coming into direct
human contact than other small quantity generator
wastes because such a Urge volume is burned in the
residential market
Thus, the Agency tees important distinctions
between small quantity generator used oil and other
email quantity generator hazardous waste. This
reasoning also applies to regulating recycled oil in
today's final rule—prior to recycled oil being a
hazardous watts without regard for quantity
generated. (The Agency is not reaching the question
of whether, assuming there was no difference
between tmall quantity generator uaed oil and other
amaU quantity generator hazardous waste, other
hazardous waste generated in volumes of 0-100 kg
per month should be regulated.)
possibility is ignitabiliry.49- »° As
discussed at proposal (see 50 FR at
1093). EPA intends that used oil that is a
hazardous waste solely because it
exhibits a characteristic of hazardous
waste be regulated as used oil fuel
(where so recycled), provided that it is
not mixed with a hazardous waste.*1
ignitable used oil is regulated as used oil
under today's rule and is prohibited
from burning in nonindustrial boilers
when its flash point is less than that of
commercial fuel (Le, 100 *F).
We have considered whether a low
flash point serves as a presumptive
indication of mixing with hazardous
waste, and therefore, that such mixtures
should be regulated as hazardous
wastes ineligible for regulation under
section 3014 standards for used oil. We
conclude that low flash point is not an
indicator of mixing for a number of
reasons and that such oil should be
regulated as used oil.
Low flash point may not be indicative
of mixing with hazardous waste because
the low flash point may be attributable
to benzene, toluene, or xylene added to
crankcase oil from engine blow-by
(these compounds are constituents of
gasoline) rather than as spent solvent
Low flash point could also be
attributable to mixing gasoline from
tank drainings at auto service and repair
•hops with used oil. Gasoline is a
commercial chemical product exhibiting
a characteristic of hazardous waste.
When gasoline (or any commercial
chemical product) is discarded, it is
subject to regulation as hazardous
waste. But when a commercial chemical
fuel is recycled (e.g., mixed with used oil
and burned for energy recovery), it is
not discarded (within the meaning of the
role) and so is not a hazardous waste.
See i 281.33 (July 15. 1985) and 50 FR 818
(January 4,1985).
In addition, today's rule for burning
low flash point used oil (or any off-
*• Although most used oils have a flash point
greater than 200 f. 28* of the used oil samples had
a flash point less than 140 *F. Source.- Franklin
Associates Ltd, Competition of Utod Oil, p. 3-5*.
" Although used oil may contain high levels of
lead, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, or barium, oil
does IKK often exhibit the characteristic of EP
Toxidty for these metals, m addition, these metals
are present In used oil almost invariably as a result
of the oil's use, not as a result of adulteration with
hazardous waste. Nevertheless, since these metals
can pose a hazard when used oil is burned for
energy recovery, the specification for used oil that
may be burned in nonindustrial boilers limits levels
of arsenic, cedmiu. chromium, and lead. Barium
levels are not considered to pose a substantial
health hazard and. thus, barium is not included in
the specification. (See section FV.C in the text)
•' Except that mixtures of small quantity
generator hazardous watte and uted oil art tuu(ect
to regulation at used oil as discussed above.
-------
49180 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
specification used oil) provides a level
of environmental protection analogous
to that provided by the rules for burning
hazardous waste fuels. Neither
hazardous waste fuel nor off-
specification used oil fuel may be
burned in nonindustrial boilers. The
only area where the classification as
used oil results in less regulation is with
respect to storage and transportation of
off-specification used oiL Although not
regulated by today's rule, storage and
transportation of off-specification used
oil is addressed in the Used Oil Listing/
Management Standards soon to be
proposed. The purpose of today's rule is
to begin regulation of blending and
burning activities by prohibiting burning
of hazardous waste and contaminated
used oil in nonindustrial boilers. Other
rulemakings will propose
comprehensive regulations under
section 3014 for storage and
transportation of used oil, and for the
actual burning of off-specification used
oil and hazardous waste fuels in
industrial boilers and industrial
furnaces. Thus, the primary purpose of
today's final rule is met by regulating
low flash point oils as off-specification
used oil rather than as hazardous waste,
while decisions on appropriate controls
(and impacts) for storage and
transportation'of off-specification used
oil are left to the rulemaking specific to
used oil that will be proposed under
section 3014.
Commenters asked whether used oil
known to be mixed with a characteristic
hazardous waste is regulated as used oil
fuel or hazardous waste fuel if the
mixture exhibits a characteristic. As
discussed above, used oil mixed with
hazardous waste is regulated as
hazardous waste fuel41 It is only when
we are uncertain that mixing has
occurred that we five the benefit of
doubt (e.g., low flash point used oil and
used oil containing less than 1000 ppm
total halogens) and do not presume that
mixing has occurred. Thus, when used
oil has been mixed with a characteristic
hazardous waste, the mixture is
regulated as hazardous waste fuel if it
continues to exhibit a characteristic. If
the resultant mixture no longer exhibits
a characteristic of hazardous waste, it is
regulated as used oil.6* This is merely a
" Except that mixture* of small quantity
generator hazardous waite and used oil are subject
on an Interim batii to regulation ai used oil
(although classified at hazardous watte fuel).
•• It should be noted that mixing a characteristic
hazardous waste with another material to render
the waste nonhazardous constitutes treatment of
hazardous waste subject to applicable standards
under 40 CFR Parts 264-285 and 270, and the
notification requirements of section 3010 of RCRA.
statement of the "mixture rule" in
1261.3.
Some used oils may exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste but
meet the specification for used oil fuel
exempt from regulation.*4 Examples are
used oil fuel with a flash point less than
140 *F. the hazardous waste
characteristic, but greater than 100 *F,
the specification level and (much less
frequently) used oil fuel with metals
levels (particularly lead) greater than
the EP toxic characteristic levels, but
less than the specification levels.
Although such used oils are exempt
from regulation and may be burned in
nonindustrial boilers, the specification
ensures that such burning would not
pose significantly greater risk than
burning virgin fuel oil.
C. The Specification for Used Oil That
May Be Burned in Nonindustrial Boilers
The Agency has developed a
specification for used oil fuel that may
be burned without regulation (i.e.,
burned without regulation in
nonindustrial boilers as well as other
boilers or industrial furnaces). Given
that oil meeting specification parameters
may be burned in nonindustrial facilities
like apartment and office buildings, the
specification is intended to be protective
under virtually all circumstances.
In this section of the preamble, we
discuss comments an EPA's risk
assessment, the basis for selecting
specification parameters and levels, and
explain the changes made in the
specification in response to comments.
We also explain why we rejected
certain commenters' arguments that off-
specification used oil should not be
blended to meet the specification and
that all burning of used oil in
nonindustrial boilers should be
prohibited. Finally, we provide guidance
on analytical procedures and testing
frequency to determine conformance
with the specification and the rebuttable
presumption of mixing hazardous
halogenated solvents.
1. Comments on EPA's Risk
Assessment EPA considered regulating
any contaminant typically found in used
oil in higher concentrations than in
virgin oil, and which also was
determined to pose a significant risk to
human health and the environment
when burned. Some commenters argued
that EPA's risk assessment approach is
overly conservative resulting in
" We have noted above that the rule provide*
the same level of protection for burning hazardous
waste fuel and for burning used oil exhibiting a
characteristic of hazardous waste that also Is off-
specification used oil fuel This Is because neUher
hazardous wast, fuel nor of^Pe^"?"'«•"' "*
fuel may be burned In nonindustrial oouers.
unnecessarily stringent regulations,
while others argued that the assessment
did not adequately consider all risks.
The Agency believes the PEDCo risk
assessment •• adequately indicates the
potential for substantial risk from
burning used oil in uran areas. The risk
assessment with one exception, is used
to indicate potential risk, not to actually
set specification levels based on some
qualification of risk.*'We used the risk
assessment to identify those
constituents that may pose increased
risks at levels that are cause for concern
given the large number of exposed
individuals in urban areas. When those
constituents are typically found in used
oil at levels greater than in virgin fuel
oils (Le.. the 95th percentile level in
No's. 2-6 fuel oils), they were included
in the specification at their 95th
percentile levels in virgin fuel oils. We
reasoned that higher levels could pose
substantial risk, and levels lower than
found in virgin fuel oil would not
provide protection of human health and
the environment if used oil is replaced
(as it would be) by virgin oil
The PEDCo risk assessment is fully
documented La a published report, a
copy of which is in the public docket
The assessment is also summarized in
some detail in the proposal See 50 FR
1693-1700. The primaryinputs to the
emissions models were actual data (e.g.,
composition of used oil based on
hundreds of analyses: emissions were
modeled for the New York City urban
area considering actual meteorological
conditions and projections of used oil
burning based on actual density and
location of multi-family dwelling units).
Boiler emissions were projected
assuming 97% destruction of organics
and a 75% emission rate for metals. The
Agency considers the 97% destruction
efficiency for organics reasonable but
conservative given that test burn data
indicate that very small boilers can
achieve 99% to 99.99% destruction
efficiency for hard-to-bum chlorinated
compounds. "Although data on metals
emissions rates are very limited, the
available data indicate that metals
emissions rates average 31 to 75%, with
chromium haying the lowest rate and
lead the highest** We thus consider a
• «• PEDCo Environmental toe, A Risk /UweM/nen.
of Watte Oil Burning ia Boilen and Space Heater*.
August 1064.
•• For lead, the risk assessment Is mod to
estimate the high end of the proposal specification
nnge. See 50 FR 1997-1988 [January it IBSSJ.
•' CCA Corp. SnrironannlaJ Characterization of
Watte Oil Combuttian. May 1984. pp. 16 and 20.
»• PEDCo Environmental too, Ritk Aaeument of
Wattf Oil Burning. January IBM. pp. 3-17 ,„,) 3_^
-------
Federal Register J Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49181
75% emissions rate for metals to be a
realistic, but reasonably conservative
assumption.
The two air dispersion models used to
estimate ground level concentrations of
contaminants are routinely used by EPA
for that purpose. Estimated ambient
levels were used to project the increased
risk from carcinorganic compounds and
to determine whether levels of other
compounds that have a safe or threshold
level of exposure (i.e., thershold
compounds) would be likely to cause
substantial adverse health effects. The
compounds considered to be
carcinogenic and their potency factors
were obtained from EPA's Carcinogen
Assessment Group. To determine
whether chronic exposure to the
estimated ambient levels of threshold
compounds would pose a health
hazard Environmental Exposure Limits
(EEL's) were calculated. EEL's are based
primarily on workplace threshold limit
values (TLVs) published by the
American Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists. The TLVs are'
adjusted mathematically for use in
assessing enviromental exposure by
considering a number of factors
including: exposure duration, population
susceptibility, and the nature and
conditions of the experimental health
effects data. TLVs are typically used by
the Agency to project safe levels of
exposure when more appropriate animal
health effects data are not available.
The limitations of using TLVs to
determine EEL's are well documented
by PEDCo".
Although some assumptions were
necessary as with any risk assessment,
and it can be argued that those
assumptions were too conservative or
too lenient, the Agency does not believe
(and commenters did not show) that the
use of alternate, but reasonable,
assumptions would affect the outcome
of the assessment
Specific comments on particular
aspects of the risk assessment are
discussed below.
2. Specification Parameters. As
discussed above, EPA identified typical
contaminants of used oil and proposed
specification levels for those compounds
found in higher concentrations in used
oil than in virgin refined fuel oil and
which could also pose a significant
health risk when burned. (See Table 2
below.) We did not propose
specification levels for compounds foud
in used oil at the same or lower levels
than are found in virgin refined fuel oil
because users could simply switch to
virgin oil to replace the recycled product
without any environmental benefit
We have added total halogens and
deleted PCBs from the specification, as
discussed below. We also respond
below to comments that a number of
other constituents should be added to
the specification.
TABLE 2-—USED On. FOB. SPECIFICATION1
CanMMM/
property
2ppmmaamum.
10 ppm mamm
10-100 ppm
90 *>n*
100 "Ft
fine* wto
2 ppm maximum.
10 ppm laaiimum.
100 ppm mamun.
'The tpecification «pf*« anty to uMd oil (Ml to not
afcrad mm hizirdou* ml* oner men ml quantity oenar-
•lor humMui mitt.
• €PA piuuuml to • Mtaet tw* tram the rang* ol 10 to
100 ppm lor promulgation. LMd • tmHJ to 100 ppm by
Mey't tnal rue.
a. Total Halogens. We have added
total halogens to the specification
because burning fuels with high chlorine
levels can have direct and indirect
effects on human health and the
environment As noted in background
documents to the proposed rule, and as
observed by a number of commenters,
hydrogen chloride emissions from
burning such fuels can increase ambient
levels of hydrochloric acid and
contribute to acid rain. Equally
significant, the chlorine can also
accelerate corrosion of boiler
components which could decrease
combustion efficiency resulting in
increased emissions of incompletely
burned combustion products. Corrosion
of any air emissions control equipment
could also be accelerated, reducing
control efficiency and directly
increasing emissions of pollutants. (See
also H.R. Rep. 98-196 at 42 noting this
concern.)
We selected a specification level of
4,000 ppm for total halogens *° based on
halogen levels in high chlorine coal. We
believe that limiting halogen levels to
the highest levels found in fossil fuels
will ensure that burning used oils with
equivalent or lower halogen levels will
not accelerate corrosion rates.*'
" PEDCo Environmental Inc. A Kill Attetiment
of Watte Oil Burning, pp. E -2 through E-15.
It it only by coincidence that thit it the time
level originally propoted for the rebultable
pretumption. The (peciflcation parameter* apply
only lo uted oil fuel after It hat been determined
that the nted oil ii not mixed with harardoui watte
(e.g., by applying the pretumption of mixing). Thut,
the total halogen tpecificttion level Ii bated on
different principle! and it uted for different
purpotei than the total halogen level for the
pretumption of mixing.
"Boiler manufacturer! become concerned (bout
•xcettive oomtion rate* when coil chlorine level*
exceed 2.500 ppm. A boiler burning uaed oil
containing about 4.000 ppm chlorine would be
Although used oil normally replaces
virgin fuel oil that has very low halogen
levels (less than 100 ppm), we do not
believe burning used oil with halogen
levels found in coal will substantially
increase corrosion rates. In fact many
boilers burning fuel oil were originally
designed to burn coal and were
converted to oil burning to meet air
emissions standards.
Used oil fuel (not mixed with
hazardous waste) can contain high
levels of halogens from two sources. As
discussed above metalworking oils are
sometimes processed to produce fuel
These metalworking oils can contain
extreme pressure additives that are
highly chlorinated, but nonhazardous,
organic compounds. Total chlorine
levels in these used oils can be several
percent.
In addition, "light ends" from the
distillation (e.g., rerefining) of used oil
can contain high levels of halogens ted
compounds. Although the used oil
feedstock entering the distillation
process contains less than 1000 ppm of
total halogens and is not presumed to be
a hazardous waste, the oil can contain
insignificant levels of volatile,
halogenated compounds (e.g., less than
100 ppm of halogenated compounds
listed as hazardous spent solvents). The
light ends produced from such oil will
contain much higher levels of
halogenated compounds due to the
concentrating effect of the distillation
process. These light ends are a by-
product of used oil rerefining to produce
recycled lube oil and are often burned
on-site as fuel. These light ends are
regulated as used oil rather than as
hazardous waste even though their total
halogen content exceeds 1000 ppm and
they contain substantial levels of
halogenated compounds listed as
hazardous spent solvents. This is
because the halogenated compounds are
present in significant levels as a'result
of processing (i.e., they are
concentrated), not as a result of mixing
with halogenated hazardous waste.82
When light ends containing less than
4000 ppm total halogens (but perhaps up
to 4000 ppm of halogenated compounds
that are listed as hazardous spent
solvents) are burned, emissions of
exposed to the tame quantity of chlorine per hour
at It would be if it were burning coaJ containing
2.500 ppm chlorine. Thit It became the heating
value of uted oil it higher thin that of coal (16,500
v§. 1UJOO Btu/lb) and. thut. lest uted oil it required
to provide a given boiler heat input
•' Although low levelt of htlogenated compound!
(e.g., let! than 100 ppm of tetrachloroethylene) m
the uied oil feedttock to the dittillation proceti
may •onetime* molt from mixing with haiardout
•pent eolvenU. the ieveit are too iow to prcium?
tuch mixing hat occurred.
-------
49182 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
hydrogen chloride or incompletely
-burned halogenated compounds will not
pose a substantial risk to human health
and the environment.*" Light ends with
more than 4000 ppm total halogens are
regulated under today's rule as off-
specification used oil, and as such,
cannot be burned in nonindustrial
boilers. We are developing permit
standards for burning «uch oil
(scheduled to be proposed in 1986) that
would consider the hazard posed by the
presence of hazardous halogenated
constituents. (Permit standards for
burning such used oil may in fact be
similar to the standards for burning
hazardous waste fuels.)
b. PCBs. EPA included polychorinated
byphenyls (PCBs) in the proposed
specification only as a reference to the
Agency's rules regulating PCBs. PCBs
are regulated under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) and the
rules are codified at 40 CFR Part 761.
Those rules include controls for the use
and disposal of materials containing
PCBs.
PCBs are not included in the final
specification promulgated today,
however, because commenters indicated
that the crossreference caused
confusion. Specifically, commenters
were concerned that setting a
specification level could encourage
dilution of PCBs in an attempt to avoid
regulation under TSCA.~DUution to
avoid regulation is expressly prohibited
under the TSCA rules. See § 761.1(b),
If used oil fuel contains PCBs and also
does not meet the used oil fuel
specification provided by,today's rules,
then it is subject to the more stringent of
the applicable TSCA PCB rules and
today's used oil fuel rules.
c. Other Constituents. Commenters
suggested that other used oil
constituents should be included in the
specification nothwithstanding our
arguments that these constituents either
are not likely to pose substantial health
risk or that they are not present in used
oil at significantly greater levels than
virgin oil (and lower specification levels
could result in a virgin product
displacing the recycled product with no
environmental benefit).
(1) Barium and Zinc. Although we
found that barium and zinc are present
in used oil in concentrations 10-100
times greater than in virgin fuel oil, the
Agency's risk assessment indicated that
the resulting increased levels of barium
and zinc would produce insignificant
risks to human health and the
environment
Several commenters expressed
concern over what they considered the
serious health impacts of high levels of
barium and zinc, and argued that EPA
should err on the overprotective side by
prescribing specifications for these
metals. EPA continues to believe that
the presence of these metals in used oil
does not pose significant risk for the
reasons discussed below.
EPA's risk assessment indicates that
maximum ambient levels of zinc from
burning used oil could represent about
2% of the Environmental Exposure Limit
(EEL).*4 Thus, zinc does not have a
serious impact on air quality near single
or multiple sources, or in high-density
urban areas.
Although the case is less clear with
barium, the Agency concludes that
barium likewise does not pose a serious
health risk. The PEDCo risk assessment
indicates that maximum ambient levels
of barium could represent 30% of the
EET. (Id). Given that the inhalation of
barium can cause toxic effects
(primarily an increase in muscle
excitability, particularly in the cardiac
muscle), the Agency specifically asked
for comment on whether barium should
be added to the specification.
For a number of reasons, however, the
PEDCo risk assessment overstates the
risk posed by barium. The PEDCo
analysis used an early survey of used oil
analyses to determine barium levels in
used oils. The most recent and
expanded data base includes 752 barium
analyses compared to the 400 analyses
in the data base used by PEDGo. The
90th percentile barium levels used in the
risk assessment (based on the 400
analyses) was 485 ppm, while the 90th
percentile barium level in the expanded
data base is only 251 ppm, about 50%
lower. Given that composition data
based on the expanded data base are*
considered more representative, the
PEDCo analyses overstates ambient
barium levels by a factor of two.
In addition, the PEDCo assessment
estimates a safe level for lifetime
exposure to airborne barium based
primarily on the workplace threshold
limit value (TLV). This safe level in
called an Environmental Exposure Limit
(EEL). See discussion above on EELs.
The barium EU calculated for the risk
assessment is more than 50% lower than
the safe level calculated from the
interim Acceptable Daily Intake set by
EPA.*1 The ADI-baaed safe exposure
level is considered more appropriate
than the TLV-based EEL because the
ADI is based on a comprehensive
review of pertinent toxicologic and
environmental data. EELs are commonly
used for risk assessments only when
ADI's have not been determined (or
cannot be determined because of
inadequate data). Thus, the risk posed
by barium has been overstated by more
than a factor of two for this reason as
well
In summary, the PEDCo assessment
overstates the risk posed by barium by
more than a factor of four. When these
factors are considered, the maximum
ambient levels (assuming clustered
boilers with overlapping emission
plumes, another conservative
assumption) would be 0.18 f*g/m* while
the ADI-based safe level for chronic
exposure is 1 f*g/m8.*6 When
background ambient barium levels are
added to the maximum levels from used
oil burning, total ambient barium levels
could range from 0,18 to 0.43 pg/m'.*7
As with lead emission* discussed
elsewhere, ambient barium levels thus
would not be expected to pose
significant risk except in extreme and
unique "hot spot" situations (e.g^ where
boilers are clustered together, and
receptors are located directly
downwind, very dose to the boilers, and
at the centerline of the emissions
plume), which would occur only very
rarely.
(2) PNAa. A few commenters
indicated the need to set specification
levels for polynuclear aromatic
compounds (PNAs).Si A major
environmental commenter was critical
of EPA's risk assessment in general and
was particularly concerned with EPA's
conclusion that specification levels were
not needed for PNAs. The commenter
argued that data cited by the Agency did
" A* discussed ibove. even very small bolltti
can achieve 99* to 99.99% desMctMn efficiency for
halogenaled compound*.
•« PEDCo Environments] too, A Kak Auettmtnt
of Wane Oil Burning, p. 8-4
•• EPA Environmental Criteria and Assessment
Office. Hfaith Effect* Aaettment for Barium, June.
1084. p. 13 [Draft), and Peer Consultants, toe,
Health Effect* and Ambient Data for Barium,
October 1BS4. p. 9 (Unpublished Report).
M This comparison stfll overstates the riak
because the PEDCo assessment eeJculaln
m«»im.mi ambient levels for the month of January
when used oil burning la greatest The ADI-bcsed
sale level of exposure, however, aasunea constant
exposure over a lifetime Thus, avenge annual
ambient levels (Including summer months when
little used oil is burned) should actually be used for
comparison to the ADI-based safe exposure level.
•«» Op Clt, Peer Consultants. toe, p. 4.« should be
noted however, thai It is not dear to what extent
the background barium levels already include
barium from used oil burning. Thus, adding the so-
called background levels to levels from used oil
burning elso may overstate the risk.
•• PNAs ore a subset of organic compounds
known ss polyaromatic hydrocarbon* (PAfisL
PNAs are of particular concern beceuae some en
known csrdnogens. PAHs are compounds with two
or more benzene rings, the basic structure that
ssparates aromatic or "ringed" compounds from
aliphatic or "chain" compounds. PNAs ere
compounds with two benxene rings fused tomther
so that they shore two carbon etoma.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49183
not show, as the Agency indicated at
proposal," that PNA levels in used oil
and virgin fuel oil are comparable, and
that PNA emissions from burning used
oil and virgin fuel oil are comparable.
We have reviewed the data used to
support our decision at proposal and
continue to believe that the risk posed
by PNAs from burning used oil and
virgin fuel oil is comparable. The
following data (Table 3) show that
levels of benzo(a)anthracene and
benzo(a)pyrene. the PNAs typically of
concern due to their cartinogenicity. in
used oil and virgin fuel oil are
comparable:
TABLE 3.—PNA LEVELS m USED OIL AND
VIRGIN FUEL OIL
Coapaund
B^W^A
Consent*.
tontouMd
efttppm)
(00th
pwcvntt*]
40
1«
CmantiB-
lion fci OTQVI
kjrio*
topm)
(rang*}
1S-BT
S»-M
. UA. Companion at U*a Ol
pp. 1-12 end 5-«.
Although PNA levels in distillate virgin
fuels (e.g.. No, 2 oil) are much lower than
in residual No. 6 oil it is reasonable to
compare used oil levels in No. 6 oil
because used oil frequently (indeed,
most-often) displaces No. 6 oil.
In addition both Recon and GCA T0
reported that they could not find
detectable levels of benzo(a)pyrene
(BaP) hi used oil emissions during a total
of 13 test burns. The BaP detectable
levels ranged from 6-9 jig/m* for the
GCA tests. Further, emissions of total
PNAs from burning used oil and virgin
oil appear comparable. Emissions of
PNAs, mostly naphthalene compounds,
measured by GCA during a number of
test burns at each of six sites averaged
92 pg/hr T1. If virgin fuel oil had been
burned rather than used oil and if total
PNA emissions were 46 ug/btu, as
reported by PEDCO (See PEDCO. Risk
Assessment of Waste Oil Burning, p. D-
7) as typical for residual fuel oil boilers
with capacities less than 250X10 • bra/
hr, PNA emissions from virgin oil
•• Sue SO FR 1695 (January 11.1965).
1 • Recon System*. Inc. and ETA Syitemi, Inc.
Uted Oil Bunted at Kiel. I860. p. 4-ft and GCA
Corp. Environmental Characterization of Watte
Oil Combustion, pp. IB. 120, US. 132.136,144. and
ISO. Both of Ineae report* w«n put of the Agency'*
record at propoBil
*' Te»ti are died in previou* note. One tmt
-------
49184 Federal Register / Vol. SO. No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
determine that the practice can result in
substantial increases in emissions of
toxic compounds at levels that pose a
significant risk to human health and the
environment
Another reason we are not addressing
this potential problem in today's rule is
that there does not appear to be a
simple remedy. We cannot require that
all used oil meet the ASTM
specifications for a particular fuel oil
grade because different boilers are
designed to bum different grades. To
address the problem, the responsible
burner must simply now that the used
oil (or virgin/used oil blend] he is
purchasing meets the grade his boiler is
designed to bum. This could be
accomplished, perhaps, by requiring that
the invoice or bill of sale indicate the
grade of fuel, and if necessary, a
statement that the oil meets the ASTM
specifications for that grade. On the
other hand, the burner who is trying to
save on his fuel costs may try to bum
lower grade (or ungraded] used oil
provided that his increased maintenance
. costs do not off-set his fuel savings. He
is not concerned about emissions of
incompletely burned compounds. If this
were the problem, a solution would be
to require that the marketer determine
the grade of his oil by ASTM
specification ami sell the'used oil only
to a burner with a boiler designed to
burn that grade of oil. Similar
requirements could be placed on burners
(i.e., they could bum only that fuel oil
grade the boiler is designed to bum). We
believe that it is clear that the •
implementation and enforcement of
provisions such as these would be a
massive undertaking and would intrude
substantially on the marketing and use
of what is essentially a commercial
product—used oil meeting the
specification established in today's rale.
Before seriously considering any such
remedies, we would need to much better
define the "problem".
(4) Other Compounds. A few
commenters suggested that the following
compounds also be included in the
specification: nickel, beryllium, mercury,
sulfur, nitrogen, and phosphorous. None
of these compounds are included for the
reasons discussed below.
Nickel is not included in the
specification because the 90th percentile
nickel level in used oil is lower than the
level found in virgin residual fuel oil (40
ppm).78 Although limited data OB
beryllium in virgin fuel oils indicate that
beryllium levels average much less than
1 ppm. while analyses of 263 used oil
samples indicate that the 90th percent!!*
beryllium level in used oil is less than
a3 ppm, (Ibid.) Similarly, limited date on
mercury indicate that levels can range
from 0.005 to 0.4 ppm in virgin fuel oils
and are less than 0.1 ppm in used oils.
(Ibid.) Clearly, beryllium and mercury
are not found in used oils at levels of
concern, and nickel emissions (end any
health risk posed) or lower from burning
used oil than virgin fuel oil
Levels of sulfur and nitrogen are
somewhat higher in virgin fuel oil than
la used oiL7T Thus, sulfur and nitrogen
oxide emissions from burning used oils
would not be higher. Although we do not
have data on phosphorous levels in used
oils and virgin fuel oils, phosphorous is
neither a designated hazardous waste
constituent on Appendix vm of Part 281
nor does it interfere with boiler
efficiency at the levels found in used oiL
3. Specificaton Levels. A Dumber of
commenters provided suggestions on
specification levels for the metals for
which EPA proposed a specification
level and for flash point The basis for
the specification levels for these
parameters is discussed below.
a. Lead EPA proposed to select •
specification level for lead from the
range of 10-100 ppm, and specifically
requested comments on an appropriate
level As discussed in the preamble to
the proposal (see 50 FR1697-1699
(January 11.1985)), levels higher than
100 ppm could result in ambient lead
levels exceeding the National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for lead
in densely populated areas where
boilers are clustered together and
receptors may be close to the sources.
Although 100 ppm appears to be
protective with respect to the NAAQS,
that level may not be protective because
health effects data available since the
lead NAAQS was established indicate
that lead causes serious, but apparently
noncancerous, health effects at any level
of exposure (i.e., lead appears to be a
"nonthreshold" pollutant). EPA is
considering these new health effects
data in its current efforts to determine
whether the existing lead NAAQS is
adequately protective. In addition.
" Source*: Franklin Associates Ltd. Campautiao
of Used Oil. Appendix A: TRW Environmental
Engineering Division. Emissions Atteftmeat of
Conventional Stationary Combuttion Systems:
Volume III. External Combustion Source* for
Electricity Generation, Novembw 1980. p. 134: US
EPA, titling Watte Oil At Hazardoui Watte—
Report to Congress. January19
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49185
appropriate; and (3) whether
•pacification levels for arsenic,
cadmium, and chormium would be
necessary if a low level is promulgated
because used oil that fails the
specification levels for these other
metals would also be expected to
exceed a low lead specification level.
A large number of comments were
received concerning the lead
specification. They are discussed below.
(1) Selecting a Level from the
Proposed Range. Most commenters
argued that EPA's proposed range of 10
to 100 ppm is too stringent Commenters
stated that it would be difficult for used
oil to pass a lead specification of less
than 100 ppm, which, they asserted,
would not only severely restrict used oil
burning, but lead to illegal dumping. It
was also suggested (by a State
commenter with substantial experience
in regulating used oil burning) that a
lead specification of 100 ppm Would be
unlikely to cause an exceedance of the
lead NAAQS.
Some commenters concurred with
EPA's selected range, favoring the high
end of the range. A specification of 100
ppm should be acceptable in all but the
most densely populated areas, according
to these commenters.
Selection of a relatively low level
from the range, such as 10 or 20 ppm,
wa* recommended by a few
commenters. Some opposed allowing
any lead at all in used oil, except in de
minimi's quantities.
(2) Phase-in a Lower Specification
Level as Gasoline Lead Levels are
Lowered, The majority of commenters
recommended that EPA set an initial
specification for lead at a relatively high
level, and then phase in lower levels in
incremental steps, tied to the EPA
mandated lowering of lead
concentration in gasoline which was
promulgated on March 7.1985 (see 50 FR
9386 and 9400). Commenters argued that
it would be illogical and unfair for EPA
to require lead to pass low
specifications in used oil, since most of
the lead in used oil originates from the
lead in gasoline. Suggested initial levels
ranged from the lead in gasoline.
Suggested initial levels ranged from 500-
1,000 ppm. Commenten also suggested
that EPA build a time-lag into such a
phasedown program, in which a certain
minimum time after the effective date of
the March 7,1985 standards would be
allowed to elapse before EPA would
effect a lower level for used oil. Such a
time-lag would accommodate the delay
between the actual use of the lowered
lead in gasoline being sold and burned
in automobiles, and changing of the oil.
(3) Risk-Based Specification Level.
Several commenters urged EPA to base
its specification for lead primarily, if not
solely, on health effects data and risk
irom lead exposure, rather than on the •
current lead NAAQS or the 95th
percentile concentration in virgin fuel
oil. These commenters argued that
regardless of typical contamination
levels of lead in virgin fuel oil, EPA is
not justified in allowing the burning of
used oil with lead levels that may cause
serious health effects. Raised blood lead
levels in young children and the danger
of lead poisoning to pregnant women
were cited. Commenters emphasized
that lead is bioaccumulative, meaning
that repeated intake over time results in
additive levels in the body.
(4) Two-Tiered Approach, Only a few
commenters addressed the suggested
two-tiered approach to regulating lead.
Commenters stated that it would only
cause cleaner, nonurban areas to
become more polluted.
(5) The Need to Regulate Arsenic,
Cadmium, and Chromium if a,Low Lead
Specification Level is Selected. Most
commenters recommended that arsenic,
cadmium, and chromium be regulated,
even if a low lead level is promulgated.
In general, commenters argued that it
has not been shown that the level of
these metals varies proportionately with
lead. Used oil could conceivably have a
low concentration of lead, but higher
levels of one or more of these three
metals. Restrictions for arsenic,
cadmium, and chromium were suggested
as a safeguard.
(8) Response to Comments. After
evaluation of these comments, we have
decided to promulgate a lead
specification of 100 ppm, but to delay
the effective date by six months. (The
other specification parameters are
effective 10 days after the date of
publication.) As discussed at proposal,
we believe that this level will ensure
that nonindustrial boilers do not cause
ambient levels to exceed the current
NAAQS except in unique and truly
extreme scenarios. See 50 FR at 1698
(January 11,1985). Moreover, we are
concerned that promulgation of a level
lower than 100 ppm at this time could
cause major disruptions to the used oil
recycling industry resulting in diversion
of oil or dumping with uncertain and
potentially adverse environmental
trade-offs. (Similar concerns were raised
by the House Energy and Commerce
Committee in their report on the RCRA
amendments. See MR. Rep. No. 98-198
at 66.)
The 100 ppm lead specification level
promulgated today is intended as an
interim measure. The Agency believes
that this lead level may not be as
protective as reasonably possible given
the new health effects data mentioned
above.. On the other hand, until we
know more about the impacts of the
other two rule* affecting management of
used oils (the soon-to-be proposed
recycled oil management standards and
the permit standards for boilers and
industrial furnaces that will be proposed
in 1986) on the used oil industry and,
ultimately, on used oil flows, we are
concerned that a lower level may cause
impacts that could result in dumping or
incineration of used oil with uncertain
environmental trade-offs. Therefore, the
Agency will evaluate the risks and costs
of a lower lead level in conjunction with
the third rule of the series—permit
standards for boilers and industrial
furnaces—scheduled to be proposed in
1986. Thus, the Agency's final position
on the lead specification will be
included in the permit standards
rulemaking.T*
In response to commenters' concerns
that a lead specification level as low as
100 ppm could cause major disruptions
of the industry and could result in
dumping, the effective date of the lead
specification is delayed six months. By
that time, the Agency's gasoline lead
phase-down standards will result in
lowered lead levels in used crankcase
oil so that a major disruption of the
industry will be avoided, as discussed
below.
On March 7,1985. EPA promulgated
standards restricting lead levels in
gasoline (see 50 FR 9386 and 9400). The
standards require that lead be reduced
from the previous limit of 1.1 grams/
gallon to 0.5 g/gal by July 1985, and to
0.1 g/gal by January 1986. This reduction
of lead in gasoline should result in a
*• We note that the Regulatory Impact Analysis
(RIA) developed to tupport the recycled oil
management standard* won to be proposed
Includes a preliminary analysis of the cost and
benefits of lower lead levels. The analysis was
initiated before the Agency decided to select 100
ppm as an interim lead specification and to make its
final decision on the lead specification in the permit
standards rulemaking. In addition, that RIA
attempts to predict used oil flows, and thus
regulatory impacts of the proponed rule, assuming
all three rulemakings are in place. Thus, th? RIA
makes the best assumptions possible at the time on
the cost of compliance with anticipated controls for
boilers and industrial furnaces burning off-
specification used oil fuel. Nonetheless, that
preliminary analysis appears to indicate that lead
specification levels lower that 100 ppm would be
cost-effective. The Agency intends to review that
analysts, op-date assumptions on permit standards
and "flow" changes as necessary, and to include a
comprehensive analysis of the cost and benefits of
lower lead specification levels in the RIA for the
permit standards rulemaking. In the interim, the RIA
for the recycled oil management standards will be
in the public docket for that rulemaking once it is
proposed. Comments received on that portion of the
RIA dealing with cost and benefits of lower lead
specification levels will be considered in developing
the Agency's position on this issue in the permit
standards rulemaking.
-------
49186 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
concomitant reduction in lead levels in
used oil We have analyzed the potential
impacts of imposing the 100 ppm
specification either immediately along
with the other specification parameter*
or in the Spring of 1986, roughly six
months after promulgation.7*Using a
data base of 143 used oils sampled in
1983, we extrapolated resulting lead
concentrations to the 1985-86 and 1986-
87 heating seasons. Based on the July •'
1985 reduction of lead in leaded gasoline
to 0.5 g/gaL we assumed an average
lead concentration (for leaded and
unleaded gasoline) of 0.2 g/gal for
gasoline affecting used oil to be burned
in the 1985-86 heating season. Similarly.
based on the January 1986 reduction of
lead in leaded gasoline to 0.1 g/gaL we
assumed an average lead concentration
(for leaded and unleaded gasotine) of
0.05 g/gal for gasoline affecting used oil
that would be burned in the 1986-37
heating season. The average lead levels
in gasoline were estimated assuming a
ratio of 40% leaded to 60% unleaded
gasoline consumption for the 1985-36
heating season, and a ratio of 37.5%
leaded to Q2J>% unleaded gasoline
consumption for the 1986-87 heating
season. (We also assumed that lead
levels in all used oils would decrease
because of the gasoline lead
phasedown.) .
This analysis demonstrates mat delay
of the implementation of the
specification will provide time for the
lead phasedown in gasoline and.
consequently, in used oil Significantly
more used oil can pass the lead
specification in May 1988 than today.
The table below illustrates the drop in
lead levels in used oil as the lead is
reduced in gasoline.
TABLE 4.—PROJECTED CHANGES m LEAD CON-
CENTRATION IN USED On. AS LEAD Is RE-
DUCED m GASOUNE (PPM)
Penan**
•M
01
ffi
•re
an
a«
1663
114
177
490
6S6
940
1.417
Utt
IMS
«9
IIS
217
337
367
946
%
»
44
67
ts
104
Z4S
Sourer FranUn AnocttM IM, EttfOt at OfOy In e»
tn&emtnuian of i Lua SetaOcttion on m MMlty at U*ud
ai u ft** m» SpicMaoon. AIM 4. 1965.
As shown, only about 40% ot the used
oil can pass the lead specification of 100
ppm now. Delay for six months
increases the total quantity passing the
lead specification to about 80%.
Delaying die effective date of the lead
specification has a corresponding effect
on the amount of used oil that can pass
the specification levels for all of die
metals (i.e., lead, arsenic, cadmium, and
chromium). As shown in the table
below, we estimate that the amount of
unblended used oil that can meet the
metals specification levels more than
doubles if the effective date of the lead
specification is delayed six months to.
May 1986 (i.e.. 20% vs. 46%).
TABLE 5.—EFFECTS OF DELAYING THE EFFEC-
TIVE DATE OF THE LEAD SPECIFICATION ON
. THE PERCENT OF SAMPLES THAT PASS THE
. SPECIFICATIONS FOA ALL METALS
IMifcndcd uwd oi
75 pc* VTrgm/J* pet . 05th percentile
metals levels) because we argued that
(1) Higher levels could result in
substantial risk (l.e, 10~«) given mat
large numbers of persons in urban areas
are exposed to emissions from
nonindustrial boilers: and (2) lower
levels could result in dirty virgin fuel oil
displacing used oil without
environmental benefit. (See 50 FR at
1697 (January 11,1986).)
Several comments specifically
questioned EPA's rationale for setting
specification levels based on the 95th
percentile level of those contaminants in
virgin fuel oil. A few commenters stated
that because these metals can cause
serious health problems, specification
levels should be based directly on risk
to health ratiier dian on concentration in
virgin oil. Other commenters (including
a major environmental group), however.
supported our decision to use the 95th
percentile of virgin fuel oil as a
reference point A few respondents
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 23. 1985 / Kules and Regulations 49187
argued that the specification levels
•elected on the basis of the 95th
percentile in virgin oil were too
stringent and that EPA was being
overly conservative in assuming that
there are no safe levels of exposure for
these metals. Workplace threshold limit
values (TLVs) and safe drinking water
standards were cited as more
reasonable for use as specification
levels.
These arguments are unpersuasive.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble to the proposed rule and
summarized above, we continue to
believe that limiting levels of these
metals to 95th percentile levels in virgin
fuel oil is appropriate.
Several commenters also disagreed
with the assumptions used to assess risk
from chromium [i.e., that all chromium is
emitted in its carcinogenic, hexavalent
state and, thus, can cause increased
cancer risk to exposed individuals).
These commenters protested EPA's
assumption that chromium is emitted hi
the hexavalent form following
combustion. Comments ranged from
assertions that EPA had no data or
infonntion to make such an assumption
to theoretical arguments mat when
combusted, trivalent chromium would
not be converted to hexavalent
chromium. In general, these commenters
suggested that EPA defer specifying a
level for chromium until the Agency
conducts studies to definitively
determine what happens to chromium
when burned in boilers.
We agree that only the hexavalent
form of chromium has been proven to be
carcinogenic, although it is a very potent
carcinogen. The data are inadequate to
classify the trivalent chromium
compounds as to their cardnogenidty.*0
However, we believe that assuming all
chromium compounds emitted from
burning used oil in boilers an
hexavalent chromium is a conservative,
but reasonable assumption. Ibid.
Although it is likely that a mixture of the
two forms fa emitted, information is not
adequate to specify the form or the
relative quantities of each. Ibid. EPA has
initiated an extensive study to better •
understand the amount of hexavalent
chromium and total chromium being
emitted from major sources including
coal and oil fired boilers and municiple
incinerators. In addition, EPA has
formally called for information on issues
pertinent to the risk posed by airborne
chromium emissions including: (1) Are
there advene health effects associated
with exposure to trivalent chromium?;
(2) does trivalent chromium transform in
the atmosphere or in the environment to
hexavalent chromium and vice versa?;
and (3) what is the relative quantity of
hexavalent and trivalent chromium
emitted from chromium sources? Ibid.
.The Agency, however, cannot
postpone regulatory action, given
especially that used oil contains
significantly higher chromium levels
than virgin fuel oil. Until more
information is available on these issues,
the. Agency will therefore continue to
assume that chromium emissions are in
the hexavalent fonn.11
c. Flash Point. Used crankcase oils
can be contaminated with highly
ignitable constituents of gasoline such
as benzene, toluene, and xylene from
• engine blow-by. Used oils can also be
mixed after use with gasoline or other
highly ignitable npnhalogenated
solvents such as xylene. Even low levels
of contamination with these low flash
point compounds can reduce the Dash
point of used oils, normally greater than
200*F. to levels lower than 100T. Nearly
7% of 650 used oil samples had a flash
point below 100*F."
EPA proposed a specification of 100T
because it is the American Society for
Testing and Materials' (ASTM)
minimum flash point specification level
for virgin fuel oils. EPA reasoned that
burners are not accustomed to handling
such fuels and so used oils with a lower
flash point may present significant
hazards during handling and storage.
Thus, such low flash point oils need to
be controlled. EPA specifically
requested comment on whether such
low flash point used oils should be
regulated as off-specification used oil
fuel as proposed, or as hazardous waste
fuel
One commenter argued mat low flash
point used oil should be subject to
regulation as hazardous waste fuel to
provide adequate controls during
storage and transportation. While share
the commenter's concerns, we have
decided that low flash point oil should
be regulated as off-specification used
oil not hazardous waste fuel. This final
rule is therefore the first step in the
Agency's efforts to regulate the blending
and burning of hazardous waste and
used oils fuels. Storage and
transportation controls for used oil,
including off-specification used oil
burned for energy recovery, are soon to
be proposed and controls (i.e., permit
•• S»t EPA'» public notice of "tamtf to Lilt
Chromium or HcuvaUot Chromium u •
H«? ininui Air PoUaUnl (10 FR 34117-M QBM 10,
was)).
•' SM •lio: US. EPA. 77m Air Toxic* Problem in
lh» United Stotu: An Anolytii of Canctr Ritkt For
Sfltottd PoJIutantt, Miy UBS.
•• FnnkHa AMoebtM Ud_ Camfo»Uha ofUttJ
O/AAppndixA.
standards) on the actual burning of
hazardous waste and off-specification
used oil fuels are scheduled to be
proposed in 1986. Thus, we believe it
may be confusing to the regulated
community and may preempt regulatory
options in these future rulemakings to
subject in piecemeal fashion used oil
off-specification only for flash point to
regulation as hazardous waste fuel. As a
matter of fact the recycled oil
management standards propose that
used oil, including off-specification used
oil fuel be subject to the same
substantive storage and transportation
controls for hazardous waste in many
situations.
As a final note on this point, low flash
point used oil cannot be presumed to be
hazardous waste under the mixture rule
(i.e, because the oil is mixed with
ignitable hazardous waste). As
explained in section TV£.3 above, the
low flash point nifty be attributable to
low flash point constituents of gasoline
(e.g.. benzene, toluene, or xylene) added
to crankcase oil during use.
Several commenters argued that a
specification level of 100 T is
inconsistent with the definition of
ignitable hazardous waste that uses a
flash point of 140 *F or below to define
ignitability. See 40 CFR 201.21. We
explained at proposal the basis for the
difference. See 50 FR 1699. n. 58. The 140
T flash point limit defining an ignitable
waste was based primarily on the
hazard posed during land disposal.
Given that virgin fuel oils can have a
flash point as low as 100 *F, we believe
that used oils with flash points of 100 *F
to 140 "F pose no greater hazard than
virgin fuels (provided they meet the
other specification limits).
D. Comments on Allowing Blending to
Meet the Specification
The Agency received a large number
of comments for and against allowing
blending of used oil to meet the used oil
fuel specification. Operators of used oil
rerefineries and some State
environmental officials argued against
allowing blending primarily because: (1)
Blending does not reduce the total.
quantity of metals emitted from used oil
burning in an urban area—blending
limits the emissions from individual
sources but allows (in theory) a larger
number of sources to bum blended oil so
that the same quantity of used oil is
burned annually in a given area (and the
same quantity of metals are emitted);
and (2) allowing blending creates an
economic disincentive to remove metals
from used oil by rerefining to produce
lube oil (and a low-metal content fuel
-------
49188
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 19B5 / Rules and Regulations
by-product)•* because blending for
marketing as fuel is often more
profitable than substantial processing.
On the other hand, processors and
blenders argued that blending should be
allowed because it results in a used oil
fuel product that in general, poses no
greater health risk than virgin fuel oils.
They argued further that grossly
contaminated used oil cannot be
economically blended to meet the
specification and will go to rerefinera for
production of lube oil or to industrial
boilers and industrial furnaces for use
as a fuel."
Processors and blenders also argued
that without blending, alternate markets
may not be available to handle the used
oil diverted from burning potentially
leading to adverse environmental effects
(see section IV.C.3 above). Industrial
boilers and industrial furnaces may not
be able or willing to burn off-
specification used oil given the Agency's
plans to regulate such burning
(beginning with the notification and
other administrative controls provided
. by today's rule). Further, rerefinera
cannot be presumed to be an unlimited
outlet for used ou. Although many
rerefineries are opera ing oeiow
capacity today, and could perhaps
double their capacity within a few yean
to' handle the increased supply if
blending were prohibited, profitability of
rerefming depends on more than an
available supply of used oiL Marketing
factors such as demand for recycled
lube products and price fluctuations in
virgin lube products (resulting from
fluctuations in crude oil prices or other
factors) are also critical. These
marketing factors may have played as
large a role historically in limiting the
viability of used oil rerefining as has the
problem of inadequate supply of used oil
feedstock due to competition from the
largely unregulated used oil fuel market
Thus, processors and blenders believe
that without blending, neither the
industrial fuel market nor the rerefining
market would be able to handle the used
oil that would exceed the specification.
The Agency agrees with points made
by both sides. The rule does potentially
encourage blending, blending creates a
disincentive to remove metals by
rerefining, and blending perse does not
•* Once used oil it proceued to remove metals. H
li considered more profitable to further process the
oil to produce lube oil rather than to market it ai
fuel oil
" Potential hazards poied by burning of off-
specification used oil in these devices should be
temporary. The Agency intends to propose permit
standards for burning off-specification used oil fuel
(and hazardous waste fuel) that will require that the
owners and operators of all boilers sad industrial
furnaces burning these fuelf limit metal emission*.
reduce (in theory) mass emissions of
metals in an urban area. However, we
believe that some highly contaminated
used oils cannot be economically
blended aad will go to rerefining or to
industrial boilers or industrial furnaces
that control metal emissions (either
currently, or eventually under rules the
Agency will propose in 1986). In
addition, as discussed above, it is not
clear that rerefineries and the industrial
fuel market would have the capacity to
handle the used oil exceeding the
specification if blending were not
allowed. In that case, used oil diverted
would be incinerated or dumped, with
uncertain environmental trade-offs (i.e.,
compared to allowing blending).
Although blending does not reduce (in
theory) mass-emissions in an urban
area, blending of used oil to meet the
specification reduces the risk to the
most exposed individuals. Finally, and
most significantly, we believe that
blending results in a product that can
pose no greater hazard than dirty virgin
fuel oil
For these reasons, today's final rule
allows blending. It should be noted.
however, that this rule is only the first of
three rules that will significantly affect
the used oil recycling industry. As we
develop these rules, we will examine
"flow changes" caused by the
regulations (e.g., increase in rerefining,
decrease in road oiling, etc.). At that
point, we will be better able to
determine whether our rules only serve
to promote dilution versus removal of -
metals (e.g., by rerefining or by burning
in devices with adequate emissions
control equipment). We cannot, at this
time, conduct such an assessment and
for the reasons cited above, can find no
basis to prohibit blending.
*
£ Consideration of a Total Ban on
Burning Used Oil in Noninduatrial
Boilers
At proposal EPA requested comments
on whether all used oil burning in
nonindustrial boilers should be banned
See 50 FR1693-94. EPA was primarily
concerned that used oil could be mixed
with hazardous waste and illegally
marketed as used oil fuel meeting the
specification.
Several commentera argued for
banning all used oil burning in
nonindustrial boilers. These commenten
were concerned that used oil would be
illegally adulterated with hazardous
waste once the used oil is outside the
regulatory system (i.e., once a collector,
processor, or blender documents the
used oil meets the specification). These
commenters reasoned that illegal •
adulteration is inevitable given the
current practice, particularly in &e
Northeast of mixing hazardous spent
solvents with used oil for marketing as
virgin fuel oil (usually after blending
with virgin oil).* given the nature of the
used oil and waste management
industry (again, particularly in the
Northeast).** and given the profitability
of illegal adulteration. It should be noted
'that the issue these commentera raise
here is whether the proposed regulatory
scheme (i.e., allowing burning of
unregulated used oil meeting the
specification in nonirfHustrial boilers)
can be adequately enforced, not
whether the specificatior itself, in
conjunction with the rebi. able
presumption of mixing halogenated
wastes, is protective perse.
Other commenten opposed an
outright ban on burning used oil in
nonindustrial boilers. These commenters
were concerned that a baa could lead to
illegal dumping or incineration of used
oil with advene or uncertain
environmental trade-offs. For reasons
uscussed above, rerefinery capacity
and the industrial fuel market may be
inadequate to handle used oil diverted
from nonindustrial boilers under a ban.
Today's rule therefore allows burning
of used oil meeting the specification in
nonindustrial boilen (or any other boiler
or industrial furnace) for a number of
reasons. We continue to believe that the
specification, in conjunction with the
rebuttable presumption of mixing, will
detect and control used oil illegally
adulterated with hazardous waste. See
SO FR 1693, n. 28. In addition, these ruler
have been developed with an
understanding of the current practices o«
the industry and should result in cost-
effective enforcement Specifically, the
controls are focused primarily on the
several hundred marketen of these fuel'
rather than the potentially thousand* of
burnera. These marketen must
determine whether they are handling
'hazardous waste fuel, off-specification
used oil, or unregulated used oil that
meets the specification, and must
manage the fuel accordingly. The
rebuttable presumption at mi-ring
hazardous chlorinated waste with used
oil. and the use of oil fuel specification
will enable both marketen and
•• National Enforcement Investigations Center.
US. EPA. Summary of Watt* Oil Recycling Facility
Innaligatioru, October 1SBS.
•• Proceeding* of the New York Staff Attentaty
Standing Committee an Bnviroameatal
Conservation Public Hearing on trie Unlawful
Diipotal of Solid and Haourioet Watte*
September 24-» 1084 at the New York Chamber of
Commerce and Industry. New York (Volumes L n.
m E and m C). and September IB-n. 1864 at the
Orange County Government Canter, Coahen. New
York (Volume L Hand on. . «w»en. New
-------
Federal Register / Vol 50, No. 230 f Friday. November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49189
enforcement officials to make • clear.
objective determination of the type of
fuel in question, and thus, the applicable
controls. Further, the tracking system for
fuel shipments, used oil analysis
requirements, and recordkeeping
requirements are intended to foster
efficient and effective enforcement
It should be noted that, in response to
commenters' concerns about .
enforceability and tracking of used oil
that meets the specification, today's rale
expands the recordkeeping requirements
for used oil meeting the specification. In
addition to records of analysis required
by the proposed rule, the person who
first claims used oil fuel meets the
specification must also keep a record of
pertinent information regarding the
shipment of the used oil including: name
and address of the receiving facility.
date of shipment and quantity shipped.
See 1286.43(b)(6)(i). This will enable
enforcement officials to track
movements one step beyond the initial
marketer. We considered applying
recordkeeping requirements to all
subsequent marketers (e.g., distributors)
until the used oil fuel is ultimately
burned. We decided not to, however.
given that the used oil fuel poses no
greater riak than virgin fuel oil and. once
it enters the commercial fuel oil market
should not be regulated differently than
virgin fuel oil (We note, however, that
subsequent adulteration with hazardous
waste or off-specification used oil
makes specification used oil subject to
regulation as either hazardous waste
fuel or off-specification used oil fuel.)
Moreover, hi response to commenters'
concerns discussed above, we reasoned
that hazardous waste could be illegally
mixed with virgin fuel oil as well as
with used oil fuel and sold to
nonindustrial boilers. (Comments of the
State of New Jersey illustrate that this
type of illegal mixing is presently
occurring.) Thus, the risk of adultering
legitimate fuels with hazardous waste is
not unique to used oil In light of these
considerations, there is no compelling
reason to further regulate specification
used oil fuel by additional
recordkeeping or by a ban on burning in
nonindustrial boilers.
F. Analytical Testing to Demonstrate
Compliance with Specification Levels
and the Rebuttable Presumption
At proposal EPA indicated that
general guidance on sampling and
analysis is provided in EPA, Test
Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,
July 1882. SW-846 (U.S. GPO). See SO FR
1705. EPA indicated further that the
Agency is revising digestion procedures
recommended by SW-846 for organic
liquids prior to determination of metals
concentrations. We were aware mat the
digestion procedures specified by
. Methods 3030 and 3050 do not result in
good recovery of metals in some oily
matrices. Finally, EPA indicated at
proposal that it was verifying the
accuracy and precision of two field tests
for total chlorine that are quick and
inexpensive—an adaptation of the
Beilstein flame colormetric test and a
field test kit using chemical colormetric
procedures.
A number of commenters requested
that EPA specify acceptable analytical
procedures fpr halogens, metals, and
flash point and to prescribe acceptable
testing frequency. Several commenters
also indicated that the Beilstein chlorine
test is neither quantitative nor reliable
(because of interferences with
contaminants) »"
-------
49190 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations
-not lessen the burden to rebut the
presumption of mixing if in fact the used
oil were found, for example by EPA
enforcement officials, to contain more
than 1000 ppm of total halogens. Given
the profitability of mixing hazardous
waste with used oil (i.e., charging
generators for waste disposal and
selling the waste, after blending with oil.
as a fuel), the nature of the industry (see
note 85), and past practices of illegal. .
mixing of hazardous waste with used oil
(see note 84). the Agency will not
necessarily accept any claim or
certification from any party. Nor would
such an approach be consistent with
other long-established hazardous waste
rules. See. e.g., 40 CFR 262.11
(generators must determine if their
wastes are hazardous and are in
violation of regulations if their
determination is erroneous). We think
that the rebuttable presumption
promulgated today provides an
objective means of distinguishing
between used oil and hazardous waste
whenever a question exists and we plan
to use the presumption routinely during
inspections of used oil facilities.
When a person first claims used oil
fuel meets the specification, today's rule
requires that he obtain an analysis or
other information to support the claim.
Thus, testing is not specifically required
to demonstrate*compliance with the
specification. (Ordinarily, however, we
expect that testing will be used to
demonstrate compliance.) The "other
information" could include personal,
special knowledge of the source and
composition of the used oil •• or a
certification from a generaW to the
processor claiming the oil meets the
specification. As explained above,
however, if a person who claims used oil
fuel meets the specification based on
"other information" and the
determination is found to be erroneous
(i.e., if testing reveals that the oil fails
the specification), he is in violation of
the'regulations.
It should be noted further that if a
marketer claims used oil fuel meets the
specification when in fact it does not
when analyzed by EPA or State
enforcement officials at any point until
ultimately burned, it is not a defense
that the recipient (or subsequent
recipients) reasonably believed the oil
•• Repeated testing may not be warranted In
every situation. For example, a generator who born*
on-fite hi* used oil that testing shows meet* the
specification may elect to eliminate or reduce the
frequency of testing if. for example, the processes
that generate the oil do not change. In this case, the
generator is using "other information'' in lieu of
testing. Nonetheless. If his determination to
erroneous, he is in violation of the regulations, aa
explained in the text.
met the specification. (Again, this
approach is identical to that used for
hazardous waste.)
EPA and State enforcement official*
also have the authority under RCRA
section 3007 to enter the premises of a
person believed to be handling used oil
fuel (including trucks in the process of
transport) and to collect samples of fuel
oil. irrespective of whether the person
reasonably believes his used oil fuel
meets the specification, for the purposes
of determining compliance with the
marketing requirements of today's rule.
Thus, a person may not deny access
because he believes the used oil fuel he
manages meets the specification and is
no longer subject to regulation.
b. Frequency of Testing. This
frequency of testing necessary to ensure
conformance with today's rules will
vary from situation to situation
depending on factors including: (1) Type
of, and changes in, sources of used oil:
(2) historical results of tests; (3) tank
filling and drawdown practices; and (4)
tank capacities. Although today's rule
does not necessarily require that each
incoming shipment of used oil be
analyzed for conformance with the
presumption of mixing, or that each
outgoing shipment of specification used
oil fuel be analyzed for conformance
with the specification (or that testing be
conducted at all), the marketer must be
satisfied that each such shipment so
conforms. In short, testing must be
conducted as often aa necessary, and
the burden is necessarily on the
marketer to determine how often is
often enough. (This is comparable to a
generator's responsibility to determine
whether the wastes he generates are
hazardous. See 40 CFR 262.22.)
Therefore, we believe it is not
practicable to prescribe a testing
frequency that is appropriate for all
situations.
TV. Regulation of Combustion Residuals
Some commenters asked whether
residuals (e.g., fly ash. bottom ash) from
burning hazardous waste or used oil for
energy recovery are subject to
regulation as hazardous waste. Unless
specifically excluded from regulation as
hazardous waste as discussed below,
such residuals are hazardous waste if:
(1) The residuals (from burning either
hazardous waste or used oil) exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste; or (2)
the residuals result from burning listed
hazardous waste and the residual has
not been "delisted" under petitioning
procedures of § 260.20 (see { 261.3(c)(2)).
These are not new requirements (and
are not being revised in any manner by
today's rules). These residuals have
been subject to regulation as hazardous
waste since the RCRA standards were
promulgated in 1980. Although the
actual burning for energy recovery is a
type of recycling currently exempt from
RCRA regulation, the exemption does
not extend to solid waste generated by
recycling.
RCRA Section 3001 temporarily
excludes specific combustion residuals
from regulation as hazardous waste. The
exclusion is codified at 9 261,4(b)(4) and
applies to residuals from combustion of
primarily fossil fuels. The Agency has
temporarily interpreted this exclusion to
mean that the following solid wastes are
not hazardous wastes: "fly ash. bottom
ash, boiler slag and flue gas emission
control wastes resulting from (1) the
combustion solely of coal oil. or natural
gas, (2) the combustion of any mixture of
these fossil fuels, or (3) the combustion
of any mixture of coal and other fuels,
including hazardous waste or used oil
fuels, up to a 50 percent mixture of such
other fuels." Thus, until the boiler and
industrial furnace rules address this"
• issue in 1986, residuals from burning the
fossil fuels oil or gas with any quantity
of hazardous waste fuel or used oil fuel
are not excluded from regulation under
§ 281.4(b)(4). Residuals from burning
coal and up to 50% hazardous waste
fuel however, are excluded.*'- •••"••
•'Talon fr<
•pondence from Gary N.
Dietrich, Associate Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Solid Wsste, EPA to Paul Emler. Jr. Chairman.
Utility Solid Waste Activities Group, dated January
13.1981. Mixture* of coal and up to SO* of other
fuel* an excluded from regulation (at this time)
becauM any contaminants from the other fuel* («4-
hazardous waste) would b* largely diluted by the
coal combustion residuals. This may not be the case
with oil or gas combustion given the low volumes of
bottom and Qy ash generally produced from
combustion of these fuel*.
•• These residual* may In fact contain only
minimal level* of toxic organic compound* in
situations when boilers (and industrial furnaces)
are operated to achieve maximum combustion
efficiency. The Agency is considering during
development of the permit standard* for boiler* and
industrial furnaces modifying the derived-from rale
to exempt nonchancteriitic residual* in cases
where we an certain that residuals do not contain
significant levels of toxic organic*.
•• We note that, the exclusion* (from regulation a*
hazardous waste) for certain large volume watte*
produced by facilities under the "mining waste-
exclusion of I 2B1.4(b)(7) may apply to certain
industrial furnace* burning hazardous wait* or
used oil. Any such exclusion* apply (pending
development of the boiler and Industrial furnace
permit standards) Irrespective of whether the
device* burn hazardous watte or used oil for enein
recovery given the likely effect of dilution of any
contaminants attributable to the hazardous waste
or used oil. Similarity, the exclusion for cement kiln
dust provided by | Z81.4(b)(B) .ppH,, irrespective of
whether the kiln bum* htzardoua waste or used oil
for energy recovery.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations 491S1
EPA also is providing that residues
from burning hazardous waste fuels that'
are exempt from regulation under
! 281.6(a)(3)(v)-{ix) (i.e. hazardous waste
fuels derived from petroleum industry
wastes, petroleum coke derived from
certain petroleum industry hazardous
waste, and coke and coal tar derived
from steel industry decanter tank tar
sludge} are not covered by the derived
from rule. With respect to burning
petroleum industry fuels derived from
petroleum industry wastes, these fuels
may be no different in composition man
• virgin fuels (at least when low volumes
of wastes are introduced into the
refining process). See sections ITLC.1
and 2 above. Under these
circumstances, wastes from burning
these fuels also would be no different
than from burning virgin fuels, so the
derived-from rule should not apply.
EPA is exempting from the derived-
from rule wastes from burning
petroleum coke to further Congressional
intent that the coke is subject to
regulation only if it exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste.
RCRA section 3004(q)(2)(A). Thus.
consistent with { 261.3 (c)(2) and (d)(l).
wastes from burning the coke should
only be considered hazardous when
they exhibit a hazardous waste
characteristic. With respect to the iron
and steel coke and coal tar. EPA has
found that these waste-derived fuels are
not significantly different than the virgin
fuels for which they substitute (and that
the organic toxicants in these fuels are
likely destroyed by burning as well).
Thus, the derived-from rule should not
apply to the wastes from burning, which
also would be comparable to the wastes
from burning virgin coke and coal tar.
V. Consideration of Special
Requirement* for D* Minimi* Quantities
Burned On Site
Several commenters suggested that
EPA establish a de minimis quantity of
off-specification used oil fuel and
hazardous waste fuel that could be
burned without regulation. Although
commenters suggested various quantity
levels to qualify for- an exemption, the
majority recommended a limit of 0.5-1%
of the total fuel consumption of the
boiler or industrial furnace. Some
commenters also urged EPA to institute
a permit-by-rule program for facilities
burning small quantities of hazardous
waste fuel or off-specification used oil
fuel that are generated on-site.
Section 3004(q)(2)(B) of RCRA
explicitly allows EPA to exempt
facilities that burn de minimis quantities
of waste as fuel provided that the
wastes are generated on-site, are burned
for energy recovery, and are burned in a
device with sufficient destruction and
removal efficiency not to present a
significant risk to human health and the
environment EPA is presently
examining the issue of de minimis
burning in developing the Phase II
permit standards for owners and
operators of boilers and industrial
furnaces. Although we may propose to
exempt de minimis quantities from the
Phase n permit standards, the basic
administrative controls promulgated
today (e.g., notification) would probably
still apply to on-site burning.*0
Therefore, today's rule does not provide
a de minimis quantity .exemption since,
for industrial burners, the rule only
addresses these administrative controls.
. A few commenters argued that
hazardous waste fuel and off-
specification used oil fuel burned on-site
should not be subject to regulation
irrespective of quantity. These
commenters argued that storage of
hazardous waste fuels is adequately
controlled by State and local
governments and that burning of either
hazardous waste fuels or off-
specification used oil fuel is adequately
controlled by State or local air pollution
-permits. We find these arguments
without merit The hazards posed by
handling and burning hazardous waste
fuels and off-specification used oil fuels
are substantial and essentially the same
irrespective of whether the fuels were
generated at that site. EPA has made
this finding for years with respect to
other hazardous wastes, and no
arguments have been presented
distinguishing hazardous waste fuels
from all other hazardous wastes
managed on site. The commenters'
argument also was rejected in the
legislative history to the HSWA. See S.
Rep. 98-284,98th Cong. 2nd Sess. at 38. .
Moreover, the storage of hazardous
waste fuels and the burning of either
hazardous waste fuel or off-specification
used oil fuels can pose much greater risk
to human health and the environment
than storage and burning of virgin fossil
fuels. State and local controls on storage
and burning of virgin fuels are not
intended to provide the level of control
of releases of toxic constituents from
storage facilities or from boilers or
industrial furnaces that EPA's
regulations will provide, starting with
today's final rule.
•• It ihould be noted tint today's nil* don not
regulate storage of uaed oil fuel Although itonge of
hazardous waste fuel If regulated by today'i rule,
•pedal (i.e.. reduced) atandardt are already
provided for on-slle storage In tank* and container!
of hatardoui wade by generator! (ice I 20&M).
Further, email quantity generator! are already
exempt from storage standards under | 2S1.5.
PART THkJc^: COMBUSTION
DEVICES THAT ARE REGULATED
L Overview -.
In this section, we identify boilers and
industrial furnaces subject to regulation
and distinguish between nonindustrial
boilers and industrial or utility boilers.
We also explain the basis for regulating
nonindustrial boilers immediately in
advance of controls for industrial boilers
and industrial furnaces. In addition, we
discuss how these nonindustrial boilers
can continue burning hazardous waste
when they operate under permit
standards for hazardous waste
incinerators. Finally, we discuss
controls for used oil space heaters and
EPA's intent to provide additional
controls for these devices in the
rulemaking proposing permit standards
for burning in trailers and industrial
furnaces scheduled for 1986.
IL Regulation of Boilers
A. Basis for Regulating Boilers by Boiler
Use
Today's rule prohibits the burning of
hazardous waste and off-specification
used oil fuel in nonindustrial boilers
(e.g., located in apartment and office
buildings, schools, hospitals) and, for the
time being, continues to allow burning of
such fuels without substantive controls
in industrial and utility boilers (and
industrial furnaces). As EPA stated at
proposal, the rule singles out
nonindustrial boilers because burning
hazardous waste fuels and off-
specification used oil fuels in these
boilers can pose the most significant
and immediate health risks. See 50 FR
1687-1888 and 1701, n. 63. Nonindustrial
boilers are typically very small and may
not achieve complete combustion of
toxic organics (e.g., 99.99% destruction)
because of inadequate controls to
maintain optimum combustion
conditions when firing fuels the boiler is
not designed to burn. Further, virtually
no nonindustrial boilers are equipped
with emissions control equipment that
would control (at least to some extent)
metals emissions, while many industrial
furnaces and some industrial boilers are
so equipped. The risks from emissions of
incompletely burned toxic organic
compounds and toxic metals from
nonindustrial boilers is compounded
because these boilers are typically
located in urban areas where sources
are frequently clustered closely togethei.
Thus, emission plumes from numerous
sources can overlap and increase
ambient concentrations of toxic
compounds. Further, individuals can be
exposed to high ambient levels of
emitted toxicants because they can be
-------
49192 Federal Register / Vol. 5ft No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1965 / Rulea and Regulations
located close to th j sources and
exposed to the even higher toxicant
levels above-ground (e.g., if the
individual is exposed to above-ground
air through a window in a multi-story
apartment or office building).
EPA also stated at proposal that then
may be many situations where
industrial (and utility) boilers and
industrial furnaces can bum hazardous
waste fuel or off-specification used oil
fuel without posing significant risks. See
50 FR1668. For example, large boilers or
industrial furnaces may be operated by
trained operators and equipped with
combustion controls sophisticated
enough to maintain peak combustion
efficiency when burning fuels the unit i»
not designed to burn.
Further, many industrial furnaces and
some boilers are equipped with
particulate control equipment that may
adequately control emissions from
metal-bearing waste fuels. The Agency
has recently completed a testing
program to determine under what
operating conditions boilers and
industrial furnaces can bum waste fuels
without posing significant health risks.
• As a result of that effort EPA plans to
propose technical, permit standards for
burning hazardous waste fuels and off-
specification used oil fuels in boilers
and industrial furnaces in 1986 taking
into account when and ht»w these
wastes can be burned safely in these
devices.
One commenter questioned whether
burning hazardous waste fuels in a
nonindustrial boiler is prohibited if the
boiler can comply with the permit
standards for hazardous waste
incinerators. Other commenters
suggested that criteria other than boiler
use (e.g.. boiler size) should be used to
identify those boilers subject to the
prohibition. These issues are discussed
below.
1. Conditional Exemption for
Nonindustrial Boilers Burning
Hazardous Waste Fuel EPA explained
at proposal that there may be particular
nonindustrial boilers that may burn
hazardous waste fuels (we know of one
location) effectively due to the unit's
operating conditions, type! of hazardous
waste fuel, etc. To allow such burning to
continue, EPA said that the owner or
operator must comply with the
hazardous waste incinerator standards
of Subpart O of 40 CFR Parts 284 or 285.
See 50 FR 1688. The owner or operator
must also comply with the requirements
for burners in today's rule (e.g., storage
standards). See $ 266.35. We are making
a conforming amendment to Subpart O
to make clear that this possibility exists.
Owners and operators of "
nonindustrial boilers currently burning
hazardous waste fuel are eligible for the
interim status incinerator standards of
Part 265 because they first become
subject to those regulations today.
Those interim status standards will
reduce the hazards posed by these
operations by prohibiting burning during
start-up and shut-down and by applying
the general facility standards (e.g.,
closure, financial requirements) for
hazardous waste management facilities.
The Regional Administrator has the
discretion to permit these facilities
under Part 264,-Subpart O (and
applicable storage provisions) by calling
in their Part B permit application. Wa
do not expect however, that
nonindustrial boilers that continue to
bum hazardous waste fuel under the
interim status standards of Subpart O of
Part 265 will be formally permitted
under Part 284 except in exceptional
circumstances. Rather, we expect that
any such nonindustrial boilers would b@
ultimately permitted under th® permit
standards for boilers and industrial
furnaces to be proposed in early 1936,
Those permit standards will likely
control emissions of toxic organics,
toxic metals, and hydrogen chloride. We
believe the standards would be
protective when applied to any device-—
e.g» industrial or nonindustrial boilers.
Moreover, those boilers and industrial
furnace standards will be equally or
more protective than the incinerator
standards under Subpart O of Part 234
(e.g., the Agency may propose direct
control of metals emissions from boilers
and industrial furnaces while particulate
controls are used for incinerators to
indirectly control metals).
2. Consideration of Other Criteria for
Identifying Boilers Subject to the
Prohibitions. At proposal EPA
explained why the prohibitions OH
burning hazardous waste fuel and off*
specification used oil fuel would apply
to boilers based on boiler use—the
prohibitions would apply to
nonindustrial boilers. Burning these
fuels in nonindustrial boilers can pose
substantial and immediate risks for the
reasons discussed above. EPA
explained further that it plans to
propose permit standards in 1986 for
industrial and utility boilers and
industrial furnaces. Nonetheless, EPA
specifically requested comments on
whether small industrial boilers should
also be prohibited from burning
hazardous waste and off-specification
used oil fuels, given that very small
boilers, whether industrial or
nonindustrial. may typically be
equipped with less sophisticated
combustion controls and may be less
rigorously operated and maintained to
achieve peak combustion efficiency.
, Many commenters said that large
nonindustrial boilers can burn
hazardous waste fuel as efficiently as
large industrial boilers and should not
be prohibited from doing so. These
commenters apparently did not
understand that EPA said as much in the
preamble to the proposal and said that
these boilers may continue burning
hazardous waste fuel if they comply
with the standards for. hazardous waste
incinerators, until we promulgate permit
standards for boilers as discussed
above. We believe that it is reasonable
to require such nonindustrial boilers to
comply with the incinerator standards
now and postpone regulation of
industrial boilers until we promulgate
permit standards for boilers because
nonindustrial boilers as a class are
likely to pose greater risks because they
are more likely to be located within
densely populated areas. (Although
industrial boilers are frequently located
in urban areas, nonindustrial boilers are
almost always so located.)
Many commenters argued for and
against prohibiting burning small
industrial boilers using the issues EPA
discussed in the preamble to the
proposal See 50 FR at 1700-1701.
Today's rule does not prohibit burning
in small industrial boilers. Although it
can be argued that nonindustrial and
industrial boilers of the same size are
likely to burn hazardous waste fuel with
similar destruction efficiency, we
believe that nonindustrial boilers as a
class pose a greater hazard for the
reasons given above. Thus, as discussed
above and at 50 FR 1687-1688, it is
reasonable to require nonindustrial
boilers to comply with the incinerator
standards now and postpone regulation
of industrial boilers until we promulgate
permit standards for boilers.
Several commenters recommended
that EPA prescribe design and operating
conditions, or performance standards, or
consider boiler location rather than
prohibiting burning in particular devices.
The permit standards for boilers that we
plan to propose in 1986, in fact would
use performance standards, or
alternative operating conditions, to
permit burning of hazardous waste fuel
in any boiler. However, until those
standards are promulgated.
nonindustrial boilers will be subject to
the conditional prohibition for the
reasons given above.
Boiler location has been considered in
supporting immediate regulation of
nonindustrial boilers—they are typically
located within highly populated areas.
Persons in less densely populated areas
would have a lower exposure; thus, we
could use site-specific risk assessments
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49193
to support alternative, reduced controls.
Given the complexity of quantitative
risk assessments (i.e., assessments that
are used to support particular controls
for particular facilities) and the number
of boilers that burn off-specification
used oil fuel and hazardous waste fuel
a regulatory program based on site-
specific risk assessment would be
difficult to implement with current and
foreseeable resources. Thus, we have
not included a variance procedure based
on risk assessment in today's rule.
B. Definition of Industrial Boiler
Today's rule, like the proposal, uses
the terms industrial boilers, utility
boiler, and industrial furnace to identify
combustion devices that are not
nonindustrial boilers subject to the
prohibition. We believe it is less
confusing to define the devices that are
not subject to the prohibition than to
attempt to define and identify the
various types of nonindustrial boilers
(e.g., residential, commercial,
institutional).
EPA defined the term "industrial
boiler" at proposal as any boiler that
produces electric power, steam or
heated or cooled air, or other gases or
fluids for use in a manufacturing
process. Further, EPA has defined
•"boiler" as an enclosed device using
controlled flame combustion and having
specific characteristics including' (1)
The combustion chamber and primary
energy recovery section must be of
integral design (e.g., waste heat recovery
boilers attached to incinerators are not
boilers); (2) thermal energy recovery
efficiency must be at least 60% and (3] at
least 75% of recovered energy must be
"exported" (i.e., not used for internal .
uses like preheating of combustion air or
fuel, or driving combustion air fans or
feedwater pumps). See 50 FR at 661 (Jan.
4.1985).
Some commenters requested that EPA
include in the definition of industrial
boiler those boilers which are physically
located on the premises of a
manufacturing facility but which recover
energy solely for space heating rather
than manufacturing. Commenters argued
that these boilers are often the same
size and are operated no differently than
other boilers at the facility producing
energy used for actual manufacturing.
Further, such boilers are often located in
industrially zoned areas, thus reducing
the probability of large numbers of
persons being close to the source and
being exposed to above-ground level
concentration as would be typical of
many nonindustrial boilers. Thus,
commenters argued that since the
burning characteristics and risks are
similar for all boilers located at
manufacturing facilities, the boilers
should be regulated in the same manner.
EPA agrees and has amended the
regulations accordingly. Section
286.31(b)(2)(i) has been modified from
proposal to define an industrial boiler as
any boiler located on the site of a
manufacturing facility.
Although we believe this definition of
Industrial boiler will enable the vast
majority of boiler owners and operators
to clearly catagorize their boilers, there
may be situations where it is not so
clear. If an owner or operator is not sure
whether his boiler meets today's
definition of industrial boiler, he should
contact the Regional Administrator for a
determination.
C. Definition of Utility Boiler
EPA defined utility boilers at proposal
as boilers used to produce electric
power, steam, heat or cooled air, or
other gases or fluids for sale. Owners
and operators of utility boilers are
burners regulated in the same way as
owners and operators of industrial
boilers.
We identified utility boilers
separately from industrial boilers only
as an indirect means of identifying
nonindustrial boilers subject to the
prohibitions (i.e., it is less confusing to
identify boilers not subject to the
prohibitions than to define nonindustrial
boilers subject to the prohibitions).
Clearly, utility boilers are not
nonindustrial boilers and have never
been identified as such.
A few commenters requested that
EPA distinguished between industrial
and utility boilers on the basis that
utility boilers achieve good combustion
efficiency and have emission control
equipment thereby leading to safe and
efficient burning of off-specification
used oil fuel. The commenters, however,
did not specify what practical regulatory
distinctions should be made.
Any special design, operation, or
emissions control features that utility
boilers may have that will reduce risk
posed by burning used oil will be
considered during development of the
permit standards for burning hazardous
waste fuel and off-specification used oil
fuel in boilers and industrial furnaces
scheduled to be proposed in 1986. EPA
can see no reason why utility boilers
should not be subject to the rules
promulgated today.
D. Nonindustrial Boilers
In the proposal, EPA explained that
noninduBtrial boilers include those
located at: (1) Single or multifamily
residences; (2) commercial
establishments such as hotels, office
building, laundries, or service stations;
and (3) institutional establishments such
as colleges, hospitals, and prisons,. To
avoid the problem of providing a clear,
encompassing, and unambiguous
definition of nonindustrial boiler, we
have identified and defined those
devices not subject to today's
prohibition: industrial boilers, utility
boilers, and industrial furnaces.
E. Marine and Diesel Engines
Used oil may be burned in other
devices such as diesel or marine
engines. These devices may not meet the
definition of a boiler and are not listed
as industrial furnaces under { 260.10.
See 50 FR at 661 (January 4,1935). Used
crankcase oil from diesel engines is
frequently blended with virgin diesel
fuel and burned in diesel engines (e.g.,
tractor-trailer engines). In addition, used
oil is sometimes used as fuel for ship
engines. Although such burning is for the
purpose of energy recovery (i.e., the
used oil provides substantial, useful
heat energy, and in fact replaces virgin
fuels), the burning of used oil in these
devices was not considered during
development of the proposed rule. Given
that it is not clear that diesel and marine
engines meet the definition of a boiler,
that EPA has not taken comment on
whether such devices meet the
definition, and that today's rules apply
to used oil that is burned in a boiler (or
industrial furnace) for energy recovery,
today's rules do not apply to marketers
and burners of such used oil. Thus, the
used oil fuel specification and the
invoice and certification recordkeeping
system do not apply to such used oil.81
With respect to notification
requirements, we have determined that
owners and operators of these devices-
need not notify the Agency (this type of
exemption if expressly allowed under
Section 3010(a)). We do not think it
serves any practical purpose for owners
and operators of marine engines (many
of which are under foreign ownership)
or other diesel engines such as the
thousands of diesel trucks "to notify of
•> It ihould be noted that If t penon market* off-
ipecificetion wed oil fuel exempt from today's rules
because It is burned in marine diesel engines, that
penon hai the burden of proof to demonstrate that
tn fact, auch exempt Died oil will be burned in those
devices. See 50 FR 1682 (January 11.1885) and SO FR
642 (January 4.1965). Ordinarily, invoices that track
a shipment of off-specification used oil to the end
user (i.e., marine or diesel engine owner or operator)
will be required to carry this burden.
•• Further, even if such used oil burned in diese)
trucks were subject to today's used oil fuel
specification, the oil would not likely exceed the
specification as burned. As will be discussed in
•ome detail in the used oil listing/management
standards rulemaking that will soon be proposed.
used diesel crankcase oil is typically mixed with
Continued
-------
49194 Federal Register / Vol 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
their used oil burning activities at this
time, and EPA does not need such
information to assess what rules may
ultimately be appropriate.
Marketers of used oil that is burned in
marine or diesel engines, on the other
hand must comply with the notification
requirement EPA needs to know who
these marketers are to be able to
investigate whether these marketers are
mixing hazardous waste with used oiL:
Hazardous waste; including used oil
mixed with hazardous waste, cannot be
burned in maring or diesel engines
unless the devices are permitted as
hazardous waste incinerators. (Device*
that burn hazardous waste by means of
controlled flame combustion and that
are neither boilers nor industrial
furnaces are considered to be
incinerators for regulatory purposes. See
5260.10 in 50 FR 661 (January 4,1985).)
Thus, used oil marketed for use as fuel
in marine and diesel engines is (like
other used oils] subject to the
presumption of mixing hazardous waste
established by today's rule.)
It should also be noted that although
the used oil fuel specification and the
invoice and certification recordkeeping
system established by today's rule do
not apply to used oil marketed for use as
fuel in marine or diesel engines, such
used oil would be subject to the
transportation and storage controls for
recycled oil that will soon be proposed.
When promulgated, those controls will
supersede today's rules for used oil fuel*
and will apply to all recycled oik.
m. Regulation of Industrial Furnaces
EPA has defined "industrial furnace"
as those devices specifically listed by
the Administrator as enclosed device*
that are integral components of a
manufacturing process and that use a
controlled flame to accomplish recovery
of materia's or energy. See 50 FR 661
(January 4.1985). The Agency has also
identified criteria for listing other
devices as industrial furnaces. To date.
the list of industrial furnaces includes
cement kilns, lime kilns, aggregate kilns
(including asphalt kilns], blast furnaces,
and smelting, melting and refining
furnaces.
Owners and operators of these
industrial furnaces are sjibject to today's
rules for burners (see 1266.35) when
they burn hazardous waste or off-
specification used oil for energy
recovery or for both energy recovery
and another recycling purpose (see
section II of this preamble).
IV. Regulation of Used Oil Space
Heaters
As proposed, today's rule provides a
conditioned exemption from the
prohibition on burning off-specification
used oil fuel in used oil space heaters.
EPA stated at proposal (see 50 FR at
1700) that it is deferring regulation of
these devices until it better understands
the risk they pose and evaluates
regulatory options to address any such
hazards. EPA stated further that it
would address regulation of these
devices in future rulemakings. In the
interim, these space heaters may
continue to bum off specification used
oil fuel provided that they vent the
heater to the outdoors and burn only
used oil they generate or receive from
do-it-yourself oil changes.**
As EPA explained at proposal used
oil space heaters are very small heaters
frequently used in service stations and
auto repair shops. The units typically
bum 1 to 2 gallons of used erankcase oil
per hour. Ninety percent (90%) of the
heaters are the vaporization type where
the oil is vaporized from a pan at the
base of the heater while metals and
heavy, low volatility compounds remain
in the pan (and are cleaned out
periodically). The other heaters are the
atomization type where the oil is
sprayed into the combustion chamber.
Vaporization units appear to have low
metals emissions rates—5 to 15% of the
metals are emitted. This is comparable
to (or lower than) the metals emission
rate from larger boilers (industrial fir
nonindustrial). Atomization units,
however, appear to have relatively high
metals emissions rates—75% to 95%.
EPA concluded that vaporization units
probably do not pose a health risk while
it is not clear whether atomization units
pose significant risks given the small
size of the units.
Most commenters supported the
exemption and believed that no further.
regulation is necessary. Supporters
argued that vaporization units comprise
90% of the units in operation and emit
only low levels of metals. Supporters of
the exemption were silent with respect
to atomization units.
Opponents to the exemption used
various arguments and proposed various
regulatory alternatives. Many
commenters were concerned that the
risk from metals and toxic organic
emissions could be significant given that
these space heaters are frequently
operated in residential areas. They
argued that it would be premature to
grant an exemption until further risk
assessment is conducted.*4 Some
opponents suggested that atomization
heaters be banned entirely and others
suggested application of emissions
standards to both atomization and
vaporization units. In addition, some
commenters suggested that an
exemption would actually cause a
proliferation of space heaters since they
could be viewed as a cheap, easy
method of providing heat as well as
getting rid of used oil. Thus, EPA should
consider "grandfathering" existing space
heaters rather than granting a blanket
exemption. Commenters were also
concerned that space heaters could
provide a loophole for disposal of
hazardous waste generated at service
stations and auto repair shops by mixing
with the used oil to be burned.
EPA continues to believe that
atomization space heaters may pose
significant risk in unique situations (e.g.,
where multiple atomization units
burning used oil with high levels of
metals are clustered together, and
persons are located dose to the sources)
while the much more prevalent
vaporization units probably do not pose
significant risks. Thus, we do not believe
there is a compelling reason to take the
extreme measure at this time of virtually
banning the use of these devices which
would result if they were not exempted
from the prohibition on burning off-
specification used oil fuel We intend to
include regulations for these devices, as
deemed necessary, when we propose
permit standards for all boilers and
industrial furnaces in 1986. Thus, we can
ensure that controls on burning in these
devices are consistent with controls.
particularly for metals emissions, on
other boilers and industrial furnaces. In
addition, by that time, we will have
proposed the comprehensive
management standards for recycled oil
which would regulate generators and
collectors, as well as the marketers and
burners (except for permit standards for
burning) regulated by today's rule. At
that time, we can consider the
regulatory impact on generators, as
95% virgin dieael hie! before UM 11 • die»el fuel.
The blended fuel it likely to meet the used oil fuel
epedficatim. Thua. ownen and operator! of inch
enginei would be burning a oaed oil that meet! the
•pacification and that would be exempt from
regulation.
•' The exemption U alao conditioned on the unit
having a capacity of leaa than OS million Bre/hr.
Thii encompaiaea all uaed oil ipace beaten in ua*
today and prevent! operator! of larger boilen from
claiming they operate uaed oil ipace heater*.
•• Harvard Univeralry lubmitted Information
about research they have bmn conducting regarding
the affect of emiaaiona from ua*d oil on mammalian
lung tiuua. Varioua dosagea wen applied in •
ihort-tenn inhalation itudy utilizing hamaten.
Harvard reported reaulta ahowing lung damage from
melala and othor toxic coratitMMi from both
vaporization and atomization lieaten. and
recommended further itudy to develop rational risk
eitimatea.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1085 / Rules and Regulations 49195
required by RCRA section 3014(c), of
regulating used oil space heaters in
conjunction with the entire regulator}'
scheme for recycled oil
As a final note, a few conunenters
suggested that proposed S 266.41(b)(4)(i)
be revised to conform with explicit
preamble language that allows the
owners or operators of exempted space
heaters to burn used oil received from
"do-it-yourself' oil changers as well as
used oil they generate. We agree and
have modified that provision in the final
rule at 5 286.41(b)(2)(iii).
PART FOUR: ADMINISTRATIVE AND
STORAGE STANDARDS
L Administrative Standard*
A. Overview
Hazardous waste fuels and off-
specification used oil fuels are subject to
certain administrative requirements,
including a one-time notification to
identify waste-as-fuel activities and to
obtain a U.S. EPA Identification
Number. Even if an individual has
previously notified the Agency, and
already has a U.S. EPA Identification
Number he must renotify to identify his
waste-as-fuel activities (although his
Identification Number remains the
same). Other administrative
requirements include compliance with a
manifest system (for hazardous waste
fuels), or an invoice system (for off-
specification used oil fuel) and
recordkeeping. In addition, persons
receiving shipments of hazardous waste
fuel or off-specification used oil fuel
must certify to the shipper that they
have notified EPA of their waste-as-fuel
activities, and that they may legally
burn the fuel These controls make it
possible to administer and enforce the
prohibitions against burning in
nonindustrial boilers, and provide for
proper tracking of the materials.
The administrative requirements
apply to both marketers and burners of
hazardous waste fuel and off-
specification used oil fuel. Generators of
hazardous waste or used oil who send
their waste directly to an individual who
burns those wastes are considered to be
marketers and are subject to these
controls. Conversely, generators who
send their hazardous waste or used oil
to an individual who does not burn the
waste for energy recovery are not
considered to be marketers, even If the
waste is burned later for energy
recovery by another person. (Such
generators of hazardous waste,
however, are subject to 40 CFR Part 282
as ordinary hazardous waste
generators.)
Hazardous waste fuel transportation
it subject to the full set of Part 263
requirements. This rule regulates for the
first time transporters of hazardous
waste fuel that is neither a listed waste
nor a sludge. These hazardous wastes
are currently exempt from regulation
under J 266.36 (see 60 FR 867 {January 4,
1985)), a provision that is superseded by
today's new Part 266 standards. Used oil
transportation is exempt from the
administrative requirements in order to
avoid piecemeal regulation of used oil
transporters.** If used oil fuel
transporters are regulated while other
used oil transporters are not,
transporters could avoid complying by
claiming that the used oil is intended for
other purposes. EPA will address
regulation of transporters in its recycled
oil management standards scheduled to
be proposed later this year.
The following table summarizes the
controls required under today's rule:
TABLE 7.—CONTROLS FOR WASTE FUELS
NJ4N.PMCAS—
C**p*oac*bon
(MdolkJ*
M.WUMCA
> end oaMd of generator* era net regulat-
ed a* rnameien irtea* eicy merkel dnctty to a owner.
- • • ion oho aend tiet weeie to a
Mr era eubreel to Pert 262
> eanaraton. SM |266J2|e). Qenera-
ton who merket OMit hezenlou* •«
*ubj»ci to 9<* Part 282 aenerattr
today'* hezerdoue neat* fit mark*
1266.32(0).
•Hazardou* '
•on e* oroVtery hi
not iwfmij to nodty or w^flotrty
luel to bairn* «•
mo
•t* In
era wHeci tonpjto-
portem. Thu*, My era
B. Notification Requirements
1. Purpose of Notification. Notification
is necessary because EPA must be able
to identify those persons who engage in
waste-as-fuel activities in order to
ensure that waste fuels are managed
properly and not routed to nonindustrial
markets. The special waste-as-fuel
notification is mandated under RCRA
•• Many wed oil tnneporten {coBecton) pick up
used oil from tevenl null generator* and
aggregate the oil it Mlelllte flange facHrtie* prior
to ibipment In larger tinker* to tued oil proc***on
or rerefinert. The*e traniporten are not considered
marketer* unle*r (1) They «hip tned oil directly to •
penon who bum* the oil for energy recovery; or (I)
they proem* need oil te produce a fuel at the
(forage facility. Any blending of u*ed oil* retailing
from accumulation in the trantporter'i rtoregr tank*
li incidental tc the primary function of
accumulation and i* not conaiaered to ba Mending
or preceMiai m tfai* ruie.
section 3010(a), as amended. A U.S. EPA
Identification Number will be assigned
to those facilities subject to RCRA
regulation for die first time.
2. Who Must Notify. The following
persons must notify either EPA or an
authorized state '• to identify their
waste-as-fuel activities: (1) Marketers of
hazardous waste fuel or off-specification
used oil fuel (e.g.. third-party processors,
blenders, and distributors, and
generators marketing directly to
burners); (2) burners of hazardous waste
fuel or off-specification used oil fuel,
except generators who burn their oil in
space heaters under { 266.41(b)(2)(iii):
and (3) marketers (or burners) who first
claim used oil fuel meets the
specification and so is exempt from
subsequent regulation. If any of these
individuals has previously notified the
Agency of any hazardous waste
management activities and obtained a
U.S. EPA Identification Number, they
must renotify, and may use the revised
notification form to do so (see
discussion below).
EPA explained at proposal that the
following persons need not comply with
the waste-as-fuel notification
requirement (1) Hazardous waste
generators who neither bum their
wastes for energy recovery nor market
their wastes for energy recovery directly
to a burner, because they may not know
the end use of their waste; (2) hazardous
waste fuel transporters, for the same
reason given for generators; *T and (3)
•• EPA ia allowing notifian to notify either EPA
or State* authorised to operate the hazardous waste
program even though amended aection JOlOfa)
require* that both EPA and authorized State* be
notified EPA it deviating from the eututory
provi*tec for practical reaaoa*. EPA and authorized
State* have developed a ayilcm for handling wction
3010 notification* that heretofore could be
(ubmitted to either EPA or the State. Under that
•yitem. the State automatically forward*
notification* it receive* to EPA for proceuing and
alignment of an identification number. If waete-ce-
fuel notification* were aubmittad to both EPA and
the authorized Slat*, a fedliry could Inadvertently
be auigned two identification number*. Thus,
aimultaneou* notification* to both EPA and State*
not only will not further environmental protection.
but could be counter-productive. In addition, the
requirement mat penon* notify both EPA and
Slate* we* to provide that regulation* implementing
Ike HSWA take effect immediately even in
authorised Slate*. • concern later addreaoed
directly by a**endi»l aection XOBfg). By amending
aection J0na(gl. Cortjrau eliminated the need for
dual notification.
" Hazardout waite generator* and traniportera
are iranetheJea* eubiect to the notification (and
other requirement!) of Part* 262 and 283 a* ordinary
generator* and tranaportere. Thu*. the lignificance
of the dleeoasion in the text i* that generator* and
traniporten need not nnnlify.
-------
49196 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
used oil generators and transporters
(unless they also market directly to a
burner). ••
Notification also does not apply to
owners and operators of boilers or
furnaces, including but not limited to
nonindusthal boilers, who bum used oil
fuel that meets the specification.
3, Use of the Hazardous Waste
Notification Form. Persons required to
file notifications (or renotify) with EPA
or authorized States because of their
waste-as-fuel activities may use EPA
Form 8700-12 (revised 11/85):
"Notification of Hazardous Waste
Activity." See the appendix to today's
regulation. This form is a revision of the
existing notification form which was
modified to include waste-as-fuel
notification requirements. The Agency
made minor changes to the proposed
form to make it dear that persons who
first claim that the used oil fuel they
market meets the specification an
subject to the requirements (including
notification, used oil analysis, and
recordkeeping) provided under f 266.43.
See preamble discussion in section FV.E
of Part Two.
• The revised notification form provides
EPA with the number and location of
facilities involved in processing.
blending, marketing, and distributing of
waste fuels, and the number, type, and
location of burners. These .data will be
used to develop a general profile of the
waste fuel industry and assist in future
regulatory development
Several commenters suggested
revisions to the proposed notification
form. One commenter argued that
language requiring the signer of the form
to be personally familiar with and
responsible for the veracity of the
responses places an undue burden on
managers of facilities who may not be
aware of all operations of their facility
on a day-to-day basis. This requirement
has been in place since the notification
form was first used for the RCRA
hazardous waste program in 1980, It is
not a special requirement pertaining to
notification of waste-aa-fuel activities.
EPA sees no compelling reasons to
modify its longstanding position that
one person must ultimate take
responsibility for a facility's operation
and compliance with federal regulations.
•• As noted it proposal however (tee SO FR1702.
o. 08). used oil generate™ end transporters who
send used oil to marketer* that bum tome B*ed oil
are not considered to be marketing osed oil fuel
directly to • burner for purposes of today's rak.
Thus, these generators and transporter* are not
regulated (and not required to notify) as marketers.
This it because the burning at the marketers' facility
is considered incidental to th« primary function of
the marketers' facility: processing and marketing of
used oil fuel
Another commenter suggested that the
reference to "listed infectious waste" on
the proposed form be dropped, since no
such category exists. This was an
oversight on EPA's part and has been
deleted from the final form.
4. Notification Procedures and
Implementation. As EPA indicated at
proposal it estimates that there are, at
most, 20.000-30,000 persons that may be
required to file notifications. While EPA
does not intend to carry out a mass
mailing to potentially affected parties.
the Agency will widely announce the
notification requirements of these rules
through the press and trade journals.
Persons required to notify under
today's rule should consider this Federal
Register notice their final notice to
submit a notification. To obtain a
notification form, you should contact
your authorized State hazardous waste
agency or your U.S. EPA Regional
Office. Each requester will receive a
complete notification package, including
a form and accompanying instructions.
to assist him in filing his notification.
EPA will return to each notifier an
acknowledgment of receipt of the
notification, and will issue a U.S. EPA
Identification Number if one was not
previously assigned. This
acknowledgement in no way constitutes
an endorsement by EPA of the adequacy
of the notification or of the notifier's
business practices; rather, it serves as a
confirmation that EPA received the
notification.
5. Legal Significance of Notification.
EPA is promulgating the notification
requirement for hazardous waste fuels
and off-specification used oil fuels under
the authority of Section 3010(a) of
RCRA, as amended. The notification is a
prerequisite for RCRA interim status
(see RCRA section 3005(e)(2)) for
owners and operators of hazardous
waste fuel storage facilities. See KR.
Rep. No. 98-188 at 41, likewise
specifying that notification of
management of hazardous waste fuels
serves as a prerequisite for interim
status.)
C Transportation Controls
As proposed, EPA is adopting today a
system to track movement of hazardous
waste fuel and off-specification used oil
fuel from the initial marketers (e.g..
processors, blenders, distributors, or
generators who market to burners
through intermediaries (e.g.,
transporters, distributors) to the
industrial users who burn the fuel for
energy recovery." This tracking system
allows regulatory officials to track a
hazardous waste fuel or pff-specification
used oil fuel from point of processing.
blending, or other treatment to point of
burning, thus making the prohibition on
burning in nonindustrial boilers
enforceable. Equally important the
tracking document (either a manifest or
an invoice) alerts persons who handle
these materials that they are receiving a
hazardous waste or off-specification
used oil.
Consequently, EPA today is finalizing
its proposal that all shipments of
hazardous waste fuel be accompanied
by a manifest Hazardous waste fuel
marketers are subject to the
transportation (and pre-transport)
requirements of 40 CFR Part 262 and
transporters are subject to the
requirements of 40 CFR Part 263.
We are requiring a slightly different
system for off-specification used oil fuel
whereby marketers (e.g.. processors.
blenders, distributors, and generators
who market to burners) offering off-
specification used oil fuel for sale must
prepare and send an invoice to the fuel
buyer, but do not have to have the
invoice physically accompany each
shipment (Transporters thus will not
have to comply with any invoice
requirement) This distinction (i.e^
invoice in lieu of a manifest) is needed
to avoid piecemeal regulation of used oil
transporters, as explained at proposal.
See 50 FR 1704 n. 78.
The invoice most include the shipment
initiator's name, address and
identification number, the receiving
facility's name, address, and
identification number and the quantity
of off-specification used oil fuel shipped.
All of this information is currently
required in the standard EPA hazardous
waste manifest
As EPA stated at proposal, in a
situation where an off-specification used
oil fuel goes from a processor or blender
. to an intermediate distributor, the
distributor must reinstitute a new
invoice to accompany any fuel it sells
that is produced from or otherwise
contains the used oil (unless the used oil
fuel now meets the specification). This
requirement is consistent with those
found in other parts of the RCRA
regulations whereby intermediate
storage facilities must reinitiate a
manifest See. e.g.. 40 CFR 264.71(c) and
282-10{f)-
••The system Is already in place for certain
hazardous waste fuels—namely listed wastes and
sludges when sent directly from the generator to a
burner. See Subpart O of Put 208 In SO FS 867
(January 4. IBM). Today's nil* expands the system
lo all hazardous waate fuels managed by all
marketers and burners, except those specifically
exempted under f 2B1.8(a)(3) aa revised in today. I
rule.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49197
As described in the proposal, the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 amended RCRA to
require producers, .distributors, and
marketers of hazardous waste fuels to
include a warning label on the invoice
or bill of sale for the fuel. The
requirement became effective in
February 1965. but is superseded by
today's rule. The Agency believes that
the requirement for an invoice or a
manifest achieves the same purposes as
a warning label—to alert the user or
distributor that he is receiving
hazardous waste fuel The manifest also
notifies the transporter that he is
handling hazardous waste because the
manifest must accompany the shipment
No comments disagreed with the
Agency's conclusion that an invoice or
manifest is an adequate replacement for
the statutory warning label.
Several comments were received on
the proposed invoice/manifest
requirement Commenters suggested that
transfer of waste fuels from site to site
within the same company should be
exempt from the invoice and
manifesting requirements. Commenters
pointed out that such transfers are
routine; thus, they reasoned that
invoices or manifests are unnecessary.
At the very least commenters requested
that EPA consider a simplified manifest
or invoice for such transactions.
EPA believes that the manifest
requirement for hazardous waste fuels
serves essentially the same purpose as
the current manifest requirement for
other hazardous waste—to alert
transporters (and emergency response
officials) as well as facility operators
(e.g., burners) of the fire and explosion
hazards posed by the shipment and to
establish a paper trail that will enable
enforcement officials to implement and
enforce the regulations. Given similar
purposes and that off-site, but
intracompany, shipments of other
hazardous waste are subject to full
manifest requirements, EPA sees no
compelling reason to modify manifest
requirements specifically for hazardous
waste fuel See also 50 FR 28724-28725
Duly 15,1985) where the Agency
adopted the same position with regard
to the warning label required by RCRA
section 3004(r)(l).
D. Notice and.Certification
Requirements
To enforce the prohibition on burning
hazardous waste fuel and off-
specification used oil fuel in
nonindustrial boilers, the prohibition
applies not only to the boiler owner and
operator, but also to the waste fuel
marketer. Thus, a marketer (a processor,
ble ider, distributor, or a generator
marketing directly to a burner) may not
sell hazardous waste fuels or off-
specification used oil fuel to a person
who burns it in a nonindustrial boiler
but must ensure that they market these
fuels only to persons in (and, thus,
aware of) the regulatory system: persons
who have notified EPA of their waste-
as-fuel activities. In addition, marketers
are responsible for determining whether
their waste fuel is subject to regulation
(i.e., whether their product fuel contains
hazardous waste or is off-specification
used oil).
As EPA explained at proposal, to
comply with these requirements,
marketers need to know whether the
person receiving a shipment of
hazardous waste fuel or off-specification
used oil fuel has notified EPA of his
waste-as-fuel activities and whether he
intends to burn the fuel only hi a utility
boiler or industrial boiler or industrial
furnace. Thus, the rules include a
provision requiring that a marketer of
hazardous waste fuel or off-specification
used oil fuel receive a certification from
the fuel purchaser stating that the
purchaser has notified EPA of his waste-
as-fuel activities and will bum the fuel
only in unrestricted boilers or furnaces.
This certification is a one-time notice
and is required before sending the initial
shipment Similarly, the purchaser is
required to send the certification before
receiving the first shipment from a
marketer. This will ensure that the
recipient is aware of the regulations
applicable to waste fuels and of his
responsibilities as a burner (or
intermediary). Hazardous waste and
used oil generators (and transporters
receiving waste from generators) who
market their waste to a person who is
not a burner are not subject to this (or
any other) requirement for marketers
and a recipient of the generator's
hazardous waste or used oil is not
required to provide the generator with a
certification notice. (Hazardous waste
generators and their transporters are,
however, subject to regulation as
ordinary hazardous waste generators
and transporters under 40 CFR Parts 262
and 263 respectively.)
£. Used Oil Analysis Requirements for
Marketers
Marketers who first claim used oil
meets the specification and is
essentially exempt from, further
regulation >0° must document by
»•• A» diicuiMd In the text bi Put Two. Motion
JV.E. luch marketer* mint keep records of the initial
ahipment of ipetification uied oil Alia ••
cUtcuued in Motion IV f. EPA end State
enforcement official! have the authority to enter the
premiie* of a penon believed to be handling used
oil fuel and to collect lamolei of fuel oil,
analyses or other information that the
oil in fact meets the specification.
Although the proposal required testing
for documentation, the final rule allows
the use of otiTer information to show
that the oil meets the specification. See
previous discussion in Part Two, section
IV f. This is consistent with a
generator's requirements under 40 CFR
262.11 (c) to use testing or other
information to determine whether his
solid waste is hazardous waste.
Ordinarily, however, we expect that
testing will be used to demonstrate
compliance. If a person's determination
that used oil meets the specification is
found to be erroneous, he is in violation
of the regulations regardless of intent
Persons required to obtain analyses
(or other information) to demonstrate
that their used oil fuel meets the
specification include processors and
blenders (and burners) who treat used
oil known to be off-specification to
produce specification used oil fuel and
persons who market or burn as
specification used oil fuel used oil
received directly from generators or
collectors. (Used oil received directly
from generators or from collectors who
receive oil from generators is presumed
to be off-specification unless
demonstrated otherwise.) EPA
explained at proposal that such
analyses and recordkeeping are requ.^ed
'to enable the Agency to enforce the
prohibitions on those persons who firs
claim that used oil fuel meets the
specification.
Persons who obtain analyses of used
oil to demonstrate compliance with the
specification must ensure that
representative samples are obtained an i
that appropriate analytical procedures
are used. Sampling and analysis of used
oil is discussed above in section IV J.
F. Recordkeeping Requirements
The recordkeeping requirements are
limited requirements designed primarily
to keep track of the movement of
hazardous waste fuels and off-
specification used fuels. The substantive
prohibitions as well as the various
administrative requirements would not
be enforceable without these
recordkeeping requirements. As
proposed, marketers and burners must
keep a copy of the manifest or invoice
(for used oil) that accompanies or that
applies to each fuel shipment In
addition, marketers and burners are
irreipective of whether the penon reasonably
believe* nil uied oil fuel meeti the ipecification. for
the purpoiei of determining compliance with
today'f rule.
-------
49198 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
required to retain copies of certification .
notices that they initiate or receive.
EPA also proposed that marketers of
used oil fuel who first claim the oil
meets the specification are required to
obtain analyses of their used oil fuel
product to document that it meets the
specification. Copies of the analyses
must be retained for three years. As
discussed above, today's final rule
allows the use of other information to
document that used oil meets the
specification. Such other information
must also be retained for three yean.
In response to commenters* concerns
about the enforceability of the proposed •
rule, the final rule includes additional
recordkeeping requirements for persons
who first claim used oil fuel meets the
specification. See section IV.E of this
preamble. Today's rule requires these
persons to also keep records on initial
shipments of specification used oil fuel
Subsequent shipments (e.g., by
distributors) are not subject to
regulation.
As proposed, all records must be
retained at the facility for three years,
except that certification notices must be
kept for three years fronv the date a
person last engages in a waste fuel
marketing transaction with the person
who sent or received the certification
notice. These records must be available
for inspection by an officer, employee,
or representative of EPA (see RCRA
section 3007).
n. Storage Requirements for Hazardous
Waste Fuel
t
As explained at proposal today's rule
expands existing requirements for
storage so that all storage of all
hazardous waste fuels is subject to
regulation. Under previously existing
provisions of 40 CFR 261.6, and
continued under the solid waste
definition rulemaking at Subpart 0 of
Part 266 (see 50 FR 667 (January 4.
1965]), hazardous wastes that are listed ~
wastes or sludges are subject to the
storage standards of Parts 262, 264, and
265, when stored prior to use as a fuel
and prior to use to produce a fuel.
Nonsludge wastes that are hazardous
only because they exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste, and
hazardous waste fuel produced by an
off-site marketer by processing,
blending, or other treatment of
hazardous waste, were exempt from
regulation prior to today's rule. All
hazardous waste used to produce fuel
and all hazardous waste fuel so
produced are subject to today's storage
requirements for the reason? given
below.
A. Which Hazardous Wastes Are
Subject to Storage Requirements
The Agency is today regulating the
storage (and transportation) of any
hazardous waste used to produce a fuel
and of any hazardous waste fuel so
produced. We are thus eliminating the
current distinction between listed
wastes and sludges on the one hand and
unlisted spent materials and unlisted
byproducts on the other. As explained at
proposal these distinctions are noi
environmentally justifiable, and exist
only because of the Agency's initial
uncertainty (in 1980) about an
appropriate regulatory regime for
recycled wastes. See 48 FR 14475 (April
4.1983). It is now our view that a
hazardous waste classification as
sludge, by-product or spent material, or
listed vs. unlisted (characteristic)
hazardous waste has no relation to the
type of hazard the waste poses when
stored, and therefore, that storage of all
of these should be regulated uniformly.
Id
B, Eliminating the Exemption for
Storage of Hazardous Waste Fuel
Produced by Persons Who Did Not
Generate the Waste
Ac proposed today's rules subject all
hazardous waste fuels to storage (and
other) controls. This includes storage by
the initial marketer (e.g., processors,
blenders), storage by subsequent
marketers (e.g., distributors), and
storage by burners. (Hazardous waste
storage by ordinary generators whose
waste is destined to be burned for
energy recovery, but who do not market
directly to burners, is also subject to
regulation.)
The present regulatory regime
provided by Subpart D of Part 266 (see
50 FR 667 (January 4, 1935)) whereby
hazardous waste fuel produced by a
person who neither generated the waste
nor bums the fuel is exempt from
regulation was intended only as an
interim measure and cannot be
defended on environmental grounds.
The argument that hazardous waste
fuels function as valuable inventory in a
burner's hands and so will be stored
safely does not appear tenable, and
already has been rejected by the
Agency. See 50 FR 617-618, 632. 643
(January 4.1985). Hazardous waste fuels
in many cases do not command
substantial economic vame; in some
situations, burners are even paid to
accept these materials. In addition, the
fact that a hazardous waste fuel is being
stored as a commodity is insufficient to-
prevent substantial risk. There have
been many damage incidents from
product and raw material storage,
examples being spills from underground
and above-ground product storage
tanks, including fuel storage tanks. See
49 FR 29418 (July 20,1884). Indeed, the
Agency has found that leaks and spills
from hazardous waste tank storage is
very likely, and that this risk is
substantial and requires regulatory
control See also Section 601 of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 requiring EPA to
regulate underground storage tanks
storing products. The Agency also has
been told by State regulatory officials
and used oU fuel dealers that hazardous
waste fuels are suspected of causing a
number of fires in the New York City
and New Jersey areas. Another
commenter described a "major accident
at a cement kiln using waste-derived
fuels." The Agency thus does not see
any reason to regulate this type of
hazardous waste storage differently
from other hazardous waste storage.
Today's rule subjects all storage of all
hazardous waste fuels to the storage
standards provided by 40 CFR Parts 262
(for short-term accumulation of fuels by
a generator who burns bis waste on site
or who markets directly to a burner),
264, and 265, with one exception. As
proposed, we are not subjecting
hazardous waste fuel storage by an
existing burner to the filial permitting
standards of 40 CFR Part 264 at this time
for several reasons. Because we intend
to regulate most burning of hazardous
waste fuels in a manner that would
require some form of permitting, we do
not want to issue a permit to a burner
for storage and then have to issue a
second permit in the near future for
burning. We thus plan to delay adopting
final permitting-storage standards for
existing burners until a single permit
proceeding can address both burning
and storage. Thus, existing burners will
be subject only to the storage standards
for tanks and containers contained in
Part 265.
In addition, as proposed, a permit is
not presently required to store off-
specification used oil fuel. EPA is not
jmposing storage requirements on used
oil fuel at this time because the Agsncy
wishes to avoid the piecemeal
regulation of used oil storage which
would result were we to regulate used
oil fuel storage in advance of other types
of used oil storage. Storage requirements
will be proposed when the Agency
proposes comprehensive regulations for
recycled oil on the next future.
Hazardous waste fuels stored by a
marketer are subject to regulation. Thus,
as explained at proposal, storage of both
incoming hazardous waste and outgoing
hazardous waste fuels are regulated.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49199
Many marketers are already subject to
regulation as storage facilities because
they store incoming listed wastes and
sludges, and may be operating under
interim status standards. These
marketers need to amend their Part A
storage applications to seek an
authorization to expand their interim
status operations to include the waste
fuel storage area. See $ 270.72.
Numerous comments were .received
on the proposed storage requirements.
Many commenters opposed compliance
with the storage standards for industrial
boiler owners and operators because
they believed they were unnecessary
since industrial" boiler owners and
operators are well aware of the hazards
of storage and handling of hazardous
waste. Compliance with the storage
standards would cause them to incur
large costs for little reason, they argued.
We disagree. We have noted above that
burner storage facilities have been
exempt from regulation only as an
interim measure and the exemption
cannot be defended on environmental
grounds. See also 50 FR 643 (January 4,
1985] where the Agency discussed why
it was unable to eliminate any
requirements from Part 285 (or 264)
storage standards for recycled
hazardous wastes.
Other commenters suggested class
permitting of storage facilities. EPA will
consider issues concerning permitting of
burner storage facilities when the permit
standards for existing burners (and
storage) are proposed in 1988. Today's
rule applies only the interim status Part
265 standards to existing burner storage
facilities (the predominant class of
storage units affected by this rule).
DL Examples of How These Regulations
Operate
The following hypothetical examples
illustrate how the rides operate:
1. Generator G generates a hazardous
waste and sends it to burner B who
stores it in a tank prior to burning in an
industrial boiler for energy recovery.
G is a hazardous waste fuel marketer
because he markets directly to a burner.
Assuming that G is a large quantity
generator (and EPA is unaware of
situations where small quantity
generators send hazardous wastes
directly to burners), he must comply
with the requirements for marketers,
including the manifest and storage
requirements, and notification as a
hazardous waste fuel marketer. Prior to
sending the first shipment he must also
obtain a certification from B that B has
notified EPA of his waste-as-fuel
activities and that he will bum the fuel
only in unrestricted units (i.e., industrial
boilers, industrial furnaces and utility
boilers). B is a hazardous waste fuel
burner and a RCRA storage facility.
Assuming he already is engaging in
hazardous waste management activities
as a facility, he must comply with the
interim status standards for storage
(including submitting a Part A permit
application). If B is a new storage
facility (i.e., is not in existence as a
facility at the time these rules become'
effective), he must obtain a storage
permit prior to storing the hazardous
waste fuel He must also notify EPA of
his waste-as-fuel activities and provide
G with the certification discussed above
prior to receiving the first shipment B
will have one identification number for
storage and burning.
2A. Generator G, a large quantity
generator, generates a hazardous waste
but sends it to an intermediate
processor P, who mixes it with other
wastes and sells the mixture to a burner
B who stores it in a tank prior to burning
in an industrial boiler for energy
recovery.
G is subject to regulation under Part
262 as a generator and must comply
with the manifest system and applicable
storage requirements. He is not subject
to the requirements for marketers. P is a
marketer. He must obtain a storage
permit to store the hazardous wastes
received from the generator. The
blended mixture is hazardous waste fuel
and is subject to the storage controls
under Parts 264 and 265. P and B must
notify EPA of their waste-as-fuel
activities, and must comply with the
certification requirements. B is a
hazardous waste fuel burner who has a
RCRA storage facility subject to the
interim status controls of Part 265
(assuming the facility is in existence at
the time the rule is effective).
2J3. G, a large quantity generator,
generates a hazardous waste and mixes
it with used oil. The mixture is sent to P,
who does further blending with used oil,
and then sends the mixture to B where it
is burned as in the previous example.
The controls operate in this situation
Just as in the previous example. A
mixture of large quantity generator
hazardous waste and used oil is subject
to regulation as hazardous waste.
2.C. G is a small quantity generator
who generates a hazardous waste and
mixes it with used oil as in example 2.B.
G sends the mixture to processor P, who
processes the material further and sells
processed oil as fuel The fuel meets the
specification for used oil. It then is sold
to retail fuel dealers and to industrial
and nonindustrial users.
In this situation (i.e., where a small
quantity generator mixes its hazardous
waste with used oil), the mixture is
exempt (for the time being) from
regulation as hazardous waste under the
provisions of 40 CFR 261.5 but (for the
time being) is .subject to regulation as
used oil when obtained by a used oil
fuel marketer, P. Thus, G (who
incidentally is not a marketer) may send
his used oil to P without an invoice. P is
a marketer of used oil fuel. He must
notify EPA of his waste-as-fuel activities
and obtain a U.S. EPA Identification
Number. He also must document with
analyses (or other information) that the
used oil fuel he markets meets the
specification since he receives used oil
from a generator (or from a transporter
who receives oil from a generator) and
markets used oil fuel as specification
used oil fuel In addition, he must keep
records of the shipment and the person
to whom the oil is first sent The used oil
fuel is exempt from further regulation
and may be sent to burners or retail fuel
dealers (i.e., distributors) who do not
have EPA identification numbers, and
who may sell the fuel on an unrestricted
basis.
If, as is more likely, P determines that
the used oil fuel does not meet the
specification, P can only send it to
persons who have certified to him that
they have notified EPA of their waste-
as-fuel activities and will burn the fuel
only in industrial boilers, utility boilers,
or industrial furnaces. P would have to
prepare and send invoices for the off-
specification used oil fuel The retail fuel
dealers (i.e., distributors) who receive
the off-specification used oil fuel are
marketers and cannot send the fuel to
nonindustrial users unless it is *
processed further to meet the fuel
specification (and they document with
analyses or other information that the
fuel meets the specification and keep
records of the shipment and the person
to whom the oil is first sent). Marketers
and burners must keep records of
invoices and certifications sent and
received and fuel analyses (or other
information) documenting compliance
with the fuel specification (where
required).
3.A. P is a used oil processor who
receives used oil from a variety of
sources and blends them to make fuels.
The used oil is not mixed with
hazardous waste. The blended fuel that
P produces is off-specification for lead. P
sends this fuel to R, a retail fuel dealer.
R blends the fuel further so that it meets
the lead specification. R then sells the
fuel to industrial and nonindustrial
users.
P is a marketer of used oil fuel.
• Because the used oil fuel is off-
specification, it can be sent only to a
person (e.g., R) who has certified to P
that he has notified EPA of his waste-as-
-------
49200 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
fuel activities (and obtained a U.S. EPA
Identification Number), and P must send
an invoice to R. R is also a marketer
because he receives off-specification
used oil fuel. Since R markets the used
oil fuel as specification fuel (by
marketing to industrial boilers without
complying with the invoice, notification,
and other requirements), he must
document with analyses or other
information that the fuel meets the -
specification, R must also keep records
of the shipment and the person to whom
the specification used oil fuel is first
sent Marketers and burners must keep
records as discussed previously.
3J). Processor P receives used oil from
different generators, and also receives
spent halogenated solvents that are
listed as hazardous waste. P blends the
hazardous solvents with the used oil
Some of the spent halogenated solvents
were generated by large quantity
generators. The mixture contains less
than 1000 ppm total halogens and meets
the specification for all other
constituents and parameters. P sells this
blended fuel to R, as in example 3.A.
P is a marketer of hazardous waste
fuel because he has mixed hazardous
waste with used oil There is no need to
invoke the presumption of mixing with
hazardous waste (based on total-
halogen levels) because it is known on
these facts that hazardous waste and
used oil have been mixed. (As explained
in section IV-B of Part n of this
preamble, it is not always certain when
used oil is mixed with hazardous waste.
In those cases, EPA is employing a
rebuttable presumption of mixing with
halogenated hazardous waste when
halogen levels exceed 1000 ppm.)
Finally, the used oil fuel specification
does not apply to hazardous waste and,
thus, does not apply to the mixture.
4.A. Petroleum refinery C generates
API separator sludge (Hazardous Waste
K052) and reintroduces it to the refining
process upstream from distillation.
All resulting fuels (including
petroleum coke) from the refining
process are exempt from regulation at
this time because the API separator
sludge is a hazardous waste from
petroleum refining which is introduced
to refining process. The API separator
sludge is not automatically exempt from
regulation until it is reintroduced.
4.B. Petroleum refinery G generated
API separator sludge, and sends it to a
different refinery where it is
reintroduced to the refining process
upstream from distillation.
All resulting rules are exempt for the •
same reason as in 4.A. The API
separator sludge is not automatically
exempt until it is reintroduced.
4.C Petroleum refinery G generates
API separator sludge and sends it to fuel
processor P who processes me sludge
along with used oil in a process that
accepts crude oil but does not include
distillation as a process step. The
resulting fuels meet the used oil fuel
specification.
The fuels produced by processor P are
not subject to regulation (aside from P
maintaining a record of the first person
to whom the fuels are sent). They would
be subject to regulation as hazardous
waste fuels if they failed to meet the fuel
specification. In addition, processor P
needs a storage permit or interim status
to store the API separator sludge.
5-A. Same facts as in 4.A. above,
except that refinery G reclaims oil from
the API separator sludge and
reintroduces the recovered oil to the
refining process.
Both the reclaimed oil (which is to be
refined) and the resulting fuels are
exempt from regulation.
5JL Same facts as in 4JL above.
except mat reclaimed oil (Le- oil
reclaimed from the API separator
sludge) is sent to the other refinery.
Both the reclaimed oil and the
resulting fuels are exempt from
regulation.
5.C. Same facts as in 4.C above,
except that reclaimed oil is sent to fuel
processor P.
Here, the reclaimed oil is not
automatically exempt because it is not
being refined (since the fuel processor is
not using distillation as a process step).
The resulting fuel is exempt (aside from
a recordkeeping step for P) if it meets
the used oil fuel specification.
6. ProcessorP obtains contaminated
used oil which it processes via
distillation to produce a fuel Oil-bearing
hazardous wastes from petroleum
refining are also used in the process.
The resulting fuel meets the used oil fuel
specification.
The fuel is exempt because it meets
the used oil fuel specification. See
{ 281.6{a)(3)(viii)(A). If the used oil fuel
did not meet the fuel specification, it
would be considered hazardous waste
fuel and be subject to full regulation.
This situation should be distinguished
from one where oil-bearing hazardous
wastes from refining are reintroduced to
a refining process. The process here is
not considered to be refining, in spite of
the use of distillation, because it does
not produce products from crude oil
PART FIVE: ADMINISTRATIVE.
ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS, AND LIST OF SUBJECTS
L State Authority
A. Applicability of Rules at Authorized
States
Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA
may authorize qualified States to
administer and enforce the RCRA
program within the State. (See 40 CFR
Part 271 for the standards and
requirements for authorization.)
Following authorization EPA retains
enforcement authority under sections
3008. 7003 and 3013 of RCRA. although
authorized States have primary
enforcement responsibility.
Prior to the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA)
amending RCRA. a State with final
authorization administered its
hazardous waste program entirely in
lieu of EPA administering the Federal
program in that State. The Federal
requirements no longer applied in the
authorized State, and EPA could not
issue permits for any facilities in the
State which the State was authorized to
permit When new, more stringent
Federal requirements were promulgated
or enacted, the State was obligated to
enact equivalent authority within
specified time frames. New Federal
requirements did not take effect in an
authorized State until the State adopted
the requirements as State law.
In contrast under newly enacted
section 3006(g) of RCRA. 42 U.S.C.
6928(g], new requirements and
prohibitions imposed by the HSWA take
effect in authorized States at the same
time that they take effect in
nonauthorized States. EPA is directed to
carry out those requirements and
prohibitions in authorized States,
including issuing permits, until the State
is granted authorization to do so. While
States most still adopt HSWA-related
provisions as Stale law. to retain final
authorization, the HSWA applies in
authorized States in the interim.
Today's rule, with respect to
hazardous waste fuels, (40 CFR 268.30-
266.35) is promulgated pursuant to
section 3004(q), a provision added by
HSWA. Thus it is being added to Table
1 in I 271.1fj) which identifies the
Federal program requirements that arts
promulgated pursuant to HSWA and
thus are immediately effective in
authorized States. States may apply for
either interim or final authorization for
the HSWA provisions identified in
Table 1 as discussed in the followin,,
section of this preamble.
-------
Federal Register / VoL 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49201
The used oil fuel standards adopted
today «t 40 CFR 266.40-266.44 also are
applicable in all States, although for a
different reason. Used oil fuel is not
presently regulated as a hazardous
waste under section 3001. Instead,
today's regulations are promulgated
pursuant to the Used Oil Recycling Act
(codified as section 3014(a) of RCRA)
which directs EPA to regulated recycled
used oil even if used oil is not a
hazardous waste. Section 3014(a)
requirements apply hi all States aa
Federal law and operate.independently
of sections 3001 through 3008. EPA,
however, is about to propose to list used
oil as a hazardous waste pursuant to
authority contained in section 3014(b) of
RCRA, a provision added by HSWA.
Should EPA adopt this listing as a final
rule, all rules regarding management of
recycled used oil thus would be
applicable in all States by virtue of
section 3006(g^as well as section 3014.
At that point, authorized States would
be required to revise their programs to
adopt these rules as discussed below.
B. Effect on State Authorizations -
As noted above, the hazardous waste
fuel rules promulgated today are
effective in all States. Thus, EPA will
implement the standards in
nonauthorized States and in authorized .
States until they revise their programs to
adopt these rules and the revision is
approved by EPA.
A State may apply to receive either
interim or final authorization to
administer and enforce the hazardous
waste fuel rules under section 3008(g)(2)
or 3006(b), respectively, on the basis of
requirements that are substantially
equivalent or equivalent to EPA's. The
procedures and schedule for State
program revisions under section 3006(b)
are described in 40 CFR 27121. See 48
FR at 21878 (May 22.1984). The same
procedures should be followed for
section 3006(g)(2).
Applying i 27L21(e)(2). States that
have final authorization must revise
their programs within a year from today
if only regulatory changes are
necessary, or within two years of
promulgation if statutory changes are
necessary. These deadline* can be
extended m exceptional cases (40 CFR
271.21(e)(3)).
States with authorized RCRA
programs already may have
requirements similar to those in today's
rule. These State regulations have not
been assessed against the Federal
regulations being promulgated today to
determine whether they meet the tests
for authorization. Thus, a State is not
authorized to carry out these
requirements in lieu of EPA until a State
program revision is submitted and
approved. Of course, State* with
existing standards may continue to
administer and enforce their standards
as a matter of State law. In
implementing the Federal program EPA
will work with States under cooperative
agreements to mmim<»» duplication of
efforts. In many cases EPA will be able
to defer to the States in their efforts to
implement their programs, rather than
take separate actions under Federal
authority.
States that submit official applications
for final authorization less than 12
months after promulgation of EPA's
regulations may be approved without
including standards equivalent to those
promulgated. However, once authorized, •
a State must revise its program to
include standards substantially
equivalent or equivalent to EPA's within
the time periods discussed above.
H. Regulatory Impacts
A. Result* of Regulatory Impact Studies
1. Executive Order 12291. As defined
by Executive Order 12291. today's
regulation is not a "major rule".
Therefore, no Regulatory Impacts
Analysis (RIA) is required. This rule will
not have an annual impact on the
national economy greater than $100
million. The estimated maximum costs
of today's rule are an initial (one-time)
expenditure of $8 million and annual
costs of $20.9 million. The majority of
affected facilities will incur less than
$1000 in additional costs with the
mavimmn expenditure for any one
facility expected to be approximately
$7000 per year. In addition, these
regulations will not significantly affect
competition, employment productivity
or innovation.
This rule was submitted to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review under Executive Order 12291.
2. Regulatory Flexibility Act We have
determined that today's rule will not
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small businesses
and that therefore, no Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (RFA) is required
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
Although a large number of small
businesses managing used oil will be
affected by some parts of the rules, we
estimate that the maximum costs that'
could be imposed will be less than 5% of
product price and will not cause a 5%
closure rate. Cost of compliance data
presented at proposal (see 50 FR 170ft-
1712) indicate that the rules may
increase the cost of a marketer's used oil
fuel by 1 to 3 cents per gallon. EPA does
not consider this a significant increase
given that generators are paid IS to 25
cents per gallon for their used oil, and
marketers charge burners 50 to 75 cents
per'-gallon for used oil fuel.
3. Paperwork Reduction Act. The
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980 (PRAJ, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq., were considered in
developing these regulations. We
believe that the reporting and
recordkeeping required by today's rules
are the minimum necessary to
implement and enforce the regulations.
The information collection
requirements contained in this rule have
been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980,44 U.S.C. 3501 et
teg. and have been assigned OMB
control numbers 2050-0028
(notification), 2050-0009 (storage
permits), 2050-0039 (manifest shipping
papers, and 2050-0047 (invoice shipping
papers, certification, and used oil
analysis).
B. Impacts on the Recycling Industry
1. Uied Oil Fuel. In the proposal, we
stated that we did not believe that these
regulations would discourage the
recycling or recovery of used oil The
rules only restrict used oil entering the
nonindustrial fuel market EPA stated in
the proposal that any used oil not sold
to this market could be sold to industrial
users or used as rerefinmg feedstock.
Many comments were received on the
subject of the impact of the rules, as
proposed on the used oil industry. Most
of the parties who commented were
concerned that the Agency
underestimated costs and impacts.
Commenters related impacts to
decreased value of used oil and the
absence of viable markets for displaced
used oil The Agency maintains that the
costs and impacts presented in the
proposed rulemaking (50 FR 1707-1714)
are generally complete and reasonable
projections. We predict that today's rule
will have minimal impacts on net
recycling because significant alternative
markets existM>
The Agency also received a number of
comments stressing the need to maintain
viable recycling markets, particularly for
used oil. Commenters frequently
discussed impacts on their particular
industry or practices. EPA maintains
that this proposal will not reduce net
•" II ihould be noted that the effective date of the
bad specification la delayed six month* expressly
to avoid major disruption of the need oil recycling
tnduatry that oould result in dumping. As shown in
Table (ia the text, delaying the effective date of the
lead apedficatioo ia expected to nor* than double
the amount of (unblended) used oil that can necl
the specification for metals.
-------
49202 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
recycling. This proposal does not restrict
combustion of hazardous wastes or
recycled oil in industrial devices. Nor
does it restrict other recycling, such as
used oil rerefining and solvent
reclamation. We recognize that the
regulation will cause some market shifts.
but maintain that net recycling will not
decrease. Commenters confused impacts
of this proposal with those of more
extensive regulations of the Phase D
standards that include industrial
burners—which this rule does not
address. Many commenters apparently
presumed that recycled oil was banned
from industrial boilers. The Agency may
apply a similar specification to recycled
oil burned in boilers under the Phase n
regulations. The costs and impacts of
that rule, however, will be presented
when that rule is proposed. Those costs
and impacts are not part of today's rule.
We maintain that today's regulation
does not impose major impacts that
require an RIA.
2. Hazardous Waste Fuel.
Commenters suggested that permits for
Small hazardous waste storage facilities
may cost $25.000, not the $10,000 we
suggested in the proposal "* EPA
estimated a $10.000 expenditure because
we utilized the cost of amending an
existing Part B permit in our cost
estimate, not the cost of obtaining a new
permit The rule requires Part B storage
permits only for facilities marketing
hazardous waste fuels (and for new
hazardous waste fuel burner facilities).
We have assumed virtually all
hazardous waste fuel contains listed
hazardous waste. Thus, the marketer's
feedstock tanks (i.e., tanks for incoming
wastes) are already subject to
regulation, the marketer's facilities
affected by today's rule would already
have RCRA permits.
In the proposal the Agency applied
unit costs to represent the total
incremental costs of these requirements
above current requirements and
practices. The costs related to this
regulation are not the total investments,
revenues, or value of products of
associated businesses, as some
commenters suggested. We estimate
that this regulation will impose direct
costs of up to $21 million per year
(annualized). This is one of the reasons
why this regulation is not a major rule
and does not require an RIA.
'"II ihould be noted that these storage facility
cost estimate* do not Include the cost of providing
secondary containment (or alternate equivalent
controls), a requirement EPA recently ptopoaed for
hazardous waste storage facilities. See SO FR 2M44-
265O4 "'me 26.1985).
m. Explanation of Compliance Dates
At proposal (see 50 FR 1714), EPA
expressly requested comment on
staggering the compliance dates for the
regulatory requirements to make them
effective as soon as practicable during
the 1985-86 heating season. Although
commenters did not indicate that the
compliance dates were unreasonable,
we have decided that the proposed 30
day compliance date for notifications
may not give noUfiers enough time to
request and receive notification
applications from their State hazardous
waste agency, and to complete and
submit the form. Thus, the final rule
allows notjfiers two months after today
to notify regarding their waste-as-fuel
activities.
We are making a corresponding
change to the compliance date for the
manifest (or invoice) system. Given that
marketers and burners must include
their UJJ. EPA Identification Number
(assigned after receipt of notification) on
manifests and invoices, and that it may
take as long as two months after receipt
of an application to apprise a notifier of
his Identification Number, (if he is not
renotifying to identify waste-as-fuel
activities) the compliance date for the
manifest (or invoice) system is four
months after today. (The proposed
compliance date was 90 days after
publication.)
Compliance dates for the prohibitions
(Le., 10 days after today) and for the
storage controls (Le., six months after
today) are adopted as proposed.
The compliance date for each
regulatory requirement is shown in the
"DATES" section at the beginning of
this preamble.
IV. List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 281
Hazardous waste. Recycling.
40CFRPart284
Hazardous waste. Insurance,
Packaging and containers. Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Security measures. Surety bonds.
40 CFR Part 265
Hazardous waste. Insurance,
Packaging and containers, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Security measures. Surety bonds. Water
supply.
40 CFR Part 268
Hazardous waste, Recycling.
40 CFR Part 271
Administrative practice and
procedure. Confidential business
information. Hazardous materials
transportation. Hazardous waste. Indian
lands. Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requrements. Water pollution control.
Water supply.
Dated: November & 1985.
Le* M. Tboznu,
Administrator,
For the reasons set out in the
Preamble, Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
1. The authority citation for Part 281
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec* 1008, 2002(«). 3001. and
3002. of the Solid Waste Disposal Act u
•mended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1978. u amended (42 U.S.C
6905,8912(a). 682L and 6922).
2. Section 281.3 is amended by adding
to paragraph (c)(2)(ii) the following (B):
(261.3 DajflnWen of hazardous mate.
(c) * * '
(2) * • •
(U) • • '
(B) Wastes from burning any of the
materials exempted from regulation by
!-2BL8M(3) (•»)•
3. Section 2814 is amended by
revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
{261.5 Special requirements for
quantity e*j
t
(b) Except for those wastes identified
in paragraphs (e). (f). (g). (h). and (k) of
this section, a small quantity generator's
hazardous wastes are not subject to
regulation under Parts 262 through 286
and Parts 270 and 124 of this chapter.
and the notification requirements of
Section 3010 of RCRA, provided the
generator complies with the regulations
of paragraphs (f). (g). (H and (k) of this
section.
• • • • #
4. Section.261.5 is amended by adding
a new paragraph (k) to read as follows:
92614 Sp<
hazardous!
st«j
fltSt
f by
quantity generator*.
(k) If a small quantity generator's
hazardous wastes are mixed with used
oil, the mixture is subject to Subpait E of
Part 268 of this chapter if it is destined
to be burned for energy recovery. Any
material produced from such a mixture
by processing, blending, or other
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1965 / Rules and Regulations 49203
treatment is also so regulated if it it
destined to be burned for energy
recovery.
5. Section 261.6 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(2)(iii), and
(a)(3)(iii), and adding new paragraphs
(a)(3) (viii) and (ix). Although only the
above changes are made under this
rulemaking, the entire { 281.6, including
provisions not affected by today's rules,
is printed here for the reader's
convenience.
1261.6 Requirements tor recyclable
materials,
(a)(l) Hazardous wastes that are
recycled are subject to the requirements
for generators, transporters, and storage
facilities of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this
section, except for the materials listed in
paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3) of this
section. Hazardous wastes that are
recycled will be known as "recyclable
materiels."
(2) The foDowing recyclable materials
are not subject to the requirements of
this section but are regulated under
Subparts C through G of Part 266 of this
chapter and all applicable provisions hi
Parts 270 and 124 of this chapter
(i) Recyclable materials used in a
manner constituting disposal (Subpart
Q:
(ii) Hazardous wastes burned for
energy recovery in boilers and industrial
furnaces that an not regulated under
Subpart O of Part 264 or 265 of this
chapter (Subpart D);
(iii) Used oil that exhibits one or more
of the characteristics of hazardous
waste and is burned for energy recovery
in boilers and industrial furnaces that
are not regulated under Subpart O of
Part 284 or 265 of this chapter (Subpart
E):
(iv) Recyclable materials from which
precious metals an reclaimed (Subpart
Ffc
(v) Spent lead-acid batteries that an
being reclaimed (Subpart G).
(3) The following recyclable materials
an not subject to regulation under Parts
262 through Parts 266 or Parts 270 or 124
of this chapter, and an not subject to
the notification requirements of section
3010 of RCRA:
(i) Industrial ethyl alcohol that is
reclaimed;
(ii) Used batteries (or used battery
cells) returned to a battery manufacturer
for regeneration;
(iii) Used oil that exhibits one or mon
of the characteristics of hazardous
waste but is recycled in some other
manner than being burned for energy
ncovery;
(iv) Scrap metal:
(v) Fuels produced from the refining of
oil-bearing hazardous wastes along with
normal process streams at a petroleum
refining facility if such wastes result
from normal petroleum refining,
production, and transportation
practices;
(vi) Oil reclaimed from hazardous
waste resulting from normal petroleum
refining, production, and transportation
practices, which oil is to be refined
along with normal process streams at a
petroleum refining facility;
(vii) Coke and coal tar from the iron
and steel industry that contains
hazardous waste the iron and steel
production process;
(viii) (A) Hazardous waste fuel
produced from oil-bearing hazardous
wastes from petroleum refining,
production, or transportation practices,
or produced from oil reclaimed from
such hazardous wastes, where such
hazardous wastes are nintroduced into
a process that does not use distillation
or does not produce products from crude
oil so long as the resulting fuel meets the
used oil specification under S 266.40(e)
of this chapter and so long as no other
hazardous wastes an used to produce
the hazardous waste fuel;
(B) Hazardous waste fuel produced
from oil-bearing hazardous waste from
petroleum refining production, and
transportation practices, where such
hazardous wastes are reintroduced into
a refining process after a point at which
contaminants an removed, so long as
the fuel meets the used oil fuel
specification under 1266.40(e) of this
chapter; and
r (C) Oil reclaimed from oil-bearing
hazardous wastes from petroleum
refining, production, and transportation
practices, which reclaimed oil is burned
as a fuel without reintroduction to a
refining process, so I6ng as the
reclaimed oil meets the used oil fuel
specification under § 266.40(e) of this
chapter and
(ix) Petroleum coke produced from
petroleum refinery hazardous wastes
containing oil at the same facility at
which such wastes were generated,
unless the resulting coke product
exceeds one or more of the
characteristics of hazardous waste in
Part 261, Subpart C.
(b) Generators and transporters of
recyclable materials are subject to the
applicable requirements of Parts 262 and
263 of this chapter and the notification
requirements under section 3010 of
RCRA, except as provided in paragraph
(a) of this section.
(c)(l) Owners or operators of facilities
that store recyclable materials before
they are recycled are regulated under all
applicable provisions of Subparts A
through L of Parts 264 and 265 and Parts
266,270, and 124 of this chapter and the
notification requirements under section
3010 of RCRA. except as provided in
paragraph (a) of this section. (The
recycling process itself ;s exempt from
regulation.)
(2) Owners or operators of facilities
that recycle recyclable materials
without storing them before they are
rcycled are subject to the following
requirements, except as provided in
paragraph (a) of this section:
(i) Notification requirements under
section 3010 of RCRA;
(ii) Sections 265.71 and 265.72 (dealing
with the use of the manifest and
manifest discrepancies) of this chapter.
PART 264—STANDARDS FOR
OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT,
STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL
FACILITIES
6. The authority citation for Part 264
continues to read as follows:
Authority. Sec*. 1006. 2002(a). 3004. 3005. of
the Solid Waiie Disposal Act at amended by
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
of 1976, at amended (42 U.S.C. 6905. 6ffl2(a).
6824, and 6925).
7. Section 264.340 is amended by
revising paragraph (a}(2) to read as
follows:
{M4.340 Applicability.
(a) • • •
(2) Owners or operators who burn
hazardous waste in boilers or in
industrial furnaces in order to destroy
them, or who bum hazardous waste in
boilers or in industrial furnaces for any
recycling purpose and elect to be
regulated under this subpart
PART 265—INTERIM STATUS
STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND
OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
TREATMENT, STORAGE AND
DISPOSAL FACILITIES
8. The authority citation for part 265
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sect. 1006. 2002(a). 3004. and
3005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1676, as amended (42 U.S.C.
6905,6924. and 6925).
9. Section 265.340 is amended to
revise paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
(265J40 Applicability.
(a) ' ' *
(2) Owners or operators who burn
hazardous waste in boilers or in
industrial furnaces in order to destroy
them, or who bum hazardous waste in
boilers or in industrial furnaces for friy
-------
49204 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
recycling purpose and elect to be
regulated under this subpart
PART 266—STANDARDS FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF SPECIFIC WASTES
AND SPECIFIC TYPES OF WASTE
MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
10. The authority citation for Part 266
is revised to read as follows;
Authorityr.Sec* 1006, 2002(a). 3004, and '
3014 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act «s
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1978, as amended (42 U.S.C.
6905, 6912(a). 6924. and 6934).
11. Subpart O is revised to read aa
follows:
Subpart D—Hazardous Waste Burned for
Energy Recovery
Sec.
266.30 Applicability.
266.31 Prohibitions.
266.32 Standards applicable to generators of
hazardous waste fuel
266.33 Standards applicable to transporters
of hazardous waste fuel
266.34 Standards applicable to marketers of
hazardous waste fuel
266.35 Standards applicable to burners of
hazardous waste fuel.
•
Subpart D—Hazardous Wast* Burned
for Energy Recovery
{266JO Applicability.
(a) The regulations of this subpart
apply to hazardous wastes that are
burned for energy recovery in any boiler
or industrial furnace that is not-
regulated under Subpart Qof Part 264 or
265 of this chapter, except as provided
by paragraph (b) of this section. Such
hazardous wastes burned for energy
recovery are termed "hazardous waste
fuel". Fuel produced from hazardous
waste by processing, blending, or other
treatment is also hazardous waste fuel
(These regulations do not apply,
however, to gas recovered from
hazardous waste management activities
when such gas is burned for energy
recovery.)
(b) The following hazardous wastes
are not subject to regulation under this
subpart:
(1) Used oil burned for energy
recovery that is also a hazardous waste
solely because it exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste
identified in Subpart C of Part 261 of this
chapter. Such used oil is subject to
regulation under Subpart E of Part 266
rather than this subpart; and
(2) Hazardous wastes that are exempt
from regulation under § { 281.4 and
26l.6(a) (3) (vHix) of this chapter, and
hazardous wastes that are subject to the
special requirements for small quantity
generators under f 261.5 of this chapter.
S266J1 Prohibitions.
(a) A person may market hazardous
waste fuel only:
(1) To persons who have notified EPA
of their hazardous waste fuel activities
under section 3010 of RCRA and have a
U.S. EPA Identification Number: and
(2) If the fuel is burned, to persons.
who burn the fuel in boilers or industrial
furnaces identified in paragaraph (b) of
this section.
(b) Hazardous waste fuel may be
burned for energy recovery in only the
following devices;
(1) Industrial furnaces identified in
, { 260.10 of this chapter.
(2) Boilers, as defined in I 260.10 of
this chapter, that are identified as
follows:
(i) Industrial boilers located on the
site of a facility engaged in a
manufacturing process where
substances are transformed into new
products, including the component parts
of products, by mechanical or chemical
processes; or
(ii) Utility boiler* ased to produce
electric power, steam, or heated or
cooled air or other gases or fluids for
sale.
(c) No fuel which contains any
hazardous waste may be burned in any
cement kiln which is located within the
boundaries of any incorporated
municipality with a population greater
than 500,000 (based on the most recent
census statistics) unless such kiln fully
complies with regulations under this
chapter that are applicable to
incinerators.
} 264,32 Standard* applicable to
generator* of hazardous waste fuel
(a) Generators of hazardous waste
that is used as a fuel or used to produce
a fuel are subject to Part 262 of this
chapter.
(b) Generators who market hazardous
waste fuel to a burner also are subject to
S 266.34.
(c) Generators who are burners also
are subject to § 266J35.
5266.33 Standards applicable to
transporters of hazardous waste fueL
Transporters of hazardous waste fuel
(and hazardous waste that is used to
produce a fuel) are subject to Part 263 of
this chapter.
{ 266.34 Standards applicable to
marketers of hazardous waste fuel.
Persons who market hazardous waste
fuel are termed "marketers", and are
subject to the following requirements.
Marketers include generators who
market hazardous waste fuel directly to
a burner, persons who receive
hazardous waste from generators and
produce, process, or blend hazardous
waste fuel from these hazardous wastes,
and persons who distribute but do not
process or blend hazardous waste fuel.
(a) Prohibitions. The prohibitions
under | 26&31(a);
(b) Notification. Notification
requirements under section 3010 of
RCRA for hazardous waste fuel
activities. Even if a marketer has
previously notified EPA of his
hazardous waste management activities
and obtained a U.S. EPA Identification
Number, he must renotify to identify his
hazardous waste fuel activities.
(c) Storage. The applicable provisions
of § 262.34. and Subparts A through L of
Part 264, Subparts A through L of Part
265, and Part 270 of this chapter
(d) Off-site shipment. The standards
for generators in Part 262 of this chapter
when a marketer initiates a shipment of
hazardous waste fuel:
(e) Required notices. (1) Before a
marketer initiates the first shipmejit of
hazardous waste fuel to a burner or
another marketer, he must obtain a one-
time written and signed notice from the
burner or marketer certifying that
(i) The burner or marketer has notified
EPA under Section 3010 of RCRA and
identified his waste-as-fuel activities:
and
(ii) If the recipient is a burner, the
burner will burn the hazardous waste
fuel only in an industrial furnace or
boiler identified in ! 261 Jlfb).
(2) Before a marketer accepts the first
shipment of hazardous waste fuel from
another marketer, he must provide the
other marketer with a one-time written
and signed certification that he has
notified EPA under section 3010 of
RCRA and identified his hazardous
waste fuel activities; and
(f) Recordkeeping. In addition to the
applicable recordkeeping requirements
of Parts 262,264. and 265 of this chapter,
a marketer must keep a copy of each
certification notice he receives or sends
for three years from the date he last
engages in a hazardous waste fuel
marketing transaction with the person
who sends or receives the certification
notice.
(The notification requirements contained in
paragraph (b) of this section were approved
by OMB under control number 20SO-002B,
The itorage requirement* contained in
paragraph (c) of this section were approved
by OMB under control number 2050-0009.
The manifest and invoice requirements
contained in paragraph (d) of this section
were approved by OMB under control
numbers 2050-0039 and 20SO-0047.
respectively. The certification requirements
contained in paragraph (e) of this section
-------
Federal Register / Vol 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules and Regulations
49205
were approved by OMB under control
number 2050-0047. The recordkeeping
requirement* contained in paragraph (f) of
'this section were approved by OMB under
control number 2050-0047.)
I2MJ5 Standards *»pac*Mt to bumm
of hazardous waste fug.
Owners and operators of industrial
furnaces and boilers identified in
S 26&31(b) that burn hazardous fuel are
"burners" and are subject to the
following requirements: '
(a) Prohibitions. The prohibitions
under { 28&31(b);
(b) Notification. Notification
requirements under section 3010 of
RCRA for hazardous waste fuel
activities. Even if a burner has
previously notified EPA of his
hazardous waste management activities
and obtained a U.S. EPA Identification
Number, he must renotify to identify his
hazardous waste fuel activities.
(c) Storage. (1) For short term
accumulation by generators who bum
their hazardous waste fuel on site, the
applicable provisions of { 28Z34 of this
chapter;
(2) For existing storage facilities, the
applicable provisions of Subparts A
through L of Part 265, and Parts 270 and
124 of this chapter; and
(3) For new storage facilities, the
applicable provisions of Subparts A
through L of Part A 264, and Parts 270
and 124 of this chapter;
(d) Required notices. Before a burner
accepts the first shipment of hazardous
waste fuel from a marketer, he must
provide the marketer a one-time written
and signed notice certifying that
(1) He has notified EPA under section
3010 of RCRA and identified his waste-
as-fuel activities; and
(2) He will bum the fuel only in a
boiler or furnace identified in
Subpart E— Us*d OB Burned for Energy
(e) Recordkeeping. m addition to the
applicable recordkeeping requirements
of Parts 264 and 265 of this chapter, a
burner must keep a copy of each
certification notice that he sends to a
marketer for three years from the date
he last receives hazardous waste fuel
from that marketer.
(The notification requirement* contained in
paragraph (b) of thi* section were approved
by OMB under control number 2050-0028.
The storage requirements contained in
paragraph (c) of this section were approved
by OMB under control number 2050-0009.
The certification requirement* contained in
paragraph (d) of this section were approved
by OMB under control number 2050-0047.
The recordkeeping requirement* contained in
paragraph (e) of this *ection were approved
by OMB under control number 2050-0047.] <
12. Subpart E is added as follows:
Sec.
286.40 Applicability.
266.41 Prohibitions.
206.42 Standard* applicable to generators of
used oil burned for energy recovery.
266.43 Standards applicable to marketers of
used oil burned for energy recovery.
266.44 Standards applicable to burners of
used oil burned for energy recovery.
Subpart E— Used Ofl Bumed for
Energy Recovery
1266.40 AppficaMKy.
(a) The regulations of this subpart
apply to used oil that is burned for
energy recovery in any boiler or
industrial furnace that is not regulated
under Subpart O of Part 264 or Part 265
of this chapter, except as provided by
paragraphs (c) and (e) of this section.
Such used oil is termed "used oil fuel".
Used oil fuel includes any fuel produced
from used oil by processing, blending, or
other treatment
(b] "Used oil" means any oil that has
been refined from crude oil, used, and,
as a result of such use, is contaminated
by physical or chemical impurities.
(c) Except as provided by paragraph
(d) of this section, used oil that is mixed
with hazardous waste and burned for
energy recovery is subject to regulation
as hazardous waste fuel under Subpart
D of Part 266. Used oil containing more
than 1000 ppm of total halogens is
presumed to be a hazardous waste
because it has been mixed with
halogenated hazardous waste listed in
Subpart D of Part 261 of this chapter.
Persons may rebut this presumption by
demonstrating that the used oil does not
contain hazardous waste (for example,
by showing that the used oil does not
contain significant concentrations of
halogenated hazardous constituents
listed in Appendix VIII of Part 281 of
this chapter).
(d) Used oil burned for energy
recovery is subject to regulation under
this subpart rather than as hazardous
waste fuel under Subpart D of this part
if it is a hazardous waste solely because
it
(1) Exhibits a characteristic of
hazardous waste identified in Subpart C
of Part 261 of this chapter, provided that
it is not mixed with a hazardous waste;
or
(2) Contains hazardous waste
generated only by a person subject to
the special requirements for small
quantity generators under f 261.5 of this
chapter.
(e) Except as provided by paragraph
(c) of this section, used oil burned for
energy recovery, and any fuel produced
from used oil by processing, blending, or
other treatment, is subject to regulation
under-this subpart unless it is shown not
to exceed any of the allowable levels of
the constituents and properties in the
specification shown in the following
table. Used oil fuel that meets the
specification is subject only to the
analysis and recordkeeping
requirements under Si 266.43(b) (1) and
(6). Used oil fuel that exceeds any
specification level is termed "off-
specification used oil fuel".
USED OIL EXCEEDING ANY SPECIFICATION
LEVEL is SUBJECT TO THIS SUBPART WHEN
BURNED FOB ENERGY RECOVERY •
GonctMuviif/ property
d*""!™
Chrarrajr*
Ltrf
Atombla level
5 ppm masmum.
2 ppm maximum.
10 ppm maanum.
100 ppm ma«»num.
100 *F minimum.
4.000 ppm rnanmum.'
•The HKOftuuun daw not apply to ueed o» «uel matd
•UK • hazardous vast* other Van mia* quantity
•Ueed el containing mora than 1.000 ppm tool halogen*
k) presumed to be a hazardous wast* under Me rebutub*
praeumpaon proMdad under |266.«0 unless the presumption al
rang ean be succanluly feeuoad.
1266.41 .Prohibitions.
(a) A person may market off-
specification used oil for energy
recovery only:
(1) To burners or other marketers who
have notified EPA of their used oil
management activities stating the
location and general description of such
activities, and who have an EPA
identification number and
(2) To burners who burn the used oil
in an industrial furnace or boiler
identified in paragraph (b) of this
section.
(b) Off-specification used oil may be
burned for energy recovery in only the
following devices:
(1) Industrial furnaces identified in
§ 260.10 of this chapter or
(2) Boilers, as defined in § 260.10 of
this chapter, that are identified as
follows:
(i) Industrial boilers located on the
site of a facility engaged in a
manufacturing process where
substances are transformed into new
products, including the component parts
of products, by mechanical or chemical
processes;
(ii) Utility boilers used to produce
electric power, steam, or heated or
cooled air or other gases or fluids for
sale; or
(iii) Used oil-fired space heaters
provided that:
(A) The heater bums only used oil
that the owner or operator generates or
used oil received from do-it-yourself oil
-------
49206 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230. / Fridayr November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations
changers who generate used oil as
household waste;
(B) The heater is designed to have a
maximum capacity of not more than 0.5
million Btu per hour and
(C) The combustion gases from the
heater are vented to the ambient air.
§266.42 Standard* applicable to
generator* of used oil burned for energy
recovery.
(a) Except as provided in paragraphs
(b) and (c) of this section, generators of
used oil are not subject to this subpart.
(b) Generators who market used oil
directly to a burner are subject to
§ 266.43.
(c) Generators who burn used oil are
subject to S 266.44.
§266.43 Standard* applicable to
marketer* of used ofl burned for energy
recovery.
(a) Persons who market used oil fuel
are termed "marketers". However, the
following persons are not marketer*
subject to this Subpart
(1) Used oil generators, and collectors
. who transport used oil received only
from generators, unless the generator or
collector markets the used oil directly to
a person who bums it for energy
recovery. However, persons who burn
some used oil fuel for purposes of
processing or other treatment to produce
used oil fuel for marketing are
considered to be burning incidentally to
processing. Thus, generators and
collectors who market to such incidental
burners are not marketers subject to this
subpart *
(2) Persons who market only used oil
fuel that meets the specification under
$ 266.40(e) and who are not the first
person to claim the oil meets the
specification (i.e., marketers who do not
receive used oil from generators or
initial transporters and marketers who
neither receive nor market off-
specification used oil fuel).
• (b) Marketers are subject to the
following requirements:
(1) Analysis of used oil fuel. Used oil
fuel is subject to regulation under this
subpart unless the marketer obtains
analyses or other information
documenting that the used oil fuel meets
the specification provided under
J 266.40(e).
(2) Prohibitions. The prohibitions
under { 266.41 (a);
(3) Notification. Notification to EPA
stating the location and general
description of used oil management
activities. Even if a marketer has
previously notified EPA of his
hazardous waste management activities
under section 3010 of RCKA and
obtained a U.S. EPA Identification -
Number, he must renotify to identify his
used oil management activities.
(4) Invoice system. When a marketer
initiates a shipment of off-specification
used oil he must prepare and send the
receiving facility an invoice containing
the following information:
(!) An invoice number;
(ii) His own EPA identification
number and the EPA identification
number of the receiving facility;
(iii) The names and addresses of the
shipping and receiving facilities;
(iv) The quantity of off-specification
used oil to be delivered;
(v) The date(s) of shipment or
delivery; and
(vi) The following statement "This
used oil is subject to EPA regulation
under 40 CFR Part 266";
Note.—U»ed ofl that meets the definition of
combustible liquid (flash point below 200 *F
but at or greater than 100 *F) or flammable
liquid (flash point below 100 *F].ii subject to
Department of Transportation Hazardous
Material* Regulation* at 49 CFR Part* 100-
177.
(5) Required notices, (i) Before a
marketer initiates, the first shipment of
off-specification used oil to a burner or
other marketer, he must obtain a one-
time written and signed notice from the
burner or marketer certifying that
(A) The burner or marketer ha*
notified EPA stating the location and
general description of his used oil
management activities; and
(B) If the recipient is a burner, the
burner will bum the off-specification
used oil only in an industrial furnace or
boiler identified in S 26&41(b); and
(ii) Before a marketer accepts the first
shipment of off-specification used oil
fronvBnother marketer subject to the
requirements of this section, he must
provide the marketer with a one-time
written and signed notice certifying that
he has notified EPA of his used oil
management activities; and
(6) Recordkeeping-ii) Used Oil Fuel
That Meets the Specification. A
marketer who first claims under
paragraph fb)(l) of this section that used
oil fuel meets the specification must
keep copies of analysis (or other
Information used to make the
determination) of used oil for three
years. Such marketers must also record
in an operating log and keep for three
years the following information on each
shipment of used oil fuel that meets the
specification. Such used oil fuel is not
subject to further regulation, unless it is
subsequently mixed with hazardous
waste or unless it is mixed with used oil
so that it no longer meets the
specification.
(A) The name and address of the
facility receiving the shipment;
(B) The quantity of used ofl fuel
delivered;
(C) The date of shipment or delivery;
and
(D) A cross-reference to the record of
used oil analysis (or other information
used to make the determination that the
oil meets the specification) required
under paragraph (b)(6)(i) of this section.
(ii) Off-Specification Used Oil Fuel. A
marketer who receives or initiates an
invoice under the requirements of this
section must keep a copy of each
invoice for three years from the date the
invoice is received or prepared. In
addition, a marketer must keep a copy
of each certification notice that he
receives or sends for three years from
the date he last engages in an off-
specification used oil fuel marketing
transaction with the person who sends
or receives the certification notice.
(The analysis requirement* contained in
paragraph (b)(l) of thii section were
approved by OMB under control number
2050-0047. The notification requirement*
contained in paragraph (b)(3) of mi* section
were approved by OMB under control
number 2050-0028. The invoice requirement*
contained in paragraph (bX4) of this section
were approved by OMB under control
number 2050-0047. The certification
requirement* contained in paragraph (b](5) of
thi* section were approved by OMB under
control number 2050-0047. The recotdkeeping
requirement* contained hi paragraph (b)(6) of
thi* section were approved by OMB under
control number 2050-0047.)
§266.44 Standards applicable to burners
of used ofl burned for energy reco»ary.
Owners and operators of facilities
that burn used oil fuel are "burners" and
are subject to the following
requirements:
(a) Prohibition. The prohibition under
f 26e.41(b);
(b) Notification. Burners of off-
specification used oil fuel must notify
EPA stating the location and general
description of used oil management
activities, except that owners and
operators of used oil-fired space beaten
that burn used oil fuel under the
provisions of S 28&41(b)(2) are exempt
from these notification requirements.
Even if a burner has previously notified
EPA of his hazardous waste
management activities under Section
3010 of RCRA and obtained an
identification number, he most renotify
to identify his used oil management
activities.
(c) Required notices. Before a burner
accepts the first shipment of off-
specification used oil fuel from •
marketer, he must provide the marketer
a one-time written and signed notice
certifying that:
-------
Federal Register / VoL SO, No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Rules and Regulations 49207
(1) He has notified EPA stating the
location and general description of his
used oil management activities; and
(2) He will bum die used oil only in an
Industrial furnace or boiler identified in
| 286.41(b); and
(d) U*ed oil foel analysis. (1) Used ofl
fuel burned by the generator is subject
to regulation under this subpart mien
the burner obtains analysis (or other
information) documenting that the used
oil meets the specification provided
under § 266.40(e).
(2) Burners who treat off-specification
used oil fuel by processing, blending, or
other treatment to meet the specification
provided under S 286.4Q(e) must obtain
analyses (or other information)
documenting mat the used oil meets the
specification.
(e) Recordkeeping. A burner who
receives an invoice under the
requirements of this section must keep a
copy of each invoice for three years
from the date the invoice is received.
Burners must also keep for three years
copies of analyses of used oil fuel as
may be required by paragraph (d) of this
section. In addition, he most keep a copy
of each certification notice that he sends
to a marketer for three years from the
date he last receives off-specification
used oil from that marketer.
{The notification requirement* contained in
paragraph (b) of this section were approved
by OMB under control number 2050-0028.
The certification requirement* contained in
paragraph (c) of this section were approved
by OMB under control number 2050-0047.
The analysis requirements contained in
paragraph (d) of this section were approved
by OMB under control number 2050-0047.
The recordkeeping requirements contained in
paragraph (e) of this section were approved
by OMB under control number 2050-0047.)
PART 271—REQUIREMENTS FOR
AUTHORIZATION OF STATE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAMS
12. The authority citation for Part 271
is revised to read as follows:
Authority. Sees. 1006.2002(a). and 3006 of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended by
the Resource Conservation, and Recovery Act
of 1976 as amended (42 U.S.C. 6905. 6912(a).
and 6026).
13. Section 271.1(j)« amended by
changing the table heading and by
adding the following entry to Table 1 in
chronological order by date of
publication:
TABLE 1.—REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE
HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE AMEND-
MENTS of 1984
DMtf
• tat*
FEDERAL
Rcotcro
Ttt> at
tor *» UmgmM of SpteK-
«n* Sp«o*c Typ« of F«eV-
Appendlx—Form—Notification of
Hazardous Waste Activity
EPA Form 8700-12 (Revised 11/85)
(This form will not appear in the Code of
Federal Regulations.)
-------
49208- Federal Register / Vol. 5d. No. 230 / Friday. November 29.1985 / Rules and Regulations '
•ilh ELITE rvo» fll crtartcten ptrr mchl in it»« unshaded «r««s only
form Approved OMfl Ho. 20SO-OO28 Cipiret 9 30'**-
CSA Ne 0246 CP* OT
United Stales Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
SE PA Notification of Hazardous Waste Activity
Please refer to the Instructions lot
filmy Notification before completing
this form. The information requested
here is required by taw ISection
3010 oi the Resource Conservetion
ind Recovery Act)'.
for Official Use Onl
Date. Received
Approved ftr. mo. derJ
Installation's EPA 10 Numbef
. Name of Installation
II. Installation Mailing Address
Street or P.O. Box
State ZIP Cod*
III. Location of Installation
Street or Route Number
IV. Installation Contact
Name and Title Hist, first endiob late,
Phone Number teret code end number!
A. Name of Installation's
B. Type of Ownership tenter eoael
VI. Type of Regulated Waste Activity (Mark 'X' in the appropriate boxes. Refer to instructions.)
A. Hazardous Waste Activity B. Used OB Fuel Activities
D 1b. Less than 1.000 kg/mo.
Ola. Generator
O 2. Transporter
O 3. Treater/Slorer/D*poser
O 4. Underground Injection
D 5. Market or Burn Hazardous Waste Fuel
Itnter 'X' and merit eppropriete ooxe* betowl
D a. Generator Marketing to Burner
D b. Other Marketer
D c. Burner
6. Off-Specification Used Oil Fuel
tenter T end merit tppropriete boxes below/
U a. Generator Markeimg to Burner
D b. Other Marketer
Q c. Burner
7. Specification Used Oil Fuel Mrketer
(Or art-Site Burner) Mho Pint CUiM
the Oil Meets the Specification.
VII. Waste Fuel Burning: Type of Combustion Device tenter •X'mtlltpftroprieteboiet to indicete typed combustion devicels) in
Hftuch heierdous weste luel or off-speeiticftion uted oil fuel is burned. See instructions for detinitiont of combustion device*.!
D A. Utility Boiler D B. Industrial Boiler D C. Industrial Furnace
VIII. Mode of Transportation (transporters only — enter 'X° in the appropriate boxfes)
D A. Aw D B. Rail D C. Highway D 0. Water D E. Other (specify!
IX. First or Subsequent Notification
Mark 'X1 in the appropriate box to indicate whether this is your installation's first notification of hazardous waste activity or a subsequent
notification. H this is not your first notification, enter your installation's EPA 10 Number in the space provided below.
LJ A. First Notification D B. Subsequent Notification (complete Hem C)
C. Installation's EPA ID Number
EPA Form 8700-12 (Rev. 11-85) Previous edition « obsolete
Continue on
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29,1985 / Rules and Regulations ' 49208
ID - For Oflici*) UM OMy
IX. Description of Hazardous Wastes /continued from front) URSHHSK
A, Hawooti* W«i
from nenspecif
c •ourcM your tncullit
1
7
•. NaxardoueWat
•pecif ic eourca
lourcee. Enter t
on hand)**. UM
2
•
* your instaltation 1
13
If
2S
C. Cmminiiiial O
Tour inctallauoi
-
O.I
1
m
B9B3IHBIEHH91SEK3
fn«eu if necessary. 1
3
f
4
10
S
11
e
12
SeufOM. Enter tne four-di«it number from 40 CfR Pen 261 .32 for e«cn fasted Nu>roou« «•»«« from
undtee. UM addnonel cneets rf nececury.
14
2O
M
IS
31
27
n handles wrfwcft may be a haxardou* «
31
37
-
43
32
3»
44
MBis. or medicaJ an
4fl
-
*er «>e four-d*(
SO
1C
22
2*
17
23
28
Enter tf*e four -digit number from 40 CfR Pan
«•*». UM additional tneet* tf neeesMry.
33
M
45
34
40
46
It
24
30
261 .33 tor eaefi cncmtcaJ njtaunet
35
»
41
47
3«
42
48
lit number from 40 CfA Pin 261 .34 tor eacft ruzardou* wisi* from nocpoiJs. vwtvrimry no«-
mjf insuttalion nend'Jcs. UM additionai cnevts if neoecut>-
SI
E. Charactertstice at WooU*t»d Naxardoue W*etes- Mar*
your inasaUaiion (undies. £S*» 40 Cf« (*»T» 261.21 —
D 1.lontt*M« D 2-Oon
180011 too
TC in me DOBM (
26134)
roaiv*
02J
S2
D3
S3
to 0>e cnaraoenctics of not
. Neaoive
IDQD3)
S4
-
•vload fvazanJousMvsits
D 4. Tone
10000)
x MM I'M •B'TTinWIf FilWTifiiil^Wfl^
/ certify und
-------
49210 Federal Register / Vol 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Rules anS "Regulations
IV. Une-by-Lhw Instructions for CompMtaf
EPA Fonn 8700-12
Type or print in black ink all items except
Item XL "Signature." leaving a blank box
between word*. When typing, hit the spaca
bar once between character* and three time*
between words. If you muit use additional
sheets, indicate clearly the number of the
item on the form to which the information on
the separate sheet applies.
items I-ill—Name, Mailing Address, and
Location of Installation:
Complete Items Wtt Please note that the
address you give for Item IB. "Location of
Installation." must be a physical address, not
a post office box or route number. If the
mailing address and physical facility location
are the same, you can print "Same" in box for
Itemm.
Item IV—Installation Contact
Enter the name, title, and business
telephone number of the person who should
be contacted regarding information submitted
on this form.
Item V—Ownership:
(A) Name: Enter me name of the legal
ownerfs) of the installation, including the
property owner. Use additional sheets if
necessary to list more than on* owner.
(B) Type: Using the codes listed below,
indicate the legal status of the owner of the
facility:
FF-FederaDy Owned, Federally Operated
FC-Federaily Owned, Operated By A
Private Contractor to the Federal
Government
FP—Federally Owned, Privately Operated
PF-Privately Owned, Constructed For Use
By The Federal Government and
Operated By The Federal Government
PL—Privately Owned. Leased And
Operated By The Federal Government
PI-Privately Owned, Indian Land
FI« Federally Owned. Indian Land
C—County
D-District
M—Municipal
P-Private
S«= State
Item VI—Type of Regulated Waste Activity:
(A) Hazardous Waste Activity: Mark the
appropriate box(es) to show which hazardous
waste activities are going on at this
installation.
(1) Generator (a) If yon generate a
hazardous waste that is identified by
characteristic or listed in 40 CFR Part 281.
mark an "X" in this box.
(b) In addition, if you generate less than
1000 kilograms of non-acutely-hatardous
waste per calendar month, mark an "X" in
this box.
(2) Transporter If you move hazardous
waste by air, rail, highway, or water then
mark an "X" in this box. All transporters
must complete Item VUL Transporters do not
have to complete Item X of this form, but
must sign the certification in Item XL Refer to
Part 263 of the CFR for an explanation of the
Federal regulations for hazardous waste
transporters. _ .,
(3) Treater/Storer/Disposer If you treat
store or dispose of regulated hazardous
waste, then mark an "X" to this box. Yon are
reminded to contact the appropriate
addressee listed for your State in Section
OI(C) of this package to request Part A of the
RCRA Permit Application. Refer to Parts 264
'and 265 of the CFR for an explanation of the
Federal regulations for hazardous waste
facility owners/operator*.
(4) Underground Injection: Persons who
generate and/or treat or dispose of hazardous
waste must place an "X" in this box if an
injection well is located at their installation.
An injection well it defined as any hole in the
ground, including septic tanks, that is deeper
than it is wide and that is used for the
subsurface placement of fluid*.
(S) Market or Burn Hazardous Waste Fuel:
If you market or bum hazardous waste fuel
place an "X" in this box. Then mark the .
appropriate boxes underneath to indicate
your specific activity. If you mark "Burner"
you must complete Item Vff—"Type of
Combustion Device*"
Note.—Generators are required to notify
for waste-as-fuel activities only if they
market directly to the burner.
"Other Marketer" is defined as any person.
other than the generator marketing his
hazardous wast*, who markets hazardous
waste fueL
(B) Used Oil Fuel Activities: Mark an "X"
in the appropriate box(es) below to indicate
which used oil fuel activities are taking place
•t this installation.
18) Off-Specification Used Oil Fuel: If you
market or burn off-specification used oil
place an "X" in this box. Then mark the
appropriate boxes underneath to indicate
your specific activity. If you mark "Burner"
you must complete Item VH—Type of
. Combustion Device."
Note.—Used oil generators are required to
notify only If marketing directly to the burner.
"Other Marketer" is defined a* any person,
other than a generator marketing his or her
used oil. who market* used oil fuel
(7) Specification Used Oil Fuel: If you an
the first to claim that the used oil meets the
specification established hi 40 CFK Part
2ee.40(e) and is exempt from further
regulation, you must mark an "X" in this box.
Item VO—Waste-Fuel Burning: Type of
Combustion Device:.
Enter an MX" in all appropriate boxes to
indicate type(s) of combustion device* in
which hazardous waste fuel or off-
specification used oil fuel is burned. (Refer to
definition section for complete description of
each device.)
Item VIII—Mode of Transportation:
Complete this item only if you are the
transporter of hazardous waste. Mark an "X"
in each appropriate box to indicate the
method(s) of transportation you use.
Item DC—First or Subsequent Notification:
Place an "X" in the appropriate box to
indicate whether this is your first or a
subsequent notification. If you have filed a
previous notification, enter your EPA
Identification Number in the boxes provided.
Note.—When the owner of a facility
changes, the new owner must notify U.S. EPA
of the change, even if the previous owner
already received a U.S. EPA Identification
Number. Because the U.S. EPA ID Number is
"lite-specific,'' the new owner will keep the
existing ID number. If the facility moves to
another location, the owner/operator must
notify EPA of this change. In this instance a
new U.S. EPA Identification Number will be
assigned, since the facility has changed
location*.
Item X—Description of Hazardous Waste:
•
(Only persons involved in hazardous wast*
activity (Item VI(AJ) need to complete this
Hem. Transporters requesting a U.S. EPA
Identification Number do not need to
complete this item, but must sign the
"Certification- in Item XL)
You will need to refer to Title 49 CFR Part
281 (enclosed) in order to complete this
section. Part 201 identifies those wastes that
EPA defines as hazardous. If you need help
completing this section please contact the
appropriate addressee for your state as listed
in Section HI(C) of this package.
Section A—tt yon handle hazardous waste*
that are listed in the "nonspecific sources"
category in Part 281.31. enter the appropriate
4-digit number* ID the boxes provided.
Section A—If yon handle hazardous wastes
that are listed in the "specific industrial
source*" category in Part 261.32, enter the
appropriate four-digit numbers in the boxes
provided.
Section C—If you handle any of the
"commercial chemical products" listed as
wastes in Part 261.33. enter the appropriate
four-digit number* in the boxes provided.
Section D—Disregard, since EPA has not
yet published infection* waste regulation*.
Section E—U you handle hazardous wsstes
which are not listed in any of the categories
above, but do posses* a hazardous
characteristic, you should describe these
wastes by their hazardous characteristic. (An
explanation of each characteristic found at
Part 281.21-261.24.) Place an "X" in the box
next to the characteristic of the wastes that
you handle.
Item XI—Certification:
This certification must be signed by the
owner, operator, or an authorized
representative of your installation. An
"authorized representative" is a person
responsible for the overall operation of the
facility (i.e., a plant manager or
superintendent, or a person of equal
responsibility). All notifications must include
this certification to be complete.
V. Definitions
The following definitions ore included to
help you to understand and complete the
Notification Form:
Act or RCRA—meant the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as
amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984, 42 U.S.C. Section 6901
etseq.
Authorized Representative—means the
person responsible for the overall operation
of the facility or an operational unit (i.e., part
of a facility), e.g.. the plant manager.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 19B5 / Rules and Regulations 49211
superintendent or person of equivalent
responsibility.
, Boiler—means an enclosed device using
controlled flame combustion and having the
.following characteristics:
(1) The unit has physical provisions for
recovering and exporting energy in the form
of steam, heated fluids, or heated gases:
(2) The unit's combustion chamber and
primary energy recovery section(s) are of
integral design (i.e., they are physically
formed into one manufactured or assembled
unit);
(3) The unit continuously maintains an
energy recovery efficiency of at least 60
percent-calculated in terms of the recovered
energy compared with the thermal value of
the fuel: and
(4) The unit exports and utilizes at least 75
•percent of the recovered energy, calculated
on an annual basis (excluding recovered heat
used internally in the same unit to, for
example, preheat fuel or combustion air or
drive fans or feedwater pumps).
Burner—means the owner or operator of a
utility boiler, industrial boiler or industrial
furnace that burns waste-fuel for energy
recovery and that is not regulated as a RCRA
hazardous waste incinerator.
Disposal—meant the discharge, deposit
infection, dumping, spilling, leaking, or
placing of any solid waste or hazardous
waste into or on any land or water so that
such solid waste or hazardous waste or any
constituent thereof may enter the
environment or be emitted into the air or
discharged into any waters, including ground
waters.
Disposal Facility—means a facility or part
of a facility at which hazardous waste is
Intentionally placed into or on any land or
water, and at which waste will remain after
closure.
EPA Identification (IJ).) Number—memo*
the number assigned by EPA to each
generator, transporter, and treatment
storage, or disposal facility.
Facility—means all contiguous land, and
structures, other appurtenaces, and
improvements on the land, nsed for treating.
storing, or disposing of hazardous waste. A
facility may consist of several treatment
storage, or disposal operational units (e.g..
one or more landfills, surface impoundments,
or combinations of them).
Generator—means any person, by site,
whose act or process produces hazardous
waste identified or listed in Part 201 of this
chapter or whose act first causes a hazardous
waste to become subject to regulation.
Hazardous Waste—means a hazardous
waste as defined in 40 CFR Part 281.
Hazardous Waste Fuel—meant hazardous
waste and any fuel that contains hazardous
waste that is burned for energy recovery in a
boiler or industrial furnace that is not subject
to regulation as a RCRA hazardous waste
incinerator. However, the following
hazardous waste fuels are subject to
regulation as used oil fuels:
(1) Used oil fuel that is also a hazardous
waste solely became it exhibits a
characteristic of hazardous waste identified
in Subpart C of 40 CFR Part 281. provided it is
not mixed with hazardous waste; and
(2) Used oil fuel mixed with hazardous
wastes generated by a small quantity
generator subject to 40 CFR Part 281.5.
Industrial Boiler—means a boiler located
on the site of a facility engaged in a
manufacturing process where substances are
transformed into new products, including the
component parts of products, by mechanical
or chemical processes.
Industrial Furnace—means any of the
following enclosed devices that are integral
components of manufacturing processes and
that use controlled flame combustion to
accomplish recovery of materials or energy:
cement kilns, lime kilns, aggregate kilns
(including asphalt kilns), phosphate kilns,
coke ovens, blast furnaces, smelting furnaces.
refining furnaces, titanium dioxide chloride
process oxidation reactors, and methane
reforming furnaces (and other devices as the
Administrator may add to this list).
Marketer—mean* a person who markets
hazardous waste fuel or used oil fuel
However, the following marketers are not
subject to waste-as-fuel requirements
(including notification) under Subpsrta D and
E of 40 CFR Part 266:
(1) Generators and initial transporters (L*,
transporters who receive hazardous waste or
used oil directly from generators including
initial transporters who operate transfer
stations) who do not market directly to
persons who burn the fuels; and
(2) Persons who market used oil fuel that
meets the specification provided under 40
CFR 206.40(e) and who are not the first to
claim the oil meets the specification.
Off-Specification Used Oil Fuel—meant
used oil fuel that does not meet the
specification provided under 40 CFR
26&40(e).
Operator—means the person responsible
for the overall operation of a facility.
Owner—meant; a person who owns a
facility or parf of a facility, including land
owner.
Specification Used Oil Fuel—means used
oil fuel that meets the specification provided
under 40 CFR 266.40(e).
Storage—means the holding of hazardous
waste for a temporary period, at the end of
which the hazardous waste is treated.
disposed of. or stored elsewhere.
Transportation—means the movement of
hazardous waste by air, rail, highway, or
water.
Transporter—means a person engaged in
the off-site transportation of hazardous waste
by air, rail, highway, or water.
Treatment—means any method, technique,
or process, including neutralization, designed
to change the physical, chemical, or
biological character or composition of any
hazardous waste so as to neutralize such
waste, or so as to recover energy or material
resources from the waste, or so as to render
such waste nonhazardous, or less hazardous:
safer to transport store or dispose of; or
amenable for recovery, amenable for storage.
or reduced in volume.
Uted Oil—means any oil that has been
refined from crude oil. used, and as a result
of such use, is contaminated by physical or
chemical impurities. Wastes that contain oils
that have not been used (e.g., fuel oil storage
tank bottom clean-out wastes) are not used
oil unless they are mixed with used oil.
Used Oil Fuel—meant any used oil burned
(or destined to be burned) for energy
recovery including any fuel produced from
used oil by processing, blending or other
treatment and that does not contain
hazardous waste (other than that generated
by a small quantity generator and exempt
from regulation as hazardous waste under
provisions of 40 CFR 261.5). Used oil fuel may
itself exhibit a characteristic of hazardous
waste and remain subject to regulation as
used oil fuel provided it is not mixed with
hazardous waste.
Utility Boiler—meant a boiler that is used
to produce electricity, steam or heated or
cooled air for sale.
Waste Fuel—meant hazardous waste fuel
or off-specification used oil fuel
(FR Doc. 85-27903 Filed 11-27-85; 8:45 am]
-------
49212 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR PARTS 260,261,266,270, and
271
ISWH-fflL 2873-5]
Hazardous Waste Management
System; Recycled Used OU Standard*
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rale.
SUMMARY: Section 3014 of RCRA. a*
amended, requires EPA to establish
standards for used oil that is recycled,
or "recycled oil" Pursuant to this
directive, EPA is today proposing
standards for generators and
transporters of recycled oil, and owners
and operators of used oil recycling
facilities. The standards would include
tracking requirements when used oil it
shipped off-site for recycling, and
facility management requirements when
used oil is stored prior to recycling.
Recycled oil used as fuel would be
subject to certain regulations, except
that fuel meeting a specification for
toxic contaminants and flashpoint
would be exempt from regulation. Uses
of recycled oil that constitute disposal
would be regulated as land disposal, but
road oiling would be prohibited outright
This proposal is closely related to the
proposed listing of used oil as •
hazardous waste, also in today's Federal
Register. The rules proposed today for
used oil that is recycled would only
apply to used oil covered by the listing,
(except that household generated osed
oil would also be regulated when
aggregated or accumulated for
recycling).
DATES: EPA will accept public
comments on this proposal until January
28,1986 Public hearings will be held to
obtain public comments on this proposal
and the proposal to list used oil as a
hazardous waste (appearing elsewhere
in this Federal Register] on January 8,
10, and 16 of 1986, The locations for the
public hearings are provided below; for
additional information on the public
hearings, see Part Four, Section in of
this preamble.
ADDRESSES: EPA will hold public
hearings at the following locations:
• January 8. 1986—Holiday tan. North Park
Plaza, 10650 North Central Expreiiway,
Dallas. Texai 75231 (Phone: 214/373-6000)
• January 10.J0S0—Raraada Renaissance.
55 Cyril Magrun Street (One block north of
5th & Market). San Francisco. California
94102 (Phone: 415/392-8000)
• January 16, 1986—Department of Health
and Human Services, North Auditorium ("CT
Street entrance), 330 Independence Ave., SW,
Washington. DC 20201
Comments on this proposal should be
mailed to the Docket Clerk (Docket No.
3014, Standards of Recycled Oil), Office
of Solid Waste (WH-562). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.
Comments received by EPA may be
inspected in Room S-212. U.S. EPA. 401
M Street. SW., Washington. DC from
9:00 am, to 4:00 pjn. Monday through
Friday, excluding holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT!
The RCRA Hotline, call toll free at (800)
424-9346 or at (202) 382-3000. For
technical information, contact Michael
Petruska, Environmental Protection
Specialist Waste Management and
Economics Division, Office of Solid
Waste, (WH-565A). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401M Street SW,
Washington, DC 20460. Telephone: (202)
362-7917. Single copies of the proposal
may be obtained by calling the RCRA
Hotline at the number above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Overview
This: preamble discussion is organized
into four major Parts. Part One
summarizes the legal authority for
today's proposal explains how this
proposal follows from previous EPA
rulemakfflgs, and includes a statement
as to the general policy EPA has
followed in developing today's proposal
Part Two goes through the proposed
rules section-by-section. For each
section, the provision is explained and
the rationale for the provision is
presented. Part Three summarizes the
impacts of this proposal, if adopted a*
proposed today, on State hazardous
waste programs, on the used oil
recycling industry, on the economy in
general and on small businesses. Part
Four includes a general request for
public comment on this proposal, lists
the titles and where applicable the NT1S
number of the major background
documents used by EPA in developing
the proposal, and provides information
on the upcoming public hearings.
Notev—Thit proposal ii one of three
regulatory actions being taken thU month by
EPA concerning used oil. In today's issue of
the Federal Regular, thii proposal for
recycled oil it accompanied by a separate
proposal to list used oil ai a hazardous
waste. Further, EPA hat promulgated in final
form its "Phase I" rules for the burning and
blending of uted oil (and hazardous waste)
fuels. [Proposed January 11.1985 at 50 FR
1684.] At this writing, it appears likely that
the final Phase I rule will appear in the same
Federal Register at the proposals for recycled
oil and for listing used oil as hazardous
waste. For that reason, this preamble refers
to the final Phase I rule as-having been
"recently promulgated." but does not refer io
Federal Register pages in the citations,
Preambla Outline
PART ONE—INTRODUCTION AND
BACKGROUND
L Legal Authority
A. General
B. Listing as hazardous waste
C Generation end transportation prior to
recycling
D. Facility standards and permitting for
recyclers
n Proceeding Rnlemaldngs
A. December 18,1978 proposal
B. May 19,1980 rules
C Final "solid watte" rule
0. Burning and blending rules
E. New tank storage requirements
in. EPA's Proposed Policy for Regulating
Uted Oil that is Recycled.
PART TWO—DETAILED DISCUSSION OF
CONTROLS PROPOSED FOR USED OIL
THAT IS RECYCLED
L Applicability and Scope of Part 286,
SubpartB
A. Definition of "recycled oil"
1. Scope of activities
2. Mixture*
a Recycled oil subject to Part 286, Subpart
E
1. General
2. Household wacte. when aggregated
3. Oil recovered from watte water
C Conditional exemptions for certain
recycled oils
1. Specification fuel
2, Asphalt paving material.
D. Overview of standards and "burden of
proof* isaoas
E. Authorization to manage recycled oil
P. Definitions and general provisions
0. Standards for Generators of Recycled Oil
A. Small quantity recycled oil generator*
1. Requirements
2, The separate small quantity limit for
recycled oil
a. Selection of 1,000 kilograms at the
limn
4. Regulation when collected
B. Large generator*
L Applicability
2. Identification numbers
3. On-tite management
4. Shipments off-site
8. Reports
DL Standards for Transporters of Recycled
Oil
A. Applicability
1. General
2. Mixture issues
3. Storage-facilities
B. Identification numbers
C Discharges
D. Manifested shipments
E. Shipments without manifests
1. Records of acceptance
i Delivery
3. Records of delivery
(V. Standardt for Owner* and Operator! 01
Uted Oil Recycling Facilities
A. Applicability and general approach to
regulation
B. Waste analysis requirements
-------
Federal Register / VoL 50. No. £30 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49213
1. Parameter*
2. Analysis plan*
C Acceptance of recycled oil from o£f-*ite
1. Manifested recycled oil
2. Unmanifested recycled oU
3. Receipt of hazardous watte mixture*
D. Storage in tank*
1. General
2. Revision* to the tank standard*
3. Reclamation in tank*
E. Uses constituting disposal
F. Burning for energy recovery
1. Facility standard*
2. Fuel transportation
3. On-lite burning of de minima*
quantities
C. Corrective measure*
V. Permitting of Used OU Recycling Facilities
A. Eligibility for pennit-by-rule
1. General exclusion* from the pennit-by-
rule
2. Case-by-case exclusions
B. Requirements of the pennit-by-rule
C Modifications to and duration of the
pennit-by-rule
D. Interim Status for Used Oil Recycling
Facilities
1. General
2. Permit applications
3. Alternative* considered
E. Enforcement
VL Proposed effective date*
A. General
E Prohibition on dust suppression
C Tank system secondary containment
standard*
PART THREE— ADMINISTRATIVE,
ECONOMIC. AND ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS
L State Authority
A. Applicability of rale* in authorised
States
B. Effect on State authorizations
IL Relationship of today's proposal Jo certain
other EPA program*
A. PCB program
B. SPCC program
C. NPDES program
D.L Regulatory. Impact Analysis — Executive
Order 12291
B. Methodology
1. Data collection
2. Economic methodology
3. Benefits methodology
4. Limitations
C Results
!• ^*fro B copff m^ impact*
2. Microeconomic impact*
a. Benefits
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
PART FOUR— PUBLIC COMMENTS,
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS. PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND LIST OF SUBJECTS
L Solicitation of Public Comments
IL Availability of Background Document*
1IL Announcement of Public Hearings
*V. List of Subjects
PART ONE-INTRODUCTION AND
BACKGROUND
L Legal Authority
A. General
Subtitle C oT the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA
or "the Act") &» amended by the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984, requires EPA to
identify wastes that may pose a
substantial hazard to human health or
the environment, and to regulate
hazardous waste from initial generation
through end disposition.
The Congress, in passing the Used Oil
Recycling Act of 1880 (Pub. L 06-463).
and the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 ("the 1984
Amendments"), supplemented the basic
requirements for regulation of hazardous
waste with certain special requirements
for used oil These requirements are
found in section 3014 of the Act'
Section 3014(a) retains the language of
section 7(a) of the Used Oil Recycling
Act
. . . The Administrator shall promulgate
regulations... as may be necessary to
protect the public health and the environment
from hazards associated with recycled oil IB
developing such regulations, the
Administrator shall conduct an analysis of
the economic impact of the regulation* on the
oil recycling industry. The Administrator
•hall ensure that such regulations do not
discourage the recovery or recycling of used
oil. .
Section 242 of the 1984 Amendments
also added the following phrase to the
above paragraph, "consistent with the
protection of human health and the
environment.'' to make it clear that
protection is of prime concern under
section 3014. and that certain recycling
practices may-indeed bs discouraged by
regulation if necessary to ensure an
adequate level of protection. [See HJL
Conf. Rep. No. 1133.96th Cong., 2d Sess.
114(1984).]
B. Listing as Hazardous Waste
Section 3014(b] requires the
Administrator to propose whether to list
or identify used crankcase oil as a
hazardous waste under section 3001 of
RCRA by November 8,1985. A final
determination as to listing all used oils
is required a year later. As explained in
detail in the Federal Register notice
accompanying this one, EPA is
proposing that used oil be listed as a
hazardous waste under section 3001 of
the Act
1 Prim to the 1SB4 Amendment*, tbt u*ed oil
requirmmti mm found IB Motion J012 of the Act.
C. Generation and Transportation Prior
to Recycling
Section 9014(c) provides special
guidance to EPA for promulgation of
regulations pertaining to generation and
transportation of used oil identified or
listed as hazardous waste that is
recycled. First section 3014(c)(l) states
that standards promulgated under
sections 3001(d) and 3002 of RCRA for
generators (including generators of
between 100 and 1000 kilograms of
hazardous waste per month), and 3003
for transporters of hazardous waste
shall not apply to used oil that is
recycled. Section 3014(c)[2) requires
EPA, by November fl. 1986, to:
. . . promulgate such standards regarding
the generation and transportation of used oil
which is recycled «s may be necessary to •
protect human health and the environment
This directive is qualified by the
following additional guidance in section
3014{c)(2):
(1) EPA must consider, in
promulgating regulations for generators,
impacts on "environmentally acceptable
types of used oil recycling," and on
"small quantity generators" and
"generators'which are small
businesses."
(2) Under certain conditions explained
.in detail below in this preamble. EPA
must not impose manifest requirements
for shipments of used oil sent for
recycling.
Section 3014(c)(3) requires that any
transporter rules promulgated by EPA
(for used oil Identified or listed as a
hazardous waste being taken to
recyclers) include, as a minimum, the
requirement that the transporter deliver
the oil to a facility permitted under
section 3005 of RCRA to manage
hazardous waste or (as described
below) permitted by rule under section
3O14(d) to recycle used oil
EPA has developed the regulation* for
generators and transporters with the
presumption that the existing hazardous
waste regulations should apply, except
as section 3014(c) provides otherwise.
The basis for this presumption is that
even though recycled oil is exempt from
sections 3001(d). 3002, and 3003 {because
of the more specific requirements of
section 3014{c)), the ultimate standard in
section 3014(c) is to protect human
health and the environment, i.e., the
same standard as applies under sections
3001(d}-3003.
D. Facility Standards and Permitting for
Recyclers
Section 3014{d) of the Act provides
that the owner or operator of a facility
which recycles ased oil identified or
-------
492?4
Federal'Register / Vol. 50, No. &0 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / 'Proposed rtulei''
listed as a hazardous waste is "deemed
to have a [RCRA] permit" for all such
treatment or recycling (and any
associated tank or container storage).
provided that the owner or operator
complies with the section 3004
standards promulgated by EPA for
hazardous waste facilities. EPA if
authorized to permit oil recycling
facilities individually when deemed
necessary to protect human health or
the environment
n. Preceding Rulemakings
The following summarizes, for the
reader's convenience, previous EPA
proposals concerning used oiL Person*
*who submitted comments pursuant to
any of these proposals should, if they
wish for EPA to consider the comments,
re-submit them at this time. [Due to the
time that has passed since these
proposals appeared in the Federal
Register and the new supporting data
available for today's proposal EPA will
not consider comments previously
submitted without re-submittaL]
A. December 18,1978, Proposal
On December 18,1978. EPA proposed
regulations to protect human health and
the environment from the improper
management of hazardous waste (see 43
FR 58946-59028). The proposed
regulations included: (1) Criteria for
identifying and listing hazardous
wastes, and a hazardous waste list; (2)
standards applicable to generators and
transporters of hazardous waste to
ensure proper recordkeeping. reporting.
labeling, containerization. and use of a
transport manifest for these wastes; and
(3) performance, operating, and design
standards applicable to persons who
treat, store, or dispose of hazardous
waste. In the proposed roles, EPA would'
have listed all used oils as hazardous
waste.
The proposed rules contained special
provisions which exempted from
regulation most recycled hazardous
wastes. However, there were two
exceptions from this exemption which .
affected used oil. First if the material
being recycled was reused.beneficially
in a manner that constitutes disposal
and was either a listed hazardous waste-
or exhibited any of a set of
characteristics (i.e., ignitability,
corrosivity. reactivity, or Extraction
Procedure (EP) toxicity), the material
was subject to the hazardous waste
regulations. This provision would have
subjected to the hazardous waste rules
most used oil applied to the land (e.g.,
used oil used as road oil. dust
suppressant pesticide carrier, etc.). The
second exclusion affecting used oil dealt
with the reuse of certain oils as fuel. -
Specifically, the regulations stated that
waste lubricating, waste hydraulic.
waste transmission fluid, and waste
cutting oils when burned or incinerated
as a fuel would also be subject to the
hazardous waste regulations.
B. The May 19,198O Rules
On May 19,1980, EPA issued final
hazardous waste rules for many of the
regulations it proposed in 1978,
However, the Agency deferred the
listing of used oil as a hazardous waste,
pending development of standards
specific to the transportation, treatment.
storage, disposal, and recycling of used
oil [See 45 FR 33094-33095.] Under the
May 19 rules, used oil is a hazardous
waste only if it exhibits one or more of
the characteristics of hazardous waste:
Ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or EP
toxicity (see 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart
C). The rules also indicated, however.
that only listed hazardous wastes and
hazardous sludges would be subject to
the hazardous waste rules when
recycled. The net effect of these
deferrals and exemptions was to subject
to the hazardous waste rules only used
oil that both exhibits one or more of the
above characteristics and is not
recycled (i.e., is disposed of)- Because
relatively little used oil meets both of
these conditions, most used oil was not
brought under the control of the federal
hazardous waste program by the May 19
rules.*
C. Final rSoZ/d Waste"Rule
On January 4,1985. EPA promulgated ,
a final rule to amend its existing
definition of "solid waste" used in
regulations implementing Subtitle C of
RCRA. Among other things, this rule
dealt with the question of which
materials are solid and hazardous
wastes .when they are recycled: this rule
also specified general and specific
standards for various types of
hazardous waste recycling activities.
See 50 FR 614-668. The final solid waste
rule is relevant with respect to today's
proposal because, as explained below,
EPA presumes that except as section
• On March 19.1083. EPA published enforcement
guidance to help Implement the May 18,1980 rain.
(See 48 FR 11157-11180.) Tin Agency memorandum
that was published provided guidance in
determining when • waste being burned was *
legitimately • tool" end to exempt from
regulation* vs. when • wait* is being burned for
destruction (disposal), and w subject to the
hazardous waste Incineration rulei in 40 CFR Part*
204 and 205. Subpart O. Thii it relevant for u*ed oil
because u*ed oil Is (omeUmei used to maak the
disposal of hazardous spent chlorinated solvents.
As explained at 48 PR 11159-11160, mixtures of .
spent hazardous chlorinated solvents end used oils
are generally subject to the hazardous waste rales
when burned, unless each spent solvent in the
mixture has significant energy value (as-generated).
3014 provides otherwise, the existing
hazardous waste standards apply. The
requirements for recycled hazardous
waste (termed "recyclable material") in
40 CFR 261.6, then, are used as a starting
point in the determination as to what
requirements should apply to recycled
oil
D. Bunting and Blending Rules
Section 3004 (q). (r). and (s) of RCRA
require EPA to establish regulations for
hazardous waste burned for energy
recovery by November 8,1986. Since
section 3014(d) of RCRA provides that
recycled oil must be managed under the
section 3004 standards. EPA has
undertaken an effort to regulate
hazardous waste and recycled oil fuels
simultaneously. [The legislative history
of the "burning and blending"
amendments states that such an
approach was expected. See H-R. Rep.
No. 98-198,98th Cong., 1st Sess, at 39
(1983).]
On January 11.1985, EPA proposes
"Phase I" of its rules for burning and
blending of hazardous wastes and used
oil [See 50 FR 1684-1723.] The rules, as
recently promulgated in final form.
require that anyone burning or
producing a fuel made from used oil
notify EPA of their wasters-fuel
activities. The rule also establishes the
following rule specification for used oil
fuel
TABLE 1.—USED OK. FUEL SPEOOCATXX
Has*
HsJooi
Persons producing used oil fuel
meeting this specification may market
the fuel to any burner or to another
processor, provided that he can
document that the fuel meets the
specification and he complies with
certain recordkeeping provisions.*
Persons producing fuel not meeting tht
specification are allowed to market the
"off-specification" fuel only to owners
and operators of industrial boilers and
furnaces who have complied with the
notification requirement (and certain
other administrative requirements)
described above. Shipments of "off
specification" fuel have to be
accompanied by an invoice bearing a
• Burners or processors who receive only
specification fuel are not subject to any of the Phe
1 requirements.
-------
Federal Register-/ 'Vol. SO. No. 230 / Friday. November S3, 19857 Proposed Rules
notice that die fuel u subject to EPA
regulations.
The Phase I rule is an interim
measure. The rules proposed today, and
the "Phase 0" burning and blending
rules (scheduled for proposal early next
year) would incorporate parts of and
otherwise expand the Phase I rule to
cover activities besides burning and
blending. Today's proposal would alter
the scope or form of some of the final
Phase I rules, and these proposed
changes are discussed below.
£ New Tank Styrage Requirements
EPA's basic storage rules were
promulgated on January 12,1981 at 46
FR 2802-2887. On June 26,1985 EPA
proposed revisions to the tank portion of
the storage rules [50 FR 26444-26504];
the Agency cited as its basis for the
proposal certain deficiencies in the
current rules. [Id. at 26447-48.] These
proposed requirements are relevant with
respect to today's proposal for recycled
oil because:
• As described above and in more
detail in later sections of the preamble.
the general hazardous waste rules are
the proper starting point in determining
what requirements should apply to
recycled oil; and
• Tank storage is the predominant
storage method throughout the used oil
recycling industry.
Therefore, changes in the hazardous
waste storage regulations will have
significant impacts on how EPA
regulates used oil storage.
As described in Section IE Part Three
of this preamble ("regulatory impacts"
section) and in the Regulatory Impacts
Analysis for this proposal (Chapters
VA, and VJ3. in particular), the storage
portions of today's proposal account for
a large portion of the total costs of the
rules, but only a relatively small fraction
of the risk reduction or benefits we
expect to achieve. This is partly because
of the great uncertainty inherent in
trying to accurately quantify the many
factors that determine the risk posed by
various storage methods. (See the
Background Document for the
Regulatory Impacts Analysis for a
discussion of uncertainties in the
analysis.] Nonetheless, other parts of the
proposal appear to achieve greater
benefits compared to associated
compliance costs than do the storage
sections.
EPA has considered whether the
proposed storage rules could be made
more cost-effective. We have, however,
only limited flexibility concerning the
level of regulation we impose. First,
RCRA section 3014 requires that, in
general, used oil recycling facilities are
to be regulated the same as hazardous
waste facilities under section 3004.4 The
recently proposed revisions to the
•hazardous waste tank standards [50 FR
26444-26504; June 26,1985] would make
the rules more stringent; tie cost of
these new requirements are included in
the cost and regulatory impact studies
accompanying today's proposal and in
fact account for much of the total costs
of today's proposal. We are currently
considering comments received on the
June 26 proposal, and should we
determine that requirements less costly
than we proposed are adequate for
hazardous waste facilities, the rules for
used oil recyciers would be revised
accordingly. Also, the Agency
specifically solicits comments ®E
whether storage standards for used oil
can be based on the interrelationship
between engineering, location, and
waste-related factors. EPA requested
comment on this type of approach for all
tank storage situations on June 23 [see
50 FR 26452, "alternative regulatory
strategy number 2,"]. We indicated that
we have some administrative concerns
with this type of approach [Id]; but we
remain interested in the possibility of
tailoring requirements to match controls
with hazard-related factors.
Second, under the special RCRA
section 3014(c) authority, EPA has today
proposed a special, reduced set of
storage standards for recycled oil
generators to minimize adverse small
business and recycling impacts. We
believe that today's proposal
accomplishes the section 3014{c) goal of
protecting human health and the
environment without causing significant
adverse impacts on generators. We
request comment on whether the
proposal strikes the appropriate balance
between ensuring protectiveness and
minimising adverse impacts on recycled
oil generators. Further, the reader will
note that in Section H.B. of Part Two of
this preamble, we solicit comments on
certain alternatives suggested by the
public pursuant to the June 26 proposal;
we will consider these suggestions and
any submitted per today's proposal to
determine whether sufficient protection
can be achieved in ways les* costly than
we propose today.1
• Section 3014(c) exampti recycled oil from RCRA
•ectioni 3001 (d) through 3003, but not from Section
SOM. The HOUM Report [Hit Conf. Rep. No. 1120.
88th Cong., 2d Sew. 114 (1884)] Itatet that thii w«
to eniure that uwd oil recycling facilitie* would be
regulated under the aame tubslantive standard* ai
other hazardout watte facilities.
• After teeing today't proposal penoot who
aubmitted comment* per the June 28 propotal may
with to reviie and ra-eubmil comment* ctmcerning
utsd oil tank regulation*.
EL EPA's Proposed Policy for
Regulating Used Oil That Is Recycled
EPA's proj ;S«d policy and rationale
for regulating used oil that is recycled is
as follows:
» Used oil meets the criteria
established in 40 CFR Part 261 for listing
a waste as hazardous;
« Certain hazardous waste recycling
activities have been found to pose
hazards and, therefore, need to be
regulated; and
• Absent special considerations, i.e..
the special requirements of section 3014,
used oil that is hazardous and that is
recycled requires the same level of
regulation as other recycled hazardous
wastes.
The Agency's basis and rationale for
listing used oil as a hazardous waste is •
discussed in detail in the Federal
Register notice that accompanies this
one. The next Part of this preamble
discusses the requirements proposed for
used oil that is recycled. The reader
should note that an underlying premise
throughout the discussion to follow is
the last point above; that is, absent
special considerations in Section 3014
(and accompanying legislative history),
recycled used oil is to be regulated as
are other recycled hazardous wastes.
And M a final point EPA has
determined that used oil mixed with
other hazardous waste should not be
eligible for the special Section 3014
standards, but rather should be
regulated under the existing hazardous
waste rules.8 This is discussed in more
detail in the next Part of the preamble,
as are means the Agency intends to use
in distinguishing between used oil and
used oil/hazardous waste mixtures.
PART TWO—DETAILED DISCUSSION
OF CONTROLS PROPOSED FOR
USED OIL THAT IS RECYCLED
L Applicability end Scope of Part 266,
Subpart E
Under today's proposal, the standards
for used oil that is recycled would be
placed in 40 GFR Part 266, Subpart E.T
This section explains the applicability
and scope of Part 266, Subpart E
A. Definition of "recycled oil"
Section 1004(37) of the Act defines
"recycled oil" as:
• Thit policy would alter the regulatory
requirement* for cartaia mixtures from the
requirement* recently promulgated in the final
Phate ! burning and blending rule: the reaaong for
time propoted policy change* are explained in tot
next Part of the preamble.
1 The term "uted oil" It denned and ditcusted
fully in the Federal Rafittar notice accompanying
thl* one ' e- the uted oil lifting propoaal
-------
49216 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1965 /
. . . any used oil which is rented following
iU original u»e, for any purpose (including the
purpose for which the oil wa» originally
used). Such term includes oil which i» re-
refined, reclaimed, burned, or reprocessed.'1*
EPA ia proposing a regulatory
definition (40 CFR §280.10) for "recycled
oil" as follows:
"Recycled oil" mean* used oil that U either
burned for energy recovery, used to produce
• fuel reclaimed (including used oil that is
reprocessed or re-refined), or otherwise
recycled, or that is collected, accumulated,
stored, transported, or treated prior to
recycling.
(1) [Reserved to define specific types of
burning considered to be recycling.]
(21 The term include mixture* of recycled
oil and other material, but not mixtures
containing hazardous waste (other than used
oil). Used oil containing more than 1000 ppm
of total halogens is presumed to be mixed
with chlorinated hazardous waste listed in
Part 281, subpart D of this Chapter. Person*
may rebut this presumption by demonstrating
that the used oil has not been mixed with
hazardous waste. EPA will not presume
mixing has occurred if the used oil does oat
contain significant concentration* of
chlorinated hazardous constituents listed io
Appendix Vffl of Part 261 of this chapter.
1. Scope of activities: The statutory
and regulatory definitions are similar in
terms of the generic used oil recycling
activities they include. Used oil that is
either re-refined or "reprocessed" i*
within the scope of the definition, W@
have used the broad term "reclaimed" to
cover all processing or treatment
activities where usable materials such
as fuels or lubricants are recovered from
used oil ["Reclamation" is the term
used in the hazardous waste regulations
to describe such activities. See
§ 261.1(c){4) and 50 FR 033-634; January
4,1985.] Burning used oil for energy
recovery is also within the scope of the
proposed definition. EPA has reserved
"paragraph (1)" in the definition to
define the specific types of burning that
will be considered recycling. In the
hazardous waste rules, EPA has used a
tripartite division to classify combustion
units: incinerators, boilers, industrial
furnaces. [50 FR 625-426; January 4,
1985.] Hazardous waste with significant
energy (Bru) value, as defined in
enforcement guidance published March
18,1983 at 48 FR 11157-11160, is
considered to be recycled when burned
in a boiler or industrial furnace (or used
to produce a fuel bound for such
burning). [See 50 FR 829-633; January 4.
1985.] EPA will be reconsidering this
classification scheme with respect to
used oil in the Phase n burning proposal,
due early next year, because used oil is
often burned in devices that do not
neatly fit into any of the .above three
categories (e.g., diesel engines and space
heaters) sand became used oil may often
be burned as « legitimate supplementary
fuel in solid and hazardous waste
incinerators. Until we can reconsider
this policy, the general policy (described
above) established for hazardous waste
would apply.
Finally, EPA considers used oil that is
being managed {e.g., collected, stored)
prior to recycling to fall within the scope
of "recycled oil" EPA has applied this
general principle to hazardous waste*
being recycled [see SO FR 650-651;
January 4,1985], and we believe
Congress intended a similarly broad
coverage for the term "recycled oil"8
2. Mixtures, Used oil ia often mixed as
blended with other materials during
collection, storage, or processing. EPA'a
policy concerning used oil mixtures it
contained in the proposed "paragraph
(2)" of the recycled oil definition and in
certain conforming amendments to Part
281, discussed below. The moot
important issue with respect te
classifying mixtures for regulatory
purposes under today's proposal ia
whether or not the materials) being
mixed with the used oil is a hazardous
waste.
a. Mixing with materials that are not
hazardous waste: When recycled oil is
mixed with any material that ia not a
hasardOTs waste, e.g., .virgin fuel oil the
resultant mixture is considered a
recycled oil Following the general
"mixture rule" policy established for
hazardous waste (see | 26TL3(a)(2)(iv)
and fc)J, mixtures remain subject to
regulation unless and until specifically
excluded.* [Although the most common
situation covered by this policy would
be blending of used oil with virgin fuel
oil, mixtures of recycled oil and non-
hazardcme wastes, or with spill control
materials, would also be considered
recycled oil.]
b. Mixing with hazardous waste:
Congress, as evidenced by legislative
history surrounding Section 3014, is
quite concerned about the problems
caused by mixing of hazardous wastes
with used oil [See generally HJt Rep.
No. 96-1415, 96th Cong. 2d Sess^ at 4-S.
* A» evidence of Congress's intent for • broad
reading of the term, note that section 3O14(c)
Include* special raqukemante tor generator* and
transportero of recycled oil Obviously, Congrese
!ntendj for EPA to consider used oil to be "recycled
oil~ from die time it la generated end »tored or
•ecoxmdated
9 The reider should note that EPA hat proposed
(ia the lilting proposal accompanying this rule) to
amend I 281J}(a)(2)(iv) to exclude wastewater
containing d» mininuu amounts of used oil and
certain oily wipers from regulation as hazardous
waste. Al*o, as will be di*co**ed below, recycled
oil fael meeting EPA'a specification* would also be
exempt (such fuel would often be a mixture of med
oil and virgin oil).
(1980\ and HJL Rep. No. 98-198,-98th
Cong., lat Sess., at 04-$7"{1983).] EPA
first dealt with the used oil/hazardous
wa»te mixture problem in the Phase I
burning and blending proposal [50 FR
1691-1692; Janraary 11.1985.] At that
time, and La the recently promulgated
final Phase I rule, EPA fating discretion
granted by Congress concerning how
ouch mixtures should be regulated)
established that certain mixtures are to
be regulated under the sssed oil fuel rule*
while others are regulated as hazardous
waste. [Id.] EPA also explained,
however, that the classification scheme
in the Phase I rale is only intended as an
interim regime, to be revisited in today's
proposed ralemaldng (particularly with
respect to mixtures of used oil and small
quantity generator hazardous waste).
pd.J Today, as explained in detail
below, EPA Is proposing that any
mixttm of used ail and hazardous waste
ist&be fully regulated as hazardous
waste. This is a cenfral principle of the
proposed recycled-oil rales, and is based
©a the following rationale:
« EPA's proposed rule* for recycled
oil were developed to control hazards
associated with recycled oil a@ a result
found Ira used ®ii When hazardous
wastes are mixed with ased oil the
narore and se^wrftv of hazards posed
can be changed and are not necessarily
controlled by the proposed recycled oil
rales
• The policy IK simpi® to understand
and implement. EPA is concerned that if
certain hazardous wastes could be
mixed with used oil and others could not
be, both industry and enforcement
officials would be confused and would
asve to spend a great deal of time trying
to determine what kind of wast® was
mixed, etc^ and
• EPA reasons that Congress
intended for osed oil reeyders, who
would benefit from special provisions in
Section 3014 discussed below, to be
involved fa legitimate processing and
upgrading of used oil to recover or
produce high quality petroleum
products. Blending and mixing of
hazardous waste with rcaed oO would
not normally improve or upgrade the
used oil and in fact may accomplish the
opposite. [For example, chlorinated
solvents, which are often detected in
used oil have Btu value ieos. than nsed
oil and also make used oil more difficult
to re-refinej
What follows are discussions of the
various mixtures covered by the
proposed policy and then a discussion of
the Agency's main mechanism to be
used to detect mixing, the "rebuttable
presumption." Comments are requested
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed' Rules' 49217
on the general policy and rationale
described above, ai well as the specific
aspects of the policy discussed next
[See proposed i$ 281.5(j), 281.6(a)(2)(iii).
and 266.40(d). as well as the {260.10 .
definitions of "recycled oil." for the
regulatory language that would
implement this proposed mixture
policy.)
(1) Listed hazardous waste from large
quantity generators. When used oil is
mixed with a waste that is listed in Part
261, Subpart D and generated by a
"large quantity" generatort/-e^ •
generator not subject to the special
requirements of S 281.5), the mixture
should be regulated as hazardous waste,
not recycled oil10 Such hazardous
wastes (and associated mixtures) were
already regulated when Section 3014
was passed, and we see no indication
that Section 3014 was meant to reduce
regulatory requirements that already
apply to those wastes.11
(2) Characteristic waste from large
quantity generators. Under the final
Phase I burning rule, used oil mixed with
a waste hazardous only because it
exhibits one of the characteristics of 40
CFR 261.21-281.24 is regulated as
.hazardous waste only when the
resultant mixture continues to exhibit
one of the characteristics; otherwise, the
mixture is regulated as used oil [In the
preamble of the final Phase I rule, see
Part Two, Section IVJJ.3.] This policy is
merely a re-atatement of
§ 281 J(a)(2)(iif). which applies to all
mixtures of "characteristic only"
hazardous waste and non-hazaidous
wastes. The proposed listing of used oil
as hazardous waste changes this
situation completely, Le* J281.3(a)(2}{ui)
no longer applies. EPA is today
proposing that mixtures of used oil and
characteristic-only hazardous waste be
regulated as hazardous waste (not as
recycled oil) regardless of whether the
resultant mixture exhibits any of the
characteristics. The Agency believes
that this is a proper approach for the
reasons outlined above and particularly
because the addition of characteristic
hazardous waste to used oil may change
'• The meter ahonJd note that on Anguct \. 1985.
per Mctton SOOl(d) of RCRA. EPA piopuMd to
•mend | 2813 to provide that only generator* of
lew than 100 kilogram* of hazardou* wade per
calendar month would be exempt a* "email quantity
generator*." (Se* SO FR 31288.]
11 At one time. EPA we* reluctant to daatify any
uaed oil from the automotive wrvice tndurtry a*
h.T.F^r-.F waste regulated oattid* the acope of
Section 3014 becauee that might render the
legulation meaninglea*. (See SO FR 1681-1092.
footnote* IB and 24 in particular. January 11,1885.]
A» diacaased in the final Pha*e 1 rule, however, we
are now convinced that mixing by automotive
generaton U quite rare, and ao the above-
mentioned ojm-rui we* unfounded. |ln the final
Phase I rule preamble, aee Part Two. Section IV.B-2]
the nature of used oil (by adding
unusual constituents or properties) and
create hazards not adequately
addressed by the recycled oil rules, e.g.,
reactivity.
A related point concerning hazardous
characteristics and used oil is that under
the final Phase I rule and today's
proposal a used oil exhibiting one of the
characteristics of J§ 281.21-261.24 but
that has not been mixed with other •
hazardous waste would be (when
recycled) regulated as recycled oil, not •
hazardous waste. For example, some
used oil has a flashpoint below 140 *F
and so is ignitable hazardous waste; we
would not presume, however, that the
low flashpoint indicates mining [See the
discussion of this issue with respect to
used oil fuels at 50 FR 1692-1693 and
1699-1700; January 11.1985, and in the
preamble of the final Phase I rule in Part
Two, Section IV.BJ.j If, however, EPA
found mat used oil being recycled at a
particular facility exhibited some
characteristic not known to be typically
associated with used oil (e.g.,
corrosivity, reactivity, or EJ>. toxidty for
a metal such as mercury), we might well
begin an investigation to determine
whether hazardous waste was being
illicitly mixed with used oil
(3) Hazardous waste from small
quantity generators. Under § 261.5, EPA
exempts hazardous waste from
generators of less than 1000 kilograms
per calendar month of hazardous waste
from most of the Subtitle C
requirements, provided that the S 281.5
conditions are complied with.11 Under
S 281.5, hazardous waste may be
recycled without regulatory controls and
may be mixed with used oils. In the
Phase I burning and blending proposal,
EPA requested comment on various
approaches for controlling mixtures of
used oil fuel and (the normally exempt)
§ 281.5 hazardous waste. [50 FR 1692;
January 11,1985.] In the recently
promulgated final Phase I rule, we
decided to regulate the mixtures as used
oil fuel (not under the full set of
hazardous waste rules) as an interim
measure, pending today's proposal [In
the final Phase I preamble, see Part
Two. Section FV.B.2.]
Today, we are proposing that
mixtures of used oil and S 281.5
hazardous waste be fully regulated as
hazardous waste when recycled. [See
proposed i 281.5rj}(2)(ii).] We have
determined, for the following reasons.
that this full level of regulation is
necessary to provide adequate control
over these mixtures:
• Small qparitity generators'
hazardous waste may impart unusual
constituents and properties to used oil,
creating hazards not addressed by the
recycled oil rules;
• Congress indicated very strong
concerns over adulteration of used oil
during collection and transportation
". . . Used oil is often heavily
adulterated before it reaches a recycling
facility, and much of his adulteration
results from haphazard mixing during
transit. This provision of the bill [i.e.,
section 3014] expressly gives the Agency
authority to address these situations."
[See RR. Rep. No. 98-198, 98th Cong.,
1st Sess., at 87 (1983).]
• EPA studies have documented that
in fact used oil is adulterated after
leaving generators' sites.13 Since so
many used oil generators are "small
quantity" generators under { 261.5,14
regulation of small quantity hazardous
waste is necessary to effectively control
adulteration; and
• As will be discussed below, the
Agency's main enforcement mechanism
to detect when mixing has occurred will
be the "rebuttable presumption," i.e» a
total halogen measurement The
rebuttable presumption only indicates
when mixing has occurred; it cannot
distinguish which types of generators
contributed hazardous waste to the
mixture. Enforcement and industry
officials would be faced with
uncertainty and confusion if small
quantity generator hazardous waste
could be legally added to recycled oil,
while other hazardous waste could not
be.
(4) The "rebuttable presumption" of
mixing. In the final Phase I burning rule,
EPA established that used oil fuel
containing in excess of 1000 ppm of total
halogens would be presumed to be
mixed with chlorinated hazardous
waste. [In the preamble of the final
Phase I rule, see Part Two, Section
IV.B.1.] Today, we are proposing to use
this same indicator (and the same
"rebuttal" procedures) to detect mixing
11 A* noted above, EPA hai propoced to lower
the excliuion limit from 1000 to 100 kilogram* of
haxardou* waate per calendar month. Thi*
diKUMion would apply to any haxardou* waate
exempted under 12C1& regardlea* of the quantity
limit ultimately promulgated.
'• See the report Composition and Management
of Uted Oil Generated in the C/.&. U.S. EPA.
November 1984. Section 3.4-3.1. Sample* taken from
proceuon an much more contaminated with
aotvent* than (ample* taken directly from
generator*.
14 An nttmated 82.500 Vehicle maintenance
ahopt, for example, generate on average 50
kilogram* per calendar of haxardou* waste (not
counting uwd oil). i«, moitly ipent tolventt. See
the draft Regulatory Impacts Analysis for Proposal
Regulation* for Small Quantity Generaton of
Hazardout Watte. February 1985. Exhibit* 3-1 and
1-3.
-------
49218 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
in any recycled oil, mot just used oil
. being used as fuel. [See proposed
|§ 261.6(a)(2)(iii) and 266.40{d), as well
as the proposed definition of "recycled
oil"] EPA believes extension of this
indicator to all used oils is appropriate
because the data and analyses used to
develop the presumption were based on
samples of all types of recycled oils, not
just used oiJ« being used as fuels. That
is, the basic premise of the
presumption—used oil that contains
more than 1000 ppm total halogens has
been mixed with one or more hazardous
chlorinated solvents—holds for all used
oils.1*
As discussed in the final Phase I
burning rule, persons may rebut the
presumption by demonstrating to
enforcement officials that the used oil
does not contain "significant levels" of
hazardous chlorinated constituents
identified in Appeidbc VIU of Part 281.'•
[See the final Phase I preamble. Part -
Two, Section IV.B.1] EPA is today
proposing that this same rebuttal
procedure would apply to all used oils
found to contain more than 1000 ppm
total halogens. EPA believes the
" procedures are appropriate for all used
oils because the question of what
constitutes a "significant level" of a
hazardous constituent (with respect to
indicating whether mixing has occurred)
is independent of the recycling method,
That is, when individual hazardous
solvents are present at very low levels
(such as less than 100 ppm). it is difficult
or impossible to pinpoint the source of
contamination and mixing with .
hazardous waste cannot be, presumed.
[Id.j Higher levels of individual
hazardous solvents (such as 100-1000
ppm). may or may root indicate mixing,
depending on circumstances specific to
individual cases. [Id.] Again, these
factors would seem to apply to all used
oils, not just oil fuels, and this supports
our proposal to extend the rebuttable
presumption (and rebuttal procedures)
to all used oils covered by today's.
'proposal, not just used oil fuels.
In summary, EPA is proposing a
mixture policy for used oil as follows:
1 • A« discussed in the final Phase 1 rule. EPA
recogtuzet that metalworking oils and re-refinery
"light ends" may contain high leveli of halogeu but
have not been mixed. (In the preamble of the final
Phaie I ruJe. see Part Two. Section IV.B.1.) Penom
managing these oilj can rebut the presumption
under the procedures described in the final Pba»e I
rule [Id.], summarized in thi« section of this
preamble.
"As also discussed in the final Phase i rule. If a
re-refiner can show that the incoming used oil does
not exceed 1000 ppm halogens, the presumption
wuuld not apply to light ends produced at the
refinery. (See the final Phase I preamble. Part Two,
Section IV.Cia.j That is. the Agency recognizes
that certain processes concentrate low boiling point
materials in a light end stream, and the presumption
«")s not developed for this type of recycled oil.
• Mixtures of recycled oil and non-
h»zardous wastes or virgin materials
would be regulated as recycled oil; but
• Mixtures of used oil and any
hazardous waste, including hazardous
waste from § 261.5 small quantity
hazardous waste generators, would be
fully regulated as hazardous waste, not
as recycled oil. The Agency's main
enforcement mechanism would be the
rebuttable presumption, which uses total
halogens as an indicator of mixing'but
which also allows for case-by-case
rebuttals.
Comments are requested on today'*
proposed mixtures policies.
B. Recycled OH Subject to Part 286,
Subpart S
1. General-., The requirements for
recycled oil are proposed in Part 266,
Subpart E. The "applicability" section of
Part 266, Subpart E identifies those
recycled oils that would be subject to
the Subpart. [See the proposed
! 266.40(a)(l).] First the Subpart would
apply to recycled ail that is hazardous
waste.11- ''Second, the Subpart would
apply to household-generated recycled
oil whea aggregated at a collection
center. Third, the Subpart would apply
to recycled oil recovered from
wastewater. The latter two points are
discussed next
2. Household waste, whea aggregated.
When EPA made final many of it*
hazardous waste rule* on May 18,1980,
"household wastes" were specifically
excluded from being hazardous wastes.
[See 40 CFR 281.4(a)(l).j EPA concluded
[see 45 FR 33098-33099], baaed on the
legislative history of RCRA, that Subtitle
C was not intended to control the
management of household refuse,
garbage, etc. However, in light of the
subsequent enactment of the Used Oil
Recycling Act in October 1980, and the
more detailed provisions of Section 3014
enacted in November 1984. EPA is
proposing to modify this exemption to
provide that recycled oil that is
household waste would be subject to
Part 266, Subpart E.but only when
aggregated or accumulated at "do-it-
yourselfer" collection centers such as
service stations, auto centers, etc. [See
the proposed i 266.40(a)(l)(ii).j EPA is
proposing this special approach for
recycled oil because:
(1) Section 3014(a) directs EPA to
control the hazards of recycled oil
regardless of its origin;
(2) A substantial portion of all of the
used oil that is generated HI the U.S.
each year comes from homeowners; **
and
(3) This homeowner-generated used
oil is almost entirely automotive oil.
EPA has a great deal of data showing
that used automotive oil is contaminated
with hazardous constitutents. *" This oil
is collected and recycled along with
other automotive oils, and we must
presume it poses similar hazards.
Since the household-generated oil
presents similar hazards, we are
proposing that it be subject to Part 266,
Subpart E which aggreated at collection
centers.
EPA is aot proposing that
homeowners themselves be regulated
under the rules proposed today. We are
proposing that household waste/
recycled oil lose its exempt status where
aggregated or accumulated for recycling.
EPA recognizes that improper practices
by homeowners themselves can alao
pose environmental problems."Tha
Agency does not believe, however, that
Congress envisaged Section 3014
applying directly to homeowners. EPA
specifically requests comment on nan-
regulatory means that might fos used to
encourage homeowners to take their
used oil to collection centers. For
example, would it be helpful to State
agencies in this field if EPA were to
publish a document summarizing
various educational and informational
programs currently ia use in the UJS.
(and perhaps abroad) to address this
problem and Use relative successes or
problems encountered with the
programs? Are there other roles EPA
could adopt to aM State agencies in
"Today'i proposal would amend | 281.8(a)(2)(iH)
to provide that recycled oil would be not subject to
the foil »«t of regulations that normally apply to
recycled hazardous wastes \L*~ 40 CFR Parts 282-
285.] but rather would be subject to Part 216.
Subpart E. Aa explained in the rest of this part of
the preamble. Pan 266. Subpart E would Incorporate
•ome. but not all, of the requirements in the existing
hazardous waste regulations.
"The reader should note that some recycled oil*
(under the statutory definition) are not solid and
hazardous wastes under today's propose!. Under
1281.2 materials that have been reclaimed and that
are then used as commercisJ products (balnot as •
fuel and aot in a manner eooatituting disposal) are
not solid waste*, and to era-not haaardco* waste*.
Example* of recycled oiii that are not solid nor
hazardous wastes era reclaimed oils that are not
solid nor hazardous waste* are reclaimed lubricants
and asphalt roofing material containing recycled oli
The reader should further note that under ii 260JO
and 28031, EPA may grant requests for variances
from a material'* being classified a* a solid waste,
and under ii 28JUO and *•"*» from a solid waste'*
being classified as a hazardous waste.
"Composition and Management of Used Oil
Generated in the U&. by Franklin Asnodatn. Ltd.
November 1084: p. 1-8. Approximately 200 million
gallon* of used oil are generated by "do-it-
yourselfers," e.g_ BOMOwnen, of the totd of 1.2
billion gallon* generated each year.
•Id, p. 3-17.
" A study for the U-S. Department of Energy.
Analyst* of Potential Used Oil Recovery /ram
Individuolt, by Market Facts, Inc. July 1881. found
that 40H of homeowners poured their uaed oil-on the
ground, while mother 21* placed it la Ike trash.
Only 14* look the oil to a center for recycling. Sue
page 42. *
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49219
addressing to "do-it-yourselfer"
problem?
3. Oil recovered from wastewater. m
the listing proposal elsewhere in today's
Federal Register, EPA proposes to
amend the { 261.3 "mixture rule" to
excluse from the definition of hazardous
waste oily wastewaters containing de
minimus amounts of used lubricating,
hydraulic, or transformer oils from
machine drippings, line spillage, etc."
[See proposed { 281 J(a)f2(iv)(F).] In
order to recover the oil (or to comply
with Clean Water Act discharge limits)
most industrial facilities treat oily
wastewater to separate some portion of
the oil Used oil recovered from
wastewater is likely to contain
hazardous constitutents at levels
comparable to other used oils, and
therefore to pose similar hazards when
managed (or mismanaged). For this
reason, EPA has proposed to limit the
scope of the exclusion so that used oil
recovered from wastewaters remains a
hazardous waste." If this ased oil is
recovered for recyctisg or rense, H
would be recycled oil subject to Part
266, Subpart E. A person who recovers
oil from exempt wastewater containing
used oil (for recycling) would be a
"generator." subject to either { 266.40(c)
or 1 266.41 of today's proposal. To make
this point clear, we have proposed
C. Conditional Exemptions for Certain
Recycled Oils
EPA has determined that certain types
of recycled oil should be exempt from
further regulation when specified
conditions are met [The proposed
S266.40(a)(2) identifies the recycled oils
eligible for the exemption and the
proposed |286.40(b) contains the
conditions.]
1. Specif icatioa fuel Recently, EPA
made final (the final "Phase I" burning
rule] a specification for fuels made from
used oils. [See Table 1, above, and in the
preamble of the final Phase I rule, see
the discussion in Part Two, Section
rV.C.] Fuels meeting this specification
would be exempt from the Phase 1
burning rule's notification and tracking
requirements and its prohibition on
burning used oils in non-industrial
boilers. [Id] EPA is today proposing to
simply carry forward the exemption for
specification fuel. Based on the
following rationale, we can see no need
to impose regulations on specification
fuel, or to add any new parameters to
'the specification. Comments are
requested on the discussion that follows.
a. Rationale for exemption: EPA
believes that fuel meeting the
specification would pose hazards not
significantly greater than virgin fuel oil
during handling and when burned and
that therefore regulation of die used oil
would not accomplish any
environmental purpose. [Id.] ** The
specification levels for three of the
constituents, arsenic, cadmium, and
chromium, were, in fact selected to be
equivalent to virgin fuel oil levels." The
specification selected for lead was 100
ppm. This is about ten times greater
than lead levels found in virgin fuel oils,
but as we explained in the final Phase I
rule, the 100 ppm level is intended only
as interim measure. When EPA proposes
its Phase n burning rules early next
year, we will re-visit the lead
specification for used oil fuels and we
may well establish a more stringent •
level. In the meantime, we do not think
it appropriate to regulate fuels meeting
the 100 ppm specification.*'
• "De minima*" n ned in mto context it
defined in the listing proposal elsewhere in today's
Fadenl Refhtar.
•The ruder should note thai this discussion only
applies to wastewater contaminated with taedoU.
For example, wastewaten from petroleum refinrriei
•bo contain recoverable otL hot do not necmurily
contain used oil
•• The reader thould note that EPA considers the
fuel specification to constitute a standard under
SOM(r) for hazardous waste fuels. The specification
to issued under the Joint authorities of sections 3014
and 3004(q). and as provided by section 9004(r),
supersedes the otherwise applicable labeling
requirement The specification limits the
composition and associated hazards of recycled oil
fuel and therefore. It in Itself fulfills the
informational and waning functions of the label
" Also, the prapoaed flashpoint specification, a
minimum of 100 *F is the same as aUowad under
ASTM specifications for commercial ("number 2")
feel oils. Further, the Phase 1 preamble explained
out we did Dot propose BpcdiiCaitioiu for certain
constituents (such as benzene and toluene) in part
because levels in used ofl are likely to be equivalent
to levels bund in virgin foal oils. (See the final
Phase I preamble, part Two, Section IV.C-3.J
•• A preliminary assessment of storage hazards of
used oil containing lead indicates that even with a
specification of 100 ppm, serious hazards from leaks
are unlikely. A computer simulation of some 9000
storage situations was conducted where lead was
assumed to be released to the environment. (See the
Background Document tar the Regulatory Impact
Analysis. EPA Office of Solid Waste, November
nas. Chapter IV.C.] Of the 9000 simulations, only 28
exceeded the lead standard ofOOS mg/1
promulgated under the Safe Drinking Water Act
It, lass than 1 percent of the cases. (This analysis
to conservative in that many of the cases simulated
assumed a laad content hftgH^r than the final
specification of 100 ppm.) The reader should note
that EPA to continuing to improve its methods for
assessing storage risks, and preliminary results
presented here are simply the bast information
currently available. Should new and better
Information be developed in the future, we mey re-
consider the storage risks posed by specification
fuel
The reader may also note that in the
final Pbase-I rule EPA declined to set
specification levels for certain toxic
constituents. However, the parameters
for which levels are not established
were either found to be present in used
oils at levels comparable to virgin fuel
oil (and so would pose hazards no
greater than virgin fuel oils when
handled prior to burning) or the
constituents just are not very toxic. Our
conclusions concerning the need for a
specification limit for individual
parameters were of course based
primarily on hazards posed by
inhalation: we have considered whethei
specifications should be established for
some parameters of low inhalation
toxicity based on potential storage
hazards. A parameter worthy of this
special additional consideration is
barium. Ten percent of the used oil
analyses reviewed by EPA showed
barium levels at or above 250 ppm."
While this is about 100 times greater
than levels found in virgin fuel oil, the
reader should note that it is only two
and one-half times greater than the E.P.
toxicity level of 100 ppm. (§261.24(b),
Table 1. /.&, "DOOS."J Given that the E.P.
is intended for leachate analysis and
that it is very unlikely that all of the
barium would leach from the oily
matrix, we do not expect used oil to
exhibit E.O. toxicity for barium.*8 To.
more directly assess the potential for
ground water contamination by imprope r
used oil storage, EPA evaluated
numerous storage scenarios.1' In all of
the various scenarios evaluated, the
predicted groundwater concentration of
barium was below 1 milligram per liter.
the standard established by EPA under
the Safe Drinking Water Act. Therefore
we do not expect significant hazards to
be posed by used oil high in barium,
even if stored improperly, and we have
not proposed any new specification for
barium.
" See the report Composition and M<:iugfn.e:tl
of llied Oil Generated in the US.. U.S. EPA.
November 1984, p. 1-12. The dats base included 712
samples analyzed for barium: 89* of the sampl»
contained detectable levels of barium.
** Also, barium to an additive used in formulation
used automotive engine oil. It seems unlikely, given
.that automotive oils contain s variety of
contaminants regulated by the specification, that
used oil would meet the specification but yet still
have high barium levels. Ibid at pp. J-6 to 3-10 and
p. J-27.
••Seethe Background Document for the
Megulctory Impact Analysis, EPA Office of Solid
Waate, November 1985. Chapter IV.C. As discusset
above for lead, this analysis included a computer
simulation of some 9000 storage situations.
Although only preliminary analysis, it seems
unlikely that used oil can pose serious sou-age
hazards because of its barium content.
-------
49220
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
Finally, under the approach proposed
today where used oil with over 1000
ppm total halogens is presumed to be
mixed with hazardous waste, the reader
may note that it is conceivable for
specification fuel to contain up to 1000
ppm of a hazardous spent solvent and
yet not "trigger" the rebuttable
presumption. EPA was concerned that
such levels of solvents, although not
hazardous with respect to burning, could
pose ground water hazards if used oil
was stored improperly. We therefore
conducted a storage assessment for
used oil containing various spent
solvents, i.e., as we did for barium.90
The individual solvent posing the
highest risk level was found to be
tetrachloroethene, with a mean or
average cancer risk level of 7 X 10~*. or
7 cancers per 1 million exposed
population. Risk levels this high can be
considered significant but EPA notes
that some 96% of the scenarios
evaluated had risk levels lower than
this. Additionally, the storage scenarios
evaluated here concerned all used oils,
while specification fuel in & special
subset of used oil because, by regulatory
definition, it must contain low
concentrations of several toxic
contaminants. We expect that
specification fuel, because it will often
be produced by treatment or blending,
will typically contain solvent levels far
below 1000 ppm: in fact it is likely that
specification fuel will often contain less
than 100 ppm of any solvent91 Used oil
containing such low levels of, solvents
would pose risks about one order of
magnitude lower than the levels
discussed above, i.e.. the risk of cancer
would generally be less than 1 per 1
million exposed population. Such low
risk levels do not appear to warrant
additional controls, and we are
therefore proposing no specification
levels for individual solvents.
In summary, we are proposing no
changes to the specification and no
additional requirements for the
management of specification fuel
because we do not see the need for
additional controls. Comments on this
proposed policy are requested.
b. Conditions for the exemption.
Persons producing specification fuel
"> Id. We assessed rukj posed by used oil
containing three common de-greasing solvents:
tetrachloroethene. 1.1.1-trichloroethane: and
trichloroethene.
'' For example, we the report Competition and
Management of Uied Oil Generated in the US, EPA.
November 1964. p. 5-15. Concentrations for various
constituents are protected for used oil blended at a
10% ratio with virgin fuel oil The avenge
concentration of tetrachloroethena~hen it 121 ppm;
and 90% of the projected cases would contain no
more than 170 ppm of that solvent
would be, under today's proposal,
subject to § 286,40(b)(tJ. The fuel
producer would have to document
through analysis that the oil meets the
specifications, and that it is used as fuel.
To document the latter point, the person
would have to keep records of the name
and address of the receiving facility, the
quantity of oil shipped, the date of
'shipment, and a cross-reference to the
oil analyses performed. These
requirements are carried forward from
the final Phase I burning rule. (They are
currently in § 266.43(b)(6); today's
proposal would move the requirements
to S 266.40(b)(l}.]
Documentation that the fuel in fact
meets the specification would normally
entail analysis. Sampling and analytical
procedures are part of a facility's
permitting requirements discussed in
later sections of this preamble.** Of
particular relevance here, the person
producing specification fuel would have
to have a plan at his facility specifying.
the sampling and analysis procedures to
be used in documenting that the oil
meets the specification. Records of
sales, use, or shipment would have to be
kept at the facility as well. Of course,
EPA reserves the right to inspect
facilities producing specification fuel to
take samples of the oil and if necessary,
to check to ensure that the product
produced is actually being burned or is
entering the commercial fuel oil
market**
c, Diesel crankcase oil: As a final
point concerning the production of
specification fuel. EPA requests
comment on whether it is necessary to
require a different kind of
documentation (or any documentation at
all) than described-above for those
generators that blend used diesel
crankcase oil with diesel fuel for use in
their own vehicles. The data available
to EPA (Table 2) suggest that used diesel
engine crankcase oils are quite low in
contaiminants as-generated. Given our
limited data base, commentera are
invited to submit additional data to
confirm or refute this conclusion.
TABLE 2..CONCENTRATIONS OF .Toxic METALS
IN USED DIESEL ENGINE CRANKCASE OILS
" As stated above, recycled oil remains subject
to Part 286, Subpart £. in its entirety until ! 286.40(b(
is fully complied with. In particular. | 286.43(b).
discussed below. Includes certain sampling and
analysis requirements for persons producing
specification fuel
" The burden for determining and documenting
that certain recycled oil should be exempt as
specification fuel falls on the person claiming the
exemption. When recycled oil is burned, sent off-
site, or otherwise managed. It is subject to
regulation under Part 208, Subpart E. absent
documentation as discussed above. This proposal
would Incorporate the analysis requirements into
the general analytical requirements for used oil
recycling facilities of proposed I 288.43(6),
Number*
Ana-
lyrad
Can-
Seact-
Coneentrebon range
(ppm)
<0.5
03
>i Ranun Assooatsa, Ua, NommtMr
1SD4, p. 3-SS.
EPA is alsc aware that manufacturers
of diesel engines generally recommend
that diesel crankcase oil be blended into
diesel fuel at a maximum rate of 5% (i.e..
a 19-1 virgin fuel to recycled oil
dilution.) s* Since diesel fuel is itself
typically low in toxic metals,*' a 19-1
dilution would seem to ensure the
resultant blended fuel would meet the
proposed specification (even if the limit
for lead was ultimately set as low as 10
ppm). Should EPA. then, specifically
state in the regulation that anaylsis is
not necessary when diesel crankcase oil
is blended by generators at or below 5%
to produce diesel fuel?
2, Asphalt paving material, EPA is-
proposing that asphalt paving material
containing certain types of recycled oil
be exempt when certain conditions are
met [See the proposed § 286.40(a){2)(ii)
and § 286.4Q(b)(2]j.] EPA is basing the
proposed exemption on 1286.20{b) of the
existing hazardous waste regulations,
wm'ch provides:.
Products produced for the general public's
owe that are used in a manner constituting
disposal and that contain recyclable
materials fs'.e,, hazardous watte] are not
presently subject to regulation if the
recyclable materials have undergone •
efaemidal reaction in the course of producing
the product to as to become inseparable by
physical means.
As discussed on January 4,1985, EPA
asserts jurisdiction over these materials
but has deferred regulation pending
studies of how the materials are
appropriately regulated. [See 50 FR 627-
629 and 646-647.] EPA has determined
that asphalt paving material containing
either of the two following types of
" See. for example, the bulletins by: Cotepillar.
September 1874. Rocor. undated. International
Hamster. February 1874 (5-H recommended up to
6J*).
•• See the report Composition and Management
of Uted Oil Generated in the t/_S~ by Franklin
Associated. Ud_ November 1964. p. Via Diesel fuel
Is essentially "Number 2" or "distillate fuel.''
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49221
recycle ofl •• meet the criteria of
f 26&20(b) «nd therefore are presently
exempt from regulation:
• Residues (bottoms} from distillation
re-refining; or
• Air pollution control residue from
fabric filters (L&, baghouse dust) when
used oil is burned as a fuel
EPA is currently studying me practice of
incorporating these materials into
asphalt Preliminary results mdicate mat
the recycled oils described here
substitute for virgin materials hi asphalt
production (i.e., they add desired
properties to the paving material) and
that at least the bottoms are typically
purchased by asphalt producers at
prices near those of their nonwaste
("virgin") counterparts.*'' Therefore, we
conclude that the incorporation of these
materials into asphalt is a legitimate
recycling practice and not merely a
disposal method for the residues.
EPA is currently assessing the
environmental hnTafrl« that may be
associated with these asphalt products
to determine what kinds of controls, if
any, may be accessary.** Eventually,
EPA might establish standards
pertaining to amounts of recycled oil
that could be in asphalt paving material
(e-g., a maximum percentage), or we
might require some form of leaching test
(similar to the Extraction Procedure in
40 CFR 281.21 and Part 261, Appendix IQ
as-a demonstration that no adverse
effects are likely. For example, we might
exempt asphalt of which the residues
constitute less than 3% (by weight or
volume)—this appears to represent
current industry practice—while the use
of asphalt containing greater than this
amount might be regulated as land
disposal or subject to some type of leach
testing. Under today's rule, however, the
person producing the asphalt product
(and claiming the exemption) would
only have to maintain adequate
documentation that the recycled oil is
being treated so that it is an inseparable
part of the asphalt product'* [See 50 FR
"Both material* Hix us sod here are residues
from treating used oil*. A* discussed in the Federal
Register notice that accompanies thii one (the
listing proposal), residue* derived from used oil* are
considered oaed oils. And a* discassad above hi
this preamble, uaed oils (not mixed with haxardon*
waste) that are recycled are recycled oil*.
•' See the draft report by Research Triangle
Institute. U*ed Oil Recycling Evaluation:
Incorporation of Residue* into Asphalt and
AMphalt-Ctmtainims Products, fune 1BB5. page* 24-
28.
•• U. Samples of the recycled oils are being
analyzed to measure concentrations of tmir-rlmt
constituent* (40 CFR Part 261. Appendix VUI)
present and how those concentration* compare to
the virgin material* they replace. Extraction tasting
for toxic metal* is also being conducted.
•• The person incorporating the bottoms or
baghouse dust into the asphalt would be subject to
646-7; January 4,1965, for a discussion
of these terms. Most asphalt products,
we expect would qualify for the
exemption.]
Comments and information are
requested on the hazards and need for
controls for asphalt products ^""*»iri See 40 CFR Part »71 (and Section I of Part Three
of this preamble) coi^eming EPA approval of State
hazardous waste programs.
M An interim status facility may only accept a
newly-listad hazardous waste under the provisic c
of 1270.72. pertaining to changes during interim
status.
-------
49222" *' Federal 'Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed dales'
II. Standards for Generators of Recycled
Oil
A "generator" is "... any person, by
site, whose act or process produces
hazardous waste ... or whose act first
causes a hazardous waste to become
subject to regulation." [See I 260.10.] In
the case of used oil. generators include:
• Service stations, auto repair shops,
and other establishments that service
vehicles or that accept oil from ("do-it-
yourselfer") households;
• Maintenance garages that service
vehicle fleets;
• Mine and construction operators
where vehicles are serviced in the field;
and
• Industrial facilities such as
metalworking shops, steel mills, etc,
that use oils to cut, grind, or work with
metal or that remove spent hydraulic
fluids or greases from machinery.
These are generators of recycled-oil
when they recycle the used oil
_ themselves, or accumulate it for
* shipment to an off-site recyder.
Section 3014(c)(2)(A) requires EPA to
regulate generators of recycled oil
"... as may be necessary to protect
human health and the environment" In
promulgating these regulations, EPA is
directed to take into account the effects
of regulations on:
• Environmentally acceptable types
of used oil recycling:
• Small quantity generators; and
• Generators which are small •
businesses.4' ••
The requirements proposed today were
developed using as a starting point the
general standards for hazardous waste
generators issued under Section 3002 of
RCRA. Those requirements were,
however, modified to take into account
the special Section 3014 mandate. A
major similarity between the approach
proposed today and the approach used
by EPA to regulate other generators of
hazardous waste is to distinguish
between the classes of generators by the
amount of waste they generate. The
discussion that follows first centers on
"small quantity recycled oil generators"
subject to special, limited standards and
then on other (large) generators of
recycled oil, who would be subject to
more extensive requirements.
A. Small Quantity Recycled Oil
Generators'
EPA is proposing a limited set of
requirements for generators of up to
1000 kilograms (about 300 gallons) of
recycled oil per month.46 [See the
proposed § 286.40(c).] The requirements
would include: *7
• A prohibition on road oiling;
• Standards pertaining to installation
of storage tanks: and
* A provision that states that if more
than 1000 kilograms is accumulated, the
generator moves into the next
"generator" category for regulatory
purposes.
Generators in the less than 1000
kilogram category are termed "small
quantity recycled oil generators."
The remainder of this section explains
the requirements that would apply; the
proposal that a separate small quantity
limit be established for recycled oil; the
rationale for the 1000 kilogram limit and
the proposed policy under which
recycled oil from these generators would
be subject to more extensive regulation
when collected
[For the reader's convenience, the
discussion below notes similarities and
differences between § § 268.40(c) and
261.S. The reader should not confuse the
§ 286.40(c) regulatory category with -
§ 261.5, which includes special
requirements for hazardous waste
generated by "small quantity
generators." The two regulator)'
categories are similar in that the
generators in each category are subject
to only minimal requirements; but there
are important differences, including
different quantity cut-offs and the
regulatory status of waste once it leaves
the generator's site.]
1. Requirements.** Generators of no
more than 1000 kilograms per month of
recycled oil would be exempt from full
regulation under the proposed Part 268,
Subpart E, provided that the generator
either sends the oil off-site for recycling
or recycles it himself under the
following requirements:
a. On-site management (1) Road
oiling is prohibited. Section 3004(1) of
RCRA prohibits the use of hazardous
waste as a dust suppressant [See 50 FR
26718; July 15,1985.] No exemption is
provided for small quantity generators;
the prohibition would become effective
the day the final rule listing used oil as a
hazardous waste becomes effective.
(2) .Proper installation of tank
systems. SPA is incorporating into these
«• Section 3O14(c)(Z)(B) contain* *pecif>c
direction! on how off-n'.e shipment* are to be
regulated Thia ii di*cu»ed below.
" Used oil accepted from household* ("do-lt-
younelfer" oil) would be counted in thi*
determination.
41 Eventually, requirement* for on-*ite burning
may alao be promulgated, but a* di*cu**ed below
this iaiue it to be addreaaed In the Phaa* D burning
and blending propoaal later thia year.
41 The requirement* dltcuited hen are propoaed
in i 286.40(c). The requirement* are very limilar. but
not identical to the requirement* of I 281J (f) and
(g| for amall quantity generator* of hozardoua
waste.
regulations, under the authority of
section 3014, tank installation
requirements similar to those required
by section 9003(g) or RCRA. the latter
termed the "interim prohibition."
Section 9003(g) prohibits any person
from installing an "underground storage
tank" [as that term is defined in section
9001(1)] unless the tank and connected
piping satisfy certain requirements,
including that they prevent releases due
to corrosion or structural failure for the
operational life of the tank and that the
lining or construction of the tank and
piping be compatible with the substance
being stored.49
Congress established this interim
prohibition as the minimum requirement
for underground petroleum tanks
installed after May 7,1985 until EPA can
develop standards as mandated by
section 9003{e) of RCRA. EPA believes
that since the provisions of Subtitle I
apply to "petroleum" (see section
9001(2] of RCRA) and used oil is a
subset of petroleum. Congress intended
for the provisions of Subtitle I (including
the interim prohibition) to apply to used
oil to provide a baseline level of control
for used oil storage. Where the specific
recycled oil provisions of section 3014
result in regulations more stringent than
provided by Subtitle I, we presume that
Congress intended for the-more stringent
requirements to apply.
EPA is proposing tank installation
requirements that amount to a modified
version of the Subtitle I interim
prohibition in the small quantity
generator provisions of today's rule for
two reasons. First, since the interim
prohibition is a minimum standard
already required by Subtitle L its
inclusion in this rule puts used oil
generators on notice of already
applicable requirements. [This purpose
is less important with respect to other
parties subject to today's proposal
because they generally would face
requirements more stringent than the
interim prohibition. As stated above, in
such a case the more stringent
requirement applies.] Second. EPA
believes that the tank installation
requirements proposed today provide a
level of control that reflects the section
3014 mandate to protect human health
and the environment considering the
impacts of regulation on recycled oil
generators.
Finally, the reader should note that
the tank installation requirements we
«• Section 9003(8) doe* provide • limited
exception for th* common protection requirement*
for tank* Inatalled at litn where (oil miitivirjr i*
12.000 ohm-cm or more. [The»e requirement* are
codified in 40.0-11280.1 and 280.2. See 90 FR 28^34-
35: July IS. 1984.)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed' Rules
49223
•re proposing today for small quantity
recycled oil generators, although based
in substance on the interim prohibition,
would apply to a broader range of tanks
than would be the case under section
9003(g]. The broader applicability of
today's proposal is brought about
because instead of using the term .
"underground storage tank" to define
coverage of the provision [defined in
section 9001(1) and § 280.1], we have
proposed to use the broader, term "tank
system." ••
We intend for 5 286.4O{c)(l)(iv) to apply
to all tank systems, /.&, "above-ground."
"ingrounoV and "underground." (Id.)
EPA believes this broader coverage,
corresponding to the scope of Subtitle C,
is called for by Section 3014. That is.
Section 3014 directs EPA to regulate the
hazards associated with recycled oil,
and recycled oil is stored in all types of
tanks.* >
Comments are requested on EPA's
proposed approach for regulating small
quantity recycled oil generators' tanks,
described above. As a final note on the
subject as EPA develops controls for
underground storage tanks under
Subtitle I, we will consider whether
additional controls should be applied to
small quantity recycled oil generators'
tanks.
(3) Accumulation of over 1000
kilograms. If Al any time a generator
accumulates over 1000 kilograms of
recycled oil. he would be subject to the
more extensive generator requirements
discussed later in this section of the
preamble." The reader should note,
however, that recycled oil that is mixed
with nonhazardous waste would
continue-to be subject to the limited
requirements discussed here even if the
1000 kilogram limit is exceeded (as long
as the recycled oil portion of the mixture
does not exceed 1000 kilograms).** [See
M As piopueed on Jane 20.1885.« "tank system"
i* comprised of • unk(i) and iu andlliary
equipment (e-g_ pipes, valves) [See 90 FR 28455).
The section 0001(1) definition of "underground
storage tank~ also include* antilliary equipment
such as pipes, bat only applies when 10* or more of
the system is beneath (round surface.
•' The reader should also note that Subtitle I
include! certain special exemptions [sections
B008(d) and (e)] for residential/firm motor fuel
tanks and heating oil tanks. These exemptions are
not relevant for Subtitle C and we have not
proposed any such exemptions today for recycled
oil Although we are today proposing to regulate
certain recycled oil tanks, described above, that are
not presently regulated nnder the section fl003(g)
interim prohibition, we note that the extent of
regulation (in most cases some form of corrosion
protection) would cause Insignificant cost impacts.
typically in the range of 8200 per affected generator.
[See the EPA report EfdmoUd Cost* of Compliance
with Proooud RCRA Regulation for Hazardoia
Watte Storage. Treatment, and Accumulation Tank
Fociiitte* (March 1985). for a cost estimate of
corrosion protection.)
" A similar provision applies to hazardous waste
small quantity generators. See i 2B1.5(0-
the proposed 8 266.40(c)(3).] The
rationale here is that the limits proposed
are meant to apply to recycled oil and
the mixing of recycled oil with non-
hazardous waste does not change the
quantity of. or the hazard associated
with, recycled oil involved.*4
(4) On-site burning. The reader will
note that EPA has reserved a paragraph
in proposed {• 286.40(c)(l) for controls on
on-site burning. For the most part, this
burning involves use of used oil space
heaters by service stations or blending
of diesel crankcase oil into vehicles'
diesel fuel. The former case has been
addressed on an interim basis under the
final Phase I burning and blending rule
[See Part Three, Section IV of the final
Phase I preamble.] As we said in that
final rule, we will re-visit the need for
controls on these units in the Phase Q
burning rules. [Id.] Any requirements for
space heaters would eventually be
codified in { 286.40(c)(l). At a minimum,
we intend to ensure that space heater
flue gases are properly vented. The case
of diesel blending was discussed in an
earlier section of this preamble
pertaining to specification fuel. As
described in that section, the data
available to EPA indicate that this kind
of blending produces specification fuel
and we are considering what type of
documentation if any should be
required. Comments are requested on
what documentation, if any, should
apply to small quantity recycled oil
generators who blend diesel crankcase
oil into their own diesel-fueled vehicles.
b. Shipments off-site: Small quantity
recycled oil generators would be
allowed to send recycled oil off-site for
recycling without any formal tracking or
recordkeeping requirements.** [The
reader should note that es is discussed
later in this Section and then below in
Section ID. E. 2., transporters who
collect-from small quantity recycled oil
generators must keep records of pick-
ups and must ensure delivery to an
authorized used oil recycling facility.]
2. The separate small quantity limit
for recycled oil. Under today's proposal.
recycled oil would have its own "small
quantity" limit of 1000 kilograms per
month; that is. recycled oil counting
against the recycled oil limit would not
also count against the { 261.5 limit for
s* A similar provision applies to hazardous waste
-mall quantity generators. See I »1 J(h).
** As described above, a mixture of used oil snd
kaxordoui waste is not recycled oil and would not
be subject to the requirements discussed here. Such
a mixture would be subject to regulation as
hazardous waste. [See proposed|| 261.f(j)(2)(ii).
261 J(a)(2)(lii). and 2M.40(d).J
M We have not proposed any time limit to
accompany the 1000 kilogram accumulation limit. A
time limit seems unnecessary since used oil is
typically picked-up frequently by collectors. HH.
Rep. No. 86-106. 96th Cong.. 1st Sess.. st 87 (1883).I
hazardous waste.**-" Therefore, under
our proposed,_app roach, a generator
could be subject to the "small quantity"
provisions oLbolh 40 CFR 261.5 and
266.40(c), or subject to one of the
provisions but not the other one. EPA
believes this approach offers the
following benefits:
(1) Impacts on small quantity
generators and generators who are small
businesses would be reduced. Without
the separate small quantity generator
limits for recycled oil and other
hazardous wastes, a generator of, for
example, small amounts of spent
hazardous solvents could have to
manage his solvents under the 40 CFR
Part 262 standards for hazardous waste
generators because of the recycled oil he
•generates. This seems inappropriate
because, as discussed in this Federal
Register notice, EPA is proposing to
regulate recycled oil under a special set
of Part 266 standards, not the general
hazardous waste standards. It also
would have the effect of subjecting
.perhaps tens of thousands of generators
of recycled oil to the hazardous waste
rules (for the small quantities of other
hazardous waste they generate). As
described throughout this section of the
preamble. EPA is attempting to minimize
the adverse impacts of regulation on
•mall quantity generators and
generators who are small businesses.
(2) Segregation of wastes would be
encouraged, and this facilitates
recycling. The separate small quantity
limits should provide an incentive for
generators to segregate used oil from
other hazardous wastes they generate
because, as described above, mixtures
of used oil and hazardous waste would
be subject to full regulation as a
hazardous waste, not the special
"recycled oil" standards."Segregation
of used oil away from other hazardous
waste facilitates used oil recycling. In
particular, when used oil is
contaminated with chlorinated solvents.
the resulting mixture:
• Has a reduced BTU content and
correspondingly reduced fuel value; and
•* Congress envisaged the possibility of such an
spprosch. as evidenced by the legislative history ol
Sect! on 3014.
•' See proposed ii 261.8
-------
49224 • Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
• la difficult to reuse as a lubricant
because the solvent reduces viscosity
(i.e., "thins" the oil)."
(3) The separate small quantity limits
proposed today would encourage
environmentally acceptable types of
recycling of used oils vs. disposal This
is one of the factors EPA is directed to
consider in regulating recycled oil
generators. Used oil, when disposed of,-
would count against the § 281.5 limit
along with a generator's other
hazardous waste. [See proposed
§ 261.5(j)(l].J A generator who recycles
his used oil therefore, would foe eligible
for the special reduced requirements for
small quantity recycled oil generators
while one who disposes of his oil would
be subject to the Part 282 hazardous
waste generator standards. [For
example, a generator of 500 kilograms of
used oil who sends the oil to land
disposal would exceed the § 281.5(a)
limit and would therefore become
subject to Part 262; however, if that
generator recycled the oil he would be
covered only by proposed g 266.40(c).]
EPA requests comment OB the
separate small quantity limit approach
described above. Do the separate limits
cause undue confusion that might negate
the benefits identified?
3. Selection of 1000 kilogfem as the
limit. EPA has proposed a 1000 kilogram
monthly generation limit *° to define a
"small quantity recycled oil generator."
[See the proposed § 286.4O(c).J As Table
3 illustrates, this Limit would bring the
majority of the recycled oil generated
within today's proposed regulatory
system, while most generators would be
small quantity recycled oil generators
and thus exempt from the mom
burdensome elements of thsrt system.
Before deciding to propose the 1000
kilogram limit, EPA considered limits
that would be both more »nA less
stringent EPA requests comment on the
range of options discussed below:
a. 100 kilogram limit: EPA considered
a small quantity limit of 100 kilograms,
i.e., the same limit proposed on August
1.1965 for hazardous waste in general
[50 FR 31278.] This would establish
regulatory control over the great
majority of the used oil generated
starting at the site of generation [see
Table 3]. As noted above, however.
Section 3014 of RCRA specifically
directs EPA to consider the impact of its
regulations on small quantity
"He-refineri mint remove the light tnd»"
(solventi and other low boiling point materials)
during processing, reducing the yield of the
lubricant production operation.
•• At described above, the monthly generation
limit would be accompanied by a total
accumulation limit of 1000 kilogram*.
generators, and small businesses, and
on environmentally acceptable means of
recycling. Under a 100 kilogram limit, at
least 274,000 generators would be
subject to regulation. EPA is concerned
not only with the unwieldy size of this
universe, but also with the potential
impacts of regulation on the small
establishments within the universe. The
great majority of used oil generators are
small businesses,*1, operated in large
part by individuals without the technical
knowledge or financial resources
necessary to operate a waste
management facility of dny
sophistication. Also, since these
establishments do not generate large
amounts of recycled oil regulatory
requirements can impose
disproportionate costs, i.e.. high costs
per gallon. The Agency's main concern
with these small establishments is to
ensure: (1) That they collect the used oil
generated at their sites for recycling and
not let it drain into sewers or otherwise
dispose of it end (2) that they continue
to accept household-generated used oil.
TASUE 3.—NUMBER OF USED On. GENERATORS AND QUANTITIES OF USED On. GENERATED
AWMUAU.V
TV— 1
I™*""** ... ., ...
T«M
>.
Nwnberol
mama
3SS.OOO
295.000
853.000
458
488
944
Szeeotegort
<10»
2SS£OQ
121.000
37V.OOQ
123
24J
48.7
month)
10O-1.000
78.100
150.000
228.100
84
300
'' 384
>1.000
24.300
24,000
48.300
350
184
514
Source Thee» esunuiles mm (tortwd (ram Vm <**fl neon. Oma*ia*aort ol tnOutfol UmS Of gsn»»mr> by Franttn
Aaaooeaa, UH, (Octttar 22. 1M4), and tie mamerandum tarn Temple. Bertw. en« Soans (Augua a, 1984) Wed -Nun.
3. The "norMnduaner eswoory induM a>
EPA considered regulating recycled
oil generators of 100-1000 kilograms per
month (kg/mo) under the set of
requirements proposed on August 1.
1985 for hazardous waste generators of
100-1000 kg/mo. [See 50 FR 31278-31306.
The proposal would amend the 9 2B&34
requirement*.] As explained in that
proposal we developed the proposed
standards for the 100-1000 kg/ mo
hazardous waste generators taking into
account their predominantly small •
business nature. [Ibid at 31284-66.} EPA
is concerned, however, that even though
the August 1 proposal Would minimi^
adverse small business impact*, the
requirements would still adversely
affect used oil recycling. [Under section
3014(c) of RCRA, EPA must when
developing rules for recycled oil
generators, not only take small business
impacts into account but also impacts
on "environmentally acceptable
recycling." EPA considers any increase
in "do-it-yourselfer" oil changes to be, in
itself, and advene impact on recycling
because this group traditionally
disposes of its used oil Sewer disposal
to avoid regulations is another adverse
impact on recycling that concerns EPA,
as is any reluctance by establishments
to accept household generated ("do-it-
yourselfer") used oil.]
We estimate the rules proposed on
August 1 would impose annualized costs
of $1000-2000, on average, if applied to
generators of recycled oil'* For a
generator o£ for example, 110 kilograms
of used oil per month, this would mean
costs of about $4.80 per gallon of
recycled oil generated (and stored).
Further, EPA is considering whether any
tank system secondary containment
standards should apply to generators of
100-1000 kg of hazardous waste per
month. [Ibid at 31286-87] The addition oi
secondary containment requirements
could double the costs presented
above." Given that recycled oil
•' See the Regulatory Impact Anolyti* for tin
Used Oil Rule*. EPA Office of SoIM Waste.
November 190$, pages V-M through V-57.
•« Unlees otherwise noted, the results prevented
here are from the Regulatory Impact Ano/yrn US
EPA. Office of Solid Waste, November 1885.
. Chapter V.
•• As points of dariAcatioo. the term-secondary
contaumenT as nsed « today's proposal refers to
the nquiieiueiiUi proposed on |«ne 20.198S for
hanrdous waste tank systems. (See 50 FR 20482-
28482. and the proposed if 284.183 and 285.193.)
These requirement* an more extensive than, for
example, the curbing and diking required for some
* Contiouvd
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49225
generators are presently paid only 10-40
cents per gallon for their used oil, costs
this high would make used oil more of a
burden than a recyclable resource. It is
difficult to quantitatively assess how
generators would respond to regulatory
costs this high, but our studies show the
following to be probable outcomes:
• Price increases in oil-change
services offered to the public. These
price increases (we estimate an increase
of 10 percent) could lead to an increase
in "do-it-yourselfer" oil changes of
approximately 12 million gallons per
year (an increase of 4 percent);
• A reluctance of service stations and
auto repair shops to accept "do-it-
yourselfer"-generated used oil; and
• Increased sewage disposal by.
generators in areas without strict local
requirements or sewer discharges.
These are the sorts of outcomes that
concerned Congress when it was
considering the issue of recycled oil
regulation. See, for example, HJt Rep.
No. 08-198,98th Cong., 1st Sea*., at 86
(1983):
Many used oil generators, »ucb a* service
stations, will be reluctant to collect and
recycle used oil if it means incurring
excessive regulatory responsibilities. Any
regulatory scheme for generators
•oould ... be structured to ovoid this
result . . ._
For-these reasons, EPA sees a clear
need to establish a small quantity limit
higher than 100 kilograms. A higher limit
would minimize the impacts of
regulation on the smallest
establishments in the generator
universe, and most importantly, would
reduce adverse impacts on
environmentally acceptable types of •
used oil recycling.
b. 2000 kilogram limit: EPA
considered a limit for small quantity
recycled oil generators as high as 2000
kilograms per month (about 600 gallons). •
We believe a limit this high would
exempt from full regulation most, if not
all of the automotive-related
establishments. However, we are
concerned that a limit this high would
not be adequately protective. The same
legislative history as cited above
concerning the need to minimize impacts
on generators goes on to say that EPA's
regulations should:
. . . encourage . . . generators to tend used
oil to facilities having permits. (And to] ...
regulate generator* in a way that discourages
unacceptable used oil recycling practices,
such as unsafe storage, or potentially
hazardous burning or land application. [Id.]
As Table 3 shows, even with a limit of
1000 kilograms, some 336 million gallons
of used oil per year (nearly half of the
oil in question) would be only minimally
controlled at generators sites. Under a
2000 kilogram limit, probably ail of the
488 million gallons of "Don-industrial"
(i.e., automotive) oil and a large portion
of the 456 million gallons of used
industrial oils generated each year
would be only minimally regulated at
generators' sites. In essence, this would
.be virtually equivalent to not having
generator regulations. In previous
ruSemakings concerning (| 281.5) small
quantity generators of hazardous waste,
EPA has only considered exempting
generators of up to 1000 kilograms per
monti; (see the discussions at 43 FR
58969-58971, December IB, 1978,' and at
45 FR 33102-33105, May 19,1980], and
EPA sees no indication that Congress
envisaged an exemption for generators
of even larger quantities of recycled oil.
c, 1000 kilogram limit: EPA has
proposed a 1000 kilogram Emit (about
300 gallons) to define small quantity
recycled oil generators. This would
subject approximately 484)00 generators
to the regulations discussed later in this
section. Some 514 million gallons (about
55% of the total generated each year, not
counting household-generated oil) would
be subject to Part 266, Subpart E
starting at the site of generation.*4
Under a 1000 kilogram limit the vast
majority of small establishments such as
family farms, service stations, auto
repair shops, and small industrial
facilities would be subject to the very
limited set of requirements discussed
above. Generators of over 1000
kilograms are auto dealerships,
establishments that offer "quick-lube"
services to the public or that service
large vehicle fleets, and industrial
facilities like steel mills and automotive
assembly plants. The establishments in
the over 1000 kilogram group can be, but
certainly are not always small
businesses (e.g., steel and auto plants
usually are not). For many of the
establishments ("quick-lube" services),
lubricant-management (purchase, sale.
etc.) is a central part of the operation. In
these respects the large generators are
unlike small auto shops and service
stations (who are almost always small
businesses and for whom lubricant
management is only a peripheral aspect
of thejr operations), and we believe the
former are in a better position to absorb
regulatory costs.**
EPA has determined that the 1000
kilogram limit strikes the best balance
between protectiveness and economic
impact concerns, as mandated by
Section 3014.~Comment8 are requested
on the range of options presented.
Comments are also requested on
whether the limit should be expressed in
gallons (/.«., 1000 kilograms is about 300
gallons of used oil). Would this simplify
compliance for generators?
4. Regulation when collected. EPA is
proposing that when recycled oil from
small quantity recycled oil generators is
collected for shipment to an off-site
facility, the oil would then become
subject to Part 266, Subpart E in its
entirety. This is different than the
approach m 40 CFR 261.5 for hazardous
waste from small quantity generators,
where waste is exempt through
subsequent management. What follows
is first the rationale for this proposed
departure from previous EPA policy
regarding "small quantity" hazardous
waste, and then an explanation of how
collectors who service small quantity
recycled oil generators would be
affected by today's proposal
a. Rationale: The reasoning behind
today's proposal is based on the
quantities of waste involved; the
composition and management practices
of used oil vs. other hazardous wastes;
and the Congressional intent in passing
Section 3014. These points are discussed
here.
(1) A significant amount of used oil is
generated in quantities less than 100
kilograms per month (kg/mo). Table 4
contrasts the generation pattern for used
oil and other hazardous wastes.
Table 4.—GENERATION OF USED OIL vs. OTHER HAZARDOUS WASTES BY GENERATOR CATEGORY
I* tuuantfc <* ions par yMt]
WasMtypa
!!_*<«•
Hazardous wast* other than usarl o3
Q»»alt» Ste CaMgonaa (kaogram* par mourn)
<100
340
ISO
100-1000
1,440
760
>1000
1.927
264.000
Totals
3.707
264.940
Bouren:
1. SOT Tat* 3. abort. [GaKont conrarUd to tons at 7.5 «M par gtOon of oL
oattgoy.)
2. Haardaus naiti Th» pracmal « SO FR 31295; Aupnt 1. 1965
Fannan' o* * included in "
-------
49228 Federal "Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
As Table 4 shows, for used oil.
generators of less than 100 kilograms per
month jkg/mo} account for 9%, and
generator* of 100-1000 kg/mo for 39%, of
the total generated each year. In
contrast for other hazardous waste,
generators of less than 100 and 100-1000
kg/mo, respectively, account for only
0.07 and 0.3 percent of the total
generated. The significant difference
between used oil small quantity
generators as contrasted to hazardous
waste small quantity generators is also
evident in terms of the absolute volumes
generated by the two groups. For
example, used oil generators of less than
100 kg/rno generate 340,000 toos per
year, or 88% more waste, than their
hazardous waste counterparts (who only
generate 180,000 tons per year).
(2) "Small quantity-generated" used
oil is similar to "large quantity" used oil
in composition and management
practices. Used oil from the leas than
100 kg/mo generators is primarily used
automotive oils, and can be expected to
contain the same hazardous constituents
(at the same levels) as found in any used
"automotive oil.8*Moreover, much of this
small quantity-generated oil is
potentially available for off-site
recycling, such as fuel use. If EPA were
to exempt from regulation used oil
generated in quaatities less than 100 kg/
mo. teas of millions of gallons of
contaminated used oil could be recycled
each year in unsound ways, such as
being sold as residential heating oil [If
this oil was exempt from regulation, it
would mot be subject to the fuel
specification promulgated in'1 the final
Phase 1 rule. See Table 1. above, for the
specification. So therefore it could be
contaminated with toxic constituents.]
We believe it is quite conceivable that
tens or even hundreds of thousands of
people could be exposed to elevated
levels of toxic air pollutants if used oil
generated in quantities less than 100 kg/
mo was exempt from regulation.87-*8
(3) Congress provided for recycled oil
"See the EPA report. Composition and
Management of Ufed Oil Generated in the IUL,
November 1S»4. p. 3-33. (or composition of used
automotive oil*.
r' Even iff only ome-half of ait the uaed o!S from
generators of leu than 100 kg/mo enters the
commercial fuel oil market (through in exemption
by EPA similar to f 261J). i.e.. about 45 million
gallona per year, this it enough'fuel for abouL4OOO .
residential boilers. [This is amuming that oa
average, & residential boiler concumen 5 gallons of
oil per hour, for 2190 hour* per year, and the used
oil it burned without blending. In practice, we
believe Che used oil would be diluted with virgin
fuel oi' at ratioi ranging from 2/1 to 0/1. «o the
actual number of boilen potentially affected could
ranje frtmn 8000-36000.)
to be regulated under a unique
framework. Section 3014 exempts
recycled oil from the requirements of
sections 3001(d), 30O2, and 3003 (the
Sections of RCRA guiding regulation of
hazardous waste generators and
transporters) and EPA is to regulate
recycled oil a$ necessary, while
minimising adverse impacts on
generators. The proposal to begin full
regulation of small quantity recycled oil
generators" oil when collected has the
advantage of imposing only minimal
requirements on the generators (a*
described above) without allowing the
oil, when collected, to go completely
unregulated. The proposal would allow
EPA to concentrate ita resourcea on
points where larger quantities of
recycled oil w«ne being aggregated and
accumulated for racy cling.
Comments are requested on the
proposal to regulate small quantity-
generated recycled oil, and the rationale
explained above.
b. Collectors: Under today's proposal.
small quantity recycled oil genraton' oil
becomes subject to full regulation under
Part 236, Subpart E upon collection. [See
proposed § 266.40(c)(2)(il).] We have
proposed special requirements for
transporters who collect from small
quantity recycled oil generators [see
proposed g 266.4Z(e)(2](iii)] under which
the transporter would assume, in lieu of
the generate?, the responsibility for
ensuring that the collected oil is
delivered to an authorized facility. In
this sense, the collector assumes certain
generator-like responsibilities."EPA
reasons that this approach would help
ensure sound management of small
quantity recycled oil generator*' oil,
while minimizing the requirement* (and
costs) imposed policy for regulating
collected "small quantity" recycled oil,
including the proposed § 28e.42(e)(2){iii) "
transporter requirements.
B. Large Generators
1, Applicability. Generators who fail
to meet the conditions for "small
quantity recycled oil generators" would
be subject to the generator standards of
§ 206.41 of today's proposal. These are
"large generators" of recycled oil, or just
"generators." T0 The reader should note
that owners and operators of facilities
would be subject to those portions of the
generator rules pertaining to initiation of
off-site shipments of recycled oil (even
though they do not generate the recycled
oil per ae).T1 The proposed requirements
for generators are discussed next
2. Identification numbers. EPA ic
proposing that generator* comply with
40 CFR 262.12 of the hazardous waste
rules, which require* generators to
notify EPA and obtain EPA
identification numbers, and allows a
generator to offer his waste only to
transporters and fadliUen who have
EPA identification numbers.T" [See
proposed $ 266.41(b).] The notification
provides EPA with the location and
other information on generators. The
identification number help* establish a
line of accountability for waste
management, starting, at th« site of
generation.
3. On-sile management. EPA is
proposing requirement* for on-tite
recycling by genera torn, and storage or
accumulation prior to recycling. [See the
proposed $ 206.41 (a)(4) and (a)(5), and
9 26fl.41(c).J
a. On-site burning: Generator* who
bum recycled oil on-site would be
nubject to the aamo standard! a* off-ilte
burners. [Today's proposal doea not
establish standards for burning, but
§ 266.44 is "reserved" for the burner
standards.]
b. Used constituting disposal:
Generators who use recycled oil in a
manner constituting disposal T> would
be subject to the aame standards a*
persona using hazardou* waste in this
manner. [See { 289-23.)
<°We do not think these some high exposure
scenario* would result when umd oil it diiopsedoi.
When ditposed. used oil would pose hazards
similar to other hazardous waste managed under
J 281.5 and for tlhw reasons explained at 46 FR
33104-6 (May IB. IBM)), we do not tee a need lor
regulation of waate managed in thii way. See
proposed S 2SlJS(j)jl). which provide! that used oil
being cht|>oe«d of would limply count along with
other hazardous woile to determine I 261.5
regulatory status.
"The collector or transporter It not, however,
subject to generator requirement*. We hava
proponed { 26CL4l(a)(e) to clarify this point The
collector would be iwjb)irct to the transporter
requirements. See proposed 1 280.42)aj(l)(l}.
'• In proposed I XK.41-mo.44 mad toe remainder
of thil preamble, the tnrm "generator" means thaw
generators who would bs «ub|sct to I 2D&41. not
small quantity recycled oil generaton subject to (hi
special requirements of \ 2M.4O(c).
'' As discussed Uter to this nrocmbla.
transporters may also be sublet to the seusietor
raqulnnnents under certain drcnnratanoas.
71 A generator who already has an EPA
Identification number need not re-notify.
ri "Used in a manner constituting disposal"
means the recycled oi! is applied to or is placed
directly on the land or contained in products that
are applied to or placed directly on the land (In
either case the "product" Itself remains a waste|- As
discussed In an earlier section of this preamble.
products produced so that the recycled oil Is
Inseparable by physical means are currently
exempt. [See I 2O8JO and proposed I 28B.40(b)(2).J
-------
Foderal Register / Vol. 50, No, 230 / Friday, November S3, 1985 / Proposed Rnlea
49227
c. On-site reclamation: EPA has
proposed BO standard* for reclamation
of used oil by genera turs. [On-site
reclamation may precede reuse of used
oil as a lubricant reuse as a fuel, or
shipment off-site.] Note mat EPA does
not presently regulate the actual
reclamation of any hazardous waste,
although facilities that only reclaim
(without storage) are subject to RCRA
Section 3010(aj notification
requirements and, for off*ite facilities,
to the 55 265.71. 265.72. and 265.76
manifest requirements. [See
5 261.8(c)(2). and 50 FR 652; January 4.
1985.] EPA. however, would tend to
view any claimed "reclamation" of used
oil in a surface impoundment to be
storage or even disposal, subject to
regulation as described below. [Id,
footnote 44; "... impoundments are
rarely considered to be an integral part
of the ... recycling process . . .**] This
policy would not, however, apply to
recovery of oil from oily wastewater
containing only de minimus amounts of
oil because such wastewater would be
exempt from regulation under proposed
5 281-3(a)(2)(iv)(F). As explained above,
a person recovering oil from this exempt
wastewater is considered, by me act of
recovery itself, a generator of used oil
[If the generator then subsequently
further reclaims the recovered oil. he
would then be subject to the policy
proposed above.]
d. On-site storage: EPA is proposing
special standards for generators who
accumulate (store] for a relatively short
time under certain conditions.
Generators who meet these conditions
would not be subject to the storage
faculty regulations (discussed in a later
section of this preamble) for used oil
recycling facilities. A generator who
fails to meet any of these conditions
would be regulated as a used oil
recycling facility under the proposed
5 266.43 standards."- " [See the
proposed 5 286.41(c], introductory text]
Each condition is discussed next [See
5 266.41(c) (1) through (6) of the proposal
for the conditions.]
(1) Storage must be in a tank or
container. Recycled oil. because its
value is decreased when contaminated
by water or dirt is nearly always stored
in a tank or container. Storage in a
surface impoundment poses inherently
greater risks than tank or container
storage, and the greater risks call for full
regulation, not reduced standards.
(2) Accumulation HI»M must not
exceed 90 days. The 90 day time limit
was adopted from the hazardous waste
regulations. [See { 262J4{a),
introductory text] EPA presently has no
information indicating that generators of
recycled oil need a longer period of time
to arrange for recycling of their oil1*
Comments are requested on this point.
Is the proposed 90 day limit adequate
for recycled oil generators? Are mere
circumstances where a longer time
period is needed" to facilitate proper
recycling?
(3) Container* and tanks most be
labeled. EPA is proposing that
containers or tanks used to accumulate
or store recycled oil be labeled with the
term "RECYCLED OIL" to dearly
identify the generator's storage area. A
similar provision applies to hazardous
waste generators under 5 282J4(a)(3).
(4) C""**'™"1 standards. EPA is
proposing most of die same
requirements for recycled oil stored in
containers that apply to generators of
hazardous waste under i 282JJ4 (which
references Part 265, Subpart I):
• Containers must be maintained in
good condition; and if a container leaks,
the contents must be removed and
transferred to a good container (or
managed in some other way, according
to the proposed ] 286.41 rules);
• Containers holding recycled oil'
must be kept closed, except when it is
necessary to add or remove oil;
• Containers must not be handled in a
way that would cause leaks, spills, or
ruptures;
• The generator must conduct a
weekly inspection of the storage area to
spot signs of leakage or corrosion; and
• Ignitable recycled oil (Le., recycled
oil with a flashpoint below 140* F) must
be kept at least 50 feet away from the
property line.™
14 Hazardous wide generator! an regulated lo •
limilar fashion. See the f 282-34 "SO day
accumulator" rule. The rule* proposed for recyded
oil generator* were developed uiing { 282.34 at i
tuning point certain modification* are propoted
pursuant to the special Section 3014 mandate
ditcuued above.
"A generator who conductt on-tite recycling.
tuch at burning or reclamation, it trill eligible for
Ihete special storage requirement*.
"The trait majority of ncydad ofl generator*
•4 tier stare to drama or is iamlcs law than COO
faOoBs ID capacity. ;Sae the noon. Watt* Oil
Storage by Franklin Asaociates. Lid, January 1964.
pp. 2-3-] Since the generate! subject to the
requirements discussed hen generate over 1.000
kilogram (300 gallont) per month, it seems
apparent that on-«te tlorage is typically much leu
than 90 day*.
"Under I 2S2J4(b] of the hazardous wait:
regulations, the EPA Regional Administrator may
gran! an additional 30 day* for "unforeseen,
temporary, and uncontrollable drcomilanes*." If
EPA receives Information indicating that t time
period longer than 90 day* U appropriate for
recyded oU. we would likely tpecify the alternate
time period in the rule ttsetf (rather than having t
provision for cate-by-cate extensions) by the
Regional Administrator.
"On June S. 1964, EPA proposed to ioe portion!
of the NFPA code as a more flexible "buffer ion*"
EPA> not proposing that i i 285.172 and
265.177 of thetazardous waste rules
apply to recycled oil. These sections
deal with hazards related to
compatibility of wastes and materials,
and co-management of incompatible
wastes. Used oil is compatible with
virtually any material so these controls
are not relevant " EPA has also not
proposed a date marking requirement (to
document compliance with the 90 day
time limit) for recyded oil containers as
is required for hazardous waste
generators under f 262.34(a](2}.
Elsewhere in today's proposal we
discuss certain recordkeeping
requirements for generators. Basically,
generators would have to record the
date of each off-site shipment of
recycled oil. Since we are attempting to
minimize the administrative burdens of
today's proposed recyded oil generator
rules, and since most generators {i.e.,
those who ship off-site] would be
subject to this other recordkeeping
requirement we see no need to
additionally require a date-marking
requirement EPA solicits comments on
its proposal Jo not include the above
requirements as part of the generator
requirements.
(S] In order to meet the statutory
mandate to effectively regulate recyded
oil while mini-mining adverse impacts on
generators, EPA is proposing a tiered
approach for recyded oil tank systems.
[See the proposed ! 286.41 (c](5).] First
all tanks would be subject to the Part
265, Subpart I standards that apply to
hazardous waste generators under
S 282J4(a)(lj. These requirements
indude;
• A "freeboard" or overflow
protection requirement for open-top
tanks;
• A requirement that continuous-feed
tanks be equipped with a shut-off or by-
pass system;
• Inspection requirements for
drainage, cut-oft and by-pass systems
(daily), for monitoring equipment (if any,
daily], for the visible portions of the
tank (daily] and the area around the
tank (weekly] to detect signs of leakage
or corrosion;
• Buffer zone requirements for when
ignitable (flashpoint below 140 * F] oil is
stored, from the NFPA code; and
* Requirements to remove and
properly manage oil residues, and
requirement. [See 48 FR 22290.1 We ire considering
commons received. H we do adopt tie more flexible
approach. 13 would of eoune apply to used oil as
will u other tgnitaok wattes.
"If incompatible or nactfv*. hazardous waste
was stored at t generator1! site along with used oil.
such waste would of coon* remain subject to
ii 265.172 and OS.1T7.
-------
49228 Federal- Register / Vol. 50, No. 230-/-fBcky. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
contaminated equipment when the tank
is dosed,
These standards have been
established through previous
rulemakings as necessary for tank
storage to protect human health and the
environment [See 46 FR 2802-2898.
January 12,1981.] With respect to
today's proposal there are two points
requiring some discussion and
clarification. First,, the proposed
requirements would apply to recycled
oil "tank systems." This term is broader
than "tank" in that it includes a tank's
ancillary equipment (e.g, valves, pipes,
etc.). [See 50 FR 26455: June. 28,1985.]
Second, the inspection requirement!
[proposed i 266.41(c)(5J(iii) (D) and (£)]
would apply only to above-ground
portions of tank systems. [The current
hazardous waste rules do not make this
explicitly clear (§ 265.194], but we have
indicated that inspections of
underground tanks are not expected.
[See 46 FR 2832: January 12,1981. and 50
FR 26487; June 26,1985.] This is
particularly relevant to the present
'discussion since most recycled oil
generators store in underground
tanxs.™] These very basic requirements
would impose costs less than $1,000 per
vtar for all affected generators and
would v»use adverse impact! on small
businesses or on used oil recycling."
Comments are requested on these
proposed requirements.
Beyond the requirements described
above, EPA is proposing additional
requirements for new tank system! (i.e*
tank systems installed after the
regulations become effective) pertaining
to secondary containment systems and
closure and post-closure requirement!.
Also, EPA is proposing special
requirements for tank systems that are
found to be leaking or otherwise unfit
for use. The additional requirement!
described here are being proposed as
part of the Agency's program to improve
its hazardous waste storage regulations.
On June 28,1985 EPA proposed
revisions and additions to the hazardous
waste tank requirements of { 282J4(a),
Part 264, Part 265. and the corresponding
" See the Regulatory Impact* Analyti*. US EPA.
Office of Solid Watte. November 1985. Chapter V.
•' Ibid. Mod genera Ion with underground tank*
would incur virtually no co«U under thit proposal.
Cost of the proposed requirement! for generators
with above ground tank* would be in the range of 25
cents per gallon of used oil generated and stored.
The reader may note that above. EPA concluded
that cost) in the range of $1,000-42.000 per year for
small quantity recycled oil generators would b*
associated with adverse impacts on used oil
recycling. However, the reader is reminded that for
the small quantity recycled oil generators costs of
$1.000-52.000 per year can mean costs, of SZ.40 to
$4.80 per gallon of used oil generated and stored.
and these higher costs per gallon are what concern
EPA (with respect to recycling '-npacts).
permit requirements of Part 270. [See 50
FR 26444.] As described in the June 26
proposal, EPA has determined that in
certain respects, the current tank
standards are incomplete and
unworkable. [Ibid, at 26447.] The finding
was made by EPA that additional
regulations are needed to adequately
control hazardous waste tank storage.
particularly hazards to ground water.
[Id.] For the reasons set forth in the June
28 preamble, EPA proposed new
requirement! for generators and owners
and operators storing hazardous waste
in tanks. EPA considered proposing all -
of these same requirements for recycled
oil tank systems. We are not proposing
all of the new requirements for recycled
oil generators,"however, because
pursuant to the section 3014(c) directive
to consider impacts, we have found that
the new requirements would adversely
affect recycled oil generators who are
small businesses and could discourage
environmentally acceptable types of
used oil recycling.0 We estimate that
the new tank system requirements, if
applied in tola, could impose annualized
costs for generators of about $1.200-
$3,600 per year. For a generator of. for
example, 1100 kilograms per month
(about 3600 gallons, per year), this would
mean cost! as high as $1.00 per gallon of
used oil generated and stored. EPA i!
concerned that costs this high, if
imposed throughout the recycled oil
generator universe, could induce the
following kinds of adverse impact!:
• Increased disposal of used oil hi
lewage systems;
• Reluctance by generators to accept
"do-it-yourselfer" (household-generated)
used oil; and
* A price increase hi oil-changes
services offered to the public (and a
corresponding increase in do-it-
yourselfer oil changes).
EPA is therefore proposing a gradual,
phased approach, that reduces impacts
on small businesses and on recycling by
requiring stringent controls on tank
systems when they are installed (/.«„
"new" tanks) and by requiring leaking
tanks to be dosed, repaired, or replaced.
with the latter two actions triggering the
new tank requirements."
"That is, for those generators who meet the
proposed 1286.41(c) conditions. For example. If a
generator stores longer than 00 days, he would not
be eligible for the special requirements being
discussed here but rather would be regulated as a
used oil recycling facility.
" Unless otherwise noted, the discussion hen is
from the Regulatory Impact* Azuilytit, US EPA.
Office of Solid Wait*. November 1885. Chapter V.
** Also, as described in the preceding section of
the preamble, we are proposing only minimal
requirement! for generators of less than 1000
Since we estimate only about 10% of
generators' tank systems are presently
leaking ", most generators would not be
immediately affected by the new,
additional requirements proposed here.
All generator! would, of course, be
affected eventually a! they replace old
tank!.
(a) Standards for new tank systems.
EPA i! proposing that new tank systems
(i.e., tanks installed after these rules are
in effect) would have to comply with
basically all of the same standards as
would hazardous waste generators
under the proposed i 28£34(a), as it
would be amended per the June 26
proposal [See 50 FR 26456.] The new
requirements pertain to secondary
containment, closure, and post-closure
of tank systems. We have "reserved"
paragraphs hi the proposed
S 266.41(c)(5)(vii) of the recycled oil rule
for the new tank standards. For the
reader'! convenience we are presenting
the proposed requirement! here in
Figures 1 and 2.
Flgim 1 Proposed Requirement* foe New
Tank System*
Paragraphs (b) and (c) from the proposed
I 265.103. secondary eantainmunt; [See SO FR
28485-88; June 28,1983.]
(b) Full Mcondary-containmeni rvateou
mutt be;
(1) Designed. Installed, and operated to
prevent any migration of wastes or
accumulated liquid out of the ayatem to the
soil or ground water or to surface water at
any time during the intended life of the tank
ays tern; and
(2) capable of detecting and collecting any
waste or leak and accumulated liquids until
the collected material can be removed.
(c) To meet the requirement* of paragraph
(b) of this section secondary-containment
system* most be a minimum?
(1) Constructed of or line with materials
that are compatible with the wate(s) to be
placed in the tank system and must have-
sufficient strength and thickness- to prevent
failure owing to pmiure gradients (including
static head and external hydrological force*),
physical contact with the wa*te to which it i*
exposed, climatic condition*, the *tre** of
installation, and the *tm* of daily operation
(including (tresses from nearby vehicular
traffic);
(2) Placed on a foundation or base capable
of providing-iupport to the secondary-
containment system and resistance to
pressure gradient* above and below the
system owing to settlement compression or
uplift:
kilograms per month of recycled oil i*, wear.
regulating larger generators more stringently than
smaller ones.
* See the Regulatory Impact* Analytic EPA
Offic* of Solid Watte. November 1865. p. IV-4S.
-------
Federal Register'/ Vol. SO. No. 230 / Friday. November" 29. Jb85 / Proposed'Rules' 49229
(3) Provided with a leak-detection system
that is designed or operated to that it will
detect the presence of any release of
Hazardous waste or accumulated liquid in the
secondary-containment system within 24
hours of entry of the liquid into the
containment system;
(4) Sloped or otherwise designed or
operated to drain and remove liquids
resulting from leaks, spills, or precipitation.
Spilled or leaked waste and accoumulated
precipitation must be removed from the
secondary-containment system in as timely a
manner as is possible but no later than 24
hours after the detection of the release;
(5) Designed or oprated to contain 110
percent of the design capaicty of the largest
tank within its boundary,
(6) Designed or operated to prevent run-on
or infiltration of precipitation into the
secondary-containment system unless the
collection system has sufficient excess
capacity in addition to that required in
paragraph (c)(5) of this section to contain run-
on or infiltration. Such additional capacity
must be sufficient to contain precipitation
from a 25 year, 24 hour rain storm.
d Rcqinraneats for N«w
Figure*—Prop.
Tank Systems
Paragraphs (a] aad (b) from the proposed
i 265.197. closure and post-closure care. (See
50 FR 28483-84, and 26487; June 28,1985.]
(a) At closure of a tank system, the owner
at operator must remove or decontaminate all
hazardous waste "tidg**, contaminated
containment system components (liners, etc.),
contaminated soji and structures and
equipment contaminated with waste, and
manage them as hazardous waste unless
i 28UJ(d) of this chapter applies.
(b) It after removing or decontaminating
all residues and lna>f<"fl all reasonable efforts
to effect removal or decontamination or
contaminated components, soils, structures,
and equipment as required in paragraph (a)
of this secion, the owner or operator finds
that not all contaminated soils can be
practicably removed or decontaminated, he
must dose the tank system and perform post-
closure care la Tr"ffrd»'"?p with the closure
and post-closure care requirements that
apply to landfills (i 284J10).
The rationale for these proposed
requirements is discussed fully in the
June 26 proposal [See 50 FR 26456 and
26462-62.] We estimate the requirements
in Figures 1 and 2 would impose average
annualized costs of approximately
$1200-3600 per year for a generator
installing a new tank.** Although this
"Sec the Regulatory Impact Analyti* Rule*. ETA
Office of Solid Waste, November IMS. Chapter V A.
Thi» tachidet the COM of secondary containment
phu. for •!»»« gi i nun I tank*, the inspection
requirements proposed above for ill recycled ofl
tank systems. The retder should also note that
under today's propoul the closure requirements for
new unk systems would be expanded ss per the
fnne 26 propose!. |SO FR 2M83-M.] We do not
discuss this put of the proposal In depth because It
mainly Is a conforming change made necessary by
the proposed secondary containment requirements
and because the coat impacts are insignificant /.«,
an estimated SSZ at closure for residue removal. (Id.)
would mean costs in the range of $0.35-
$1.00 per gallon, of used oil we do not
think that today's proposal would cause
significant adverse impacts on
generators, based on the following
rationale:
• Of the 46,000 generators potentially
subject to the requirements (i.e.,
generators over 1000 kilograms per
month), we expect that about 41,000
would incur annualized costs less than
$1600 per year, that is. less than S0.45
per gallon, and costs this high are not
likely to cause adverse impacts;
• The 7000 or so generators that
would potentially incur larger costs (Ae.,
up to $3600 per year) are industrial
operations, and given their overall cost
structures these operations would not be
adversely affected by. costs in this
range;17 and
• Because the requirements would be
phased-in. generators would have, in
most cases, years to set aside funds for
new tank installation.
The last point is of particular
importance. The proposed secondary
containment requirements would require
fairly large initial expenditures (e-g.,
about five times greater than the
annualized costs presented above). Most
recycled oil generators are small
businesses and could have difficulty
obtaining financing. Phasing-in the
requirements not only minimizes .
impacts on the generator universe as a
whole (and therefore on the nationwide
"flow" of used oil) by spreading-out the
impacts over time, but also would allow
each generator to make financing
arrangements suitable to his own cash
flow situation.
The June 26 proposal also discussed
certain alternatives to secondary
containment that the Agency has
considered, but did not propose. [See 50
FR 26451-53 for a full discussion of these
alternatives.] These include:
• A combination of secondary
containment and ground-water
monitoring;
• National risk-based standards;
• Minimum national standards with a
variance from containment requirements
based upon risk:
• Minimum performance standards;
• A ban on underground tanks; and
• Forced retirement of underground
tanks.
The public may comment on these
requirements as they would apply to
recycled oil generators as alternatives to
Figures 1 and 2. Also, with respect to
•standards for new underground tank
systems, EPA considered (in lieu of
today's proposal) application of the
"interimprohjjbition" from section
9003(g) of RCRA. As described in the
previous section'of this preamble, this
requirements, which amounts to
corrosion protection, is the
Congressionally-mandated minimum
level of control for underground tank
systems (storing petroleum and other
hazardous substances) and as the
reader will note, we have proposed a
modified version of the interim
prohibition for small quantity recycled
oil generators." The Agency has
concluded, however, that for hazardous
waste tank systems corrosion protection
alone is not as protective as full
secondary containment [See 50 FR
26450; June 26,1985.] Since, as we
discussed above, EPA intends to require
secondary containment for other
hazardous waste tank systems under
Subtitle C and since the proposal to
phase-in secondary containment
requirements for recycled oil generators
would not cause significant adverse
impacts, we do not see a basis for
proposing less stringent requirements for
recycled oil tank systems within the
framework of section 3014{c).
Comments regarding the adequacy
(i.e., protectiveness) and costs of all of
the options discussed above for new
tank systems are requested.
(b) Standards for leaking tank
systems. For the reasons described
above (i.e~, adverse impacts), EPA has
not proposed secondary containment
requirements for all recycled oil
generators. Therefore, even under
today's proposal some tank systems will
- fail and leak. EPA has proposed that
(see $ 266.41 (c)(5)(vi) of the proposal) as
soon as a generator is aware that his
tank system is leaking (or otherwise
unfit-for-use), he must take the following
actions: **
• Stop the flow of oil into the tank;
• Remove the oil from the tank (to
prevent continued release and allow
inspection);
• Contain visible contamination; and
• Report the event to the Regional
Administrator within 24 hours after
discovering or confirming the release.
Tanks taken out of service as described
here would either have to be closed
(with the removal of contaminated soil
or equipment), repaired, or replaced.
"Ibid. Chapter IV-C and D.
"Further.as we explained above, the section
8003(g) Interim prohibition currently spplies to all
underground petroleum tanks, including used oil
tanks. |See 40 CFR 280.1 and 280.2-1 Thu
requirement will return in effect until the rules
proposed today, when promulgated in final form.
become effective.
"These requirements an taken from th«
proposed new | 285.192, proposed on June 26, [50 FR
28485) for hazardous waste tank systems.
-------
49230 Federal Register / Vol 50, Na 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
When a tank k repaired or replaced, we
would consider it a "new" tank, subject
to the standards proposed above
[Figures 1 and 2). EPA views this latter
aspect of the proposal {i.e.. tanks
returned to service being considered as
"new" tanks) to be a crucial aspect of
the proposal to phase-in secondary
containment for recycled oil generators.
In this way, tank systems posing the .
greatest hazards (i.e., those that are
leaking) would be replaced with tank
systems that are not likely to pose any
significant hazards, and therefore the
hazards posed by the national universe
of generators' tanks would be reduced
overall."
We do not expect the proposal [for
replacement tanks to comply with
secondary containment) to cause
significant adverse impacts for the
following reasons:
• We estimate that nationwide, only
about 10% of the used oil tanks are
presently leaking, so therefore most of
the recycled oil generator universe
would not be immediately affected by
the proposal:
• Of the approximately 4500
generators thought to have leaking
tanks, we estimate over 3500 would
incur initial costs less then $6,000, and
. annualized casts less than $1600 par
year; and
• Generators with leaking tanks
would have the option of closing the
tank system and storing the oil in some
other way, for example in containers.
Finally, the reader may note that we
have not at this time proposed any leak
detection requirements for recycled oil
generators. That is, the proposed
requirements for leaking tanks have no
"trigger" mechanism. EPA considered
requiring a one-time "assessment and
certification" provision for recycled oil
generators' tank systems similar to the
requirements proposed on June 28.1985
for hazardous waste interim status
facilities. [See 50 FR 28464-85, and
proposed $ 265.191.] This would include.
among other things, leak testing for the
underground portions of a tank system.
[Id.] We have not proposed this
requirement because we are still
evaluating various leak detection
schemes for petroleum materials, both in
terms of their effectiveness and (a*
required by Section 3014(c) for recycled
oil) their cost impacts.*1 At this time, the
Agency does wish to specifically solicit
public comment on the following
suggestions made to EPA pursuant to
the June 26,1985 proposal for hazardous
waste tank systems:*1
• Observation weOs (installed in the
backfill material) for both new and
existing tank systems;
* Inventory monitoring.
On the latter point EPA has indicated
that we believe inventory monitoring is,
for several reasons, inaccurate and
largely ineffective. [50 FR 26449-49; June
26,1985.] With respect to recycled oil
we are also concerned that inventory
monitoring would impose time-
consuming and costly administrative
burdens on generators (/.*., small
amounts of used oil are constantly
added to storage tanks, changing the oil
level with each addition). We continue
to believe inventory monitoring holds
little promise for controlling hazardous
wastes tanks, including used oil tanks.
We welcome, however, any new
information on this point
Observation wells, by contrast may
be more effective. EPA is interested in
the extent to which wells are presently
employed for used oil tanks, the costs of
installation (particularly for refro-
fitting), any technical difficulties
experienced with weila, and sensitivity
of wells as a leak detection mechanism.
Comments are requested on observation
wells and other leak detection schemes.
EPA will continue its evaluation through
the public comment period and we may.
at some later date, propose leak
detection requirements to accompany
the rest of today's proposal
(6) Standards for facility management
EPA is proposing that generators most
comply with tire following requirements
pertaining to facility management [see
proposed J 26fl.41(c)[6)J:
« The establishment would have to
have oil-site e telephone, on appropriate
number and fypet of fire extinguishers,
and spill control material (such a* sow
dust);
• At all times, ass "emergency
coordinator." (E.C.). /.».. someone
familiar with mem requirement*, must
be oa-site (or on call). The E.C can.also
designate someone to act in ni> place;
• The generator must request an
inspection by the local fire department
to make sore me department personnel
know where oil is stored; that the
appropriate type and number of
extinguishers are present etc;
• The generator must post certain
information next to the telephone.
including: the name and phone number
of the E.C.; location of fire extinguishers
and spill control material; and the phone
number of the fire department:
• The generator (or the E.C.] would
have to respond to any emergencies that
arise. In the case where an emergency
was serious enough to warrant a visit by
the fire department or where oil reaches
surface water or adjoining shoreline the
generator would have to file a report
with the EPA Regional Administrator.
and
• The generator must ensure that hi*
employees are familiar with these
requirement*.
EPA has determined mat the above
requirements would ensure sound
facility management (or "good
housekeeping"), without adversely
affecting generators. The reader should
make note of certain points concerning
these proposed requirements. First.
absorbent materials soaked with used
oil (e.g., such aa machine drippings) and
used oil spill clean-up material* would
both, via the "mixture" policies
discussed above in section LA2. of this
Part of the preamble, be subject to
RCRA regulation.** When such materials
are disposed of. they are subject to full
regulation as hazardous waste under
Parts 281-265,124. and 270.** When
recycled, the material would be
considered recycled oil subject to all
applicable requirements proposed today
(and if burned for energy recovery, to
the final Phase I burning rule). Second,
when generators train their personnel
regarding the recycled oil requirements
proposed today [proposed
I 266,41(c)(6)(vi)3, the Agency would
also expect that employees be made
aware (or reminded) of EPA's Chemical
Advisory on the potential hazards
associated with prolonged skin contact
with used motor oiL"
mSn ftif Rfguhrtmy Ifnpocta Anofytn. US SPA .
Office- of Solid Wo*te. November IMS, Chapter V-E.
and the BmJiground Document far the KJA.
November 1985, Chapter IV. for the digcmiion of
the eiivirmrftenlal benefits aiitiifpfltutl mitim
today • prepowri Heraew rale*.
" Under loday'j proposal Slate Or local agendei
could conduct leak letting al gemrnlon' site* or
k cewld specify ted method? within their ami of
furisdiction. In any case, when en a factual matter •
leak ii detected tie propuwii requfcanmift far
laaktot tank syWasM (•reaoaa) | OtoAUc&Hifft
would, than COB* in to play.
** Another mggrnitud approach %aa» to nqnira
only corroiion protection (if, tht "Interim
prohibition") for now tank cyitms In lira of
(•condor tormmPMnl We nfisnuesd this law* at
KHM length abova and to bare focua only on
(uggettioni consenting leak detection.
* A generator who use* absorbent materials to
cleanup apffl* or etsrhine dripping* would not da*
to thai activttr. VMS aiigibUtty for the special
reduced requirement* (or "SO day' recycled oil
generator! (U, the proposed | 2B8.«(c)V
MNotv rhet to the Bating proposal that appeal*
elsewhere in this Pedeni Register, wa propose an
mvmtnflitmt for OSTtato ~O&f Wipfln.*
•EPA found that mica dermally nrpoeeij to nasd
motor oil exhibited a significantly »»«"-• trt
Incidence of cancer. EPA recommend* that to
prevent cancer, personnel working with
automobUea should regularly wash with soap and
water and avoid unnecessary prolonged contact
with used motor oil See the Notx, of Potential
Ritk Vttd Motor O>7 [Chemical Advisory. Issued
under the Toxic Subslanoas Control Act). February
-------
Federal Register / Vol. SO, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49231
The reader may note that generator*
of hazardous wastes, under S 26&34(a).
must comply with certain requirements
from Part 265 pertaining to general
facility management. These include Part
265, Subpart C (preparedness and
prevention) and Subpart D (emergency
procedures), and $ 265.16 (personnel
training).
These requirements are intended to
ensure that the generator's personnel
are properly prepared to manage waste
and respond to any emergencies that are
likely to arise. EPA considered applying
these same requirements in toto to
generators of recycled oil, but we are
concerned that these requirements are:
(1) Written in a manner designed to
cover the multitude of hazards that may
arise at any kind of generator site (i.e.,
not specific to recycled oil); and (2) that
the requirements are costly (about $1000
per facility) and, when considered along
with the proposed storage requirements
(above), could have adverse impacts on
small businesses and sound'recycling
practices. Because of these concerns, we
have developed a simpler set of
•requirements that we believe will be
adequately protective and yet that
would also be less costly and better-
suited to the small business nature of
most recycled oil generators."
Comments are requested on today's
proposal
f. Shipments off-site. Section 286,41 (d)
of today's proposal would establish
certain requirements for used oil sent
off-site for recycling."- "These
requirements are based on the existing
standards for hazardous waste
generators in 40 CFR Part 262, taking
into account the special requirements of
RCRA Section 3014(c) (2) and (3) for
recycled oil generators.
"The reader should note Hut on August 1. UBS
EPA prapoMd standards for generators of between
100-1000 kilograms of hazardous waste per month,
as required by Mction 3001(d) of RCRA. (SO FR
31278.) A* explained in the proposal, these
hazardous waste generator* an predominantly
tmaD businraae*. The requirement! proposed for
•these generator* take into account small business
Impact concerns. (Ibid at 31202-86.] Today's
proposal tor recycled oil generators, as described
above, takes into account similar concerns, and ,
therefore the standards proposed today for recycled
oil generators are similar to the standards proposed
for the 100-1000 kg/mo hazardous waste generators.
"As mentioned above, owners and operators of
ased oil recycling ffriiiK«« would also have to
comply with this paragraph when sending
shipments off-site, for example when one processor
sends oil to another processor, or when a fuel is
shipped to a burner. For simplicity, ths rest of this
discussion refers only to generators.
"The reader should note that this paragraph
would not apply to the marketing of the recycled
oils {specification fuel and certain asphalt products)
conditionally exempted under the proposed i 286.40
(s)|2) and (b).
(1) Pre-transport requirements.
Today's proposal would require that
-recycled oil generators comply with .
certain requirements for packaging
(§ 262.30), labeling (S 262.31), marking
(S 262.32), and placarding (S 262.33) that
apply to hazardous waste generators
under 40 CFR Part 262. [See 5 266.41(d)
(1) of today's proposal.] These
requirements reference standards of the
U.S. Department of Transportation in 49
CFR Parts 172,173, and 178. Further,
under the proposal generators could
only offer their recycled oil to
transporters with EPA identification
numbers. [See the proposed { 266.41(b).
which references S 282.12 of the
hazardous waste rules pertaining to
"identification numbers."] This is to help
establish a line of accountability for
shipments sent off-site, i.e., to initiate a
tracking system.
(2) Manifest exemption for recycled
oil. Under 40 CFR Part 262, generators of
hazardous waste must initiate a
hazardous waste manifest which begins
the "cradle to grave" tracking system of
Subtitle C Congress, however,
mandated a different approach for
tracking recycled oil in section
3014(c)(2)(B). This section of the Act
provides that EPA must not impose
manifest requirements if a generator
meets the following conditions.
• He must make arrangements to
have the used oil collected and recycled
at a permitted facility (either his own
facility or a facility he contracts with),
including those facilities deemed to have
a permit under section 3014(d) of RCRA:
• He does not mix other hazardous
waste in with the recycled oil; and
• He complies with whatever
recordkeeping requirements
promulgated by EPA in lieu of the
manifest requirements.
EPA has proposed these conditions in
} 266.41(d)(2)(i).»
"EPA has not included the "no mixing" condition
in | 286.41(d)(2)(i). As discussed in detail above.
Part 266, Subpart E applied only to recycled oil. By
definition, recycled oil has not been mixed with any
other hazardous waste. Therefore, a similar
provision in 1266.41 would be redundant. Also, we
consider Interim ststus facilities to be within the
scope of "permitted'' facilities in the first condition
because section 3005(e)(l)(C) of RCRA states that
EPA should treat these facilities as having been
Issued a permit (until action is taken regarding their
permit application). See proposed i 2fl6.40(e)(3)
pertaining to "authorized" facilities. EPA believes
such a reading is necessary because to conclude
otherwise would mean that Congress was being
more restrictive for generators of recycled oil than
for other hazardous wastes generators (£•,
hazardous waste generators can ship to interim
status facilities without penalty); section 3014(c), to
fact, seems to indicate that Congress's intent was
hist the opposite.
EPA has further added a condition
that exports of recycled oil are not
eligible for thermanifest exemption. As
with all hazardous wastes listed or
identified under section 3001. the export
of such oil will be covered by the
provisions of section 3017, which was
specifically enacted by Congress to
address hazardous waste exports.
The Agency has considered whether
section 3014 requires extension of the
recycled oil manifest exemption to
exports. For the following reasons, we
believe it does not Although section
3014(c) broadly states that the existing
Subtitle C standards under section
3001 (d), 3002 (manifest requirements),
and 3003 shall not apply to recycled oil.
the Section also provides that the
recycled oil standards must "protect
human health and the environment". As
explained in Section IQ of Part One of
this preamble (above), since the
environmental standard under Section
3014 is identical to that upon which
existing Subtitle C hazardous waste
regulations are based, the recycled oil
regulations in this proposal have been
developed on the presumption that
Subtitle C requirements apply to
recycled oil unless section 3014
specifically provides otherwise. In the
case of manifests, section 3014(c)(2)(B!
specifically provides that recycled oil
generators are exempt from any
manifest requirement if, as noted above.
they arrange for delivery to a recycling
facility authorized to manage recycled
oil. Since the manifest exemption is
conditioned upon delivery to an
authorized faculty, it does not extend to
exports to foreign facilities, which are
not covered by RCRA. This limitation on
the application of the manifest
exemption is supported by the
legislative history of section 3014 which
explains that "... generators of used oil
that is a hazardous waste... are
exempt from ... manifest requirements
provided that such used oil is delivered
to one or more permitted used oil
recyclers who are in compliance with
the special standards adopted pursuant
to this legislation" (emphasis added).
[H.R. Rep. No. 98-198,98th Cong., 1st
Sess. at 66, (1983).]
This limitation is also consistent with
tRe provisions of Section 3017(a)(l)(c)
which provides that a receiving
country's written consent be "attached
to the manifest accompanying each
waste shipment" (emphasis added).
[Id.]
-------
49232 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
A generator who meets the above
conditions Iao has the option of
complying either with the Part 262
manifest requirements, or the special
alternate requirements described
here.101 [See the proposed
I 262,41(d)(2)(ii).]
(3) Shipping without a manifest
(a) Required notices. Before a
generator starts sending used oil to a
recycler, he must obtain from the
recycler a one-time written notice .
certifying that his facility is authorized
to manage recycled oil. The generator
would have to keep records of notices
received from each recycler for at least
three years from the time he last sends a
shipment to the recycler. These
requirements are necessary to ensure
that the recycled oil, in the absence of
the manifest, is being sent to an
authorized facility. [See proposed
§ 286.40(e)(3) for the types of
"authorized" facilities.]
(b) Designated facilities. The proposal
[S 266.41 (d)(ii)(B)j would require that
when a generator offers a shipment of
, recycled oil to a transporter, the
generator would have to provide the
transporter with a list of the names,
addresses, and EPA identification
numbers of those facilities who have
provided notices to the generator (see
above). In practice, transporters
collecting from multiple generators are
often associated with (or owned by) a
recycler, so the "designated facility" is
obvious. In other cases, however, an
understanding between the generator
and the transporter as to the receiving •
facility is a crucial part of the regulatory
approach today. That is, to be exempt
from the manifest under this proposal, a
contractual relationship must exist to
provide for recycling at an authorized
facility, so one or more specific facilities
must be designated by the generator as
eligible to receive the generator's
recycled oil
• (c) Records of shipments. Today's
proposal would require that generators
record the following (for example on a
log) each time recycled oil is offered for
off-site shipment
• The name, address, and EPA
identification number of the transporter
accepting the oil;
• The quantity of recycled oil being
shipped; and
• The date of shipment
The generator would have to retain
these records for a minimum of three
years from the date of shipment [See
the proposed § 2S6.41(d)(2)(ii)(C).]
This recordkeeping requirement,
together with the corresponding
requirements for transporters and
receiving facilities (discussed in later
sections of this preamble), would
establish a line of accountability from
the generator through to the receiving
facility. The records required by today's
proposal would include virtually all of
the information required on a hazardous
waste manifest by 40 CFR 262.21, The
approach proposed here is different than
the Part 262 manifest requirements in
that no document need travel with the
shipment and the receiving facility need
not send a copy of the manifest back to
the generator (as required under 40 CFR
284.71 and 264.42 of the hazardous
waste rules), e.g., there is no "return
loop." The recordkeeping requirements
proposed here, together with the
condition that a recycling agreement
exist for a generator to be eligible for the
special, reduced requirements, serves to
ensure that the generator's oil will be
delivered to an authorized facility,*"*
5. Reports. EPA requires generators of
hazardous waste to file a report with the
Regional Administrator every even
numbered year, describing the types and
quantities of wastes generated, and the
transporters and facilities used for off-
site shipments, if any, during the
previous calendar year.10* [See 40 CFR
262.41, the biennial report] EPA is
proposing that recycled oil generators be
exempt from the biennial reporting
requirement Due to the section 3014(c)
mandate to consider impacts on small
businesses and on used oil recycling,
EPA has been very careful in today's
proposal to keep "paperwork" to a
minimum. The information that would
be gathered through the biennial report
can be obtained from alternate means.
[For example, in support of today's
proposal, EPA utilized surveys and
contacts with trade associations.] Since
we are able to obtain necessary data
from alternate means, we have
concluded that burdens on generators.
should be reduced by not requiring the
biennial report.104 Comments are
requested on this proposal to not require
the biennial report and all other aspects
of the proposed approach for regulating
generators.
m. Standards for Transporters of
Recycled Oil
A Applicability
1. General. Section 266.42 of the
proposal would establish standards for
transporters of recycled oil. This section
would apply to "collectors" who
transport used oil from generators to
reclaimers, reprocessora, and re-refiners,
and to persons who transport recycled
oil between reclaimers and from
reclaimers to users.10* In certain cases,
a transporter would also be subject to
the generator requirements of
§ 266.41.to* First if a transporter brings
used oil into the United States from
another country, he is the generator.
Second, if he mixes recycled oils of
different U.8. Department of
Transportation (DOT) shipping
descriptions, he would be considered a
generator.101*
2, Mixture issues. Several situations
could arise where a transporter could
-have problems with mixtures. For
example, generators could add
hazardous waste into their used oil
tanks without telling the collector. As
described in Section LA. of this Part of
the preamble, a mixture of used oil and
other hazardous waste is not recycled
oil, and the generator is responsible for
initiating a manifest for the shipment10*
™*A generator who fails to meet any of the
conditions mutt comply with the manifest
requirement* of40 CFR Part 282 in IU entirety.
•" EPA a proposing thi« optional approach
because tome generators may actually prefer to UM
the National Uniform Hazardoui Waste Manifest,
or may be required by a State to usejhe manifest In
either caie. we do not believe a generator ihould
have to comply with both the manifest and the rules
proposed here. The manifest alone if adequate.
"" The reader should note that similar systems
are used in various State regulatory programs. See.
for example, the letter from Missouri dated July 30,
1984. on "waste oil logs."
101 The biennial report was originally intended to'
serve as a summary of manifests from both
generators and facilities that could be used as in
enforcement tool through comparisons between
generator and facility reports; currently its primary
function is for data collection.
'•• Authorized State* may. of course, require
reports from generators within their own
boundarie*.
'"• Transporter* of the recycled oil* conditionally
exempted under I 266.40(b) (for example a
transporter of specification fuel) would not be
subject to I 286.42. Further, the transport of
household-generated recycled oil would not be
subject to regulation because, a* explained above..
we have proposed that inch oil does not lose it*
exempt ("household") status until aggregated.
>M Transporters who collect from small quantity
recycled oil generator* would also be subject to the
transporter standards proposed here.
'•» Under 49 CFR 172.101. used oil as a petroleum
material may either be classified as "combustible"
(flashpoint I* between 100 *-200 *F) or ••flammable"
(flashpoint is lea* than 100 *F). A transporter who li
placarded for combustible material and then
accepts low flashpoint/flammable oil would have to
Initiate a new shipping paper under 49 CFR 172.202
and would be subject to the generator requirement*
of S 286.41 a* well a* the transporter requirement*
of I 266.42 of this proposal
">• The data available to EPA indicate* that molt
used oil.being stored at generators1 sites is not
adulterated with hazardous waste. With respect to
the three hazardous waste* most commonly mixed
with used oil (1.1.1,-trichloroethane.
trichloroethylene. and tetrachloraethylene). samples
taken at generator sites do not typically even
contain these conitltuenta. and rarely are the
CoDuoutd
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
4S233
This problem can often be addressed by
contracts between the transporter (or
the receiving facility) and the generator
that forbid the generator from adding
hazardous waste to the used oil. The
reader should note that the "rebuttable
presumption" of mixing provision
proposed today for all used oils
(discussed above in Section I.A.4. of this
Part of the preamble) would apply to
used oil being collected. That is, a
truckload of used oil with-a total
halogen content exceeding 1000 ppm
would be deemed to be a hazardous
waste (not recycled oil) unless the
transporter could demonstrate that
mixing had not occurred. '••
Also, some transporters collect and
haul both hazardous waste and used
oils. We have not proposed any rule to
forbid this practice, but the transporter
should be aware that when a container
(vehicle) is used to hold or transport
hazardous waste, any material
subsequently placed in the container is
deemed to be a hazardous waste.110
The exception to this general rule is
when the container is cleaned
("emptied") according to 40 CFR 281.7.
This section of the regulations defines
when a container that has held
hazardous waste may be considered
"empty," and so therefore when the
mixture rule no longer applies.
3. Storage facilities. EPA is proposing
that except Tor* two types of "transfer
facilities" discussed here, transporters
who store recycled oil in the course of
transportation would be regulated as a
recycled oil storage facility under the
proposed 5 266.43 standards. [The
standards for storage facilities are
discussed in the next section of the
preamble.]
Transporters' transfer facilities'"
meeting the conditions discussed here
would be exempt from the facility
standards.
a. Container facilities: EPA is
proposing that storage of recycled oil at
a transfer facility in containers meeting
the U.S. Department of Transportation
oomtituenti |iiaa«iit in excess of 100 ppm.
CompOM:':ion and Management of Used Oil
Generated in the US. November 1964, pages 3-33 to
WS.
lo* Transporter* mey find H desirable to conduct
periodic epot check* on generator*, wing • fimple
chlorine detection test EPA ii currently assessing
the reliability of chlorine field teMt thet collector!
might UK.
1 '• That is, the residue remaining in the container
U hazardous, end my material subsequently added
ii. via the "mixture rale" in 40 CFR 261.3. il>o •
hazardous wute. except« i 261.3 or { 281.7
provide§ otherwise.
111A "transfer facility" Is denned In 40 CFR 260.10
as "... any transportation-related facility including
loading docks, parking areas, storage areas, and
other similar areas where shipments . . . are held.
during the normal course of transportation."
(DOT) packaging requirements of 40
CFR Parts 173,178, and 179 would be
•exempt from the facility regulations.
This exemption is currently provided for
hazardous waste transporters. [See
J5 263.12, 264.1(g)(9), and 265.1(c)(12).
and the discussion at 45 FR 86966-68,
December 31,1980.] We see no basis to
deny recycled oil transporters this
special provision, which was instituted
to accomodate storage incidental to
normal and routine transport and
transfer activities [Id.]
b. Tank facilities: EPA is proposing
that-transfer facilities with tanks
meeting the { 265.193 secondary
containment standards proposed on
June 26,1985 [50 FR 26485-86] would
also be exempt from the facility
requirements. We have "reserved"
paragraphs in the regulation
[85 266.42(a)(3](ii)(B) of the proposal] for
these secondary containment standards.
The proposal standards are presented
for the reader's convenience in Figure 1
of this preamble (above, in the
"generator" discussion). What follows
here are two points relevant to this
proposed conditional exemption:
(1) There is presently no exemption
for tank transfer facilities in the
hazardous waste regulations. EPA
requested public comment on the need
for such an exemption on December 31,
1980 [see 45 FR 8696&-6B] but since no
comments were received at that time,
we concluded that the exemption was
unnecessary. EPA has determined,
however, that tank transfer facilities are
in fact the norm within the used oil
recycling industry."* We therefore
believe an exemption is appropriate for
this portion (used oil recyclers] of the
Subtitle C regulatory universe. In the
preamble of the December 31,1980
proposal. EPA stated its intent to impose
40 CFR Part 265. Subpart I tank
standards as a condition should the tank
exemption be granted. [Ibid at 86967.]
EPA was concerned that the transfer
and short-term storage activities
conducted at transfer facilities could
pose spillage and leakage hazards and
that some requirements should apply.
[Id.] EPA continues to believe some
requirements are necessary for transfer
facilities. We considered proposing the
current Part 265, Subpart j tank
standards for recycled oil tank transfer
facilities. The Agency, however, has
determined that the existing Part 265,
Subpart ] tank standards are inadequate
in several respects [SO FR 26447-48; June
26,1985], ari'd as described in the
"generator'rsection above, we have
proposed revisions to that Subpart.
[Some of the proposed revisions are
presented in Figures 1 and 2 above.] We
also considered proposing Part 265.
Subpart J as it would be amended per
the June 26 proposal for recycled oil
tank transfer facilities. We are not
proposing the revised Part 265, Subpart)
in its entirety because we believe the
secondary containment portions of the
proposed rules (Figure 1, above) would
provide adequate protection at transfer
facilities.1"
Comments are requested on applying
the Figure 1 secondary containment
standards to'tank transfer facilities. •
Comments are also requested on
applying:
• The existing Part 265, Subpart ]
standards;
• Part 265, Subpart I as it would be
revised per the June 26 proposal, that is.
not only the secondary containment
portions of the proposal but also the
remainder of proposed Subpart J; and
• The alternatives to secondary
containment discussed in the June 26
proposal [50 Fr 26451-531 as they would
apply to recycled oil tank transfer
facilities.
(2) The proposal would adopt the 10-
day time limit in the existing hazardous
waste exemption. As EPA explained on
December 31,1980, the 10-day limit was
selected:
... to allow short term holding of waste fa:
transfer and to account for such things as
scheduling problem*, weather delays,
temporary closing and other factors which
might cause unforseen delays." (See 45 FR
86967.]
The Agency determined that this time
limit was adequate and would not
interfere with normal transportation
activities, fid.] EPA is concerned,
however, that a 10-day limit might be
unduly restrictive for some used oil
collector operations.114 That is, some
111 Waste Oil Storage. Franklin Associated. Ltd..
January 1984. pp. 2-2 through 2-7. A "typical"
collector facility has one or two 5.000 gallon
aboveground tanks. This storage is short term, and
is usually associated with consolidation activities,
i.e., transfer of oil into larger vehicles. EPA has
concluded that this storage is incidental to
transportation.
'"The secondary containment requirements
(Figure 1, above) would provide a le\e! of control
equivalent to the conditions that containers meet
certain DOT psckaging requirements, in the existing
exemption [51 263.12.261 UgliS). 2£S.l(c)(12Jl. Th.it
is, the existing exemption does not require
compliance with the Part 285. Subpert I conteirvr
.standard), but rather provides that releases wi!'. tx
muiimized through packaging requirements that
ensure container integrity. Secondary ccntairjn°ii
would serve the lame purpose for tank, facilities.
i.e.. minimize releases through ensuring lar.k sys'-iTi
integrity. The remainder of Part 265, Subpart J,
includes additional requirements necessary for
storage facilities, but not. in our view, necessary for
transfer facilities.
'"See the discussion of collector rmpac, issues >n
the Regulatory Impacts Analysis EPA, Office of
Solid Waste. November 1965, Cheptei V.C.
-------
49234
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rulas
transporter/collectors may not
accumulate enough recycled oil in 10
days for economical shipment to a
reclamation facility. EPA does not
intend for the 10-day limit to interfere
with normal transport and transfer
operations, and we are concerned that
some small collector operations could
even be forced to close due to a 10-day
limit115 We therefore request comment
on what limit would constitute normal
used oil transport practice, the extent to
which a 10-day limit would restrict
normal practice, and whether a 20 or 30-
day limit would better accommodate
normal practices.
c. General conditions: The proposal
would adopt certain restrictions or
conditions from the existing hazardous
waste exemptions for both tank and
container facilities. These include:
• The exemption would not apply to
reclamation or fuel blending facilities; "*
• Since the recycled oil held at a
transfer facility is considered in transit.
the transporter responsibilities
pertaining to discharge reporting and
clean-up would apply to any releases
' occurring at the transfer facility. [See
I 266.42(c) of the proposal which
references Part 263, Subpart C of the
hazardous waste transporter rules]; and
* The time recycled oil is held at a
transfer facility counts against the 35-
day period allotted for shipments sent
from generators to receiving facilities,
[See the proposed 5 286.42(e)(2).
introductory text for the delivery limit
The 35-day limit applies to hazardous
waste transport under § § 282.42(a) and
263.21.)
These conditions were explained on
. December 31.1980 (45 FR 86966-68] for
the hazardous waste exemption, and
EPA can see no basis for modifying any
of these requirements for recycled oil.
Comments are requested on the
transfer facility exemption proposed
here and supporting rationale, and the
specific points raised above. The
' requirements for transporters are
discussed next
B. Identification Numbers
Under { 266.42(b) of today's proposal
transporters would have to comply with
40 CFR § 263.11. pertaining to the need
for an EPA identification number. Under
this requirement transporters would
have to notify EPA and obtain an EPA
"Md.
"'A facility could conduct incident*! fettling of
bottom sediment and water and «till qualify for the
exemption. |Thi» type of activity ii not considered
"reclamation.") Al«o. dl0erenl used oil* could of
course be "blended." i.e.. placed in a single tank.
Operations thai blend used oil with -»irgin fuel oil.
however, are not within the intended scape of the
proposed transfer facility exemption.
Identification Number. [Transporters
who already have an EPA ID number
need not re-notify.] The notification and
identification number process helps
establish a line of accountability for the
movement of used oils from generators
to recyclers, and between recyclers.
C. Discharges
Section 266.42(c) of today's proposal
would require transporters to comply
with 40 CFR Part 263, Subpart C, which
requires hazardous waste transporters
to take appropriate actions in the event
of a transportation mishap, including
notifying appropriate authorities and
cleaning-up material discharged. These
requirements are necessary to ensure
public safety as hazardous materials are
transported.
D. Manifested Shipments
Whenever a generator of recycled oil
initiates a manifest transporters would
have to (under § 266.42(d) of the
proposal) comply with 40 CFR Part 263.
Subpart B, the hazardous waste
manifest rules. This situation could
occur because the generator failed to
meet one of the conditions in
§ 266.41(d)(2)(i) of the proposal, or even
though he may meet the conditions,
company or State policy requires the use
of the National Uniform Hazardous
Waste Manifest In this situation, the
recycled oil transporter is functioning as
any other hazardous waste transporter
and would be regulated as such.
£, Shipments Without Manifests
As discussed above (in Section II of
this Part of the preamble), EPA has
proposed that generators who meet
certain conditions may, at their option,
comply with the special requirements of
S 286.41(d)(2)(ii) in lieu of the hazardous
waste manifest requirements. Also,
transporters may collect from small
quantity recycled oil generators under
§ 266.40(c)(2). and these generators are
not subject to the manifest. In either
instance, the transporter may accept
recycled oil without a manifest and must
comply with the proposed 5 266.42(e) in
lieu of Part 263, Subpart B of the
hazardous waste regulations. The
proposed § 266.42(e).requirements for
transporters would be as follows:
1. Records of acceptance. Under
i 266.42(e)(l), the transporter would
have to record (for example on a log)
certain information at each collection
stop, specifically:
• The name, address, and when
applicable."'The generator's EPA
identification number,
• The quantity of recycled oil
accepted;
• The shipping description required
by the U.S. DOT under 49 CFR Part 172;
and
• The date the oil is accepted.
These records would help establish a
line of accountability for the movement
of the used oil to a recyder. Also, the
shipping description provides certain
information that may be helpful in case
of a transportation accident [In nearly
all cases, the description of recycled oil
would be: "Waste Oil: NA1270"; and
either "combustible liquid" or
"flammable liquid." See 49 CFR Part 172.
If a generator does not know whether
the oil is "combustible" or "flammable,"
the transporter would be advised to
describe the oil as "flammable," (the
more stringent category] to be on the
safe side.] Finally, the transporter would
have to keep these records for at least
three years from the date of acceptance.
2. Delivery. As required by section
3014(c)(3) of the Act EPA has proposed
in S 266.42(e)(2) that transporters must
deliver all recycled oil collected to a
facility authorized to manage recycled
oil81* Also (under the proposed
S 266.42(e)(2)(ii)) the transporter would
have to deliver the oil to a facility
designated by the generator. These
"designated facilities" are those which
have entered into appropriate '
agreements with the generator and who
have notified the generator [under
§ 266.41(d)(2}(ii)fB)] that they are
authorized to accept recycled oil.11'
Delivery would have to occur within 35
days of acceptance, the same time limit
as required under § § 262.42 and 263.21
for manifested shipments of hazardous
waste. The delivery time limit helps
ensure that hazardous waste arrives
promptly at the generator's intended
destination. The Agency determined
that 35 days was an adequate period of
"'Small quantity recycled oil generator* need not
obtain EPA identiGcation number* under today's
proposal.
"'This would include those facilities permitted-
by-rule under the special provision* of section
3014(d) of RCRA. (See the proposed i Z70.60(d) for
pemu't-by-rule conditions and requirements.)
Facility permitting i* discussed later in this
preamble. The reader should note that the
transporter may also deliver the recycled oil to a
facility in interim status under section 300S(e) of
RCRA and 40 CFR 270. Subpart C. See proposed
J 2S0.40(e)(3) for die types of facilities authorized to
manage recycled oil
"•As discussed above in section U.A.4-
collectors who accept from (mall quantity recycled
oil generators would be required (in lieu of the
generator) to ensure the receiving facility i*
authorized to accept recycled oiL
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
40235
time for normal hazardous waste
transport, taking into account storage at
transfer facilities and any minor delays.
EPA believes that since recycled oil
collection and marketing is typically
local or regional in nature, the 35-day
limit would not interfere with normal
recycled oil transportation activities.
However, the Agency solicits comments
on the 35 day time limit are there
circumstances where a longer time
period, e.g.. 45 days, would be necessary
to ensure efficient transportation of
recycled oil? •"
3. Records of delivery. When the
transporter delivers the oil to the
receiving facility, { 266.42(e)(3) would
require him to record the following
information:
• The name, address, and EPA LD.'
number of the facility:
• The quantity of oil delivered: and
• The delivery date.
These records would have to be
retained for 3 years from the date of
delivery by the transporter, and would
serve to provide another link in the line
of accountability for the oil as it is
recycled.
Comments are requested on all
aspects of the approach proposed for
regulating transporters.
IV. Standards for Owners and Operators
of Used Oil Recycling Facilities
A. Applicability and General Approach
to Regulation
Section 268.43 of today's proposal
would apply to owners and operators of
any facility that recycles or stores
recycled oil.'"The kinds of operators
that would be subject to 8 286.43 include
reclaimers, reprocessors, re-refiners.
blenders-, and burners. Facilities subject
to any S 286.43 requirements are knowns
"used oil recycling facilities." Witt the
exception of those generators who
accumulate recycled oil under the
special "90-day" rule in | 286.41 (c)(2) of
today's proposal generators who store.
accumulate, or recycle on-site would
also be subject to 5 286.43.U1 And. as
discussed above, with the exception of
certain transfer facilities, transporter
storage facilities would be subject to
S 286.43. Finally, recyclers and
reclaimers who do not store would be
subject only to identification and notice
requirements ({ { 284.11 and 264.12): to
•The reader t* reminded mat me term "recycled
olli" •• need here doe* not include liil exempted
from regulation. For example. I 2U.40(b)
conditionally exempt* *pecification fuel and certain
atphalt product* from Subpart £. FacUltie*
accepting only Ifaefe recycled oil* would be *abfect
to I 286.43.
"'Small quantity recycled oil generator! who
recycle on-elte under f ZemXcXD would aho not
be mibjecl to I 286.43.
waste analysis requirements
(8 268.43(b)(lH3)); and to recordkeeping
requirements (S 266.43 (e) and (f)).
discussed below.IB [See the proposed
( 266.43(a}(4).]
This last provision is analogous to
i 261.6(c)(2) of the hazardous waste
regulations. As discussed in the final .
solid waste rule [see 50 FR 652, January
4.1985], at present we do not regulate
the actual process of reclamation. The
proposed i 268.43(a)(4p) does make it
clear that this exemption does not apply
to facilities processing in an
impoundment Such a facility is not
exempt because as we stated on January
4,1985, surface impoundments are rarely
considered a legitimate recycling device.
[See 50 FR 652.] This is especially true in
the case of used oil. Storage in an open
impoundment allows petroleum loss
through seepage, and water and dirt
contamination. Petroleum products, for
these reasons, are not typically stored or
processed in impoundments. In
summary, the coverage of { 266.43 is
analogous to the coverage of the
standards for hazardous waste recycling
(and storage) facilities.
Before discussing the requirements of
i 268.43 in detail EPA must note that as
a general policy, any facility storing.
treating, or disposing of hazardous
waste is subject to the section 3004
standards, ;>., the standards for
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities in 40 CFR Parts 284
and 265. Congress did not exempt used
oil recycling facilities from this general
requirement as they did for generators
.and transporters under section
3014(c)(l) with respect to sections
3001(d), 3002, and 3003. [In fact the
Conference Report states that". . .
facilities which recycle used oil will
need to comply fully with the standards
applicable to owners and operators of
any hazardous waste treatment storage,
and disposal facility." See H.R. Conf.
Rep. No. 1133,98th Cong.. 2 Sess. at 113
(1984).]
Section 3014(d) also provides that
except for certain kinds of facilities,
used oil recycling facilities that comply
with the section 3004 standards are
deemed to have a RCRA permit In other
words, these facilities would not
normally be subject to section 3005 of
the Act nor to section 7004, which
specify procedures for permitting of
hazardous waste facilities. The { 286.43
standards, therefore, are based on
RCRA section 3004 but are intended to
be implemented through a special
permit-by-rule'prdcedure, discussed in
the next section of the preamble.
Section 3014(d), however, also grants
EPA the authority to permit used oil
recycling facilities individually under
section 3005(c) if EPA determines that
individual permitting "... is necessary
to protect human health and the
environment" The following kinds of
facilities have been determined by EPA
to be Inappropriate for the pennit-by-
rule approach, and would be permitted
individually:m
• Facilities where used oil is stored or
treated in a surface impoundment or
used in a manner constituting disposal:
and
• Facilities that manage other
hazardous waste in addition to recycled
oil.
The reasons that these kinds of facilities
have been deemed not eligible for the
section 3014(d) permit-by-rule are
discussed in the "permitting" section of
the preamble, (ths section after this
one). A pont that is relevant here is that
these facilities would be subject to 40
CFR Part 270 Subpart G, the
requirements for interim status
hazardous waste treatment storage, and
disposal facilities as well as proposed
I 268.43. [See proposed
I 286.43(a)(5)(i).]"*«»
What follows is a detailed discussion
of the standard proposed for used oil
recycling facilities in i 286.43. The
reader is referred to 45 FR 33158-33220,
May 19.1980 for an explanation of the
40 CFR Part 264 and Part 265 standards
for hazardous waste facilities, and to 46
FR 2802-2897. January 12,1981, for
certain additions to Parts 284 and 285.
As discussed above, these standards
would, in general, apply to used oil
recycling facilities. However. EPA is
proposing in f 286.43 some variations to
the hazardous waste standards for used
oil recycling facilities and these
differences are discussed here.
[Permitting requirements are discussed
in the next section of the preamble.]
These proposed variations would not
substantially change the level of
protection achieved, but rather are
'"The owner or operator may alio be tubfect to
f 26B.40(b). If he produce* one of the conditionally
exempt oil*: to I XBMlfd). If he ihlpi recycled oil
off-iite; to | 266.23 if recycled oil touted in t
manner constituting dicpoul; and to 12A&44 If he
-bum* recycled oil. The latter two practice* are
di»cue*ed later m thia aection.
-See | rnuofdHD of today's propoul.
"•The reader ihould note that EPA doe* not
grant Interim tutu*. The criteria for determining
Interim ftatu* eligibility are ipecified in RCRA
eection 3005{e) and 40 CFR Part 270. Subpart G. A
facility that doe* not qualify for Interim ttatu* and
doe* not have a permit 1* tub-feet to enforcement
actkm If It continue* operation. See I 27u.70(b).
'» For a facility that I* alreadly permitted, the
permit would have to be modified to allow
management of the newly regulated haxardou*
wute (i*~ recycled oil). See | 270.41 and 124 S for
permit modification procedure*.
-------
49236
Federal Register / VoL 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
necessary to implement the special
recycled oil permitting (and tracking)
system mandated by Section 3014.
B. Waste analysis requirements
Under 40 CFR 2&4.13, owners and
operators of hazardous waste facilities
must comply with a general set of
requirements to ensure that all of the
information needed for proper waste
management is available. Sampling and
analysis parameters and procedures
must be specified in a waste analysis
plan, which becomes part of the
facility's permit EPA has determined
that in the case of used oil recyders,
much of the waste analysis plan can be
specified in the rule itself. The special
analytical requirements for used oil
recyders are proposed in § 2£6.43(b) (!}-
(3). and would replace the 40 CFR
§ 264.13 requirements. The special
requirements are equivalent to § 264.13
in protectiveness but are more specific
this should simplify compliance.13*
1. Parameters. All used oil recyclers
must develop or obtain information
concerning the first two of the
parameters below, and many would
need information on the third. Only
operators of hazardous waste facilities
need be concerned with the fourth group
of parameters.
a. Halogens,' As discussed in Section
I.A.4. above, we are proposing that any
used oil containing in excess of 1000
ppm total halogens will be presumed to
have been mixed with hazardous waste
(and therefore is nofrecyded. oil")
unless a person successfully rebuts the
presumption. Therefore, the owner or
operator must determine the halogen
content of used oil accepted at the
facility. This does not necessarily mean
that the used oil must be sampled and
analyzed for halogens. Nonetheless, if
used oil with over 1000 ppm halogens is
accepted at the facility, the owner or
operator must either rebut the
presumption of mixing (by showing that
the used oil has not been mixed with
hazardous waste) or manage the oil 03
hazardous waste (not recycled oil). If
EPA (or a State agency) samples used
oil at a facility and finds total halogens
exceeding 1000 ppm and the
presumption cannot be successfully
rebutted, the owner or operator must be
in compliance with all applicable Part
264 or 265 hazardous waste
requirements (and the Part 270 permit or
interim status requirements), not today's
proposed recycled oil standards.
Otherwise, the owner or operator is
subject to enforcement action for
violations of applicable Subtitle C
requirements.
EPA expects that some used oil
recyders will, on a routine basis, accept
recycled oil that is high in total halogens
but that has not been mixed with
hazardous waste. The most common
such cases are expected to be
processors of used chlorinated
metaiworking oils and re-refiners. In the
former case, some metaiworking fluids
contain high levels of chlorinated
extreme pressure additives that are not
listed as hazardous constituents in 40
CFR Part 261, Appendix VOL These
processors, we expect will conduct
analysis to document that hazardous
constituents are not present at
significant levels (e.g., generally lew
than 100 ppm) in the used oil they
accept, and that therefore the 1000 ppm
total halogen presumption does not
apply. Re-refiners, by contrast, often
produce light end streams high in total
halogens because low boiling point
solvents are present at low levels in
incoming used oil, and distillation or
dehydration concentrates the "low
boilers" in the Sight ends. In this case, if
used oil accepted does not exceed the
1000 ppm total halogen level, the
presumption would not apply to the light
ends produced.
Finally, w either of the above cases,
the reader should note that the recently
promulgated final Phase I established a
specification for used oil fuels of 4000
ppm total halogens. [See the preamble of
the final Phase I rule. Part Two, Sections
IV.B. and IV.C] When a recyder
establishes that the 1000 ppm
presumption does not apply, he must
nonetheless document compliance with
4000 ppm limit in order to market
(exempt) specification fuel [Id]
b. Ignitability: Under Part 264, certain
special standards apply to ignitable
hazardous waste.117 [See 40 CFR 264.176,
264.198 and 264.229.] The owner or
operator must, therefore, determine if
the oil received exhibits the
characteristic of ignitability.
Alternatively, the owner or operator
could simply manage all recycled oil he
accepts as ignitable waste. In this case,
analysis to determine flashpoint may
not be necessary.
c, Fuel specification: As discussed in
Section LC, of today's proposal. EPA has
proposed to carry forward the
exemption for specification fuel (Table 1
above). The owner or operator of a
facility producing specification fuel
would have to document that in fact the
specification IB met [See § 266.40(b)(l)
of today's proposal.] Therefore, analysis
of the specification parameters—
namely, arsenic, cadmium, chromium,
lead, halogens and flashpoint—would be
necessary.
d. Additional parameters: In addition
to* the analytical requirements described
above, the owner or operator of a
facility where other hazardous wastes in
addition to recyded oil are managed
would have to comply with additional
requirements. [See § 286.43fb)(l)(iv) of
today's proposal.] The owner or
operator would have to identify at least
one indicator parameter for each
hazardous waste managed at the
facility. For wastes listed in 40 CFR Part
261, Subpart D, the indicator parameter
would normally be one of the
constitutents identified in Appendix VH
of Part 261 as a basis for listing. Where
the Appendix VH constituent is,
however, also a normal contaminant of
used oil, the EPA permit writer may
specify one or more other indicator
parameters.111 Recyded oil managed at
facilities along with other hazardous
wastes would have to be analyzed for
these indicator parameters (along with
total halogens) to help document that
mixtures of hazardous waste and
recyded oil are not being managed
under Part 266, Subpart E."*[Such
mixtures are hazardous waste, subject
to 40 CFR Parts 261-286. Subpart D.] As
an alternative to the special sampling
and analysis requirements discussed
above, EPA considered whether
hazardous waste facilities should simply
be prohibited from handling recyded
oil130 This would simplify enforcement
The Agency is concerned, however, that
many hazardous waste facilities can
properly manage recyded oil without
mixing, and that it would be unfair not
to allow management of both types of
'"Part of the simplification coma* from die fact
thai used oil us > fairly stable liquid. e*. It is not
reactive nor volatile. Aim used oil i« not corroeiva.
Therefore, the information needed to manage toil
waite (• nsrrowed u compared to the variety of
hazardous wastes some facilities may manage.
m An ignitable waste, as defined In 40 CFR
281.21, has a flashpoint of leu than 140 'F.
Approximately 28* (80 of 289) of the wed oil
analyses EPA reviewed exhibited this
characteristic. See Competition and Managnmtml of
Used Oil Generated in the U.S. by Franklin
Associates. Ltd.. November 1964: p. 3-5*.
"•As discussed above^a facility managing both
recycled oil and other hazardous waste would be
permitted Individually, not by-rule. Interaction
between the owner or operator and the EPA permit
writer will therefore be possible in selecting theae
indicator parameter*. EPA la. however, concerned
that this provision, became It is not self-
Implementing, may not work effectively during
Interim status. This problem la itiansrarfl below.
"•The reader should note that an owner or
operator remains subject to H 285.13 and 264.13 (or
any other hazardous wast* that he manages.
"•A similar approach would be for EPA to
prwume that any used oU managed at a hazardoa*
waste facility is mixed with hazardous waste.
Under this kind of approach, a person might or
might not have the opportunity to nbnt the
presumption through analysis.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules 49237
materials. EPA requests comment on
this alternative (and on the variations
described in footnote 130, below). EPA
specifically requests comment on
applying the prohibition during interim
status. During this period,
$ 266.43(b)(l)(iv) would not be fully
effective because EPA would not yet
specify indicator parameters and
therefore no direct control beyond the
rebuttable presumption would be in
place to document the "no-mixing" rule.
Should co-management (of recycled oil
and other hazardous wastes) be allowed
only at permitted facilities! [Under this
approach, the prohibition would
supplement, but not replace the
proposed 5 268.43(b)(l)(iv).]
2. Analysis plans. As required for all
hazardous waste facilities under
$ 264.13(b). we are proposing that the
owner or operator of a used oil recycling
facility mast develop and follow a
written plan describing his sampling and
analysis procedures.0> Under today's
proposal [§ 266.43(b)(2)(iii)], the owner
or operator would have to describe the
following kinds of arrangements made
to comply with the analysis
requirements.
a. Halogens and flashpoint The
owner or operator may obtain
information on halogen content and
flashpoint of the oil he accepts by
obtaining data, information, or samples
fronrgenerato'rs, and/or by sampling
incoming shipments. The analysis plan
would have to describe these
arrangements, e.g» which (if any)
generators would be providing
information on the halogen or flashpoint
content of oil they generate, vs, a
schedule of Campling incoming
shipments. In either case, it is the
responsibility of the owner or operator
to ensure used oil high in halogen
(exceeding the rebuttable presumption)
is managed as a hazardous waste and to
ensure ignitable used oil is managed
under the special requirements for
ignitable hazardous waste.
b. Specification fuel: The owner or
operator would have to describe at what
point(s) in his fuel production process
the oil would be sampled to document
compliance with the fuel specification.
For example, he could designate certain
tanks "for product only" and test these
tanks when near full or alternately, he
could analyze his incoming used oil and
the virgin fuel oil used for blending and
then blend at a certain ratio designed to
'" Acceptable •netytice! procedure* under the
hazardous wsite regulations (including procedure*
for oily wallet) are mdaded in (he EPA publication
SW-«46. Tat Method* far Evaluating Solid Waste.
Ptiysical/CJMsmjcal Method*. Second Edition. 1982.
See I 280.11. "reference*-"
meet the specification. (In this case, he
may not need to analyze the final
product.) In any case, a shipment sent
off-site is subject to i 266.41(d) (of the
generator requirements) of today's
proposal unless the requirements of
J 286.40{b)(l) for specification fuel are
complied with. Whenever a person
initiates a shipment without complying
with i 26&41(d) (or he bums without
complying with $ 266.44) because he
claims to have specification fuel, he is
responsible for obtaining the necessary
documentation as required by
{ 266.4O(b)(l), including analysis of the
specification parameters.
c. Frequency: For aE of the analyses
described above, the owner or operator
would have to specify in the plan the
frequency of sampling and analysis. The
owner or operator must perform
sampling and analysis on a schedule
that M adequate to meet all applicable
requirements. [See proposed
S 266.43(b)(l).] EPA considered whether
• some minimum frequency should be
specified for the various kinds of
sampling nnri analysis required under
today's proposal, but we have been
unable to develop a schedule that would
appropriately take into account the
many facility-specific variables that
affect sampling and analysis-frequency.
For example, if weekly sampling and
analysis is specified, different size
facilities would be affected very
differently, e.g., some operations process
100,000 gallons in a week, and others
only 10,000 gallons. In some operations
where specification fuel is produced, the
owner or operator might use a large tank
to hold the "product" fuel and test only
when the tank is full (which may not
•Man weekly testing). In other
operations, for example where on-site
lab facilities are available, daily testing
may be feasible.
Comments are requested on the need
for • specific sampling and analysis
schedule. To encourage public comment
on this subject EPA has included in
Table 5 below a schedule adapted from
one used by the State of Rhode Island as
permitting guidance for used oil burners.
Comments are requested on whether
thin or a similar schedule should be
specified by-rule for used oil recycling
facilities.
TABLE 5.—EXAMPLE OF A SAMPLING AND ANAL-
' TSW SCHEDULE TO« USED OlL RECYCLING
FACUITIES (SAMPLES ANALYZED PER YEAR)
TABLE 5.—EXAMPLE OF A SAMPLING AND ANAL-
YSIS SCHEDULE FOR USED OIL RECYCLING
FACILITIES - (SAMPLES ANALYZED PER
YEAR}—Continued
Ane)y**> paamalar
Lead (and other
nmta)
Metooen,
Facnty tfvouonpu (oallane/nee*)
-------
49238
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
generator or transporter, and if not able
to do so, to file a report with EPA's
Regional Administrator, and
• Except as discussed below
(pertaining to special arrangements and
the manifest exemption) { 264.76
requires that when hazardous waste
unaccompanied by a manifest is
accepted the owner or operator must file
a report with the EPA Regional
Administrator.
2. Unmanifested recycled oil. As
discussed above in Section 113.4. of this
preamble, EPA has proposed that under
certain conditions generators may ship
recycled oil without using the
manifest1" Under these circumstances,
the owner or operator would comply
with § 268.43(e)(2) of today's proposal in
lieu of {§ 264.71 and 264.72.1"
Section 266.43(e)(2) would require-
that, for each acceptance, the owner or
operator would have to record the
following:
• The name, address, and EPA
identification number of the transporter
who delivered the shipment;
• The name, address, and EPA
identification number of each generator
who contributed to the shipment [The
transporter is required to keep this
information and the owner or operator,
may, for example/obtain a copy of the
transporter's collection log.]
• The quantity of recycled oil in the
shipment: and
« The date of acceptance.
These records would have to be kept for
a minimum of three years (from the
acceptance date). Aa discussed
previously, the recordkeeping
requirements proposed today, in
conjunction with the condition that a
recycling arrangement exists, provides a
tracking system virtually as protective
as the hazardous waste manifest while
still complying with the directive in
section 3014(c)(2)(B) of the Act (to not
impose the manifest).
3. Receipt of hazardous waste
mixtures. EPA is proposing that when an
owner or operator receives a shipment
of used oil that he believes to have been
mixed with other hazardous waste (e.g.,
when it contains total halogens in
excess of 1000 ppm), he must take action
111 A* described in Section tLA_ above, mull
quantity recycled oil generator* need to comply
with no requirement* when initiating an off-lite
shipment [See proposed | 288.40(c)(2).] Large
generators may comply with alternate
recordkeeping requirements in lieu of the manifest If
certain conditions pertaining to recycling contracts
are met (See proposed || 26e.41(d}(2) and
266.42(e)(2).J
"' And when recycled oil is accepted under
theae conditions, the owner or operator would, of
course, not be required to Tile an unmanifested-
waste report under 5 264.78.
as described here. [Proposed
{ 266.43(e)(3).]
a. Acceptance of shipment: Facilities
may only accept hazardous wastes
specifically described in their RCRA
permits.134 Since mixtures of used oil
and other hazardous waste(s) are not
"recycled oil" a facility receiving such
mixtures would Have to be permitted to
accept both used oil and the other
waste(s) in the mixture (e.g., spent
trichloroetbylene. etc.). A facility not
permitted to accept such mixtures must
turn away the shipment131 A facility
permitted to accept the wastes in the
mixture may do so, but the mixture must
be managed as hazardous waste (not as
recycled oil).
b. Unmanifested shipments: In
addition to the requirements described
above pertaining to acceptance of used/
oil hazardous waste mixtures, if the
shipment is not manifested an owner or
operator must comply with § 264.79
pertaining to "unmanifested waste
reporting." That is, the owner or
operator must submit a report to EPA
within 15 days as specified in § 264.76,
D, Storage in Tonka
We discuss here how tanks used to
reclaim or store recycled oil would be
regulated under today's proposal first in
general, and then taking into account
two on-going EPA rulemakings.
1. General. EPA is proposing that all
owners or operators of used oil recycling
facilities be subject to the tank storage
standards of Part 265. Subpart J, but
only those owners and operators who
must obtain individual permits would be
subject to Part 264. Subpart J."4 [See the
proposed S 268.43(h)(2).] EPA is not
proposing to require all owners or
operators to comply with Part 264,
Subpart J because we do not believe
that { 264.181(a). the "shell thickness"
design standard, can be effectively
implemented through a permit-by-rule.1"
'•• Facilities In interim status may accept wastes
Identified In their "Part A" permit application. [See
II 270.71. 270.72.] The reader should also note that
we are today proposing a special permit-by-rule
[See proposed 5270.60(d)) for certain facilities
managing recycled oil
»• In this case, the transporter must take the
shipment to an alternate facility. If one is
designated by the generator, or return the waste to
the generator. [See i 282^0.)
"*As explained above and In the next section of
the preamble, some facilities an not eligible for the
permit-by-rule. (See proposed I 270.eo(d)(l).J Also.
some facilities may be required to obtain Individual
permits on a case-by-case basis. [See the proposed
I 270.60(d)(3).)
'"Except for the shell thickness requirement.
Subpart J of Parts 264 and 26S are virtually Identical
[See 46 FR 2831-32 for a discussion of
the shell thickness rule and the
permitting interaction necessary to
implement the rule.] The Part 285
standards, by contrast, are designed to
be self-implementing and so are more
amenable to a pennit-by-rule
approach.1"
2. Revisions to the tank standards.
EPA proposed on June 28,1985 to revise
Part 265, Subpart J. and Part 264,
Subpart ] to include requirements for
secondary containment (among other
requirements) for most aboveground,
underground, and in-ground tanks used
for storing hazardous waste. [See 50 FR
26444.J This proposal is relevant to the
present discussion because as stated
above used oil recycling facilities are
subject to Section 3004, Len to Parts 264
and 265. Therefore, amendments to Part
284 or 285 would apply to used oil
recycling facilities when final. Figures 1
and 2 above present some of the
requirements proposed on June 26. The
reader is advised to review the June 26
Federal Register proposal in its entirety
for a full understanding of the proposed
revisions. The public is invited to
comment on the proposed tank rules,
and alternatives presented at 50 FR
26451-53, as they would apply to
recycled oil "* Commenters should -
consider the following in preparing
comments:
(1) Used oil recycling facilities are,
under Section 3014, to be subject to the
Part 264 and 265 requirements. Any
regulatory distinction made for recycled
oil must be based on technical factors,
not adverse economic impacts.140 Since
used oil is very similar to other
hazardous wastes stored in tanks (i.e., it
is liquid, it contains toxic and
carcinogenic constituents), we have
proposed that used oil recycling
facilities will be regulated the same as
hazardous waste treatment and storage
facilities. [The reader should note one
important difference. As discussed
above, specification fuel (a recycled oil
low in contaminants) would be exempt
"•EPA considered requiring all facilities to.
comply with Part 204. Subpart). and to obtain
individual permits- Sine* nearly all used oil
recycle™ store in tanks, however, this would
effectively negate the section 3014(d) permit-by-roie
Congress envisaged. This would appear contrary to
congressional Intent. /.&. the language of section
3014{d) specifically includes "tank and container
storage" within the scope of the permit-by-rule.
"'The Regulatory Impact* Analysis for today's
proposal include* the costs of the proposed new
standards.
"•This In contrast to the requirements for
recycled oil generators, where the reader will note
that because of RCRA requirements have been
reduced to mitigate adverse impacts on generators.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49239
from all requirements, including the
storage requirements discussed here.]
(2) Some of the proposed new Part 264
standards would require a great deal of
interaction between the permit applicant
and the permitting official.141 [See. for
example, the proposed § § 264.191
pertaining to design of tank systems,
and 264.T92(e) pertaining to corrosion
protection.] Therefore, we would not
change the policy proposed above to
require Part 284, Subpart J only for those
facilities that must be permitted
individually. We believe the proposed
Part 265, Subpart) requirements (see
Figures 1 and 2 for some of the
requirements) are self-implementing,
protective, and amenable to a pennit-by-
rule approach.
3. Reclamation in tanks. Under 40
CFR 261.6(c), EPA regulates the storage
of hazardous waste prior to (and in
some cases following) reclamation.
Further, the Part 284/285 Subpart I tank
standards apply to treatment tanks;
these standards, however, do not apply
when hazardous waste is actually being
reclaimed in a tank. (See 45 FR 33093,
May 19,1980; and 50 FR 652. January 4.
1985.] Tanks used for "incidental
settling." however, are not meant to be
exempt from the Subpart J standards.
[Id.]141 EPA recognizes that this policy
requires specific interpretation as it
would apply to used oil recyclers,
because virtually all used oil recycling
facilities perform at least some minimal
amount of reclamation.
First some devices (which may
arguably be "tank-like") such as
distillation columns at re-refineries are
clearly used for recycling and would not
be subject to Subpart ]. Many tanks,
however, are used for settling and
blending, and it may not be obvious
whether the tank is used primarily for
storage vs. recycling. EPA currently
addresses this question on a case-by-
case basis. An owner or operator who
claims to be exempt from Subpart I
because the device is used for recycling
bears the burden of proof to document
the claim. [See the discussion at 50 FR
642, January 4.1985, relating to similar
exemptions and variances.] EPA
requests comment on whether specific
criteria should be added to the rules (or
whether detailed guidance should be
provided) to aid owners, operators and
enforcement officials in determining
when a tank may be exempted under the
above-described recycling policy.
E. Uses Constituting Disposal
On January 4.1985, EPA promulgated
40 CFR Part 266, Subpart C for
hazardous wastes used or reused in a
manner constituting disposal [See 50 FR
627-629.) Under { 266.23, hazardous
wastes (or those products which contain
hazardous waste) applied to or placed
directly on the land are subject to the
land disposal standards of Part 264,
Subpart A-N, e-g.. users of such
"products" are fully regulated as land
disposal facilities.14* Further. Part 266,
Subpart C was recently revised on July
15,1985 to incorporate the statutory
prohibition (section 213(1) of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984) on the use of
hazardous waste as a dust suppressant
[See 50 FR 28718.] Therefore, when EPA
lists used oil as a hazardous waste
(proposed today else where in this
Federal Register), road oiling would be
prohibited.
A used oil recycling facility where
recycled oil is used in a manner
constituting disposal (according to
S 266.20) would be subject to the same
standards (§ 266^3) as apply to any
hazardous waste used is this manner.144
As described above, recycled oil is not
exempt from section 3004, and the
requirements of § 266.23 (issued under
section 3004) have been deemed
necessary by EPA, and in the case of the
dust suppression ban, by Congress, for
all hazardous wastes used in this
manner.
F. Bunting for Energy Recovery
Today's proposal does not include air
emissions standards pertaining to the
burning of recycled oil as fuel. As
explained in Section n of Part One of
this preamble, EPA recently
promulgated Phase I of its Section 3004
burning standards and we plan to
"'The reader should note that we have proposed
lo delete the { 204.191 '(hell thickness"
requirement. (See 50 FR 2645S-S8: |ane 20.1985.]
""That is. the tank mast actually be an integral
component of a recycling system, not merely a
storage tank in which some settling happens to
occur. The Pan 264/285 Subpart) tank standards
apply to storage (and treatment) tanks.
"•As explained in Section LC, above. I 286.20(b)
conditionally exempts hazardous wastes
incorporated into commerical product* (produced
for the general public's use) where the hazardous
waste become inseparable from the product EPA
has identified those recycled oils which meet these
criteria and included the conditional exemption in
the proposed || 266.40
-------
49240
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
recycling facilities under
§ 266.43(a)(2)(ii)] are different from the
recently promulgated marketer
standards in the following ways:
(1) Under today's proposal, shipments
of recycled oil would be subject to the
hazardous waste manifest unless the
conditions of proposed I 266.41(d)(2)(i)
pertaining to recycling contracts are
met. In this case, proposed
§ 265.41(d)(2)(ii) would require notice
and recordkeeping requirements very
similar to the current § 266.43 marketer
standards. As discussed above (in the
"generator" discussion. Section IL B. 4.
of this Part of the preamble), this
approach is based on Section
3014(c)(2)(B) of the Act The proposal is
different than current § 266.43 in that if
the recycling contract conditions are not
met. the hazardous waste manifest
would apply.
(2} The reader may note that the
current § 266.43(b)(4)(vi) of the marketer
standards requires a statement on the
invoice as follows: "This used oil is
subject to EPA regulation under 40 CFR
Part 266," while today's proposal does
not contain such a requirement We
believe the requirements proposed
today render this label unnecessary.
This is discussed next in the context of
the RCRA Section 3004(r) labeling
requirement - - '
b. Labeling of fuel shipments: Section
3004(r) requires that any fuel made from
hazardous waste must bear a warning
label stating that the fuel contains
hazardous waste, and listing the '
contents contained therein. [See 50 FR
28724-25; July 15,1985.] Listing used oil
as hazardous waste (proposed
elsewhere in this Federal Register)
would trigger this labeling requirement
In fact, EPA recently promulgated the
Phase I labeling requirement for off-
specification used oil fuel (even though
used oil is not currently a hazardous
waste) in response to the Congressional
concern with persons unknowingly
receiving contaminated fuels. [See 50 FR
1704; January 11.1985J We believe, for
the following reasons, today's proposal
renders the warning label requirement
unnecessary by fulfilling the same
functions as would a label.11*
(1) For those shipments of off-
specification fuel that are manifested
clearly a warning label would be
redundant and unnecessary. [Id.]
(2) To be exempt from manifest
requirements, the fuel seller and
purchaser must have a recycling
agreement; further, facilities that receive
off-specification fuel (including burners)
must be authorized to manage recycled
oil and would be subject to the proposed
§ 268.43 requirements for used oil
recycling facilities. In this situation, i.e..
where the receiving party would be
regulated, a warning label also seems
unnecessary.
3. Qn-site bunting of de minimus
quantities. Section 3004(q)(2)(B)
provides that EPA may exempt on-site
burning of de minimus quantities of
hazardous waste (to be defined by the
Administrator), provided certain
conditions are met EPA is currently
considering whether such an exemption
is appropriate for recycled oil
generators. Any exemption of this sort
would be proposed with the Phase II
burning and blending rules early next
year.
C. Corrective Measures
Section 3004(u) of RCRA. as amended,
requires EPA to develop standards
pertaining to corrective action for
releases of hazardous waste or
hazardous constituents14* from solid
waste units at facilities seeking permits
under section 3005(c) (including releases
that occurred in the past)."0EPA
amended Parts 264 and 270 to include
provisions to implement this
requirement [50 FR 28711-16; July 15,
1985.] The requirements are to be
administered during the facility
permitting process. These corrective
action requirements would apply,
therefore, to all used oil recycling
facilities that are required to obtain
individual facility permits under section
3005(c). [See proposed § 270.60(d)(l).
which would exclude certain facilities
from the permit-by-rule, and proposed
§ 270.60(d)(3). which specifies criteria
EPA would use in determining on a
case-by-case basis when an individual
permit is necessary.] In fact as
discussed in the next section of the
"•Today's proposed rain for recycled oil ire
issued under the joint authorities of section* 3004
and 3C14 of RCRA. As such, section 30O4(r) allows
EPA to supersede the statutory warning label with
regulations.
'•See Put 281. Appendix VOL for the U*t of
hazardous constituents,
"•The reader should note that releases of oil
and/or hazardous substance* trigger certain other
EPA requirements as well Under thai
Comprehensive Environmental Response.
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1960 (CERCLA).
• person in charge of • vessel or facility having
knowledge of a release to the environment from thar
vessel or facility of a quantity of a hazardous
substance at or above the reportable quantity of
that substance must report that release to the
National Response Center (NRC). In the case of
used oil. EPA Is proposing a reportable quantity of
100 pound*. See the listing proposal elsewhere in
this Federal Register. If the discharge of the used oil
occurs in a navigable waterway and is sufficient to
cause a sheen on the water, then the discharge must
al*o be reported to the NRC pursuant to regulation* '-
promulgated by EPA undnr section 311 of the Clean
Water Act [40 CFR Part 11C.)
preamble, one criterion EPA will
consider in determining which facilities
should be individually permitted is the
need for corrective measures at a
facility.
V. Permitting of Used Oil Recycling
Facilities
This section of the preamble discusses
EPA's proposed approach to implement
the permitting provisions of section
3014(d) of the Act Most used oil
recycling facilities would, under today's
proposal, be pennitted-by-rule: in
contrast most other hazardous waste
facilities are (usually after an "interim
status" period] permitted individually.
This special approach is undertaken due
to the special section 3014(d) mandate
for recycled oil. We discuss next the
eligibility criteria for this special permit-
by-rule, the requirements that apply to
facilities permitted-by-rule, the
provisions for modifications to the
permit-by-rule, and the duration of the
permit-by-rule. Some facilities would not
be eligible for the permit-by-rule; the
owners or operators of these facilities
would have to obtain individual facility
permits. We do not discuss procedures
for individual facility permitting here as
these procedures have been established
for hazardous waste facilities through
previous rulemakings.'[See40 CFR Part
270. and 46 FR 14228: April 1.1983.]
Finally, we discuss the issue of interim
status for used oil recycling facilities.
and then some enforcement principles
that would apply to all used oil
re cyclers.
A. Eligibility for Pennit-by-Rule
Section 3014(d) provides that owners
and operators of used oil recycling
facilities U1 are deemed to have a permit
for their recycling activities and
associated tank and container storage.
provided the owner or operator complies
with the standards for hazardous waste
treatment and storage facilities
promulgated by EPA under section
3004. "* EPA is authorized under section
3014(d) to permit used oil recycling
faculties individually as necessary to
protect human health and the
environment EPA has proposed to
exclude certain kinds of facilities from
the permit-by-rule and has proposed
"'The term "used oil recycling facility" is used
for convenience to describe those facilities subject
to i 286.43 of today's proposal, e.g. processors, re-
refiners, and burners of off-specification fuel
'"The reader is reminded that used oil being
disposed of without recycling would be subject to
full regulation under 40 CFR Part* 282-285 and
facilities disposing of used oil (or storing or treating
used oil before disposal) would be permitted
individually under Part 270.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49241
Criteria for case-by-case determinations
for when individual permitting is
necessary.
. I.-General exclusions from the permit-
by-rule. EPA has determined that
permitting-by-rule is inappropriate for
the following kinds of facilities:
• Recycled oil is stored or treated in a
surface impoundment
• Recycled oil is used or reused in a
manner constituting disposal:
Other hazardous wastes are managed
at the facility in addition to recycled oil
[See the proposed J 270.60(d)(l).]
a. Surface impoundment storage:
Section 3014(d) provides that treatment
recycling, and associated tank and
container storage may be permitted-by-
rule. Storage or treatment of recycled oil
in a surface impoundment is not
included in the statutory language, and
the legislative history indicates the
omission was deliberate. [See FLR. Rep.
No. 96-198,98th Cong, 1st Seas., at 69
(1983). Surface impoundment storage is
•used as an example of an activity meant
to be permitted individually.]
b. Uses constituting disposal: The
standards for persons using hazardous
waste in a manner constituting disposal
(5 2S&23. which references Part 284,
Subparts A-N) cannot in EPA's view.
be effectively implemented through a
permit-by-rule.111 but rather must be
implemented through individual facility
permitting."4 See-far example, the Part
284, Subpart F ground-water monitoring
requirements. The EPA Regional
Administrator must specify certain
requirements in §5 264.91 (b), 284.93(a),
264.94(a). 284.94(b). 264.95(a), and -
2644»{a).
c. Hazardous waste facilities: The
third group of facilities that would be
excluded from the permit-by-rule under
today's proposal are facilities that
manage other hazardous wastes in
addition to recycled oiL These facilities
are likely sources of hazardous waste/
used oil mixing,>u and they therefore
•"This problem would also exist for surface
impoundment regulation and permitting.
114 EPA could conceivably require compliance
with Purl 2SS. not Port 2M. for penoo* using
recycled of) in manner constituting disposal and
perhaps for surface impoundment storage in that the
Put 285 standards are meant to be self- •
implementing. This is what we have proposed for
tanks. (See the discussion In Section IVJ). above.)
Ac have not proposed this approach because
Congress has registered a strong concern with land
disposal and surface Impoundment storage of
hazardous waste (see section l«K(bK") of RCRA.
« amended) indicating a need for maximum
scrutiny of these practices by EPA. A*. Individual
facility permitting.
"See the report. Composition and Management
of Uftd OH Generated in the L>£~ by Franklin
Associates. Ud_ November IBM. pp. 3-32 through
1-37. It appears obvious thai hazardous solvents are
commonly introduced either during collection or at
require the additional scrutiny provided
by individual facility permitting. '**•'"
Finally, as discussed in Section IVJ).
above, EPA has proposed special
analytical requirements for facilities
managing both recycled oil and other
hazardous wastes [the proposed
i 286.43(b)(l)(iv)]. In general, we have
made the analytical requirements self-
implementing, but the special
requirements for facilities managing
both recycled oil and other hazardous
waste require interaction between EPA
and the owner or operator and are best
implemented with the significant
Agency oversight provided by facility
permitting.
2. Case-by-case exclusions. In
1270.80(d)(3] of today's proposal. EPA
has included provisions under-which the
Regional Administrator (or the Director
of an authorized State hazardous waste
program) may require the owner or
operator of a used oil recycling facility,
on a case-by-case basis, to apply for an
individual RCRA permit The basis for
requiring an individual permit would be
the receipt of information (through site
inspection, or other means) indicating
that any of the following situations exist
at the facility."*
• The owner or operator is not hilly in
compliance with one of the permitting
requirements of i 270.60(d)(2). discussed
below; or
• The facility, because of the
quantities of recycled oil being managed
or the management methods in use. or
the facility's location, could pose a
substantial potential hazard to human
health or the environment: or
facilities dining storage or processing. To cite foal
one example, samples of used automotive oil token
at generator sites had 90th percanttla values of
Mchloroetbane. trichloroethylene. and
tetncUoroethylene (three hazardous spent
solvents; of IS. 11. and 55 ppm. respectively (p. J-
33). The SOth percentile values of these same
constituents In "automotive oil" samples at
processor facilities or WOO, SOD. and 3000 ppm (p. 3-
34).
"•Since these facilities manage other hazardous
wastes, they are presently subject to individual
permitting under 40 CFR Port 270. [The most EPA
could do under Section 3014(d) would be to permit
the recycled oil portion of the facility by-rule.] For
4 those facilities that are permitted before today's
rules become effective, a permit modification would
be necessary to allow acceptance of used oil or
recycled olL See II124J and 1270.41 regarding
permit modifications.
"'The reader should note that In Section IVA.
above. EPA has requested comment on whether we
should prohibit co-management of recycled oil and
other hazardous wastes'.
*• A State authorized by EPA to manage Its own
hazardous waste program under 40 CFR Part 271
could, by Its own regulations, require some or all of
the used oil recycling facilities within the State to
apply for individual RCRA permits. How today's
proposed rules would operate in authorized States
is discussed more fully in the next part of the
preamble.
• There has been a release of
recycled oil, hazardous waste, or a
hazardous constituent at the facility and
corrective measures taken by the owner
or operator are not adequate to protect
human health and the environment
In the first situation, an owner or
operator may make a good faith effort to
comply with the permit-by-rule
requirements of { 270.60(d)(2), discussed
below, and believes that he is in
compliance. A site inspection by EPA,
however, may lead to a determination
by EPA that the steps taken by the
owner or operator to comply with
{ 270.60(d)(2) are not adequate, and that
additional measures are necessary. In
such cases. EPA would either initiate an
enforcement action to bring the facility
into compliance, and/or could make the
determination that the facility in
question is more appropriately regulated
through an individual permit For
example, a facility may be more
appropriately regulated under an
individual permit where site-specific
conditions exist that require special
individual consideration.
The second situation, where the
facility is posting a potential hazard,
also requires explanation. Some
facilities, in the judgment of the
Regional Administrator, may pose at
least a potential hazard even though
they are technically in compliance with
S 27060{d)(2). An example might be a
facility reclaiming, storing, or burning
large quantities of recycled oil in a
densely populated urban area. In this
case, the Regional Administrator would
not have grounds to dte the facility for
violations of the permit-by-rule
conditions. The potential for a hazard,
however, may be substantial because of
proximity to population centers or to
sensitive population groups, such as
children. In this case, individual
permitting would provide the maximum
scrutiny possible under Subtitle C and
would also allow for public participation
in the permitting and siting process.
Finally, as described above, if the
Regional Administrator determines that
an owner/operator's response to a
release is inadequate, he can require the
owner or operator to apply fpr an
individual permit to institute the
corrective action requirements of Parts
264/270, "•
"The reader should note that when an owner or
operator is required to obtain an Individual permit
under 1 270-80(d)(3). be must then also comply with
the "corrective measure" provisions of I 2B4.101.
{See the proposed I 266.43(a)(5)(iv).) This is becsuse
section 3004(u) of RCRA requires any permit issued
by EPA to Include corrective measures requirements
as appropriate.
-------
49242 Federal Register / VoL 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rule*
Under | 270.60(d)(3)(ii) of today's
proposal, the Regional Administrator (or
State Director) would notify the owner
or operator of the determination that an
individual RCRA permit is required; the
owner or operator would then have 160
days to submit "Part B" to the RCRA
permit application. "*
B. Requirements of the Permit-by-Rule
EPA has proposed requirements for
the permit-by-nile in S 270.60(d){2) for
those facilities not excluded from
eligibility (as described above). These
requirements are based on the statutory
provision [section 3014{d)] that the
facility must be in compliance with
standards promulgated under section
3004.'«' Pint the proposed
S Z70.60(d)(2)(i) provides that the owner
or operator comply with ! } 266.43 and
268.44. the standards proposed today for
used oil recycling facilities (including
burners). These standards are proposed
under the joint authorities of sections
3004 and 3014. In the case where these
rules are amended or modified, the
owner or operator would have to comply
with the modified requirement within
the time limit as specified in the
appropriate Federal Register notice.
[This will be particularly important for
burners. Today, § 266.44 is reserved for
the standards that will apply to •
burners.]
Paragraphs (H) through (xvi) of the
proposed { 270.60(d){2) contain
requirements that are necessary to
ensure compliance with { 268.43 or
S 266.44. These requirements apply to
EPA issued permits (see { 270.30). and
are proposed here under the authority of
section 3014 to implement this special
permit-by-rule. The conditions are
summarized here;
• Paragraph (ii) provides that
noDCompliance with Si 266.43 or 286.44
is allowable only under terms of an
emergency permit issued under { 270.61;
• Paragraph (iii) provides that it shall
not be a defense in an enforcement
action to claim that it would have been
necessary to halt or reduce a permitted
activity in order to maintain compliance
with S 266.43 or i 266.44;
• Paragraph (iv) requires that in event
of non-compliance, the owner or
operator must take all reasonable steps
*^Th|Mi*g thia tine, the 0W3MT Of Operelor KEOale!
remain tubject to | Z70.eo(d){2). If compliance with
tho*e standard* cannot be maintained through the
permitting proceti. it i minimum through in interim
undemanding between the owner or operator aad
the permitting authority, tbe facility would hive to
ce«M operation. See RCRA section 3008 pertaining
to compliance order*.
•"The reader ahoiikl no** thai except for facUitiaa
excluded from eligibility from the permH-by-mk
under | 270.60(d)(n owaen or .operator* ara
•objec* o * TOflO(d)(2).
to minimize any impacts on human
health or the environment
• Paragraph (v) provide* mat the
facility's operating equipment must be
properly operated and maintained
(including adequate staffing and training
of personnel quality assurance
procedures, eta}:
• Paragraph (vi) makes it dear that
the permit-by-rule conveys no property
right or exclusive privilege;
• Paragraph (vii) requires the owner
or operator to provide EPA or a State
with any information relevant to
determining compliance or the need for
an individual permit
• Paragraph (viii) codifies some of
EPA's inspection and entry authorities
granted by Section 3007 of RCRA;
• Paragraph (ix) provides that any
sampling or other measurements taken
to comply with the regulations must be.
representative of the volume and nature
of the measured activity;
• Paragraph (x) stipulates specific
recordkeeping requirements for any
sampling or monitoring performed to
comply with the regulations;
• Paragraph (xi) codifies that
requirement for a facility to have an
operation record [required under
i 264.73. reference by the proposed
{ 266.43(e)(3)]:
• Paragraph (xii) stipulates signatory
requirements for any reports or
information submitted to EPA or-a State: •
• Paragraph (xiii) requires the owner
or operator to notify EPA or me State of
any activity mat may cause
noncompliance;
• Paragraph (xiv) specifies reporting
procedures the owner or operator must
follow in the event of a serious mishap
at the facility;
• Paragraph (TV) specifies procedures
for submission of the RCRA biennial
report and
• Paragraph (xvi) requires the owner
or operator to promptly submit any
relevant information when omissions or
mistakes are discovered
In summary, when an owner or operator
meets all of the requirements of
S 270.60(d)(2). he is deemed to hold a
RCRA permit under the special authority
of section 3014(d).The requirements of
§ 270.60(d)(2) would be applicable to the
owner or operator as if he held an
individual permit [See section 3008 of
RCRA, federal enforcement authorities.]
C. Modifications to andDuratioa of the
Penut-oy-Rtde
As discussed above, EPA intends to
propose burner -standarda in the near
future (the "reserved" § 266.44). Also,
over time, EPA may amend tbe S 266.43_
standards for used oil recycling
facilities. Owners or operators would
have to comply with the-new or revised
standards within the time limits
specified in the Federal Register. [See
the proposed S 270.80(d)(2)(i).] Finally,
because of the on-going, continuing
nature of a permit-by-rule, the permit is
not issued for a fixed term, but rather
continues in force as long as the facility
meets the eligibility criteria and the
requirements are complied with. '**
D. Interim Status for Used Oil Recycling
Facilities
1. General. The preceding discussions
concerned facilities that would be
eligible for the proposed permit-by-rule.
For those facilities that meet all of the
proposed S 270.80{d)(2) permit-by-rule
requirements immediately interim status
is not relevant'An issue that requires
additional discussion, however, is the
question of facilities that are not
completely hi compliance with the
permit-by-rule requirements when the
latter become effective. Such a facility is
subject to enforcement action under
RCRA section 3006 not simply for non-
compliance with applicable
requirements but also for operating an
unauthorized hazardous waste facility.
Under proposed § 286.40(e)(3), facilities
are only authorized to manage recycled
oil if they are permitted or in interim
status.» >M A facility is.not pennitted-
by-rule unless it is in full compliance
with proposed i 270.60(d)(2). [This
requirement i* from RCRA section
3014(d).]
With respect to those facilities that
are not in compliance on the effective
date of this regulation. EPA believes
that the permit-by-rule authority of
section 3014(d) should be read in
conjunction with the existing interim
status provisions of section 3005(e).
Pursuant to the terms of these two
section, used oil recycling facilities that
fail to meet the i 270.60(d)(2)
requirements by the effective date of
this regulation (and thus do not qualify
for the permit-by-rule) become subject
to the section 3005(a) prohibition against
operating without a permit and must
^ either shut down or seek interim status
authorization under.section 3005(e).
Owners and operators of used oil
•"Because the pemtt-by*ii)e far need oat
recycling facUitte* would be lamed under jedtaB
3014 and not aeetioa 3006 of the Act »ectio»
JOOS[cX3) pertamiMg to "pannit ton" daw art
apply.
waitea. See I 270.1(b). "overview of the RCRA
permit program,"
•* Aa deacrioad in S*ctk* Ii of tab Part oHto
preamble, certain recycled oil (a*, apedfication
fuel) ate eMapt fraaa ngeeatfen and can be
managed at faciltta MUbmt aotaomaticn.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49243
recycling facilities should note that
under this approach they have a choice.
If a used oil recycling facility meets all .
-the requirements of i 270.60(d)(2) on the
effective date of this regulation, it is
deemed to have a permit under section
3014(d) and, therefore, interim status is
not required. However, if there is some
doubt as to the extent of a facility's
compliance, an owner or operator may
wish to consider taking the steps
necessary to qualify for interim status to
avoid being vulnerable to a'possible
enforcement action for operating
without a permit
To receive interim status
authorization under section 3005(e), a
facility must meet three requirements.
First, the facility must have been in
existence on November 19,1980 or the
effective date of the statutory or
regulatory changes that rendered it
subject to the requirement to have a
permit Second, it must comply with the
notification requirements of section
3010(a). And third, it must submit an
application for a permit On the effective
date of this regulation, existing used oil
recycling facilities will, by definition,
meet the first requirement of section
SOOS(e). With respect to the second
requirement (£e. notification), many
used oil recycle™ are presently required
to notify the Agency under the Phase 1
burning rule."* [In the final Phase I
preamble, see. Part Four, Section LB.J
EPA has determined that the third
requirement (for permit applications)
calls for an approach slightly different
than the one that currently applies to
hazardous waste facilities; this is
discussed next
2. Permit applications. EPA is
proposing that the owner or operator of
a used oil recycling facility that seeks
interim status (because he is not in
compliance, or is not sore of whether he
is in compliance with proposed
S 270.60(d)(2)). must inform EPA that
information submitted to the Agency
under the RCRA section 3010(a)
notification requirement is also intended
to fulfill the "permit application"
requirement of RCRA section
3005(e)(l)(C)."» [See proposed
S 270.10(a)(3).]
'•For tbotc facilities not tubject to the special
"waite-is-fuel" notification of the final Phase I rule.
the reader ihould note that under I 284.11
(referenced by i 2fl6.«(b), Introductory text of
today's propoial). facility owner* and operator!
must notify the Agency and obtain EPA
identification number*. Owner* and operator* who
file "wnte-nt-Iuel" notification* need not re-notify
under today'i proposal, except a* discussed next.
i.e. those facilities who must obtain interim status.
"•This discussion only applies to facilities that
would otherwise be eligible for the pennit-by-rule.
but are not fully in compliance;. Facilities excluded
from eligibility by I 270*Xd)(l) must obtain interim
EPA considered whether owners and
operators should submit full "Part A"
RCRA permit applications, as is
required for all other hazardous waste
facilities under {§ 27O70(a)(2) and
270.10(a)(l). We are not requiring the full
Part A submission because much of the
Part A information is, for used oil
recyclers, not relevant That is, the Part
A submission was intended as the first
step in individual facility permitting.
[See 45 FR 33322-23; May 19,1980.] We
fully expect however, that most used oil
recycling facilities that seek interim
status will eventually come into full
compliance with S 270.60(d)(2), and at
that point they will be deemed to have
a permit Therefore, we see no need to
require additional information beyond
the RCRA section 3010(a) notification
requirements. We must require the
special "interim status notification" to
ensure that the RCRA section
3005(e)(l)(C) "permit application" has
been complied with. This special
notification to EPA would ensure mat a
used oil recycling facility, even if subject
to enforcement action for being in
violation of S 270.80(d)(2), would
maintain its legal authorization to
operate.
3. Alternatives considered. As an
alternative to the proposed interim
status approach, EPA considered a
second approach of extending the
pennit-by-rule to all recycled oil
facilities, regardless of their compliance
status, on the effective date of these
regulations. Under this approach, the
Agency would pursue case-by-case
enforcement against those facilities later
found to be out of compliance. The
major difficulty with this approach is
that it is inconsistent with the explicit
language of section 3014(d). Congress
specifically provided that an owner or
operator of a used oil recycling facility
"shall be deemed to have a permit under
this subsection for all treatment or
recycling. . . //such owner or operator
comply with the standards promulgated
by the Administrator under section 3004
. . ." (emphasis added). Aa EPA does
not have the information or data on
which to conclude that all used oil
recycling facilities will come into
compliance by the effective date of this
regulation, it lacks an adequate basis for
implementing this approach.
EPA also considered an approach
under which a facility not hilly in
compliance with § 270.60(d)(2) on the
effective date of the requirements would
thereby lose eligibility for the pennit-by-
rule, and would have to seek interim
status-and a full RCRA individual
facility permit as would any hazardous
waste facility. EPA did not propose this
approach because it could result in
outcomes contrary to Congressional
intent Many owners or operators may
simply be unsure of their compliance
when today's proposed rules become
effective, or may make good faith efforts
to comply but are still not completely in
compliance. To make a blanket
determination that all used oil recycling
facilities must be permitted individually
does not seem in line with
Congressional intent that EPA avoid
discouraging used oil recycling
consistent with protection of human
health and the environment See H.R.
Conf. Rep. No. 1133.98th Cong., 2d Sess.,
at 114 (1984).
Comments are requested on the
Agency's proposed interim status
approach.
£ Enforcement
All used oil recycling facilities would
be, under today's proposal, subject to
§ 266.43 (and burners would also be
subject to ( 286.44). Whether a facility is
authorized to operate under interim
status, or an individual facility permit
or the proposed pennit-by-rule, EPA
may take enforcement actions under
RCRA section 3008 for violations of
applicable requirements. With respect to
those facilities that qualify for the
pennit-by-rule and then later are found
in violation of an applicable
requirement EPA would proceed as it
does against any permitted facility
found in violation. That is, EPA may
issue compliance orders and schedules
under RCRA section 3008, and in some
cases may seek injunction for temporary
or permanent facility closure. Our
reasoning for treating facilities
permitted individually under section
3005(c) and by-rule section 3014(d) in a
similar fashion is that permits issued
under both Sections serve the same
statutory purpose, ;'.e, implementation
of the Section 3004 standards.1*1
Regulations issued under each section
are designed to provide specific
guidance as to what constitutes
compliance with those standards.
Because of the similarity of these
sections not only in their purpose uu.
also in many of the section 3004
requirements they implement, EPA sees
no reason for treating noncomplying
facilities differently under each
status and apply for a full permit under 40 CFR Part
270. as would any hazardous watt* facility.
•"Section 30Q5(c). however, has a broader scope
than doe* section 3014(d); for example, section
3004(u) corrective action requirements are
implemented through section JC05{c) permit*.
-------
49244
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Proposed. Rules
section.'"The Agency therefore
believes that since a facility's failure to
comply with a permit condition does not
lead to a loss of authority to operate
under RCRA section 3005(c), it should
not do so under section 3014(d).
VL Proposed Effective Dates
This section discusses when various
parts of the proposed rules would
become effective. The public is invited
to comment on the proposed effective
dates as well as the substantive
requirements themselves.
A. Genera!
Under RCRA section 3010(b),
hazardous waste regulations are
generally to become effective six
months after final rule promulgate for
good cause. Except as discussed below,
we are proposing that the recycled oil
rules would become effective six months
after the day they are published in final
form in the Federal Register.
B. Prohibition on Dust Suppression
As discussed above in Section TVJL of
this Part of the preamble, RCRA section
3004(1) prohibits the use of hazardous
waste for road treatment or dust •
suppression (/.
-------
Federal Register / VoL 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49245
adoption of these regulation* is
described in 40 CFR 271.21. [See 49 FR
21678; May 22,1984.] See also SO FR
28731: July 15.1985.
Applying { 27L21(e)(2), States that
have final authorization must revise
their programs within a year of
promulgation of EPA's regulations if
only regulatory changes are necessary,
or within two yean of promulgation if
statutory changes are necessary. These
deadlines can be extended in
exceptional cases. [See 40 CFR
271.21(e)(3).]
States with authorized RCRA
programs may have requirements
similar to those in today's rule. These
State regulations have not been
assessed against the Federal regulations
being proposed today to determine
whether they meet the tests for
authorization. Thus, a State is not
authorized to carry out these
requirements in lieu of EPA until the
State program revision is approved. As a
result, the standard proposed in today's
rule will apply in all States, including
States with existing standards similar to
those in today's rule. States with
existing standards may continue to
administer and enforce their standards
as a matter of State law. In
implementing the Federal program EPA
will work with States under cooperative
agreements to minimize duplication of
efforts, in many cases EPA will be able
to defer to the States in their efforts to
implement their programs, rather than
take separate actions under Federal
authority.
States that submit official applications
for final authorization less than 12
months after promulgation of EPA's
regulations may be approved without
including standards equivalent to those
promulgated. However, once authorized,
a State must revise its program to
include standards substantially
equivalent or equivalent to EPA's within.
the time period discussed above.
Finally, we have proposed to amend
Part 271, the Requirements for
Authorization of State Hazardous Waste
Programs, by amending Table 1 of
{ 27l.l(j) to add the citations and the
standards for managment of recycled oil
to the list of regulations implementing
the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984.
IL Relationship of Today's Proposal to
Certain Other EPA Programs
This section discusses the relationship
of today's proposal to certain other EPA
regulatory programs. This discussion is
for informational purposes only; no new
requirements are proposed here. [Note
that in the listing Federal Register
notice, we propose to alter the CERCLA
"importable quantity" for used oil.]
-------
49246 Federal Register /Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 19B5 / Proposed Rules
costs of requirements, costs to facilities,
impacts on businesses and used oil
recycling, and changes in potential risks.
1. Data Collection. Before initiating its
regulatory impact analysis, the Agency
collected data on current used oil
management practices. These efforts
included a survey of used oil handlers
and burners, a site visit program, test
burns of used oil combustion devices, a
used oil sampling and testing program,
and discussion with many used oil
businesses and experts, including state
program officials. EPA's understanding
of the used oil system is summarized in
U.S. EPA, Composition and
Management of Used Oil Generated in
the U.S., (by Franklin Associates)
November, 1984.
2. Economic Methodology. The
economic impact analysis involved the
following steps. We developed model
used oil facilities. We estimated
compliance costs for each model facility.
We conducted a market or macro.
analysis to estimate changes in prices,
changes in used oil supply and demand,
and aggregate national costs. We also
conducted a financial, or micro, analysis
to estimate changes in profits, and
closure and employment impacts.
To estimate costs and economic
impacts, we first developed thirteen
model facilities to represent the used oil
recycling system which includes-
generators, collectors, processors, and
rerefmers. We also evaluated end user
costs, but did not develop end user
model facilities. Instead we modeled
end users as markets demanding used
oil "products."
We separated used oil generators into
industrial used oil generators who
produce used oil from maintenance of
machinery and non-industrial used oil
generators who produce used oil from
maintenance of vehicles. We also split
generators by size. Large generators
produce greater than 1000 kilograms
(about 300 gallons) per month.
Collectors purchase used oil from
generators and transport it to processor*
and rerefiners. We developed three
sizes of collectors: small collectors who
handle an average of 125,000 gallons per
year, medium collectors who handle
300,000 gallons per year, on average, and
large collectors who handle an average
of one million gallons per year.
We developed model facilities for
used oil processors and rerefiners who
produce used oil "products," such as
fuels and lubricants, for sale to end
users.
We also evaluated end use markets
for used oil. These included use as fuel
(in boilers and other combustion
devices), use as rerefining feedstock use
as road oil, miscellaneous non-fuel uses,
and disposal
Next for each of the model plants
(and end users], we estimated
compliance costs. To estimate these
costs, we conducted engineering studies
of the activities and costs required to
comply with the regulatory provisions."*
These estimates included initial, capital,
and annual costs, which we annualized.
For one-time costs, such as many of
the capital costs, we assumed that
facilities could amortize these costs over
20 years, at a nominal interest rate of
13%.m This rate corresponded to real
costs of capital, not to an estimate of
social discount rates, or social costs. For
annual and recurring costs, we
converted uneven streams of payments
to annualized present values using
discounted cash flow calculations. We
discounted future costs to current
dollars assuming a six percent annual
inflation rate and a three percent real
discount rate. Finally, we multiplied the
model facility incremental costs by the
total number of facilities to obtain the
national aggregate cost estimates.
Next for each of the model facilities
and end users, we collected information
on prices in used oil markets; we
estimated costs of production for used
oil collectors, processors, and rerefiners;
and lastly, we estimated flows of used
oil from generators to different end
users. We combined all of this
information into an economic model to
simulate current supply and demand for
used oil, and the macro and micro level
impacts of regulatory costs on supply
and demand. (This model is documented
in detail in U.S. EPA. Background
Document' Regulatory Impact Analysis
of Proposed Standards for the
Management of Used Oil, November
1965.)
We first conducted a macroeconomic
impact analysis using our supply and
demand model and our estimates of
regulatory compliance costs for each
model facility. We used the model to
predict (1) Changes in supply to and
demand for used oil in end use markets,
(2) changes in flows through
intermediary facilities, and (3) price
changes. We also calculated aggregate
national costs of the regulation.
Secondly, we conducted a
microeconomic impact analysis by
evaluating facility finances, using the
'" Moit of these coit «f timatu appear In Co*t of
Control Options for Reducing Watte Oil Handling
RieJa. Draft (prepared by P.E.L, formally PEDCo).
May 1084.
m We iued 13% to represent the coat of
borrowing money at the prime rate plua three
percent (Became few of the regulatory coils an ~
capital coiu. auumptiona about interett rate* are
not critical to the conclusion!.)
same model facilities (disaggregated
into small, medium, and large facilities),
to predict closures and employment
effects. For each model facility, we
developed income statements using
publicly available financial data and
data on the used oil industry collected
by the Agency. Using these income
statements, we calculated current cash
flows and net value of the businesses.
To these baseline finances, we then
imposed net regulatory costs, which
included the effect of price changes.
First we estimated how these changes
affected the profitability of firms. Next
we estimated business closures by
comparing the value of the firm after
regulation to the value of selling a firm.
that is, the "salvage value." If a firm's
salvage value was greater than its value
after regulation, we predicted closure of
that firm.
3. Benefits Methodology. To compare
the benefits of the proposal and
regulatory alternatives, we estimated
the changes in potential health risks
from used oil practices before and after
regulation. We estimated risks of five
types of used oil practices:
—Burning in space heaters, asphalt
plants, and boilers and other
devices;
—Road oiling;
—Disposal in incinerators and landfills;
—Storing in drums, aboveground tanks.
and underground tanks; and
—Dumping.
For each practice, we estimated
potential releases of and potential
exposures of people (and the
environment) to constituents in used oil
We estimated benefits as the reduction
in potential health risks resulting from
management practices after regulation
compared to potential health risks from
current practices.
To estimate national aggregate health
risks from used oil practices, we made a
number of simplifying calculations and
assumptions. First based on our
sampling data, we calculated mean
concentrations of hazardous
constituents in different types of used
oils (that is, for used oils recycled in
different ways). We then designed
model practices to represent average
practices, such as road oiling and
disposal. For these practices, we
estimated quantities likely to be
released from routine emissions and
accidental releases. We then calculated
concentrations of hazardous
constituents that would result from
dispersion and degradation of the
releases. By assuming population
densities, we estimated exposures. We
then estimated health effects using dose-
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49247
response data for individual
constituent!, assuming lifetime (seventy
year) exposures. (The risk analysis is
discussed in detail in the RIA
Background Document.]
4. Limitations. The economic impact
analysis depended upon our
characterization of current used oil
practices and the responses of facilities
to regulatory costs and constraints. We
presumed that businesses will make
economically rational and legal
decisions. We modeled used oil markets
using accepted macroeconomic
assumptions about supply and demand.
We also assumed that facilities could
finance regulatory compliance
expenditures.
The Agency's benefit analysis of the
regulatory alternatives also depended
upon characterizing model practices. To
estimate the regulatory benefits as
accurately as possible given our data.
we used assumptions, simplified
practices, and representative (or
average) parameters. Therefore, the
benefits results are best used to
compare across the alternatives'
included, in the analysis.
Because we recognized variability in
the practices, we analyzed the
variability in the parameters that
determine risks, and changes in risk.
The analysis of variance is discussed in
more detail in the RIABackground
DoeunTent • '
The RIA risk analysis did not capture
all benefits of the regulation. In addition
to reducing cancer cases, the proposed
regulation creates other health benefits
(such as reduced lead poisoning) and
environmental benefits.
Because we characterized average
practices in the benefits analysis, we
quantified the health effects of only
typical practices. We estimated the
effects of hazardous constituents
typically found in used oil When other
hazardous constituents are present hi
used oil they may pose additional risks
that we have not quantified—but risks
that the regulation does prevent For
example, in the aggregate analysis we
did not analyze the risks of road oiling
with used oil containing dioxin. The
proposed regulation would, however,
help prevent such risks. The listing
preamble'and listing background
document cite instances of extreme
cases that have caused damages that
are not fully captured by the risk
assessment
The regulation also produces
environmental benefits that we did not
quantify. Improperly managed used oil
and its hazardous constituents can
create environmental damage.
Constituents in used oil are toxic to
plants and animals. The physical
properties of oils may also affect
organisms. Used oil releases can also
degrade environmental media, such as
ground and surface water.
C. Results
1. Macroeconomic Impacts. Table 6
presents our estimate of the aggregate
annualized national costs of the
proposal. Even though most of the
regulatory requirements fall on the
intermediary facilities that control the.
flow and quality of recycled used oil,
generators and end-users incur high
aggregate costs (almost three quarters of
the total), primarily because of their
large numbers. Although regulated
generator costs average only $650 per
year, they incur in aggregate $31 million
per year. Annualized intermediary costs
range from $4.300 to $356,700 per facility.
and total $36 million per year. End user
costs total $81 million per year. Major
costs by regulatory component include
disposal ($10 million), storage ($67
million), testing ($16 million),
administrative requirements ($10
million), substitute dust suppressants
($26 million); and off-spec pollution
control and test bums ($37 million).
TABLE 6.—AGGREGATE (ANNUAUZEO)
NATIONAL COSTS OF REGULATION
gallons per year) is banned. The
displaced oil flows largely to use aa a
rerefining feedstock, which increases
from 85 to 135 million gallons per year.
We estimate that overall, used oil
recycling will increase by about 100
million gallons per year.
TABLE 7.—EFFECT OF REGULATION ON MARKET
FLOWS OF USED OIL
IMBon QMm pv y«v]
Total bur—**
Lufrtfl"
tfepOMJ.
_*
249
•4
121
IS
34
73
see
59
tl»RlA.
We evaluated also the facility level
(or microeconomic) impacts of
regulatory costs—measured as changes
in prices, reductions in profits, closures,
and employment effects. Table 9
presents the price changes we predicted
in the markets in which used oil
intermediaries purchase and sell used
oil. Price changes help processors offset
-------
49248 Federal Register / Vol 5D. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed-Rules
their regulatory costs by increasing revenues (by as much as fourteen cents per gallon).
TABLE S.-PRICE CHANGES FOR INTERMEDIARIES
IC*«* p*r Baton]
'"rftnott
Avtrag* puehtM price
Pf»noUMaiy
21
21-24
Pod
nguMay
1*
11-22
Cheng*
-2
_a-<_3)
PiMauMoiy
40
4S-65
PO*t
ragulaimy
M
ss-se
»
Owig*
-4
+4-^11)
M*tg*to
-2
+•-(+«)
R*gutatofV
eoo/giltan
»4
8-6
We also predicted closures that might
result from the resulting changes in
profits (or net present value). For small
collectors, particularly, profits decrease
significantly. Reduced profits may not
cause a business closure, if a facility"
choose to continue operating with
reduced profits. Table 10 presents our
estimate of facility closures predicted by
comparing net present value to salvage
value, and considering changes in flows
of used oil implied by the market
changes presented in Table 7. The
discussion below provides a more
detailed explanation of impacts on used
oil generator, collector, and processor
facilities.
TABLE 10.—CLOSURES AND CHANGES m AVERAGE SIZE CREATED BY FINANCIAL IMPACTS AND
FLOW CHANGES
RMJONPW
«•*•>
-Z.8-7J
1.S-M
2J-&6
Cheng* fei
•o>(p*ro*nl
o«ng^
Numbtrol
clo>u*e
316
12
3
327
Cheng* in
(pvc*nt
Bang*)
-MT2
1 Rtfe el n*t pram
'NC-nolcalaMUd. M*
1 N«gttv* datura*
(NPV) to
InRIA,
(Of
For industrial generators, used oil
management is generally a very minor
part of their production processes. This
waste provides revenue when sold to a
collector or processor. Once regulated.
larger industrial generators may spend
as much as $3.700 per year (only $910,
on average) to comply with the
proposed requirements. Used oil will
still be sold to collectors and processors.
. but for a lower price. Although net
revenues from used oil will decrease/
these changes will represent an
insignificant change in overall
production costs for industrial
generators.
For non-industrial (automotive)
generators, however, regulatory costs
are more important Based on
discussions with a number of used oil
generators, we have assumed that
automotive generators pass through
regulatory costs to their customers by
increasing the price of their service—oil
changes. We have assumed that oil
changes will decrease by the same
percentage, Le., the elasticity of
substitution equals one. More people
will change th«ir own oiL and recycling
Mn on* (kidudng n*o«>.« ratio*) knot? Oomn.
will decrease since most homeowners
dump their used oil, according to our
information. Full Subtitle C regulations
cause an increase in these homeowner
oil changes of twelve million gallons per
year. We therefore have tailored used
oil regulations to reduce burdens on
generators.
The regulations will seriously affect
collectors. EPA predicts that it will be
uneconomical for 473 small and medium
collectors to continue operating as
small, independent businesses. Although
these small collectors represent about
fifty percent of the faculties within the
used oil recycling industry, they
currently handle only about ten percent
of the volume of oil entering the
recycling system. EPA predicts that
these collectors will close because their
annualized regulatory costs will be
between $4.300 and $9,700 per year.
compared to net earnings before
regulation of only $2,500 per year. We
also predict, however, that 155 of these
smaller collectors will grow or become
part of larger businesses, because; (1)
The total quantity of used oil flowing
through collectors will increase and (2)
larger collector (and medium
transporter) businesses will be
economically viable. Larger collectors
will be able to afford the regulations; as
will other used oil businesses that
handle larger quantities of oil. This is
because many costs are fixed,
independent of quantities handled. That
is, there are economies of scale—the
regulatory cost per gallon is three cents
for larger collectors, eight cento for
small
Overall, the closure rate for today's
proposal is less than one precent That
is, we predict only 327 net closures from
over 50,000 establishments that would
be subject to regulation. It should be
noted that approximately three million
establishments would be exempt from
regulation under the provision described
in Section tt Part Two of this preamble.
The closure rate of establishments
potentially subject to regulation is
therefore about one one-hundredth of a
percent
3. Benefits, Table 11 presents our
estimates of the health effects (cancers)
in the U.S. potentially caused by used oil
management practices as we have
modeled them before and after the
proposed regulation. The variation
around these point estimates is several
orders of magnitude, particularly for
risks caused by releases to ground
water. The regulation reduces risks by
controlling several practices. Most
importantly, the fuel specification and
burning in controlled devices reduce
combustion risks. Cancer risks from
burning decrease by almost fifty
percent (The prohibition of unvented
space heaters prevents unsafe
exposures to lead, which hi the baseline
cause almost 25 health effects per year.)
Requirements for secure disposal of
used oil also significantly reduce risks.
Disposal risks decrease by seventy
percent Overall, the proposal reduces
potential cancer risks by half, in
addition to eliminating lead poisoning
cases from used oil apace heaters.
(Calculated without dumping, which the
regulations don't address, cancer risks
decrease by more than sixty percent)
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules 49249
TABLE 11.—RIA ESTIMATES OF POTENTIAL
RISKS OF AVERAGE USED On. PRACTICES.*
Practta
ffr™ I ii' i •
AowtoCng,
TffW
N**(C(M|»rywf)
B»iini
M
66
110
<1
6
<5
-'270
^Mwwww4
^WUWBWO
ragUMon
M
56
90
<1
<«
0
135
-»
prop**** UMd to oompsy*
regulation. Thsj RIA and *»
in dvtai •)!• NiTytB&ow 0f
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601) requires the Agency to
evaluate the impacts of regulations on
small entities. When a regulation
imposes significant impacts on a
substantial number of small businesses,
the Agency must conduct a regulatory
flexibility analysis to evaluate
regulatory options to reduce impacts on
small entities (consistent with other
mandates, such as protection of human
health and the environment). Although
today's proposal imposes impacts on
many small businesses, the total
fraction of small.businesses significantly
affected (less than one percent) is not
substantial. Nevertheless, to meet the
requirements of section 3014 (to avoid
discouragement of recycling, to reduce
impacts on generators, and to protect
human health and the evironment), the
Agency has reduced regulatory burdens
to the extent possible. These are
documented in the RIA which includes
evaluation of the impacts of full Subtitle
C regulations, in addition to the impacts
of the proposal
In the used oil system, most
establishments are small businesses.
We estimate that approximately ninety
percent (about 680 of 950) of the
intermediary faculties (collectors,
processors, and rerefiners) are small
businesses. These small businesses
employ less than 100 people and have
annual revenues less than $1-5 million.
Most of these businesses are small
collectors employing one or two people.
We predict that (net) 318 collectors will
close. The increased flow of oil through
collectors, however, will mitigate
employment impacts.
The proposed regulation reduces
small business impacts when compared
to Subtitle C requirements. Instead of
full hazardous waste facility standards,
EPA has proposed a special provision
that would expand the transfer facility
exemption in the hazardous waste rules
to include recycled oil transporter tanks
:with secondary containment. This
would allow most collectors to avoid
being a RCRA facility, and would
reduce impacts. Costs for small
collectors drop from about $9,700 to
$4,300 per year—for medium collectors
from $18,300 to $8.500 per year. Without
tailored standards, we predict that an
additional 301 collectors would close.
The tailored requirements reduce
impacts consistent with environmental
protection.
We have not proposed any special
requirements to mitigate impacts on
processor facilities because Congress
did not exempt used oil recylcers from
Section 3004. We have proposed to use
the permit-by-rule authorized by
Congress for most recycling facilities.
We estimate that the permit-by-rule
reduces costs by $10,000 to $20,000 per
facility.
Like the intermediaries, almost all
used oil generators are small businesses
(based solely on number of employees).
Congress exempted generators who
recycle used oil from Sections 3001(d)
and 3002, and directed EPA to consider
small business impacts on generators in
promulgating used oil regulations. The
proposal includes a limited set of
requirements for generators that are less
stringent than the standards that apply
to hazardous waste generators, and that
reduce impacts. Specifically, EPA has
proposed (in lieu of Subparts C, 0, and
S 285.16 of Part 265) simplified and
tailored facility management
requirements for recycled oil generators
(see the proposed { 266.41(c)(6)). As
described in section IL Part Two of the
preamble, we are proposing these
reduced requirements to reduce impacts
on recycled oil generators (many are
small businesses). Further, we have
proposed: (1) limited secondary
containment requirements for generator
storage tanks, and (2) a conditional
exemption for "small quantity" recycled
oil generators. These provisions
significantly reduce regulatory costs to
generators, and substantially reduce the
number of generators regulated.
Although the intent of these provisions
is primarily to mitigate adverse impacts
on environmentally acceptable
recycling, the reduced standards also
serve to mitigate small business
impacts.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Submit comments on these requirements
to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs; OMB; 726 Jackson
Place. NW., Washington, DC 20503
marked "Attention: Desk Officer for
EPA." The final rule will respond to any
OMB or public comments on the
information collection requirements.
This regulation will require collection
logs or shipping papers, internal
recordkeeping, and facility operation
records, including testing records. Table
12 presents our estimates of the numbers
of shipping forms the regulation will
require.
The purpose of these forms is to bring
more accountability to the system, and
to provide a means for enforcing against
violations. We have reduced the burden
of these requirements by proposing
alternatives to the analogous Subtitle C
requirements of manifesting and full
Part B permits.
TABLE 12.—PAPERWORK REQUIREMENTS
tSMpmna pv ywr nauring ndung)
Tott ntrtm of Mp
7*7.000
122.000
•18,000
PART FOUR—PUBLIC COMMENTS.
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS.
PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND LIST OF
SUBJECTS
This Part provides information that
should aid interested parties to
understand EPA's rationale and to
prepare comments on today's proposal.
L Solicitation of Public Comments
Today's two notices describe
regulatory proposals, and therefore the
public may comment on any aspect of or
issue related to the proposals.
Commenters who have previously
submitted comments pursuant to
previous EPA used oil proposals and
Federal Register notices (such as 50 FR
1684.1/11/85) should re-submit those
comments at this time so they may be
considered in today's proposal. The
Agency will not address comments
submitted pursuant to prior Federal
Register notices unless the comments
are re-submitted.
IL Availability of Background
Documents
EPA relied on the following primary
documents in developing today's
proposal. All documents cited in the
.preamble are available in the public
-------
49250 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
docket for this rulemaking, located at
EPA Headquarters. Room S-212,401
"M" Street Southwest, Washington. DC.
20460. The docket is open to the public
from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except on holidays.
Some of the documents listed below an
also available through the National
Technical Information Service (NTIS),
an agency of the U.S. Department of •
Commerce, located in Springfield,
Virginia (703) 487-4650. (NTIS does
charge a fee per-page for documents
ordered.)
Composition and Management of Used Oil
Generated in the U.S., by Franklin
Associates. Limited November 1964. NTIS
*PB/a5-18O-297.
Listing Background Document for Used Oil
US. EPA Office of Solid Waste, November
1985.
Regulatory Impact Analyst* of the Proposed
Standards for the Management of Used Oil,
U.S. EPA. Office of Solid Waste, November
1985.
ID. Announcement of Public Hearings
EPA will hold public hearings on the
rules (both the listing and management
standards) proposed today as follows:
• January & 1906—Holiday Inn. North Pmrk
Plaza, 10650 North Central Expressway.
Dallas. Texas 7S231 (Phone: 214/373-6000)
• January 10.19B6—Ramada Renaissance,
55 Cyril Magnin Street (One block north of
5th & Market), San Francisco, California
94102 (Phone: 415/392-8000)
• January 16,198ft—Department of Health
and Hunan Services. North Auditorium ("C"
Street entrance), 330 Independence Ave., SW.
Washington, DC 20201
The hearings will begin at 9:30 ajn.
(registration at 9:00 a.m.) and will end at
4:30 p.m. unless concluded earlier. EPA
encourages all interested persons to
attend one of the public hearings. If you
would like to present an oral statement
at one of the hearings, please notify in
writing Ms. Geraldine Wyer, Office of
Solid Waste (WH-562). U.S. EPA,
Washington, DC 20400.
Oral and written statements may be
submitted at the public hearings.
Persons who wish to make oral
presentations must restrict their
presentations to 10 minutes and are
encouraged to provide written copies of
their complete comments for inclusion hi
the official record.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 260
Administrative practice and
procedure. Confidential business
information. Hazardous waste.
40 CFR Part 201 '
> hazardous waste. Recycling.
4OCFRPart2B6
Hazardous waste, Recycling.
40CFRPart270
Administrative practice and
procedure. Confidential business
information. Hazardous materials
transportation. Hazardous waste.
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Water pollution control.
Water supply.
40 CFR Part 271
Administrative practice and
procedure. Confidential business
information. Hazardous materials
transportation. Hazardous waste, Indian
lands, Intergovernmental relations.
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Water pollution control.
Water supply.
For the reasons set out in the
Preamble, it is proposed to amend 40
CFR Chapter I as set forth below:
Dated November 8, 1985.
LMM. Thomas,
AdmMttrator.
PART 260—HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: GENERAL
1. The authority citation for Part 260
continues to read as followa:
Authority: Sees. 1006.2002(a). 3001
through 3007, 3010, 3014, 3015. 3017, 3018,
3019, and 7004 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as amended by the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act of 1976, as amended [42 U.S.C. 6905,
6912(a). 6921 through 6927,6930. 6934.
6935. 6937. 6938, 6939. and 6974],
2. In Part 260, a new definition is
added to i 260.10 to read as follows:
1260.10 Deflnttlone.
• • • • »
"Recycled oil" means used oil that is
either burned for energy recovery, used
to produce a fuel reclaimed (including
used oil that is reprocessed or re-
refined), or otherwise recycled, or that is
accumulated, collected, stored,
transported, or treated prior to recycling.
(1) [Reserved to define specific types
• of burning considered to be recycling.]
(2) The term includes mixtures of
recycled oil and other materials, but not
mixtures containing hazardous waste
(other than used oil). Used oil containing
more than 1000 ppm of total halogens Is
presumed to be mixed with chlorinated
hazardous waste listed in Part 261,
Subpart D of this Chapter. Persons may
rebut this presumption by demonstrating
that the used oil has not been mixed
with hazardous waste. EPA will not
presume mixing has occurred If the used
oil does not contain significant
concentrations of chlorinated hazardous
constituents listed in Appendix Vm of
Part 281 of this Chapter.
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
3. The authority citation for Part 261 is
revised to read aa follows:
Authority: Sees. 1006, 2O02(a). 3001.3002,
and 3014 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as
amended by the Resource Conservaton and
Recovery Act of 1970, as amended [42 U.S.C.
0905. 6912(a), 8921. 6922. and 6934].
4. In i 261.5, paragraphs (b) and Q) are
revised to read as follows:
rrtstor
$281J Special requlr
hazardous waste generated by email
quantity generators.
(b) Except as provided by paragraphs
(e), (f), end (j) of this section, a small
quantity generator's hazardous wastes
are not subject to regulation under Parts
262 through 265,270, and 124 of this
chapter, nor to the notification
requirements of section 3010 of RCRA,
provided the generator complies with
paragraph (g) of this section,
(f) Used oil. (1) Used oil that is
disposed of (and not recycled) is.
included in the quantity determinations
of this section and is subject to the
requirements of this section.
(2) Used oil that is recycled is subject
to regulation as follows:
(i) Recycled oil is not included in the
quantity determinations and is not
subject to the requirements of this
section, but instead is subject to Part
266, Subpart E of this chapter.
*(ii)(A) When hazardous waste that
would otherwise be conditionally
exempt from full regulation under
paragraph (b) of this section is mixed
with used oil in the course of recycling
(e.g., during collection or storage) the
resultant mixture is no longer subject to
the reduced requirements of this secti.cn
but instead is subject to full regulation
under Parts 262 through 265. Part 266,
Subparts Subparts C and D, and Parts
270 and 124 of this chapter, and to the
notification requirements of section 3010
of RCRA.
(B) Used oil containing more than 1000
ppm of total halogens is presumed to
have been mixed with chlorinated
hazardous waste listed in Part 261,
Subpart D of this chapter. Persons may
rebut this presumption by demonstrating
that the used oil has not been mixed
with hazardous waste. EPA will not
presume mixing has occurred if the used
oil does not contain significant
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
49251
concentrations of chlorinated hazardous
constituents listed in Appendix Vffl of
Part 261 of this chapter.
5. In 5 281.6, paragraph (a)(2)(iii) is
revised to read as follows:
(a) * • •
(2) * * «
(lii) Recycled oil. (Subpart E).
Note.— Mixture* of used oil and hazardous
waste are not recycled oil and when
recycled, are subject to full regulation under
this section.
PART 266— STANDARDS FOR THE
MANAGEMENT OF SPECIFIC WASTES
AND SPECIFIC TYPES OF FACILITIES
6. The authority citation for Part 266
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sees. 1000. 2O02(a). 9004. and
3014 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1978, as amended [42 U.S.C.
W05, 6B12(a), aa24. and 0934).
7. In Part 266. f 266JO{b)(l) is revised
to read as follows:
I26&30 AppOcsMtty.
(1) Recycled oil is subject to Subpart E
of this Part, not to this Subpart
» • • • •
a In Part 286. Subpart E is revised to
read as follows:
Subpart E—Standards for MM Management
of Recycled OU
Sco.
28640 Applicability.
266.41 Standards for generators.
286.42 .Standard! for transporters.
286.43 Standards for owners and operators
of used oil recycling facilities.
286.44 Standards for burners.
Subpart E—Standards for trie
Management of Recycled Oil
1266.40 AppffcablBty.
(a) General. (1) This subpart applies
to recycled oil that is:
(i) Hazardous waste, as defined by
§§261.1-281.3 of this chapter; or
Note: Recycled oil Is a subset of used oO.
the latter being listed as "F030" in I 261 Jl of
thii chapter.
(ii) Household waste, but only when
aggregated or accumulated at service
stations, auto centers, or other "do-it-
yourselfer" collection centers. The
owner or operator of a collection center
that accepts household recycled oil is
considered a "generator" for the
purposes of this Subpart, and is subject
either to paragraph (c) of this section or
to § 266.41 of this subpart. as applicable;
or
(iii) Recovered from only wastewater
exempted from regulation under
I 266.3(8) (2) (iv) (F) of this chapter. The
person who recovers the ofl is
considered a "generator" for the
purposes of this Subpart, and is subject
either to paragraph (c) of this section or
to {266.41 of this subpart, as applicable.
(2) Conditional exemptions. The
following recycled oils, when recycled
in compliance with paragraph (b) of this
section, are not subject to any further
requirements under this subpart
(i) Fuel meeting the following
specification, to be known as
"specification fuel:"
RECYCLED OIL FUEL SPECIFICATION
SPI
2 ppm i
10 ppm i
100 ppm irodmum.
4000 ppm mndmum.
100 ppm njdnun.
NMM—Ttw •pucOesOon daw net ipp* K> UMd oi mind
- -
(ii) Asphalt paving material containing
either of the following used oil recycling
residues:
(A) Distillation bottoms from used oil
re-refining: or
(B) Residue (i.e., baghouse dust) from
a fabric filter air pollution control device
used to control emission'from recycled
oil combustion.
(b) Conditions to exempt certain
recycled Oils. Recycled oil is subject to
this Subpart until the conditions of this
paragraph have been complied with:
(1) Specification fuel. In order for fuel
to be exempted from regulation under
paragraph (a) (2) (i) of this section, the
person first claiming the exemption
must
(i) Document through analysis that the
recycled oil does meet die specification
in § 266.40(a) (2) (i) of this subpart
Analytical procedures must be specified
in the plan required by { 286.43 (b) (2) of
this subpart and
(ii) Record the following information
for each shipment of specification fuel:
(A) The name and address of the
receiving facility;
Note—Since thii exemption ii for fuel, the
receiving facility U expected to either burn
the recycled oil or use it to produce fuel.
(B) The quantity of specification fuel
sent
(C) The date of shipment and
(D) A cross-reference to analysis
performed under 5 266.43 (b) (2) of this
subpart-f/.e., the documentation that the
fuel meets the specification of pargraph
(a) (2) (i) of tots section).
(iii) Maintain records of analyses and
•shipments of specification fuel as part of
the facility's operating record required
tinder { 266.43(f) of this subpart.
(2) Asphalt paving material. In order
for asphalt paving material to be
exempted from regulation under
paragraph (a) (2) (ii] of this section, a
person must ensure that the distillation
bottoms or baghouse dust that has been
incorporated into the paving material
has undergone a chemical reaction in
the course of producing the material so
as to become inseparable by physical
means.
(c) Small quantity recycled oil
generators. A generator of 1000
kilograms or less of recycled oil per
calender month need not manage the
recycled oil generated in that month
under this Subpart, provided the
following requirements are complied
with. Such a generator is a "small
quantity recycled oil generator."
Requirements:
(1) On-site management. If the
recycled «il is managed on-site, the
following requirements apply:
(i) The use of recycled oil for road
treatment dust suppression, or road
oiling is prohibited;
(ii) [Reserved for controls on burning.}
(iii) Small quantity recycled oil
generators may accumulate and store
recycled oil on-site. If more than 1000
kilograms is accumulated at any time.
all of the accumulated recycled oil is
subject to the remainder of this subpart
not to the special requirements of
paragraph (c) of this section. The
generator, when the quantity limitation
is exceeded, becomes subject to the
generator requirments of { 266.41 of this
Subpart
(iv) A small quantity recycled oil
generator must not install a tank system
unless the following installation
requirements are complied with.
Paragraph (c) (1) (iv) (B) of this section
does not apply if soil tests conducted in
accordance with ASTM Standard G57-
78 show that soil resistivity at the site is
12,000 ohm-cm or more. Installation
requirements:
(A) Such tank will prevent releases
due to corrosion or structural failure for
the operational life of the tank; and
(B) Such tank is cathodically
protected against corrosion, constructed
of non-corrosive material, or designed in
a manner to prevent the release of
recycled oil; and
(C) The material used in the
construction or lining of the tank is
compatible with recycled oil.
-------
49252
Federal Register / VoL 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
Note.—Steel and fiberglass are both
compatible with most used oils.
(2) Off-site recycling, (i) A small
quantity recycled oil generator may
send his recycled oil off-site for
legitimate recycling.
(ii) When a small quantity recycled oil
generator sends oil off-site for recycling.
it becomes subject to the remainder of.
this subpart upon collection (i.e.. when
accepted by the transporter).
Note.—A perton who collect* recycled oil
from small quantity recycled oil generator* It
subject to the transporter reqninments of
i 266.42 of this subpart
(3) Mixing with non-hazardous waste.
A small quantity recycled oil generator
may mix his recycled oil with non-
hazardous waste and remain subject to
paragraph (c) of this section as long as
the recycled oil portion of the mixture
does not exceed 1000 kilograms.
(d) Used oil mixed with hazardous
waste. (1) Used oil that has been mixed
with hazardous waste, including waste
from generators that would otherwise be
subject to the special requirements of
5 261.5 of this chapter, is not subject to
this Subpart but instead is subject to full
regulation under Parts 262 through 265,
Part 266, Subparts C and D, and Parts
270 and 124 of-this chapter, and to the
notification requirements of section 3010
ofRCRA.
(2) Used oil containing more than 1000
ppm of total halogens is presumed to be
mixed with chlorinated hazardous waste
listed in Part 261, Subpart D of this
chapter. Persons may rebut this
presumption by demonstrating that the
used oil has not been mixed with
hazardous waste. EPA will not presume
mixing has occurred if the used oil does
not contain significant concentrations of
chlorinated hazardous constituents
listed in Appendix Vm of Part 261 of
this chapter.
(e) Definitions and other general
provisions. (1) The terms used in this
Subpart unless otherwise noted, have
the meanings provided in § J 260.10,
261.1, 261.2, and 261J of this chapter.
(2) The following general provisions of
Part 260 apply throughout this subpart
Section 260.2, availability and
confidentiality of information;'
Section 260 J, use of number and gender;
Section 260.11, references; and
Subpart C, rulemaking petitions.
(3) Authorized facilities. When used
in this Subpart the term "authorized
facility" means a facility authorized to
manage recycled oil under one of the
following authorities:
(i) The facility has been permitted by
EPA under Part 270, Subparts A through
E of this chapter or
(ii) The facility has been pennitted-by-
rule under $ 270.60 of this chapter or
(iii) The facility has been permitted by
a State with a hazardous waste program
approved by EPA under Part 271 of this
chapter; or
(iv) The facility is in interim status
under section 3005(e) of RCRA and Part
270, Subpart G of this chapter.
1266.41 Standards for generators.
(a) Applicability—(1) General. This
section applies to generators of recycled
oil, including persona who aggregate
household-generated recycled oU and
persons who recover used oil from oily
wastewater (for recycling), but not to
small quantity recycled oil generators
who comply with S 286.40(c) of this
subpart
(2) Owners and operators of facilities
that recycle or store recycled oil are
subject to paragraph (d) of this section
in addition to ! 266.43 of this subpart
when they initiate off-site shipments.
(3) A generator who transports
recycled oil off-site is subject to the
transporter standards of § 266.42 of this
subpart in addition to this section.
(4) A generator who uses recycled oil
oil-site in a manner constituting disposal
as defined by i 266,20 of this chapter is
subject to the standards for persona
using hazardous waste in a manner
constituting disposal of i 266.23 of this
chapter in addition to this section.
(5) A generator who bums recycled oil
on-site is subject to the burner
standards of $ 266.44 of this subpart in
addition to this section.
(6) A person who collects recycled oil
from small quantity recycled oil
generators under $ 266.40(c) of this
subpart is subject to the transporter
standards of J 266.42 of this subpart but
is not subject to this section.
(b) Identification numbers. Generators
must comply with S 282.12 of this
chapter.
(c) On-site storage. Except as
provided by this paragraph a generator
who stores on-site is subject § 266.43 of
this subpart as well as this section.
Generators who meet the following
requirements are not subject to I 266.43
of this subpart
(1) The generator only stores recycled
oil in either tanks or containers;
(2) Recycled oil is stored on-site no
longer than 90 days;
(3) Tanks and containers must be
clearly labeled with the term
"RECYCLED OIL;"
(4) Container standards. Generators
storing in containers must comply with
the following requirements from Subpart
I of Part 265 of this Chapter
Section 265.171, the condition of
containers;
Section 265.173, the management of
containers;
Section 265.174, inspections; and
Section 265.176, special requirements for
ignitable waste.
(5) Standards for tank systems.
Generators storing in tanks must comply
with the following requirements for tank
systems:
(i) Uncovered tanks must be operated
to ensure at least 60 centimeters (2 feet)
of freeboard, unless the tank is equipped
with a secondary containment structure
(e.g., dike or trench) or • diversion
structure (e.g., standby tank) with a
capacity that equals or exceeds the
volume of the top 60 centimeters (2 feet)
of the tank;
(ii) Continuously fed tanks. Where
recycled oil is continuously fed into a
tank, the tank must be equipped with a
means to stop this inflow (e.g., a waste
feed cutoff system or bypass system to a
standby tank);
(iii) Tank system inspection
requirements. The generator must
conduct and document an inspection of
(where present):
(A) Discharge control equipment (e.g.,
waste-feed cutoff systems, bypass
systems, and drainage systems) at least
once each operating day, to ensure that
it is in good working order;
(B) Data gathered from monitoring
equipment (e.g., pressure and
temperature gauges) and leak detection
equipment at least once each operating
day, to ensure that the tank system and
leak detection system (if any) are being
operated according to their design;
(C) For uncovered tanks, the level of
recycled oil in the tank at least once
each operating day;
(D) The aboveground portions of the
tank system, if any. at least once each
operating day, to detect corrosion or
leaking of fixtures, joints, or seams; and
(E) The construction materials of, and
the area immediately surrounding the
externally accessible portion of the tank
system and secondary containment
structure (if any) at least weekly to
detect erosion or signs of leakage (e.g.,
oil spots, dead vegetation).
(iv) Closure of tank systems. At
closure, all recycled oil and associated
residues must be removed from tanks,
discharge control equipment and
discharge confinement structures (if
present).
Notb—Used oil mod associated residues
removed at closure are subject to this subpart
if recycled. If disposed of (or if mixed with
another hazardous waste) the used oil and '
residue* are subject to the hazardous waste
regulations of Parts 261-265 of this chapter.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 28, 1985 / Proposed Rules
49253
(v) Special requirements for ignitable
recycled oil, A generator who stares
igni table recycled oil as defined by
i 261.21 of this chapter, mu»t comply
with the buffer zone requirements for
tanks contained in Tablet 2-1 through 2-
6 of the National Fire Protection
Association's ""Flammable and
Combustible Liquid's Code" 1977 or 1SS1
[incorporated by reference, see i 280.11
of this chapter].
(vi) Special requireatents for tank
gystems thai are leaking or otherwise
unfit-far~use.. A-generator with • tank
system that is leaking or otherwise unfit-
tor-use most comply with the following
in addition to otherwise applicable
paragraphs of this section:
(A) A tank system found to be leaking
must be immediately removed from
service and the generator moat satisfy
the following requirements:
(I) The flow or addition of recycled oil
into the tank system must be stopped
immediately;
(2) The ™»m«inmg recycled oil in the
tank system (or its secondary
containment system, if any} must be
removed as quickly as possible and no
later than 24 hours after detection of the
leak so that no further release of
recycled oil is permitted to occur and
Inspection or repair of the.tank system
can be performed;
(3) Necessary steps must be
immediately taken to contain any visible
contamination resulting from i release
from the tank system that has occurred
or is occurring; and
[4] The Regional Administrator must
be notified within 24 hours after
confirmation of the leak.
(B) Tank systems taken out of service
in accordance with paragraph
fc)(5)(vi)(A) of this section must be (at
the option of the generator) either
(I] Closed in accordance with
Paragraph (c](5](v) of this section; or
(2) Repaired:: or
(3) Replaced.
[C] When the generator repairs or
replaces a tank system under paragraph
(cK5](vi)[B) of this section, he must then
comply with the standards for new tank
systems in paragraph [cK5)(vii] of this
section.
(vii) Special requirements fur new
task systems, A generator who installs a
tank system after [reserved far the
effective date of these regulations] must
comply with the following requirements
in addition to otherwise applicable
paragraphs of this section:
(A) [Reserved far seeaadary
containment standards]-, and
(B) [Reserved far clos-ure and post-
closure requirements}.
(6) Standards for facility
management. Generators must comply
with the following requirements.:
(i) Required items. The following
items must be on-site:
(A) A telephone;
(B) An appropriate number and type
of portable fire extinguishers.; and
(C) Absorbents (e.g., sawdust] or
other spill control material
oil rplll dean-upmiteriati
and tt**d aLl-toakad absorbent* tra
haxardou* wit let. If needed, the materials
art lubfect to thit Subpart. If di*po*td at the
material it rub feet to full regulation u
hiiirdoiu wut* under Parti 261-265, 270,
and 124 of thii chapter.
(ii) Emergency coordinator. At all
times there must be at least one
employee either on the premises or on
call (i.e., available to respond to an
emergency by reaching the facility
within a short period of time] with the
responsibility for coordinating all
emergency response measures specified
in paragraph (c](6][v) of this section.
This is the emergency coordinator.
(iii) Arrangements with local
authorities, The generator must request
an inspection by the local fire
department to familiarize the fire
personnel with the layout of the facility,
where oil is stored, and entrances to and
roads within the facility, and to
determine that an appropriate number
and type of fire extinguishers are
present. Where the fire department
declines to conduct such an inspection,
the generator must document such
refusal and keep a record of the refusal
at the facility.
(iv) Posting of information. The
generator must post the following
information next to the telephone:
(A] Name and telephone number of
the emergency coordinator;
(B) Location of fire extinguishers, spill
control materials, and if present fire
alarm; and
(C) Telephone number of the fire
department, unless the facility has a
direct «k>rm-
(v) Emergency procedures. Ether the
emergency coordinator or his designee
must respond to emergencies as follows;
(A) In the event of a fire, attempt to
extinguish it using a fire extinguisher
and tall the fire department;
[B] In the event of a spill, contain the
flow of ail to the extent possible and as
soon as practical clean-up the oil and
any contaminated materials or soil;
(C) When either the fire department
must be summoned or when a spill
reaches surface waters or an adjoining
shoreline the generator must file a report
with the Regional Administrator within
IS days including the following:
(1) The name, address, and EPA
identification number of the generator,
(2) Date, time, and type of incident
(e^, spill or fire];
(3} Quantity of oil involved in the
•incident;
[
-------
49254
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rulea
for at least three yean from the date
recycled oil is last sent to the facility.
(B) Designated facilities. When
offering a shipment of recycled oil to a
transporter, the generator (or owner or
operator) must provide the transporter
with the names, addresses, and EPA
identification numbers of those facilities
who have provided the written notice
required by pararaph (d)(2)(ii)(A) of this
section.
(C) Records of shipments. For each
shipment off-site, the generator (or
owner or operator) must record the
following information. The records must
be retained for at least three years from
the date of shipment Required
information: '
(1} The name, address, and EPA
identification number of the transporter,
[2) The quantity of recycled oil being
shipped; and
(3} The date of shipment
§266.42 Standard* for transporters.
(a) Applicability. (l)(i) This section
applies to transporters of recycled oil,
including persons who collect from
small quantity recycled oil generators
under § 266.40(c)(2) of this subpart;
(ii) This section does not apply to on-
site transportation either by generators
or by owners or operators of facilities.
(iii) This section does not apply to
transportation of the recycled oils
exempted under S \ 266.40(a)(2) and
256.40{b) of this subpart nor tq
transportation of household-generated
recycled oil from households to •
collection centers.
(2) A transporter is subject to the
generator standards of \ 266.41 of this
Subpart in addition to this section if he:
(i) Transports recycled oil into the
United States from abroad; or
(ii) Mixes recycled oils of different
DOT shipping descriptions by placing
them in the same container.
(3)(i) Except as provided by paragraph
(a)(3)(ii) of this section, a transporter
who recycles or stores recycled oil at a
facility is subject to the standards for
used oil recycling facilities of S 266.43 of
this subpart
(ii) Storage of recycled oil at a transfer
facility for a period not exceeding 10
days is exempt from § 266.43 of this
subpart and from permitting under Part
270 of this chapter, provided the
following conditions are met:
(A) Containers used for storage must
meet applicable packaging requirements
of the U.S. Department of
Transportation under 49 CFR Parts 173, '
178, and 17ft and «
(B) [Reserved for tank system-
secondary containment standards. ]
(b) Identification numbers.
Transporters must comply with $ 263.11
of this chapter.
(c) Discharges. Transporters must
comply with Part 263, Subpart C of this
chapter.
(d) Manifested shipments. When a
transporter accepts a shipment of
recycled oil accompanied by a
hazardous waste manifest he must
comply with the manifest and
recordkeeping requirements of Part 283,
Subpart B of this chapter.
(e) Shipments without manifests. A
transporter may accept recycled oil from
a generator without a hazardous waste
manifest under the special conditions of
either 8 266.40(c)(2) of this subpart
pertaining to small quantity recycled oil
generators or of 8 266.41(d)(2)(i) of this
subpart pertaining to recycling
contracts. When so accepting
unmanifested shipments, the transporter
must comply with the following
requirements in lieu of Part 263, Subpart
B of this chapter.
(1) Record of acceptance. For each
acceptance, the transporter must record
the following information. The record
must be retained for at least three yean
from the date of acceptance. Required
information:
(i) The name, address, and (when
applicable) EPA identification number
of the generator (or the owner or
operator) offering the shipment;
(ii) The quantity of recycled oil
accepted;
(iii) The proper shipping name of the
oil under U.S. Department of
Transportation rules in 49 CFR Part 172;
and
(iv) The date the recycled oil is
accepted
(2) Delivery. Transporters must
deliver all recycled oil accepted within
35 days of acceptance to a facility that
meets the following conditions:
(i) The facility is authorized to
manage recycled oil; and
(ii) Except for recycled oil collected
from small quantity recycled oil
generators under 9 266.40(c) of this
subpart the facility is one of the -
facilities designated according to
S 266.41(d)(2)(ii)(B) of ths subpart and
(iii) When recycled oil is collected
from small quantity recycled oil
generaton under { 266.40(c)(2) of this
subpart, the transporter must before
delivering oil to a facility, obtain from
the owner or operator of die facility a
one-time written and signed notice
certifying that the facility is authorized
to manage recycled oil, and including
the facility's EPA identification number.
The transporter must keep each notice
received for at least three yean from the
date recycled oil is last delivered to the
facility.
(3) Records of delivery. For each
delivery, the transporter must record the
following information. The records must
be retained for at least three yean from
the date of delivery. Required
information:
(i) The name, address, and EPA
identification number of the receiving
facility;
(ii) The quantity of recycled oil
delivered; and
(iii) The date of delivery.
§286.43 Standards for owners and
operators of used ofl recycling facilities.
(a) Applicability—{1} General, (i) This
section applies to owners and operators
of facilities that recycle or store
recycled oil. including, but not limited
to: Reclaimen, reprocesson, re-refiners.
blenden, and burners. A facility subject
to any paragraph of this section will be
known as a "used oil recycling facility."
(ii) This section does not apply to
facilities that only manage recycling oil
that has been exempted under
S§ 266.40(a)(2) and 266.40(b) of this
subpart
(2) Generators, (i) Except as provided
by S 9 266.40(c) and 266.41 (c) this
subpart generaton who recycle or store
recycled oil are subject-to this section as
well as S 266.41 of this subpart
(ii) Except as provided by the
conditional exemptions $$ 266.40(a)(2)
and 266.40(b) of this subpart an owner
or operator who initiates a shipment off-
site must comply with \ 266.41 (d) of the
generator requirements of this subpart
(3) Transporters. Except as provided
by the special provisions of
S 266.42(a)(3) of this subpart for transfer
facilities, a transporter who recycles or
stores recycled oil at a facility is subject
to this section as well as S 266.42 of this
subpart
(4) Recyclers without storage, (i)
Except as provided by paragraph
(a)(4)(ii) of this section, the owner or
operator of a facility who recycles but
does not store recycled oil is subject
only to the following requirements from
this part or Part 264 of this chapter, as
applicable:
Section 264.li EPA identification number?.
Section 264.12, required notices;
Section 266^3, standards for UM*
constituting disposal;
Section 266.41(d), requirements for shipments
cent off-iite;
Section 266.43(b)(l). (b)(2), and (b)(3),
analysis requinmmentK
Section 266.43(e), acceptance of recycled oil
from off-site;
Section 286.43(0, recordkeeping and
reporting; and
Section 266.44. the standard* for burners.
-------
Federal Register / Vol SO. No: 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules 49255
(ii) The owner or operator of a facility
who recycles used oil in a surface
impoundment is subject to all applicable
paragraphs of this section, not to the
reduced requirements of paragraph
(a)(4)(l) of this section.
(5) Additional requirements for
certain facilities. In addition to all other
applicable provisions of this Subpart
the following owners and operators are
subject to additional requirements as
follows:
(i) An owner or operator of any of the
following kinds of facilities must comply
with Part 270, Subpart G of this Chapter
pertaining to requirements for interim
status facilities:
(A) A facility where recycled oil is
stored or recycled in a surface
inpoundmenf or
(B) A facility where hazardous waste
is managed in addition to recycled oil:
or
(C) A facility where recycled oil is
managed in a manner constituting
disposal (as defined by 8 266.20 of this
Chapter).
Noto^-A facility that hat received a permit
under Part 270 or Part 271 of this chapter is
not eligible for interim status. In order to
manage recycled oil. a facility that hat
received a permit mutt comply with f) 124.5
and 270.41 pertaining to permit modification*.
(ii> Aa owner or operator who uses
recycled oil in a manner constituting
disposal (as defined in i 286.20 of this
chapter is subject to 8 266.23 of this
chapter.
(iii) An owner or operator who bums
recycled oil for energy recovery is
subject to 8 266.44 of this subpart*
(iv) An owner or operator who is
either excluded from permitting-by-rule
under 8 270.60{d)(l) of this chapter, or
who is required to obtain an individual
facility permit under 8 270.60(d)(3] of
this chapter, must comply with § 264.101
of this chapter pertaining to corrective
measures for releases from solid waste
management units, as applicable.
(b) General facility standards. The
owner or operator must comply with
Part 264, Subpart B of this chapter,
except that in lieu of the analysis
requirements of 8 264.13 of this chapter,
the owner or operator must comply with
paragraphs (b)(l) through (b)(3) of this
section.
(1) Analysis requirements. The owner
or operator must perform sampling and
analysis as necessary to comply with
applicable provisions of this Subpart At
a minimum, the analysis must include
the following:
(i) Halogens. The owner or operator
must determine the total halogen
content of used oil managed at the
facility. Used oil containing more than
1000 ppm total halogens is presumed to
be mixed with chlorinated hazardous
waste listed in Part 261, Subpart D of
this chapter. Persons may rebut this
presumption by demonstrating that the
used oil has not been mixed with
hazardous waste. EPA will not presume
that used oil has been mixed with
hazardous waste if it does not contain
significant concentrations of chlorinated
hazardous constituents listed in
Appendix Vffi of Part 261 of this
chapter.
(ii] Ignitability, The owner or operator
must determine whether recycled oil
managed at the facility is ignitable
according to 8 261.21 of this chapter,
unless all recycled oil is managed as
ignitable waste under 8 8 264.17,264.176,
and 264.198 of this chapter:
(iii) Specification fuel. An owner or
operator who produces fuel he claims is
exempt from regulation under
8 266.40(a)(2) of this subpart
("specification fuel") must analyze the
fuel for arsenic, cadmium, chromium,
lead, total halogens, and flashpoint An
owner or operator who produces
specification fuel is subject to
8 266.40(b)(l) of this subpart as well as
this section.
(iv) Mixing indicator parameters for
hazardous waste facilities. The owner
or operator of a facility where
hazardous waste is managed in addition
to recycled oil must comply with the
following in addition to applicable the
requirements of paragraphs (b)(l)(i),
(b)(l)(ii), (b)(l)(iii) of this section:
(A) For each hazardous waste
managed at the facility, the owner or
operator must identify at least one
indicator parameter that is found in the
hazardous waste but not normally found
in the recycled oil managed at the
facility. For wastes listed in Part 261,
Subpart D of this chapter, the indicator
•parameter would normally be the
constituent specified in Appendix VII of
Part 261, Subpart D of this chapter as the
basis for listing; however, the Regional
Administrator may, on a case-by-case
basis, specify one or more alternate or
additional indicator parameters; and
(B) The owner or operator must
analyze the recycled oil managed at the
facility for the parameters identified in
paragraph (b)(l)(iv)(A) of this section to
document that no mixing of hazardous
waste and recycled oil occurs.
(2) Analysis plan. The owner or
operator must develop and follow a
written analysis plan describing the
procedures he will use to comply with
paragraph (b)(l) of this section. He must
keep the plan at the facility. At a
minimum, the plan must specify the
following:
(i) The methods used to analyze
recycled oil for me parameters specified
in paragraph (b)(l) of this section;
(ii) The sampling method used to
obtain representative samples to be
analyzed. A representative sample may
be obtained using either
(A) One of the sampling methods in
Appendix I of Part 261 of this chapter or
(B) A method shown to be equivalent
under 8 8 280.20 and 260.21 of this
chapter.
(iii) For paragraphs (b)(l)(i) and
(b)(l)(ii) of this section, whether
samples or other information will be
obtained from generators, or
alternatively, whether analyses will be
performed on incoming shipments of
recycled oil;
(iv) For paragraph fb)(l)(iii) of this
section, whether recycled oil will be
sampled and analyzed prior to or after
any blending or treatment in the course
of fuel production; and
(v) For all requirements in paragraph
(b)(l) of this section, the frequency of
sampling to be performed, and whether
• analysis will be performed on-site or off-
site. ,
(3) Analysis records. Records of
analyses conducted to comply with this
paragraph must be maintained at the
facility as part of the facility's operating
record
(c) Preparedness and prevention. The
owner or operator must comply with
Part 264, Subpart C of this chapter.
[a} Contingency plan and emergency •
procedures. The owner or operator must
comply with Part 264, Subpart D of this
chapter.
(e) Acceptance of recycled oil from
off-site—{\} Manifested recycled oil. (i)
When a shipment of recycled oil
accompanied by a hazardous waste
manifest is accepted, the owner or
operator must comply with 8 8 264.71
and 264.72 of this Chapter.
(2) Unmanifested recycled oil. (i)
When recycled oil is accepted without a
manifest in compliance with the special
provisions of 88 266.41(d)(2) and
266.42(e) of this subpart the owner or
operator must record the following
information for each acceptance. The
records must be retained for at least
three years from the date of acceptance.
Required information:
(A) The name, address, and EPA
identification number of the transporter,
(B) The name, address, and (when
applicable) EPA identification number
of each generator who contributed to the
shipment;
(C) The quantity of recycled oil
accepted; and
(D) The date of acceptance.
-------
49256 Federal Register / Vol 50. No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
(ii) When recycled oil is delivered
without a manifest but arrangements
have not been made under
${ £66.41(d)(2) and 266.42(e) of this
chapter, the owner or operator must
comply with § 264.76 of this chapter
pertaining to unmanifested waste
reports.
(3] Hazardous waste mixtures. When _
an owner or operator determines
through analysis required by paragraph
(b)(l)(i) of this section or other means
that an incoming shipment (that was
expected to be recycled oil but instead)
has been mixed with hazardous waste,'
he must
(i) Either refuse to accept the
shipment, or accept the shipment and
manage the mixture as hazardous waste
under Parts 262-265, Part 266 Subparts C
and D, and Parts 270 and 124 of this
chapter; and
Note.—Under \\ 282,20 and 283.21. when •
shipment of hazardous waste cannot be
delivered to the generator'* designated
facility, the transporter must take the waste
to an alternate facility or return it to the
generator.
(ii) If the shipment is not manifested.
comply with the requirements of
§ 264.76 of this chapter pertaining to
unmanifested waste reports.
(f) Recordkeeping and-reporting. In
'addition to the requirements of
paragraphs (b)(3) and (e) of this section,
the owner or operator must comply with
the following record-keeping and
reporting requirements from Part 264 of
this chapter t
Section 264.73. operating record;
Section 264.74, availability, retention, and
disposition of records;
Section 264.75. biennial report and
Section 264.77, additional reports.
(g) Closure, post-closure, and
financial requirements, (i) Owners or
operators must comply with Subparts G
and H of Part 265 of this chapter.
(ii) The owners or operator of any of
the facility types excluded from
permitting-by-rule under 5 270.60(d)(l)
of this chapter, or who is required to
obtain an individual permit under
5270.60(d)(3) of this chapter, must
comply with Subparts G and H of Part
264 of this chapter as well as Subparts G
and H of Part 265 of this chapter.
(h) Storage requirements—(1)
Containers. An owner or operator who
stores recycled oil in containers is
subject to Part 264, Subpart I of this
chapter.
(2) Tank systems, (i) An owner or
operator who stores recycled oil in
tanks is subject to Part 265, Subpart ] of
this chapter. ± *
(ii) The owner or operator of any of
the facility types excluded from
permitting-by-rule under $ 270.60(d)(l)
of this chapter, or who is required to
obtain an individual permit under
§ 270.60(d){3) of this chapter, must
comply with Part 264, Subpart J as well
as Part 265, Subpart J of this chapter.
(3) Surface impoundments. An owner
or operator who recycles or stores
recycled oil in • surface impoundment is
subject to Part 285, Subparts F and K
and Part 264, Subparts F and K of this
chapter.
§266.44 Standards) for bumera.
(a) Applicability. (1) Generml. (i) This
section applies to any person (by site)
who bums recycled oil A person who
bums will be known as a "burner."
(ii) This section does not apply when
the special requirements of
i 286.40(b)(l) pertaining to specification
fuel are complied with.
(iii) This section does not apply to
small quantity recycled oil generators
who bum on-site in compliance with
8 266.40(c)(l) of this subpart.
(2) Generators who burn on-site are
subject to § 266.41 of this subpart in
addition to this section.
(3) Burners are subject to the
standards for used oil recycling facilities
in { 266.43 of this subpart in addition to
this section.
(b) [Remainder of this section
reserved for substantative standards for
burners.]
PART 270—EPA ADMINISTERED
PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMIT
PROGRAM
9. The authority citation for Part 270 is
revised to read as follows: .
Authority: Sees. 1000. 2002(a). 3005. 3007,
3014. and 7004 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act as amended by the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as
amended [42 U.S.C. 6001,6912(a), 6925,6927.
6934. and 6974] unless otherwise noted.
10. In Part 270, a new definition is
added to S 270.2 to read as follows:
827O2 DennMona.
• V. • * •
"Recycled oil" means used ofl that is
either burned for energy recovery, used
to produce a fuel, reclaimed (including
used oil that is reprocessed or re-
refined), or otherwise recycled, or that is
accumulated, collected, stored.
transported, or treated prior to recycling.
(a) [Reserved to define specific types
of burning considered to be recycling.}
(b) The term includes mixtures of
recycled oil and other materials, but nol
mixtures containing hazardous waste
(other than used oil). Used oil containing
more than 1000 ppm of total halogens is
presumed to be mixed with chlorinated
hazardous waste listed in Part 261,
Subpart D of this chapter. Persons may
rebut this presumption by demonstrating
that the used oil has not been mixed
with hazardous waste. EPA will not
presume mixing has occurred if the used
oil does not contain significant
concentrations of chlorinated hazardous
constituents listed in Appendix VIH of
Part 281 of this Chapter.
• « • • •
11. In S 270.10, paragraph (a) is
revised to read as follows:
J 270.10 General application
(a) Permit application. (1) Any person
who is required to have a permit
(including new applicants and
permittees with expiring permits) shall
complete, sign, and submit an
application to the Director as described
in this section and §{ 270.70 through
270.73.
(2) Persons currently authorized with
interim status shall apply for permits
when required by the Director.
Except as provided by this paragraph
for used oil recycling facilities, persons
covered by RCRA permits-by-rule
.(S 270.60) need not apply. The owner or
operator of a used oil recycling facility
who is not excluded from permit-by-rule
eligibility by { 270.80(d)(l) of this part
but who is not in full compliance with
the permit-by-rule requirements of
S 270.60(b)(2) of this Part as of [insert
effective date of the final rule
§ 270.6O(d)(2)\ must provide written
notice to EPA, by [insert effective date
of the final rule § 270.6O(d) (2)} that
notification information submitted to
EPA pursuant to RCRA section 3010 is
intended to also satisfy the RCRA
section 3005(e)(l)(C) "permit
application" requirements for interim
status.
(4) Procedures for applications.
issuance, and administration of
emergency permits are found
exclusively in S 270.61.
* * • • •
12. In Part 270, a new paragraph (d) is
added to S 270.60 to read as follows:
} 27060 Pwmttsi by rut*.
• * • « *
(d) Used oil Recycling Facilities.
Except as provided by paragraph (d)(l)
or (d)(3) of this section, the owner or
operator of a facility that recycles or
stores recycled oil. if the owner or *
operator complies with the requiremecU
of paragraph (d)(2) of this section.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. SO. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 19B5 / Proposed Rules 49257
(1) Exclusions from the permit-by-
rule. Owners and operators of the
following kinds of facilities are not
eligible for the pcrmit-by-rule, and are
subject to individual permitting under
this Part
(i) Recycled oil is stored in « surface
impoundment; or
(ii) Recycled oil is used at the facility
in a manner constituting disposal, as
defined by 126&20 of this Chapter, or
(iii) Other hazardous wastes are
managed at the facility in addition to
recycled oiL
(2) Requirements. An owner or
operator not excluded from permit-by*
rule eligiblity by paragraph (d)(l) of this
section must comply with the following
requirements:
(i) Standards. The owner or operator
must comply with $ S 266.43 and 266.44
of this Chapter, including amendments
or modifications to § 260.43 or i 266.44
of this chapter within time limits as
specified in the Federal Register;
(ii) Duty to comply. The owner or
operator must comply with all
conditions of i 266.43 and 266.44 of this
chapter except that the owner or
operator need not comply with the
conditions to the extent and for the
duration such non-compliance is
authorized in an emergency permit as
provided by 1270.61 of this Part Any
non-compliance, except under the terms
of an emergency permit, constitutes a
violation of the Act and is grounds for
an enforcement action.
Note.—When there is a violation of
i 27O00(d)(2) of this Part, the EPA Regional
Administrator may take enforcement action
under section 3008 of RCRA. Such action may
include compliance orders and schedule*,
including monitoring schedules, and including
revocation of authorization to manage
recycled oil, as appropriate.
(iii) Need to halt or reduce activity not
a defense. It shall not be a defense for
an owner or operator in an enforcement
action that it would have been
necessary to halt or reduce the
permitted activity in order to maintain
compliance with the requirements of
f 266.43 or f 266.44 of this chapter.
(iv) Duty to minimize. In the event of
noncompliance, the owner or operator
must take all reasonable steps to
minimize releases to the environment
and must carry out such measures as are
reasonable to prevent significant
adverse impacts on human health or the
environment
(v) Proper operation and
maintenance. The owner or operator
must at all times properly operate and
maintain all facilities and systems of
treatment and control (and related
appurtenances) which are installed or
used by the owner or operator to
achieve compliance with { 266.43 or
.1266.44 of this chapter. Proper operation
and maintenance includes effective
performance, adequate funding,
adequate operator staffing and training,
and adequate laboratory and process
controls, including appropriate quality
assurance procedures.
(vi) Property rights. The permit-by-
rule of this section does not convey any
property rights of any sort, nor any
exclusive privilege.
(vii) Duty to provide information. The
owner or operator must furnish to the
Director, within a reasonable time, any
relevant information which the Director
may request to determine whether cause
exists for revocation of permit-by-rule
authorization or for requiring an
individual permit or to determine
compliance with i 286.43 or i 266.44 of
this chapter. The owner or operator
must also furnish to the Director, upon
request copies of records required to be
kept by i 266.43 or 1266.44 of this
chapter.
(viil) Inspection and entry. The owner
of operator must allow the Director, or
an authorized representative, upon
presentation of credentials and other
documents as may be required by law
to:
(A) Enter at reasonable times upon
the owner or operator's premises where
a regulated facility or activity is located
or conducted, or where records must be
kept under 1266.43 or { 266.44 of this
chapter.
(B) Have access to and copy, at
reasonable times, any records that must
be kept under { 286.43 or 1266.44 of this
chapter
(C) Inspect at reasonable times any
facilities, equipment (including
monitoring and control equipment),
practices, or operations regulated or
required under i 286.43 or { 266.44 of
this chapter, and
(D) Sample or monitor at reasonable
times, for the purposes of assuring
compliance with { 266.43 or S 266.44 or
as otherwise authorized by the Act any
substances or parameters at any
location.
(ix) Representative sampling. Samples
and measurements taken to comply with
1266.43 or { 266.44 of this chapter must
be representative of the volume and
nature of the sampled or measured
activity.
(x) Recording of monitoring. The
owner or operator must retain records of
all monitoring information and copies of
all reports required for a period of at
least 3 yean from the date of the
sample, measurement or report
Records of monitoring must include:
(A) The date, exact place, and time of
sampling or measurement;
(B)The individual(s) who performed
the sampling or measurements;
(C) The dates analyses were
performed;
(D] The individual(s) who performed
the analyses;
(E) The analytical techniques or
methods used; and
(F) The results of such analyses.
(xi) Operating record. A written
operating record must be kepj at the
facility. The following information must
be recorded as it becomes available and
maintained in the operating record until
facility closure:
(A) A description of and the quantity
of recycled oil managed at the facility;
(B) The location of recycled oil stored
at the facility and the quantity stored at
each location;
(C) Summary reports and details of all
incidents that require implementation of
the contingency plan;
(D) Records and results of inspections
(including the date and nature of any
necessary repairs); and
(E) Results of any monitoring
performed to comply with { 266.43 or
I 266.44 of this chapter.
(xii) Signatory requirement. All
reports or information submitted to the
Director must be signed by a responsible
corporate officer [as defined by
1270.11(a)(l) of this part], by a general
partner, by the sole proprietor, or by the
principal executive officer or ranking
elected official, and must include the
following certification:
I certify under penalty of law that this
document and all attachments were prepared
under my direction or supervision in
accordance with a system designed to assure
that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on
my inquiry of the person or persons who
manage the system, or those persons directly
responsible for gathering the information, the
information submitted is. to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and
complete. 1 am aware that there are
significant penalties for submitting false
information, including the possibility of fine
and imprisonment for knowing violations.
(xiii) Anticipated noncompliance. The
owner or operator must give notice to
the Director of any planned changes in
the facility or activity which may result
in noncompliance with either { 266.43 or
1286.44 of this chapter.
(xiv) 24 hour reporting. (A) The owner
or operator must report any
noncompliance which may endanger
human health or the environment orally
within 24 hours from the time he or she
becomes aware of the circumstances,
including:
(1) Information concerning release of
any recycled oil or hazardous
-------
49258 Federal Register / VoL 50. No. 23J / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
constituent thereof that may cause an
endangerment to public drinking water
supplies; and
(2) Any information of a release or
discharge of recycled oil or hazardous
constituent thereof or of a fire or
explosion from the facility, which could
threaten the environment or human
health outside the facility.
(B) The description of the occurrence •
and its cause must include:
(1) The name, address, and telephone
number of the owner or operator
(2) The name, address, and telephone
number of the facility;
(3) The date. time, and type of
incident;
(4] The name and quantity of
material(s) involved;
(5) The extent of injuries, if any;
(6) An assessment of actual or
potential hazards to human health or the
environment outside the facility, if
applicable; and
(7] Estimated quantity and disposition
of recovered material, if any, resulting
from the incident
. (C) A written submission must also be
provided with in S days of the time the
owner or operator becomes aware of the
circumstances. The written submission
must contain a description of the
noncompliance and its cause: the period
of noncompliance including exact date*
and times, and. if the noncompliance
has not been corrected, the anticipated
time it is expected to continue; and steps
taken or planned to reduce, eliminate,
and prevent reoccurrence of the'
noncompliance. The Director may waive
the 5 day written notice requirement in
favor on a written report within 15 days.
(xv) Biennial report The owner or
operator must prepare and submit a
single copy of a biennial report to the
Director by March 1 each even-
numbered year. The report must cover
activities of the previous year (odd-
numbered year) and must be prepared in
accordance with the requirement* of
{ 264.75 of this chapter and submitted
on EPA Form 8700-1 3E
(xvi) Other information. When the
owner or operator becomes aware that
he or she failed to submit any relevant
facts or submitted incorrect information
in any report to the Regional
Administrator, he or she must promptly
submit corrected information or
additional facts.
(3) Individual permits, (i) The Director
may require an owner or operator to
apply for and (as a condition of
continued operation) obtain an
individual RCRA facility permit under
this Part if he obtains information
through site inspections or other meant
indicating any of the following
conditions:
(A) The owner or operator has not met
one of the requirements of paragraph
(d)(2) of this section; or '
Note.—The EPA Regional Administrator
may, in addition to requiring an individual
permit take enforcement action under
section 3006 of RCRA for • violation of
i 270.eo(d)(2) of this chapter.
(B) The facility, because of the type or
quantities of recycled oil being
managed, or the management methods
in use, or the facility's location, or other
relevant factors, could in the judgment
of the Director, pose a substantial
potential or present hazard to human
health or the environment and that
Individual facility permitting under this
Part is necessary to provide adequate
protection; or
(C) There has been a release of
recycled oil, hazardous waste, or a
hazardous constituent from a solid
waste management unit at the facility to
the environment and in the judgment of
the Director, the corrective action
measures implemented by the owner or
operator are inadequate to ensure
protection of human health and the
environment
Note*—When an owner or operator Is
required to obtain an individual RCRA
permit he Is subject to | 284.101 of mis
chapter pertaining to corrective action for
releases from solid waste management units,
as applicable.
(ii) Within 180 days of notification by
EPA that an individual RCRA facility
permit is required, the owner or operator
must submit Part B of the RCRA permit
application under Subpart B of this part
The owner or operator remains subject
to paragraph (b)(2) of this section until
final disposition is made concerning the
individual facility permit
(iii) If the Director denies the owner's
or operator's application for a permit he
is not eligible for the permit-by-rule
under paragraph (d) of this section.
Noto/—Ths owner or operator of • facility
whose permit application is denied is not
eligible for Interim status under section
3005(e)ofRCRA.
PART 271—REQUIREMENTS FOR
AUTHORIZATION OF STATE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAMS
13. The authority citation for Part 271
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sees. 1000, 2002(a). and 3008 of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act at amended by
the Resource Conservation tad Recovery Act
of ism, as amended [42 U.S.C. 0905,6912(a)
and 8828].
14. In Part 271. { 271.10) is amended
by adding the following entry to Table 1
in chronological order by date of
publication:
TABLE 1.—fteaumTONS IMPLEMENTING THE
HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE AMEND-
MENTSOM984
Om al puHeatton In tic
FcaetM. REOKran
Tltorf
da» ol puMafeH o*
MfrafnM.
lor e*
IMM of Ftaeyctad Ol
[FR Doe. 85-27902 Filed 11-27-85; 8:46 am]
VLUM com mm n m
40 CFR Parts 260,261,271. and 302
[SWH-FRL-2873-S(a))
Hazardous Wast* Management
System; General; Identification and
Listing of Hazardous Waste; Ussd Oil
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
Asmott Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) it today proposing to
amend the regulations for hazardous
watte managment under Subtitle C of
the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), by listing need oil
as a hazardous waste. EPA ha*
determined that used oil typically and
frequently contains significant
quantities of lead and other metals,
chlorinated solvents, toluene, and
naphthalene which would pose a
substantial hazard to human health and
the environment If improperly managed.
Today's notice also proposes a
regulatory definition of used oil and
proposes two modifications to the
mixture rule to exempt certain mixtures
of used oil from regulation. Finally.
because used oil will become a
hazardous substance under the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) as a result of today's
listing, EPA is also proposing to adjust
the statutory one pound CERCLA
reportable quantity (RQ) for used oil to
100 pounds. The effect of today's
proposal, if promulgated, would be to
control the treatment and disposal of
used oil (as well as its transportation,
accumulation, or storage prior to
treatment or disposal), by subjecting it
to full hazardous waste regulation under
Subtitle C of RCRA. At the same time,
most used oil that is recycled would be
subject to the special management
standards for recycled ofl being
proposed in another Section of today's
Federal Register.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
49259
DATES: EPA will accept public
comments on this proposal antfl January
28,1986. Public hearings will be held to
obtain public comments on this proposal
and the proposed management
standards for recycled oil (appearing
elsewhere in this Federal Register) on
January 8,10, and 16 of 1986. The
locations for the public hearings are
provided below; for additional
information on the public hearings, see
Part Four, Section III of the management
standards preamble.
ADDRESSES: EPA will hold public
hearings at the following locations^
• January B, 1986—Holiday Inn, North
Park Plaza. 10650 North Central
Expressway. Dallas, Texas 75231
(Phone: 214/373-6000.
• January 10,1986—Ramada
Renaissance, 55 Cyril Magnin Street
(One block north of 5th ft Market), San
Francisco, California 94102 (Phone: 415/
392-8000)
• January 18,1986—Department of
Health and Human Services, North
Auditorium ("C" Street entrance), 330
Independence Avenue SW. Washington,
DC 20201.
Comments on this proposal should be
mailed to the Docket Clerk (Docket No.
3001/Listing of Used Oil), Office of Solid
Waste (WH-562), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401M Street S.W.,
Washington. D.Ct 20460.'Comments
received by EPA may be inspected in
Room S-212, US. EPA, 401M Street
SW, Washington, DC, from 9:00 ajn. to
4.-00 p.m. Monday through Friday,
excluding holidays.
FOR FURTHER MFORUATIOM CONTACT.
The RCRA Hotline, call toll free at (800]
424-9346 or at (202) 382-3000. For
technical information, contact Matthew
Straus, Chief. Waste Identification
Branch, Characterization and
Assessment Division, Office of Solid
Waste. (WH-562B). U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401M Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Telephone: (202)
475-8551. Single copies of the proposal
may be obtained by calling the RCRA
Hotline at the number above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INPOMMATION:
Outline of Today's Proposal
L Introduction
A. Background
B. Used Oil Recycling Act (UORA)
C. Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984
IL Relationship of Used Oil Listing to Section
3014 Management Standards for
Recycled Oil
ID. Summary of Proposed Used OH Lilting
IV. Applicability and Scope of Used Oil
Listing
A Authority to List Used Oil as a
Hazardous Waste
B. Scope of Used Ofl Listing
X. Definition of Used Oil
2. Re-refined Oil
_ 1. Mixtures of Used Oil and Other
Materials
a. Existing Mixture Rule
b. Mixtures of Wastewater and Used Oil
c. Oil-Contaminated Industrial Wipers
(oily rags)
C Debiting Procedures for Used OH
V. Basis for Listing Used Oil as a Hazardous
Waste
A Criteria for Listing
B. Summary of Used Oil Universe
C. Toxic Constituents of Concern
D. Waste Constituent Mobility:
Environmental Fate and Transport
E. Waste Mismanagement Potential
VL CERCLA and Clean Water Act Impacts:
Proposal to Adjust Used Oil Reportable
Quantity to lot) Pounds
VIL State Authorization Impacts
Vm Request for Comments
DC Executive Order 12291
X. Regulatory Flexibility Act
XL Paperwork Reduction Act
X1L List of Subjects
L Introduction
A. Background
On December 18,1978, EPA initially
proposed guidelines and regulations for
the management of hazardous wastes
and specific rules for the identification
and listing of hazardous wastes under
Section 3001 of RCRA. See 43 FR 58946.
At that time, EPA proposed to list waste
lubricating oil' and waste hydraulic and
cutting oil as hazardous wastes on the
basis of their toxidty. In addition, we
also proposed to regulate osed
lubricating, hydraulic, transformer.
transmission, or cutting oil that was
hazardous and was incinerated or
burned as a fuel and waste oils (again,
that were hazardous) that were used in
• manner constituting disposal* (See
proposed § 250.10 where the Agency
proposed to define the term "other
discarded material" that is used in the
definition of "solid waste.")
A large percentage of commenten on
the 1978 proposal argued that the
Agency should not list waste oil as
hazardous because most waste ofl was "
reused and was, therefore, not a waste:
in addition, they argued that such a
designation would have serious impacts
on the recycling industry. Consequently,
in its May 19,1980 regulations, EPA
decided to defer promulgation of rules
covering the use or recovery of many
'The term "wette ofl" tacludn both oeed «nd
•nued oil* which may no longer be used for their
origin*! purpoie. While the Agency Initially
considered fating the entire weite all anivene,
todey'i proposed ruta epply oidy to thet portion of
the weite ofl anfrene camprtted of aeed oili.
'"Die hi e mnmer cmutltutton dieposeT meant
the placement of hezerdoo* weite directly onto the
land for beneficial recycling or the placement of
products which contain certain hazardous wute
onto the lend for beneficial recycling.
waste streams, including waste ofl, in
order to fully consider whether waste-
and use- specific standards should be
implemented rather than imposing the
full set of Subtitle C regulations on
potentially recoverable and valuable
materials. See 45 FR 33084. EPA stated
hi the preamble to those regulations that
it intended to address the reuse and
recovery of waste oil in the Fall of I960.
Since the Agency had anticipated
controlling the recycling of used oil
within a short time, is also decided not
to list waste oil for disposal in the 1980
regulations in order to deal with the
entire waste oil issue at one time. Under
the May 19,1980 regulations, however,
used oil that exhibits any of the
characteristics of hazardous waste (i.e.,
ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or
extraction procedure (EP) toxicity) and
is disposed (or accumulated, stored, or
treated prior thereto) is hazardous and
subject to full regulation under Subtitle
C of RCRA.
B. Use Oil Recycling Act (UORA)
In an effort to encourage the recycling
of used oil, and in recognition of the
hazards posed by its mismanagement,
on October 15.1980, Congress passed
the Used Oil Recycling Act (UORA)
(Pub. L 96-483). Among other
provisions, the UORA required the
Agency to make a detemmation as to
the hazardousness of used oil and report
such findings to Congress together with
a detailed statement of the data and
other information upon which the
determination was based; in addition,
the Agency was to establish
performance standards and other
requirements under Section 7 of the
UORA as "may be necessary to protect
the public health and the environment
from hazards associated with recycled
oil" as long as such regulations "do not
discourage the recovery or recycling of
used oil."
In January 1981, EPA submitted the
Used Oil Report to Congress mandated
by Section B of the UORA * indicating in
the report that the Agency intended to
list both used and unused waste oil as
hazardous under section 3001 of RCRA.
The Agency based its intention to list
both used and unused waste oils on the
presence of a number of toxicants that
are present hi crude or refined oil (e.g.,
benzene, naphthalene, and phenols) as
well as contaminants which are presen.
in used oil as a result of use (e.g., lead,
chromium, and cadmium).4
'Rgport to Cangnu: Lilting of Watt* Oil a* e
Hatardoia Watt* fuauaat to Suction 18)12). Pub. L.
86-463; U.S. EPA. 1081.
• In detailed comment* on the Uied Oil Report to
Congre** lubmitted to the Agency by the American
Continued
-------
49260
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules
C. Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of1984
On November 8,1984, the President
signed the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 ("1984
Amendments"). These amendments.
taken along with the provisions of
section 3012 of RCRA (which
incorporated section 7 of the UORA),
establish the requirements for the
regulation of used oil which are now
embodied in section 3014 of Subtitle C of
RCRA.* Section 3014(a) requires the
Administrator to:
. . . promulgate regualtioni ... at may be
necessary to protect the public health and
environment from the hazards associated
with recycled oil In developing such
regulations, the Administrator shall conduct
an analysis of the economic impact of the
regulations on the oil recycling industry. The
Administrator shall ensure that such
regulations do not discourage the recovery or
recycling of used oil, consistent with the
protection of human health and the
environment.
These amendments alter EPA's
mandate with respect to the regulation
of used oil by stipulating that protection
of human health and the environment is
the prime consideration, even if such
regulation may discourage the recovery
or recycling of used oil, in some cases.
The comprehensive management
standards for recycled used oil
mandated by section 3014 are being
proposed today in another section of
today's Federal Register. A more
detailed discussion of the background
leading to the development of those
management standards is contained in
the notice.
Of specific relevance to today's
proposed listing of used oil as a
hazardous waste is section 3014(b) of
RCRA which requires the Administrator
to propose whether to list or identify
used automobile and track crankcase oil
as a hazardous waste by November 8,
1985, and to finalize that proposal as
well as determine whether other used oil
should be listed or identified as
hazardous by November 8,1986. Today's
proposal reflects the Agency's
determination that petroleum derived
and synthetic used oil should be listed
as a hazardous waste under Section
3001 of RCRA,
Petroleum Inatitute (API) in December 1981. API
raited *everal i**ue» relevant to the prapoxd lilting
of both u*ed and unuaed "watte oil*." Sine* the
Agency is repropoiing the lilting of need oil a* a
hazardous waate, the Agency will not reipood to
ipecific comment* on previou* propo*al* regarding
u*ed oil. APT* comment*, however, an available
for review in the RCRA docket. _.
•Prior to the 1884 Amendment*, the u*ed oil
requirement* were found In lection 3012-of RCRA.
Since a substantial amount of time
has elapsed since the 1978 proposal and
since the Agency has obtained extensive
additional data on the constituents of
used oil the Agency has decided to re-
propose the listing of used oil end seek
additional public comment rather than
publish the listing as a final rule.
Consequently, persons who commented
on the 1978 proposal should resubmit
their comments or submit new
comments for consideration in this
rulemaking.
O. Relationship of Use Oil Listing to
Section 3014 Management Standards for
Recycled Oil
The management standards being
proposed in another section of today's
Federal Register are being issued under
the authority of sections 3004 and 3014
of RCRA.* Under section 3014 of RCRA,
EPA is required to establish standards
applicable to recycled used oil that will
protect public health and the
environment and. to the extent possible
within that context not discourage used
oil recycling. Section 3014(cJ provides
specific guidance to EPA on the
standards applicable to generators and
transporters of recycled used oil that is
identified or listed as hazardous under
section 3001. Section 3014(d) provides
that the owner or operator of a facility
that recycles used oil is subject to the
Section 3004 hazardous waste standards
but is deemed to have a RCRA permit
provided the recycling facility complies
with those standards. Section 3014(d)
also provides the Administrator with
authority to require such owners or
operators to. obtain an individual permit
under section 3005(c) if he determines
that an individual permit is necessary to
protect human health and the
environment
Today's proposed listing of used oil as
a hazardous waste is based simply on
EPA's determination that used oil meets
the criteria for listing under section 3001
of RCRA, (See 40 CFR 281.11(a)(3).)
Therefore, under today's proposed
listing, disposal1 of hazardous used oil
• EPA recently began the proem of regulating
o*ed oil burned a* • fuel by finalizing the Thai* T
management itandard* on the actual burning of
uMd oil and administrative control* on penona who
market and bum hazardou* wa*te fuel and u*ed oil
fuel The management *tandard* for the recycling of
u*ed oil being proposed elwwhere in today's
Federal RegUtar will aupplement the Phsw I
burning and blending rule* aa thoie rule* apply to
luedoU.
' For purpoie* of this rulemaking. the term
~di*po*al" la limply intended to dUdnguiah
between the management of u**d oil under the
exi*ung provision* of Section* 3002 thru 300* venua
that uaed oil which la recycled and subject to the
providon* of Section 3O14. It doe* not reflect a
rethinking of itatutory or regulatory concept* of
what coiutltute* "di*po*al"-
will be subject to regulation under 40
CFR Parts 282-285,124. and 270-271.
while recycled used oil that is
hazardous will be subject to the
recycled used oil rules codified in 40
CFR Part 266,
Persons interested in commenting on
this listing and/or on the 3014 standards
should note that the scope of today's
notice proposing to list used oil as a
hazardous waste is different from that of
the accompanying notice which
proposes specific standards for the
management of recycled oil under
section 3014, The main issue relevant to
the proposed listing of used oil is
whether used oil meets the criteria for
listing contained in § 261.11 (a)(3).
However, other issues addressed in this
notice that may also be of interest
include the Agency's definition of used
oil, modifications to the mixture rule to
exempt certain oil mixtures from
regulation, and the Agency's proposal to
adjust the statutory RQ of used oil.
The second of today's proposals
concerning used oil. on the other hand,
seeks to address the broader issues
concerning the extent of regulation that
should be imposed on used oil recycling
practices in order to protect human
health and the environment and, to a
lesser degree, the specific impacts of
that regulation on the various segments
of the recycling industry. The Agency's
detailed analyses of the used oil
universe, management practices, and
regulatory and economic impacts are,
therefore, to be found in the
accompanying Federal Register proposal
rather than in this notice.
HL Summary of Proposed Used Oil
Listing
This notice proposes to amend 40 CFR
Part 261. Subpart D, to add used oil to
the list of hazardous wastes. As detailed
in the Basis For Listing Section, below
EPA-has evaluated used oil against the
criteria for listing hazardous wastes
contained in § 261.11(a)(3) and has
determined that it poses a substantial
present or potential hazard to human
health or the environment when
improperly managed. This determination
is based on analytical data from
approximately a thousand used oil
samples that indicate that a number of
toxic constituents are typically and
frequently present hi used oil at levels of
regulatory concern, either as a direct
result of use or subsequent adulteration.
In addition, these toxicants have the
potential to migrate from used oil and
escape Into the invironment This has
been demonstrated in a large number of
damage cases where used oil was
mismanaged and presented a
-------
Federal Register / Vol. SO. No. 230 / Friday. November 29, 1985 / Proposed Rules 49261
substantial hazard to human health and
the environment*
• The toxic constituents of concern
identified by the Agency include lead,
three chlorinated aliphatic
hydrocarbons (1,14-trichloroemane,
trichloroethylene, and
tatrachlonethylene), toluene, and
naphthalene. EPA also has identified as
constituents of concern several metals-
cadmium, arsenic, and chromium—
which are typically found in wed oil at
concentrations, which may pose a
significant risk when used oil is burned
A regulatory definition of used oil is
being proposed today for inclusion in 40
CFR 260.10. The proposed definition of
used oil includes all petroleum-derived
or synthetic oils * originally used as a
lubricant (including engine oils), as a
hydraulic fluid, as a metal working fluid
(jnrlnfting cutting, grinding, and
machining fluids, and rolling, stamping,
quenching, and tempering oils), and as
an insulating fluid or coolant10 Except
as provided below, the above used oils
will all be considered hazardous wastes
when disposed of. when recycled, or
when accamulated, treated, stored or
transported prior to disposal or
recycling.
Excluded from the Hating of used oil
are crude or fuel oils spilled onto the
land-or"water? and wastes from
petroleum refining operations such as
API separator sludge. Today's notice
also proposes to exclude from the used
oil listing re-refined oil used as a
lubricant since the Agency has
determined that re-refined oil that is
used as a lubricant is not a solid waste
and thus is not a hazardous waste. In
addition, EPA is proposing to amend the
mixture rule (5 26L3(a)(2)) to exclude
from regulatory control: (1) wastewaters
contaminated with small amounts of
used oil; and (2) industrial wipers (i.e.
"oily rags") contaminated with used oil
as a result of being used to clean the
face and hands of the user or wipe or
dean equipment or machinery.
Finally, EPA is proposing an
amendment to 40 CFR Part 302 to list
used oil as a CERCLA hazardous
substance and is proposing to establish
a reportable quantity (RQ) for used ofl
of 100 pounds.
•See the Background Document for Uted Oil for
diacuaaioB of damage incident! at uaed oil facSUira.
•Synthetic oili are being indoded to today1*
lilting tor the maona aet forth in Section IV JJ,
"In addition, oil derived bom pyrolyaU of acrap
tin* would elM be covered by the uaed oil Hating
after me end oontajnmatioa.
IV. Applicability and Scope af Used Oil
Listing
A. Authority to List Used Oil as a
Hazardous Waste
Section 3001 of RCRA provides the
Agency with the general statutory
authority under RCRA for identification
and listing of hazardous wastes. The
1984 Amendments to RCRA specifically
require EPA to excercise this authority
and propose whether to list or identify
used automobile and truck crankcase oil
as a hazardous waste by November 8,
1865, and to finalize that proposal as
well as determine whether other used oil
should be listed or identified as
hazardous by November 8,1886. (See
section 3014fb).)
These OTngnjrfm>nfa alan affirm fha
Agency's authority to regulate, as a
hazardous waste, used oil that is
recycled, even though such regulation
. may have a discouraging effect on some
recycling. Prior to the 1964 amendments,
the Agency was directed to ensure that
its regulations did not "discourage the
recovery or recycling of used oil"
However, the 1984 amendments deleted
this language with respect to the listing
decision and modified it for the used oil
management standards by adding the
phrase "consistent with protection of
human health and the environment" By
doing this. Congress clearly intends for
the Agency to regulate recycling
activities sufficiently to assure adequate
protection while reducing, as much as
possible, the impact on the recycling
industry as a whole. The conference
report accompanying the 1984
amendments specifically notes that"
. . . [T]he purpose of the provisions is to
clarify the intent of section 3014 in order
to assure that EPA's regulations in this
area are protective of human health and
the environment... It was never
Congress' intent that protection of
human health and the environment be
subordinated to the continuation of used
oil recycling activities. The Agency can
and should prohibit or control used oil
recycling practices that it determines
will pose a potential hazard to human
health and the environment even though
such regulations would impede
recycling." (See (LR. Conf. Rep. No.
1133, 98th Cong. 2nd Sess. 113 (1984)].
B. Scope of Used Oil Listing
As discussed earlier in this preamble,
today's proposed hating applies to used
oil when disposed of, recycled, or when
accumulated, stored, or treated prior to
being disposed or recycled. This section
discusses EPA's regulatory definition of
"used oil" as well as the special status
of re-refined oil. Lastly, this section will
explain the amendments to the mixture
rule contained in I 2B1.3(a)(2) that will
propose to remove from regulatory
control; (1) Wastewatera that are
contaminated with small amounts of
used oil: and (2) industrial wipers used
to clean up small oil spills and wipe or
dean equipment machinery, or the face
and hands of the user.
1. Definition of Used Oil. EPA is
proposing a definition in 40 CFR 260.10
for "used oil" as follows:
"Uaed Oil" is petroleum-derived or
synthetic oil including, but not limited to, oil
which is osed at a: f) Lubricant (engine,
turbine, or gear); if) Hydraulic fluid (including
transmisfion fluid)-, ill) Metalworking fluid
(including cutting, grinding, machining,
rolling, stamping, quenching, and coating
oilc) or iv) Insulating fluid or coolant and
which is contaminated through u*e or
subsequent management.
This definition would include those
used oils mat are contaminated with
PCB's. However, it should be noted that
the use of used oils containing any
concentration of PCBs and the disposal
of used oils containing 50 ppm or greater
of PCBs are subject to the TSCA PCB
rules promulgated under 40 CFR Part
781. Under the'current TSCA PCB rules,
the use of used oils containing any
concentration of PCBs is prohibited and
the disposal of used oil containing 50
ppm or greater PCBs is strictly
controlled. When today's listing
proposal is promulgated, users and
disposers of used oils containing PCBs
will be subject to both the TSCA and
RCRA regulations until the Agency
integrates the PCB rules with the
hazardons waste rules. Where both sets
of regulations are applicable, EPA will
apply the more stringent of the two
requirements. The Agency, however.
solicits information on whether certain
used oils containing PCBs should be
exduded from the biting because they
do not typically contain other toxic
constitutents (e.g. metals).
Examples of petroleum wastes which
are not "used oils" include: crude oil or
virgin fuel oil spilled on the land or
water oily sludge in the bottom of crude
or fuel oil storage tanks; and wastes
from petroleum refining operations such
as API separator sludge.
This regulatory definition is drawn
partly from the statutory definition of
used oil found at section 1004(36) of
> RCRA. That section defines "use oil" as
any oil which has been:
A. Refined from crude oil,
B. Used, and
C As a result of such use,
contaminated by physical or chemical
impurities.
The Agency is interpreting the
definition of used oil contained in the
-------
49262 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
•statute to include: (1) Used oils which
are adulterated subsequent to use as
well as those that are contaminated "as
a result of such use" (section 1004(36));
(2) synthetic oils, including those
derived from coal or shale; and (3)
processing residues from the recycling of
used oil."
EPA's broad regulatory definition of
used oil is based on a combined
interpretation of sections 1004(36) and'
3014. The proposed definition
incorporates both the specific elements
of section 1004(36) as well as the factors
necessary to meet the related statutory
mandate of section 3014. The specific
language and legislative history of
section 3014 make dear that Congress
passed section 3014 to address the wide
range of troublesome and difficult
problems associated with used oil
recycling activities from generation and
collection, through treatment and
processing, to final end use. This broad
objective is reflected in Congress'
comprehensive mandate to EPA to
"promulgate regulations—as may be
necessary to protect public health and
environment from hazards associated
with recycled oil." Section 3014(a)
(emphasis added). As recycled oil is
defined in terms of used oil. it is
necessary to define used oil in such a
way as to ensure that the Section 3014
regulations cfo" address the many
hazards that can normally and
reasonably be expected to be associated
with the recycling of used oiL To define
the term more narrowly would permit a
number of regulatory loopholes and
create implementation problems that
would run counter to Congress' explicit
intent "to reduce the uncertainty and'the
gaps in the regulatory treatment of used
oil." (See H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 1133. 98th
Cong. 2nd Sess. 113 (1984).
With respect to oils adulterated
subsequent to use, the Agency has
concluded, on the basis of extensive
sampling and analyses, that used oil
typically and frequently contains
several contaminants which are found in
used oil as a result of intentional or •
inadvertent mixing subsequent to use
rather than as a direct result of a
particular use. The Agency has found
that under existing mismanagement
practices, used oil is frequently mixed or
blended with other waste liquids which
contain toxic contaminants (many of
them not yet defined as hazardous
under RCRA) either at the generation
site or at used oil processing facilities.
These contaminants, although not
present as a result of actual use, are.
nevertheless, present at levels of
regulatory concern in most used oil
samples tested. Therefore, they are
being listed among the constituents of
concern which form the basis for today's
proposed listing.
The Agency could list these used oils
as hazardous (i.e., those which become
contaminated with non-hazardous
wastes subsequent to use) and not
subject them to the special management
standards, but rather to the Subtitle C
rules. However, we believe that used
oils which contain essentially identical
constituents and pose essentially the
same risk be regulated similarly. In
addressing specifically this issue, the
Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works, hi its report on used oil
stated "Under some circumstances, it
may be difficult to determine if a waste-
derived fuel should be classified as a
used oil fuel or a hazardous waste fuel
For example, used oil contains
contaminants, such as lead, that may be
present either through use of the oil or
through deliberate adulteration. Both
hazardous waste fuel and contaminated
used oil fuel should be regulated in
accordance with these new provisions,
as necessary, to protect human and the
environment The Agency, however, has
some discretion as to how to classify
these types of fuel mixtures." Sen. Rep.-
No, 284,98th Cong.. 1st Sess.. 36 (1983).
Therefore, we believe the Agency has
discretion to expand the difinition of
used oil as currently defined hi RCRA to
incluie those oils which become
contaminated (with non-hazardous
wastes) subsequent to use and thus,
subject those used oils that are recycled
to the special management standards.u
As stated earlier, we believe that
Congress intended the Agency to
consider all contaminants typically
found in used oil when it directed the
Agency to protect the public and the
environment from the "hazards
associated with recycled oil" (RCRA
section 3014).
While section 1004(36) of RCRA
appears, on its face, to limit the
statutory definition of "used oil" to oil
derived from petroleum, we nevertheless
are interpreting the definition of used oil
more broadly to include synthetic oils
derived from shale and coal. EPA
believes that in constructing the
definition of used oil. Congress did not
intend to exclude synthetic oils from
control under section 3014, despite the
" Thii definition expandt upon the regulatory
definition of used oil contained in the Phate 1
burning and blending nil*.
"A* ditcutted In Section IVJ, when in oil it
adulterated with a hazardoua waate (i.e. a
hazardoua ipent tolvent). the mlxtun would be
fully regulated at a hazardout watte under the
general hazardout watte regulation! and would not
be tubrect to the tpecitl ttandardt for recycled uted
oil
fact that used oil is defined as being
derived from crude oil "under RCRA. The
Agency's rationale for this position is
based on three points. First synthetic
oils are used for the same purposes a»
petroleum derived oils, are usually
mixed and managed in the same manner
after use, and present as great a hazard
as petroleum-based oils due to the fact
that these oils are just as likely to be
contaminated from use or be
adulterated. To condition a used oil
. regulation on a preliminary
determination of whether a particular
used oil has been derived from crude oil
or whether it is synthetic in origin or
whether and to what extent it has been
mixed would seriously complicate the
Agency's efforts to regulate recycled oil
We do not believe that this is what
Congress intended. Second, such a
distinction would serve no practical
purpose since mixtures of used oil and
synthetic oil would be regulated under
the Subtitle C rule* or the recycled oil
rules in any case as a result of the
mixture rule. Finally, excluding these
oils from the definition of used oil would
necessitate a separate listing of
synthetic used oils.-resulting in
regulation of synthetic used oils that are
recycled under the full set of hazardous
waste regulations while petroleum-
derived oik that are recyled would be
regulated under tailored standards
issued pursuant to Section 3014,
Congress dearly did not intend that
used oils which contain essentially
identical constituents and pose
essentially the same risk be regulated
differently.
EPA is also proposing to indude hi the
definition of used oil residues or sludges
resulting from the storage or processing
of used oils although these processing
residues are not specifically mentioned
in the statutory definition of used oil
These processing residues would, in any
case, be hazardous wastes under the
'derived from" rule contained in
{ 261 J(c)(2) of the regulations. Under
that rule, any waste which is derived
from a hazardous waste continues to be
a hazardous waste unless and until it
has been demonstrated to be non-
hazardous. Since used oil will be a listed
hazardoua waste under today's
proposal, residues from the processing
of used oil would still be hazardous
wastes. Thus, if used oil processing
residues were not regulated as used oils
when they are recyded, they would be
subject to the full set of Subtitle C
regulations under the derived-from rule.
EPA believes, however, that since these
residues are similar to used oil in terms
of the hazardous constituents that are
present these residues should be
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Fridav. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
49263
regulated under the special management
standards for recycled used oil being
proposed under section 3014 of RCRA.
Such an approach would be
environmentally protective and would
allow any person who generates or
manages used oil or these processing
residues to comply with one set of
regulations.
2. Re-refined Oil. Re-refined ofl is
defined in section 1004(39) of RCRA as
"used oil from which the physical and
chemical contaminants acquired through
previous use have been removed
through a refining process." Re-refining
of used oil to produce a lubricant is the
highest form of used oil recyling and, by
definition, produces a product-like oil
that is virtually free of contamination
and essentially the equivalent of virgin
oil Thus, the Agency believes that used
oil which is used as a lubricant, once it
has been re-refined, no longer meets the
definition of a solid waste contained in
S 261.2. and is not, therefore, a
hazardous waste.u Although re-refined
oil is not considered to be a solid and
hazardous waste under today's
proposed listing, the transportation and
storage of used oil prior to the actual re-
refining process is still subject to
regulation under the proposed section
3014 standards. Thus, while the re-
refined oil itself is not a- solid waste.
until .such time-as the oil becomes a'
product, it continues to be recycled oil
and subject to regulation under section
3014.
The exclusion of re-refined oil from
today's listing is consistent with the
recent amendments to the definition of
solid waste. See SO FR at 634. January 4,
1965. Under those amendments, most
materials which are reclaimed from
solid wastes and that are used
beneficially are not solid wastes and,
therefore, are not hazardous wastes
provided they are not used as a fuel or
used to produce a fuel or are not placed
on the land for beneficial use.14 Used oil
which is used as a lubricant that has
been re-refined is one such example and
is, therefore, deemed to have been
reclaimed from solid waste and, thus, is
not a solid waste within the meaning of
Subtitle C of RCRA.
3. Mixtures of Used OH and Other
Materials—a. Existing Mixture Rule.
"Although re-refined oil U not a toUd or
hazardous waete under this propoML re-refined oQ
would continue to be • ued oil within the meaning
of section 3014 of RCRA.
" Material* the! ire redefined from • tolld weite
em itill be a «oUd and huardoui watte \I: (1) The
materials ore accumulated apeculatively. or (2) the
materials have been processed minimally or the
material* have been partially reclaimed but mutt be
reclaimed further before recovery to complete (ace
SO rR S35. January 4.1865).
Under the existing rule concerning
mixtures of hazardous wastes and solid
wastes (40 CFR 281.3), when a
characteristic or listed hazardous waste
is mixed with another solid waste, the
•entire mixture becomes a hazardous
waste subject to 40 CFR Parts 262-265
except in the following circumstances:
(1) When a waste that is hazardous
solely because it exhibits one of the
characteristics in Subpart C of Part 261
Is mixed with another waste such that
the entire mixture no longer exhibits any
of the characteristics: (2) when a waste
that is exempted under 5 261.5 (i.e.,
waste's from small quantity generators)
is mixed with another (non-hazardous)
waste, the resultant waste mixture is
generally exempt from regulation; and
(3) when a waste that is hazardous
•because it is listed in Subpart D of Part
261 is mixed with non-hazardous solid
waste, the entire mixture is hazardous
unless it is exempted from regulation
under \l 260.20 and 260.22."
This general policy concerning
mixtures has been incorporated into the
recycled oil. rules (i.e., a mixture of
recycled used oil and another hazardous
waste will be considered a hazardous
waste subject to the full set of the
Subtitle C rules). However, the Agency
is proposing one major change to the
policy described above. In particular,
under the general hazardous waste .
rules, a mixture of small quantities of a
hazardous waste and a non-hazardous
waste would be conditionally exempt
from regulation (/.«., not subject to the
hazardous waste rules). Under today's
proposal however, a mixture of used oil
and small quantities of another
hazardous waste (as defined hi S 281.5]
will be fully regulated as a hazardous
waste and not a used oil We believe
this change in policy is necessary in
order to prevent small quantities of
hazardous wastes from being illicitly
disposed of by being mixed with
recycled oil. (See the proposed
management standards for a more
detailed discussion of the mixture rule
as it applies to used oil.)
Under today's proposed listing, used
oil will be a listed hazardous waste
subject to all applicable requirements
under Parts 262-265 when it is disposed.
Consequently, mixtures of used oil and
other hazardous wastes (including small
quantities of hazardous wastes) will be
hazardous wastes subject to full
regulation under Subtitle C when that
mixture is disposed, except as provided
in Sections b. and c., below.
(b) Mixtures of Wastewater and Used
Oil. EPA is today proposing an
amendment to the mixture rule (40 CFR
261.3) in order to avoid regulating
certain mixtures as a hazardous waste
or a used oil where the Agency believes
that such regulation would not be
necessary to protect human health and
the environment The Agency is
specifically concerned that under
today's proposed listing of used oil,
otherwise non-hazardous wastewaters
contaminated with very small amounts
of used oil would be subject to
regulation as a hazardous waste under
the existing mixture rule.
The wastewater from many industries
(e.g.. steel manufacturing, railroad
yards, etc.) frequently contains small
amounts of oil which enters the system
from a variety of sources, including
drippings from machinery and other
processes. The contamination of
wastewater with small amounts of oil is
virtually impossible to control. EPA
believes that such small amounts of oil
in wastewater pose no significant
hazard when stored, transported,
treated, disposed, or reused.
Consequently, 4he regulation of such
mixtures as hazardous wastes under
RCRA is unwarranted.
Under the existing Subtitle C system,
however, such mixtures would
nonetheless be considered listed
hazardous wastes. The only mechanism
presently available to handlers of these
mixtures to remove their wastes from
regulatory control would be to petition
the Agency to exclude (or delist) their
waste under the procedures contained in
40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22. Because of the
large potential numbers of facilities
involved and because the Agency does
not consider such mixtures to be
hazardous, EPA is proposing a different
approach for removing mixtures
containing only small amounts of used
oil from regulatory control under this
listing.1*
. Specifically, EPA is proposing to
emend the mixture rule contained in 40
CFR 2814 to provide that a mixture of a
non-hazardous wastewater and used oil
caused by a de minimis loss of
lubricating oil, hydraulic or
metalworking fluids, or insulating fluids
or coolants due to spills or drippings
will not be subject to regulation as a
used oil (and hence, as a hazardous
waste). As noted above, EPA believes
that the concentrations of hazardous
constituents that may be present in such
'• The Agency alto hai exempted certain other
mixture! of huardoui and non-hazardoua waite*
from the mixture rule. See 40 CFR 281 J(«)(2)()v); see
also. November 17.1861.
"The Agency hai made previous modiflcationt tc
the mixture rule when such mixtures were not
considered hazardous (tee 48 FR SR58Z November
17.1981).
-------
49264 Federal Register / Vol 58. No. 230 / Friday. November 2a 1985 / Proposed Rides
a mixture will be se small as to pese no
significant hazard to human health -and
the environment
While the Agency is not proposing «
specific concentration limit for such
used oil in wastewater, EPA requests
comment on whether .such a limit should
be established, aad if so. what that level
should be. This exemption would apply
only to very small amounts of used oil
which are lost in normal operations TO
when small amounts of oil are lost te (he
wastewater treatment system during
draining or washing operations. The
exemption for mixtures of used oil and
non-hazardous wastewaters would not
apply, however, if the used oil it
discarded as a result of abnormal
manufacturing operations, (e.g., plant
shutdowns or operation malfunctions
resulting in substantial spills, leaks, or
other releases). In addition, EPA ie
placing two additional conditions oa
this exemption.
First this exemption will not affect
the mixture rule as it applies to mixtures
of hazardous wastes and other wastes.
In other words, a mixture of wastewater
(containing used oil) and another
hazardous waste would still be a
hazardous waste subject-to full
regulation under40 CFR Parts 282-265.
and 270, 271, and 124. This condition is
necessary to .prevent the ilticit disposal
of a hazardous waste by mixing it with
an exempted mixture.
The second condition applicable to
this amendment applies to oil that is
recovered from an exempted mixture.
Used oil that is recovered is essentially
the same as other recycled oil in terms
of the contaminants that may be present
as well as the management practices
which subsequently may be applied
Consequently, EPA believes it is
appropriate to regulate oil recovered
from mixtures exempted under this
proposed amendment Hence, when
recycled, such oil will be subject to
regulation under the rules being
proposed today for recycled used oil
Used oil that is recovered from
wastewaters and which is disposed will
be subject to the general hazardous
waste rules rather than the recycled oil
rules.
c. Oil-Contaminated Industrial
Wipers (Oily Rags). EPA is also
proposing an amendment to the mixture
rule that would exempt from regulatory
control industrial wipers that are
contaminated with used oil
Industrial wipers " are widely used in
a variety of industrial settings to wipe
small amounts of oil «• •other substances
from areas or objects seeding cleaning
or polishing, including machinery, tools,
•ad other objects, A major use of
industrial wipers is also wiping the
hands and face of the user. According to
infoKHBrtioB provided by Kfaubariy-Clirk
to. £ petition submitted to EPA,
industrial wipers are need at some
540,000 industry sites to the United •
States. '•Kimberly-Claric estimates that
me total quantity of used oil found in all
•discarded industrial wipers on a yearly
basie would not exceed £3% of all used
oil**
la its petition. Kimberly-Clark argued
that industrial wipers da not pose any
significant environmental hazards when
.disposed of as part of the regular, non-
hazardous solid waste stream and that
regulations of oil-contaminated wiper*
would not be cost-effective. Specifically.
Kitufoerly-Ckrk argued that the actual
amount of used oil likely to be disposed
of at a typical non-hazardous waste
landfill or by incineration is insignificant
and would likely have a net positive
effect in terms of the wipers' ability t*
absorb additional liquid if placed in *
landfill or to combust more completely
and provide heat value if incinerated,
iCimberly-Clark also argued that
requiring users to handle their wipers as
hazardous waste would have *
substantial negative impacts, both
economically and from an
environmental standpoint.
We have evaluated the petition
submitted by Kimberly-ClarJc and ham
decided to propose exempting industrial
wipers from regulatory control under the
mixture rule (/A. we ore proposing to
amend the mixture rule to say that a.
mixture of a used -oil and an industrial
wiper will not be considered a
hazardous waste). However, this
exemption would not apply to oily rags
which exhibit a characteristic of
hazardous waste pursuant to Subpart C
of Part 261. It should also be noted that
this exemption is not intended to apply
to those industrial wipers used to clem
up oil spills but only to those wipers
used to clean drips or other incidental
amounts of oil from machinery or
equipment or the face and hands of the
user. EPA generally believes that these
wipers (although contaminated with
used oil) would contain relatively small
itrxtioos of theJiazardous
"The term industrial wipers lAcludet:-5A£p
towels (2.9 billion wipers annuaUy) which an doth
wipers that are generally not discarded but an
washed and reused-, rays (2.9+ billion wipers
annually) which an generally dispMcd of m pert
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules 49255
constituents) other than those for which
the waste was listed, if the
Administrator has a reasonable basis to
believe that such additional factors
could cause the waste to be a hazardous
waste. In addition, the amendments
specifically require the Agency to
provide notice and an opportunity for
public comment before granting a
delisting petition. Under today's listing
proposal, generators or other handlers of
used oil who wish to petition the Agency
to have their specific used oil delisted
must follow the same delisting
procedures as for any other hazardous
waste (£&. they must submit sufficient
data so that the Agency can evaluate
their used oil to determine its
hazardousness with respect to any toxic
constituent that may reasonably be
present in the waste).
The Agency recognizes that
aignifieant numbers of used oil handlers
may wish to petition the Agency for a
delisting, especially since non-
hazardous used oil will not be subject to
regulatory control Some generators may
well, due to their generation and
handling procedures, generate relatively
clean used oils. While the Agency has
sought to exclude from the listing or
exempt from regulation under section
3014 those used oils which Jo not pose a
hazard tp the environment, the Agency
is somewhat concerned that a large
number of petitions could unnecessarily
overtax the Agency's delisting
resources.
EPA considered an approach that
would involve setting concentration
limits for specific constituents of
concern. Used oil that did not exceed
these concentration limit* would be
exempt from regulation as a hazardous
waste. However, this approach poses
several practical problems concerning
the appropriate concentration limits that
should be set for which constituents
(/.&, used oil can contain any one of the
toxic contaminants listed in Appendix
Vm of Part 261) and problems relating to
implementation. Therefore, the Agency
has concluded that such an approach is •
not feasible at this time and that any
person who wishes to delist their used
oil will need to submit a petition
pursuant to 40 CFR 260.20 and 26022."
The Agency requests public comment
on the issue of delisting nonhazardous
used oils and is particularly interested
in any particular used oils that should
be specifically excluded from the listing
of used oil as a hazardous waste.
V. Basis for Listing Used Oil as a
Hazardous Waste
A. Criteria for Listing
EPA may list as waste as hazardous if
it meets any of the criteria for listing
contained in 40 CFR 261.11. Among
others. S 261.11(a)(3) provides that the
Administrator may list a waste as
hazardous if it contains any of the toxic
constituents listed in Appendix Vffl.
unless, after considering certain factors,
the Administrator determines that the
waste will not pose a substantial
present or potential hazard to human
health or the environment when
mismanaged. The factors that can
mitigate such a listing are: (i) The nature
of the toxidty presented by the
constituent (ii) the concentration of the
constituent in the waste, (iii) its
potential to migrate or persist in the
environment (iv) the plausible types of
improper management to which the
waste could be subjected, (v) the
quantities of waste generated and the
nature and severity of human health and
environmental damage that has
occurred, and (vi) any other factors that
may be appropriate.
The Administrator has determined
that used oil contains highly toxic
contaminants in significant quantities,
that these contaminants are mobile and
persistent in the environment and that
used oil is generated in large quantities.
Thus, these wastes may pose a
substantial present-or potential threat to
human health or the environment when
improperly transported, treated, stored,
recycled, disposed, or otherwise
managed.*1
B. Summary of Used Oil Universe
Based on 1982 automotive and
industrial new oil sales of 1.244 and
1.171 million gallons, respectively, it is
estimated that 746 million gallons of
automotive used oil and 402 million
•At • miirfnmm EPA would expect the petitioner
to demonstrate thai the aMd ofl; (1) MMU the Phase
I fad specification* (SO FR1718. (unary 11.1065).
and (2) don not exhibit any of the hazardous watta
characteristic*. In addition, the petitioner most
demonstrate that the used oil to not hazardous for
the roaaon it was listed and must submit sufficient
Information for the Administrator to determine
whether the need oil la hazardous for any other
"Tasting of naad oil has shown that nearly JO
percent of the samples have flash points below 140*
F. with some samples having flash points as low as
72*F. These low flash points generally result from
oontamination with gasoline, which has an initial
boiling point below 1OTF. In addition to
contamination with gasoline, used oil also contains
many other highly flammable light aliphatics and
aromatic*. Thus, used oil may, at times, exhibit the
characteristic of ignltability. However, since only 20
percent of the samples tested exhibited the
ignltability characteristic, we are not tn^wjing It as
a basis for listing. Nevertheless, each generator Is
responsible for determining If his waste exhibits
any of the hazardous waste characteristics.
gallons, of industrial used oil are
generated each year. Approximately 57
percent of the total generated, or about
660 million gallons, are currently
managed by collectors, processors, re-
refiners, and end-users and will be
brought under regulatory control under
the special management standards. The
remaining 43 percent or 488 million
gallons, result from do-it-yourself oil
changers, agricultural and construction
machinery operators, and small
generators of industrial oils who often
dispose of their oils off-site rather than
accumulate them or take them to a point
of accumulation.
C. Toxic Constituents of Concern
As discussed above, the primary basis
for listing used oil as a hazardous waste
under 40 CFR 261.11 concerns the
presence of certain toxic constituents
contained in used oil. Used oil typically
contains a number of toxicants listed in
Appendix Vffl in concentrations well
above those necessary to cause
substantial harm. These constituents,
including lead, trichloroethylene,
tetrachloroethylene. 1.1.1-
trichloroethane, naphthalene, and
toluene, have been measured in used
oils in significant concentrations. Based
on the Agency's survey of used oil
samples, the following contaminant
levels were reported at the statistical
90th percentile "for the constituents of
concern.*1 Lead was reported at 1200
ppm, naphthalene at 990 ppm,
tetrachloroethylene at 1300 ppm, 1,1,1-
trichloroethane at 3100 ppm,
trichloroethylene was reported at 1000
ppm, and toluene at 5000 ppm. The
constituents are, therefore, present in
used oil at levels ranging from 10* to 101
higher than any health-based standard
(i.e.. Ambient Water Quality Criteria or
Drinking Water Standards). See Table 1,
below. Consequently, only a small
percentage of the toxicants would need
to migrate from the waste and escape
into the environment at levels above the
reported health-based standard to pose
a substantial hazard to human health
and the environment
These toxicants are known to have
carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic, or
other chronic or acutely toxic properties.
In particular, tetrachloroethylene has
beeaidentified by the Agency's
•At the statistical 90th percentile, 90% of all of
the samples will contain that constituent at that
velue or lower. See Background Document for Used
Oils for mean, median and 75th percentile
concentrations of these constituents In used oil
samples analyzed.
•Franklin Associates. Ltd_ Competition and
Management of Uted Oil» Generated in the United
State*, September 1964.
-------
49266
Federal Register / Vol SO. No. 230 / Friday. November 28. 1985 / Proposed Rules
Carcinogen Assessment Group (CAG) at
• possible human carcinogen." aIt is a
mutagen in bacterial assays; it is also
chronically toxic to dogs, causing kidney
and liver damage, and to humans,
causing impaired liver function. In mice
and rats, tetrachloroethyleoe has caused
toxic nephropathy. Tfee Agency's CAG
has also identified tafchforoetnylene se a
potential human carcinogen. In addition,
trichloroethylene causes some liver aad
kidney damage. 14,1-Tricbloroethane
has been shown, in animal studies, to
produce adverse effects in the central
nervous system, pulmonary system,
heart, kidney, and liver. Results of a
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
carcinogenesis bioasssay also have
indicated that oral administration of
1.1.1-trichloroethane produced a variety
of neoplasms; however, re-testing of this
compound is in progress since a high
incidence of premature deaths was
observed in this initial study. Toraene ie
known to cause central nervous system
dysfunction and baa been linked to
reproductive effects in humane. Chronic
occupational exposures to toluene also
have resulted in neurologic effects, such
as impaired performance on tests for
intellectual and psychomotor ability and
muscular function.
TABLE 1.-Ujseo On. CONTAMINANT CONCEN-
TRATIONS AS COMPARED TO HEALTH BASED
CRITERIA
Continued
U.1-
Ti
T70.:
S7.003
aon/DWS
a.109
1*306
AWOCt
40
37,806
Sob-
OVA
720
13,300
•Background Doaummt tor Uaad OL
•US. EPA. 19M. Hanoi and Enwrerwn
RCRA SutMUM C Background Cocuma*.
0* SoSe WtAtft, WfttfMftgtOQ, D£.
NO tnaaW^WaMBvt ^aaVtcaeWO IBB ^Vf I
A. Office
ConaBBMnt
UMOOi '
(90B1
pew*.
1.200
1JOO
MOO
1.100
JOOt
14.3
CUTS'
(Long,
turn
3NARU
(ppm)
42
J43
ppm
150
-S3*
Naphthalene is a systemic poison
which faioaccumulates in me skin, liver,
brain, blood, muscle, and heart In
particular, chronic exposure to
naphthalene produces cataracts,
hemorytic anemia, and kidney disease in
humans. Finally, lead ii a .systemic
toxicant causing renal damage,
cerebrovascular disease, heart failure, •
electrocardiogrsphic abnormalities,
impaired liver function, impaired thyroid
function, intestinal colic, and
miscarriages and still births. [For
additional information on the toxicity of
the hazardous constituents see me
Health aad Environmental Effects -
Profile (HEEPs), available from the
public docket at the address given
abovcj
In addition, it is important to note that
used oil nay cantata a'gFJ.f'f'-fLrt*
aggregate concentrations of one or more
other toxic constituents identified by the
Agency. Table 2 details additional
constituents which have been found ia
used oils.
TABLI 3.—Toxic CoksrmjENTs1 FOUND M
USED OIL (yiiSMAHASEMENT INCIDENTS
RATIO OF CONCENTRATIOII TO CRTTERIA
"US, EPA 1985. Health AMetiment Document
for telrachlonMtbyleae (peKhlomelhyJene). ERA
BOQ/8-82-005F.
• The Agency ii preaeBllyconpletiiig awaluiHoD
of two edditioncl positive etudiai by the Nadoael
Tonicology ProgrwB (NTP) performed by inheUticn
expofura of rati end mice. Thli n^veluetiaa la
expected to result 4n the daieUkalfam af
percbloroethylene a«e "B-Z* caidnooeo (i*. *
probable human carcinogen). See 49 FR-4629*.
ompaunda that the US. EPA't Canlmgan
**»»»"•« Onup (CAG) hai (Mtarmkwd to haw ewclma
a< earani^fiiHUiy. The >wgm <* mdenra tor ea»
For earn* of »Ma» dwmeak thai* •
.
danoa (apidamHogieal daa)-«hia tar othan anty
tal mm* awoanoa a) avaUtna. Some: The Cardnegan
Uat at Canaiaoan.* Jiff K tSo.
' PCS'K
i. and UM ol PCB't to pnynbRad by T5CA f «<•) unM«
>yTC8TaguMioraj«ioar
r40CFB'Pait
end reproduce* affeett. not Oft^enVpoimaal In enimat
efcrtaa. EPA taa tound no avidanca tt mgaart thai -pCB'a
•r«MW not nave wear alOaMi and 'aneoaantc poaveal In
hwnone.
Another factor considered by the
Agency as a basis for listing used oil as
hazardous concerns the fact that they
typically and frequently contain toxic
heavy metals which present a particular
health hazard when burned. Fuel
specifications for the burning of used oil
have bees defined for arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, and lead.1* The rationale for
selecting these constituents is discussed
in the Phase I burning and blending
proposal (50 FR1884-1723), All of these
constituents have been identified in
significant concentration* in used oil
samples as is evident from the
contaminant levels reported in the
Agency's survey of approximately a
thousand used ofl samples. This survey
revealed the following levels at the
statistical 90th percentile for the
following constituents of concern:
Arsenic at 19 ppm; cadmium at 10 ppm:
chromium at 30 ppm; and lead at 1200
ppm. These levels have been shown to
POK« potential substantial hazard to
human health and the environment
when burned in an incinerator or boiler.
{See Phase I burning and blending
proposal for more detailed discussion.)
CAG has identified both arsenic and
cadmium M having sufficient evidence
of eardnogenicity to categorize them as
potential human carcinogen.
Hexavaleni chromium also
Atemons&atec evidence of carcinogenic
potential Arsenic, OKJmlirm. and
aexavalent chromium *iso demonstrate
mutagenic effects and arsenic and
cadmium further show teratogenic
activity."
D. Waste Constituent Mobility:
Environmental Fate and Tnatspoft
As stated in 40 CFR 261.11. the
Administrator will consider the mobility
potential, persistence, and potential to
bioaccumulate of toxic constituents in a
waste in determining whether to fist a
waste n hazardous.
1. Mobility Potential. The water
•BotobiDty of a given toxic constituent is
indicative of its mobility potential (i.e.
(he likelihood that« wifl be released
from a management site and become
dissolved in a water resource of
concern). Many of the used ofl
CDMtttaeRta of concent are highly water
soluble and thos~ characterized by a high
mobility potential. Their solubilities are
many orders of magnitude greater than
their respective Ambient Water Quality
Criteria levels oad designated Drinking
—Thi HIM. I hiimlin nnlliliailimi iiu.meel rien
propoMd epactfiaatoavtar total cfalonm and
flaafcpomt
"SeeSufa/dffC—Mmstiftaatitrnmul LMirt .
Bockgaxaul DOOOOHM. .Appendix A-^UeaJto and
Environmental Effects Profile* October 30.1
-------
Federal Register / VoL 50, No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
49267
Water Standard*. See Table 1. If
improperly managed, these toxicant*
can lie expected to migrate from storage
or disposal facilities and to become
dissolved in drinking water resources at
levels exceeding the corresponding
health standards.
For example, trichloroeihylene is
soluble in water at concentrations which
exceed the long-term SNARL (Suggested
No Adverse Response Level) by a factor
of approximately 13.000. If improperly
managed, leachate from wastes
containing trichloroethylene could
migrate to water supplies resulting in
concentration levels far in excess of the
corresponding long-term SNARL
Tetrachloroethylene is similarly very
soluble in water at concentrations
exceeding the long-term SNARL by a
factor of 7,500. Furthermore, since the
used oil itself is a liquid, the potential
for these toxicants to migrate from the
waste is enhanced. Therefore, these
toxicants are likely to escape from the
waste and migrate into ground water to
present a substantial hazard to human
health and the environment
2. Persistence. Many of these
constituents are highly persistent in the
environment (e.g.. 1,1.1-trichloroethane
has a half-life of 5-9 months in fresh
water and 39 months in sea water and
tetrachloroethylene has a residence time
of several years-or decades in deep soils
and ground water). Metals, such as
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and lead
will persist in the environment
indefinitely.**
The Agency considers a material to be
persistent if it persists in the
environment long enough to be detected
since it may also result in exposure to
humans in the same period of time. Most
of these constituents have been
repeatedly detected in ground and
surface water surveys conducted by the
Agency which provides a further
indication of their environmental
persistence. For example, in one Agency
survey of 969 water systems, 1.4 percent
of the tapwater samples exceeded the 50
ppb standard for lead. Similarly.
naphthalene has been detected in
natural waters and in drinking water
supplies.
In nationwide surveys of organic
chemicals in the drinking water of
representative U.S. communities,
toluene was found to contaminate one
raw and eleven finished water supplies
out of the 133 water supplies surveyed.
Toluene has also been detected in sea
water and fish obtained near petroleum
and petrochemical plants in Japan.
" See SPA report entitled "Water-related
Ennroamental Fate of 129 Priority Pollutant*."
Januar> 1979. EPA-MO/4-7«028«).
Fcmr Federal surveys used to estimate
level* of 1,1,1 -trichloroethane in public
drinking water supplies in the U.S.
reported that 3 percent of the ground-
water systems are expected to have
between 0.5-5 ppb of 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, and that most surface
water systems have detectable levels of
1,1,1-trichloroethane. Thus, many of
these constituents, including used oil
itself, have been found to migrate and
present a hazard to human heahh and
the environment at Superfund sites.
The toxicologic properties,
environmental mobility, and persistence
of these toxicants are described in the
corresponding Health and
Environmental Effects Profiles. We note
further, however, that a consideration of
the toxidty of individual waste
constituents is likely to understate
waste toxidty. This understatement
relates to the fact that used oil is a
complex mixture of many hazardous
constituents. Aggregate toxic effects,
whether additive or synergistic, are
likely manifestations of exposure.
3. Bioaccumulation. Another factor
which the Administrator considers in
the dedsion to list a waste as hazardous
concerns "the degree to which the
constituent or any toxic degradation
product of the constituent
bioaccumulates in ecosystems."
Bioaccumulation is the tendency of a
snbstance to become concentrated in
living tissue. Many of the constituents in
used oil bioaccumulate in the tissues of
living organisms. Naphthalene, for
example, can accumulate in living
tissues at concentrations up to 186 times
those in the contaminated water.
Toluene can accumulate in living tissues
at concentrations 78 times the
concentration in the water. 14.1-
Trichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene,
and trichloroethylene also
bioaccumulate at 56 times, 43 times, and
15 times their respective concentrations
in water. Thus, only a small fraction of
the toxicants present in these wastes
need migrate and reach environmental
receptors to pose the potential for
substantial harm to human health and
the environment.
E. Waste Mismanagement Potential
Used oils are capable of causing
substantial harm to human health or the
environment, if managed improperly.
Typical improper management practices
include disposal in unlined or
inadequately lined land disposal
facilities leading to contamination of
ground water, surface water, and soil,
and improper burning, resulting in
exposure to unbumed toxicants in the
wastes as well as products of
incomplete combustion.
Appendix A of the used oil
background document provides a
summary of approximately 80 major
mismanagement incidents and the cost
implications of cleanup operations
($10,000 to S5.150.000 per site). The
mismanagement issue is not confined to
on-site management of used oil, as
evidenced by the fact that seventy (70)
of these incident* occurred off the
generation site. The media affected
include surface water (35 sites), ground
water (24 sites), drinking water (17
sites), air (8 sites), and soil (25 sites).
Treatment, storage, and disposal of
used oils in tank and container storage
facilities (25 sites), surface
impoundments (36 sites), and other
improper disposal facilities (35 sites),
burning operations (7 sites), and use of
'waste oil as a dust suppressant (3 sites)
have resulted in the pollution of ground
or surface water with lead, chlorinated
organics, or aromatic organics from
these wastes.
In summary, the Agency has
determined that used oil typically
contains toxic constituents at
concentrations that are of concern, Liat
these constituents are mobile, persistent,
and bioaccumulative, and capable of
migration in hazardous concentrations,
and, therefore, that these wastes are
capable of causing (indeed, repeatedly
have caused) substantial harm if
mismanaged. Consequently, the Agency
is proposing to add used oil to the lists
of hazardous wastes.
VL CERCLA and Clean Water Act
Impacts: Proposal to Adjust Used Oil
ReportabJe Quantity of 100 Pounds
Today's proposed listing of used oil as
a hazardous waste will, upon final
promulgation, also result in its
classification as a hazardous substance
under Section 101(14) of CERCLA,
Section 103 of CERCLA requires that
persons in charge of vessels or facilities
from which hazardous substances have
been released in quantities that are
equal to or greater than the reportable
quantity (RQ) established under
CERCLA section 102 immediately notify
the National Response Center (NRC) of
the release.
Under section 102 of CERCLA, used
oil will be automatically assigned an RQ
of one pound (after it has been listed as
a hazardous waste) until EPA adjusts
the statutory RQ. Thus, until adjusted by
EPA regulations, persons releasing one
pound or more of used oil must notify
the NRC. EPA is today proposing to
adjust the statutory one pound RQ for
used oil to 100 pounds based on the
application of its RQ adjustment
-------
49268 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
methodology. See 50 FR13456 (April 4.
1985).
The 100 pound RQ proposed today for
used oil is based upon the toxicity of its
constituents and its ignitability. As a
hazardous waste, used oil is a mixture
of hazardous substances for CERCLA
purposes, and its RQ is based upon the
RQs established for each of its
hazardous constituents. Because the
exact composition of a hazardous waste
is usually unknown, the RQ of the waste
is normally based upon the lowest RQ
established for any of its constituents.
However, the composition of used oil is
sufficiently well characterized to enable
an RQ adjustment to be based upon
calculations at the 90th percentile
concentrations of each hazardous
constituents.
The substances with the lowest RQs
at the 90th percentile concentration are
lead and tetrachloroethylene and,
therefore, the RQ of used oil is based on
the RQs of these substances. Because
the RQs of both of these substances at
that concentration are between 100 and
1000 pounds, the applicable RQ for used
oil has been set at 100 pounds. The
ignitability of used oil also results in an.
RQ of 100 pounds. (See Background
Document for a more detailed
explanation of our basis for setting an
RQ of 100 pounds.)
The CERCLA RQ proposed today
applies to releases of used oil to all
environmental media, including
navigable waters, the contiguous zone,
and ocean waters. EPA has rejected a
media specific RQ approach to avoid
confusion, arbitrariness, and inequity in
release notification. See 50 FR 13466-
13467 (April 4,1985). However, under
the Clean Water Act, the oil sheen has
been the RQ for discharges of oil to
navigable waters and the contiguous
zone since 1970. "The sheen test
"Known aa the "sheen rule," the Clean Wain
Act (Section 311(b)) prohibition and reporting
requirement for discharge* that "may be harmful"
actually include* discharge* of oil that
(a) Violate applicable water quality standards,
or
(b) Canae a film or ahaen upon or discoloration
of the turface of the water or adjoining
aborelinea or cauae a aludge or emulaion to be
depoaited beneath the aurface of the water or
upon adjoining shorelines.
Pursuant to the 1977 amendment! to the Clean
Water Act EPA haa proposed to extend the aheen
teil beyond the contiguous zone to dlacharget into
ocean water* "In connection with activitiea under
the Outer Continental Shelf Landa Act or the Deep
Water Port Act of 1074. or which may affect
natural reaourcei belonging to, appertaining to. or
under the excluaive management authority of the
United Statei (including resource* under the
Magnuion Fiahery Conservation and Management
Act)." (Section 33 U.S.C. 1321 (b) and (c)). SO FR
0776. (March 11.1985).
"Attention should alao be given to the reporting
requirements prescribed under The Act to Prevent
provides a non-quantitive reporting
trigger and is not supplanted by today's
proposed CERCLA rulemaking.*1
Unlike hazardous substances under
the Clean Water Act, the RQ for oil
established under that Act is not
automatically altered to correspond to
the adjusted CERCLA RQ. See SO FR
13473 (April 4,1985). Furthermore, there
are important reasons for retaining the
oil sheen RQ. The sheen test is generally
a more sensitive reporting trigger than
the proposed RQ because a sheen may
be created by a quantity of used oil less
than 100 pounds. The sheen has been a
useful trigger because it is easily
recognized and does not require the
sometimes difficult determination of the
volume of spilled oil. Those who
implement the current regulation have
found it to be successful over the past IS
years in creating an effective early-
warning system for oil spills and in
improving oil handling techniques. Most
importantly, however, it has been
supported by scientific studies which
have concluded that repeated and low
level releases of oil may cause harm to
aquatic environments. Moreover, these
effects may not be adequately measured
by the aquatic toxicity tests used under
CERCLA and the Clean Water Act to
evaluate individual constituents of
hazardous wastes.
Thus, the CERCLA 100 pound RQ for
used oil will apply to all environmental
media, including surface waters. A
release of used oil equal to or greater
than 100 pounds must be reported to the
NRC under CERCLA whether or not an
oil sheen is produced or the waters
affected are inside the contiguous zone.
If the release of 100 pounds or more ia
into navigable waters and the ~
contiguous zone, the release is also
subject to the reporting requirement of
the Clean Water Act but one report to
the NRC will satisfy the notice
requirements of both statutes. Releases
of used oil in amounts less than 100
pounds to navigable waters and the
contiguous zone will be subject to
reporting requirements under the sheen
rule of the Clean Water Act Such
releases must also be reported to the
NRC, as provided under that Act
VIL State Authorization Impacts
A. Applicability of Rules in Authorized
States
Under section 3006 of RCRA, EPA
may authorize qualified States to
administer and enforce the RCRA
Pollution from Ships. 33 U.S.C. 1901-1911. Those
requirements and their applicability an set forth In
33 CFR 151.15 and 1S1JH, respectively. These
requirements would not be affected by today's
proposal
program within the State.-iSee 40 CFR
Part 271 for the standards and
requirements for authorization.)
Following authorization EPA retains
enforcement authority under sections
3008. 7003. and 3013 of RCRA, although
authorized States have primary
enforcement responsibility.
Prior to the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA)
amending RCRA, a State with final
authorization administered its
hazardous waste program entirely in
lieu of the Federal program. The Federal
requirements no longer applied in the
authorized State, and EPA could not
issue permits for any facilities in the
State which the State was authorized to
permit When new, more stringent
Federal requirements were promulgated
or enacted, the State was obligated to
enact equivalent authority within
specified time frames. New Federal
requirements did not take effect in an
authorized State until the State adopted
the requirements as State law.
In contrast under newly enacted
section 3006(g) of RCRA. 42 U.S.C.
6926(g), new requirements and
prohibitions imposed by the HSWA take
effect in authorized State at the same
time Shat they take effect in
nonauthorized States. EPA is directed to
carry out those requirements and
prohibitions in authorized States,
including the issuance of permits, until
the State is granted authorization to do
so. While States must still adopt
HSWA-related provisions as State law
to retain final authorization, the HSWA
applies in authorized States in the
interim.
Today's rule would be added to Table
1 in | 271.10) which identifies the
Federal program requirements that are
promulgated pursuant to HSWA. The
Agency believes that it is extremely
important to clearly specify which EPA
regulations implement HSWA since
these requirements are immediately
effective in authorized States. States
may apply for either interim or final
authorization for the HSWA provisions
identified in Table 1 as discussed in the
following section of this preamble.
B. Effect on State Authorizations
Today's announcement proposes
standards that would be effective in all
States since the requirements satisfy
EPA obligations under the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984.
Thus, EPA will implement the standards
in nonauthorized States and in
authorized States until they revise their.
programs to adopt these rules and the
revision is approved by EPA.
-------
Federal Raehter / Vol. 50, No. 230 / Friday, November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
49269
A State may apply to receive either
interim or final authorization under
section 3006(g)(2) or 3006{b),
"respectively, on the basis of
requirements that are substantially
equivalent or equivalent to EPA's. The
procedures and schedule for State"
program revisions under section 3006(b)
are described in 40 CFR 271.21. See 49
FR 21678 (May 22,1964). The same
procedures should be followed for
section 3006(g)(2).
Applying i 271.21(e}f2). States that
have final authorization must revise
their programs within a year of
promulgation of EPA's regulations if
only regulatory changes are necessary,
or within two years of promulgation if
statutory changes are necessary. These
deadlines can be extended in
exceptional cases (40 CFR 271.21{e)(3)).
States with authorized RCRA
programs may have a listing similar to
that included in today's role. These
State regulations have not been
assessed against the Federal regulations
being proposed today to determine
whether they meet the tests for
authorization. Thus, a State is not
authorized to implement this listing in
lieu of EPA until the State program
revision is approved. As a result the
listing proposed in today's rule wifl
apply in all States, including States with
an existing listing similar to that in
today's-rule. States with an existing
listing may continue to administer and
enforce their standards es a matter of
State law. In implementing the Federal
program. EPA will work with States
under cooperative agreements to
minimize duplication of efforts.
States that submit official applications
for final authorization less than 12
months after promulgation of EPA's
regulations may be approved without
including standards equivalent to those
promulgated. However, once authorized,
a State must revise its program to
include standards substantially
equivalent or equivalent to EPA's within
the time periods discussed above.
Vm. Request for Go
The Agency seeks public comment on
all of the issues discussed in this notice
concerning the listing of used oil as a
hazardous waste. The Agency is
particularly interested in comments on
the proposed amendments to S 261.3 (i.e.
the exemptions for wastewaters
contaminated with small amounts of oil
and for industrial wipers) and on vaious
approaches which may provide practical
relief to used oil recyclers that handle
used oils which are low in
contamination.
Comments concerning the extent of
regulation that should be imposed on
various used oil recycling practices
should, however, be addressed under
the section 3014 proposal.
DC. Executive Order 12291
Under Executive Order 12291, EPA
must determine whether a regulation M
"major" and therefore subject to the
requirement of a Regulatory Impact
Analysis. The regulatory impact of this
proposal, taken together with the
recycled oil rules, is major and is
addressed in the proposed management
standards for recycled used oil,
appearing elsewhere in today's Federal
Register.
X. Regulatory FtadbUhy Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C 601 et teq., whenever an
agency is required to publish a general
notice of rulemaking for any proposed or
final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a
regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the impact of the rule on small
entities (;'.&. small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions). The impact of this rule on
•mall entities is addressed in the
proposed hazardous waste management
standards for used oiL appearing
elsewhere in today's Federal Register.
XL Paperwork Reduction Act
The reporting or recordkeeping
(information) provisions in this rule will
be submitted for approval to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)
under section 3504(b) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980, U.S.C. 3501 et
seq. Any final rule will explain how its
reporting or recordkeeping provisons
respond to any OMB or public
comments.
XTL List of Subjects
40CFRPart260
Administrative practice and
procedure, confidential business
information, hazardous waste
40 CFR Part 261
Hazardous waste, Recycling
40 CFR Part 271
Hazardous materials. Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Waste
treatment and disposal, Water pollution
control. Water supply,
Intergovernmental relations. Penalties,
Confidential business information.
40 CFR Part 302
Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous materials. Hazardous
materials transportation, Hazardous
substances. Intergovernmental relations.
Natural resources, Nuclear materials,
Pesticides and pests. Radioactive
materials. Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Waste
treatment and disposal. Water pollution
control
Dated: November 8,1985.
LM M. Tbonuu,
Afiminiatmtnr
For the reasons set out in the '
preamble, it is proposed to amend Title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 260—HAZARDOUS WASTE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM—GENERAL
1. The authority citation for Part 260
continues to read as follows:
Authority- Sees. 1006. 2002(a), 3001 through
3007, 3010, 3014, 3015, 3017. 3018, 3019, and
7004 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1876. as amended [42 U.S.C
6905, 6912(8), 6921 through 6927, 6930. 6934.
8935, 6937. 6938, 6939, and 6974).
§260.10 [Anwnd«d]
2. Section 260.10 is amended by
adding a new definition for used oil to
appear alphabetically.
• • i • • •
"Used Oil" is petroleum-derived or
synthetic oil including, but not limited
to, oil which is used as a: i) Lubricant
(engine, turbine, or gear); ii) Hydraulic
fluid (including transmission fluid); iii)
Metalworking fluid (including cutting,
grinding, machining, rolling, stamping,
quenching, and coating oils;) or iv)
Insulating fluid or coolant and which is
contaminated through use or subsequent
management
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
3. The authority citation for Part 261
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec*. 1006, 2002(a). 3001. and
3002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as
amended by the Resource Conservation and
• Recovery Act of 1976, at amended [42 U.S.C.
6905, 6912(a). 0921, and 6922).
4. Section 261.3 is amended by
revising the introductory text of
paragraph (a)(2)(iv), by adding a new
paragraph (a)(2)(iv)(F); and by adding a
new paragraph (e), to read as follows:
{261.3 Definition of hazardous waste
• • • • *
(a) * * '
(2) • • *
(iv) Except as provided in paragraph
(e) of this section, it is a mixture of solid
waste and one or more hazardous
wastes listed in Subpart D and has not
-------
49270 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No. 230 / Friday. November 29. 1985 / Proposed Rules
been excluded from this paragraph
under § § 260.20 and 260.22 of this
Chapter, however, the following
mixtures of solid wastes and hazardous
wastes listed in Subpart O are not
hazardous wastes (except by
application of paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (ii)
of this section) if the generator can
demonstrate that the mixture consists of
wastewater the discharge of which is "
subject to regulation under either
Section 402 or Section 307(b) of the
Clean Water Act (including wastewater
at facilities which have eliminated the
discharge of wastewater) and:
• • • • •
(F) Used oil caused by a de minimi*
loss of lubricating oil, hydraulic oil,
metalworking fluids, or insulating fluid
or coolant For purposes of this
paragraph, "de minimis" losses include
small spills, leaks, or drippings from
pumps, machinery, pipes, and other
similar equipment during normal
operations or when small amounts of oil
are lost to the wastewater treatment
system during washing or draining
operations. This exception will not
apply if the used oil is discarded as a
result of abnormal manufacturing
operations resulting in substantial leaks,
spills, or other releases or to used oil
recovered from wastewater.
• • * • •
(e) The following mixture of solid
waste and hazardous wastes listed in
Subpart D are not hazardous wastes
except by application of paragraph
with small amounts of used oil The term
industrial wipers includes shop towels,
rags, and disposable wipers.
(2) [Reserved]
5. In S 261.31, add the following waste
in numerical order
S 26141 Hanrdou* waste from nan-
specific sources.
Industry «nd EPA
tiOUB VCVfeV
No.
Generic
rtrt <* Irakrfno Momo-
ttv*. hydraulic, ooctont. In-
and mminortUnq
(T)
& Add the following entry in
numerical order to Appendix VH of Part
261:
Appendix VH—Basi* for Luting
Hazardous Waste
EPA
Tte
(No.
HoBntou.1 ountlltojMtt for vMoh
KX
Laad. eraante, eMMum. cftrenium. 1.1.1-
itoinoio«lhan».
(1) Industrial wipers contaminated
PART 271—REQUIREMENTS TOR
AUTHORIZATION OF STATE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PROGRAMS
7. The authority citation for Part 271
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 1006, 2002(aj. and 3000 of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended b>
the Reiources Conservation and Recovery
Act of 1970, as amended (42 U.S.C 6805,
9312(0.}, and 6928).
{271.1 [Amend**]
8. { 271.10) is amended by adding the
following entry to Table 1 in
chronological order by date of
publication:
TABLE 1.—REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING
THE HAZARDOUS AND SOLID WASTE
AMENDMENTS OF 1984
Dale of puMcattn in the
Federal Ftcpatar
Oneart de* ef ptMcaten of UsOng of Unri O*
VwiralnM.
PART 302— DESIGNATION,
REPORTABLE QUANTITIES, AND
NOTIFICATION
9. The Authority citation for Part 302
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sec. 102 of the Comps-ehenaiva
Environmental Response. Compeasatioa and
Liability Act of 1880, 42 3X5.C 9802; Sections
311 and SQ1W of the Federal Water Pollutioo
Control Art. 33 U.S.C 1321 and MBlr
la It if proposed to amend 40 CFR
$ 302.4 by amending Table 302.4 by
adding the following entry in numerical
order, aa follows:
TABLE 302.4.—LIST OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND REPORTABLE QUANTITIES
CASRN
RQ Cadet
RCRA
WcaM
Ma.
fox :
"U**d Or >> pMol«unv4_iMd or ffrOttme of induing, bill not ImlM to. a* vhfcti • uMd
•t IL n lubnam (cngini. Uttra. or OMT): I) Hy*«*c fluid (Induifng tnnmann Budk
•) Maltemntung flud (nduing euMng, ghndng. imcJnq. raHng. tttmpmg. autnchlng.
•nd ctxtng dto.} or rfi muung (Ud and coottnt and wna\ H conumimtta Vmu^i uw
Ofl '
160 {46.41
[FR Doc. 85-27901 FUed 11-27-85; 8:45 am]
BUOJNO COOf M4O-IO-II
'D.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1994-515-003/87130
-------
Appendix 3
Used Oil Correspondence
and Memoranda
l?
5 3
a
-------
CONTENTS
APPENDIX 3 USED OIL CORRESPONDENCE AND MEMORANDA
Definition of Used Oil
Rebuttable Presumption
Used Oil Mixtures
Used Oil Transportation
Definition of Used Oil Processor
Used Oil Burning
Used Oil Filters
Miscellaneous
-------
Appendix 3
Used Oil Correspondence
and Memoranda
Definition of Used Oil
2,
Sr
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ^ S ~
REGION Vir
726 MINNESOTA AVENUE
KANSAS CITY, KANSAS 66101
FEB t mwir
MEMORANDUM
•^••^^•^•••••^•^ \
SUBJECT: Hazardous Waste SUtus of Automotive Fluids
FROM:
Chief, RCRA Branch
TO: Marcla Williams, (WH-562)
Director, Offlct of Solid Waste
The small quantity generator rules have caused many automotive service
facilities to be concerned about various automotive fluids. W« get many
inquiries about antl freeze fluid, brake fluid, power steering fluid,
automatic transmission fluid, and windshield washer fluid.
We have been responding that these fluids art not, at this time,
hazardous waste under RCRA unless they fall a characteristic.
My understanding 1s that QSU may have access to fonmilators or
specifications for various automotive fluids via the Toxic Substance Act
reporting or other mechanisms.
It would be helpful 1f your office could 1ssut a definitive statement
regarding each of these fluids and any potential the fluid might have to
fall a characteristic or be a listed commercial chemical product.
If you have any questions on this, your staff may call Chet Mctaujfill*.
of my staff, at FTS 757-2852.
-------
un 11 i
i iwrt A— .
W 6198T
SUBJECT: Hazardous Waste Status- of Automotive Fluids
FPOM: Mardia B. Williams ~*
Oirector, OSW
TO: Michael J. Sanderson f .
Chief, RCRA Brar.ch
EPA Region VII
This is to provide guidance on the questions raised in your
February 19, 1987 meno. First, no automotive fluid* have beer.
listed as hazardous under Subtitle C of PCRAj therefore, the
question of whether these fluids are subject to the hazardous
regulations depends on whether the fluid in question exhibits on*
or more of. the RCRA hazardous waste1 characteristics. Althouah
we do not have studies in this area, we have bees informed that
sore brake fluids and automatic transmission fluids are ianitarl*
under 40 CFR 5261.21. Used crankcase oils may also be inr.itable
(because snail amounts of gasoline are added durinq or after use.'.
ar.d nay exhibit F.P. toxictty for lead.
However, for those automotive fluids that are used oils an*
are recycled, the hazardous waste regulations would not currer.tlr
apply, even'if the fluid exhibits a characteristict rather all
used oils that are recycled are subject to 40 CF3 Part 266, Subrvart E
(Sec 40 CP9.S261.-6 (a) (2) (it 1).) Currently, Part 26«, Suhnart t
only reaulates the recycling of uaed oil as fuel. All other ctcrc-
linrt ncthods are exer»pt from regulation. Those auto»*otive MuiM
that are either not a used oil, or are used oil that is disnc««<;
•40U }
aj«HAMff ^
:*TC ^
.wK^M.6
*\V^—
s/y/f7
•x^^OK
*&£F*
•TZ*r^-
\\n\rt
<
*
C3MCU**CNC
IS
•
nit f »^ • • ; :• •
-------
(
V
-2-
of, ar« subject to the hazardous waste reflations if they exhibit
one or t«ore of the characteristics. CurrerLly, we define "used oil1
in *266.40(b) very broadly. Brake) fluid, power steering fluid,
an^ automatic transmission fluid i«ould all be considered used oil«.
On the other hand, antifreeze an* vindshield washer fluid, because
they are not "oils" as the term Lm commonly use**, would not. be
used oils.
As a practical matter, our understanding is that brake,
steering, and transmission fluids are typically mixed with crank-
case oils and recycled. Therefore^ the hazardous wast* characteris-
tics are not relevant and Part 266, Subpert 2 applies if the oils
are recycled as fuel. Used anti-ffreeze- is sot * used oil and is
net likely to exhibit any of the b*zardou» waste charateristicsr
consequently, it rav be disposed of ae a solid waste In Subtitle D
facilities. Similarly, windshield washer fluid is not used oil,
and is not liV.ely to exhibit a characteristic* thus, it say also
be disposed of as solid waste.
Please feel free to call Mr. Mike Petnska at 8-383-7737 if
you have and further questions.
cci Becional Branch Chiefs (EPA BLe>gions I-r/ and VII-X)
uw-562B/MPetruska/bc/242/475-85 52/2/26/87
Peview Section Controlled Correspondence
-------
UNfTEO STATES IHV1RONMIHTAL PROTECT 9441.1990(27
W3QI99D
Mr. williaa A. Anderson, II
Bracawell and Patterson
2000 K Street, Northwest
Washington, D.C. 20006-1309
D«ar Mr. Anderson:
This is in response to your 1attar of November 5, 1990
concerning the applicability of the Agency's usad oil definition
to your client's open-gear lubricant, "Caarite." This lubricant
is described as a petroleum-based, semi-solid material which
becomes^ liquefied when heated, and is sprayed onto the bull gears
of cement Jcilns for lubrication. The. spent Gearite is collected
in drip pans at the bottom of the enclosed gears and is
eventually piped back into the original product drums, where it
solidifies upon cooling. The Gearite is TC hazardous but can be
reused as a fuel in cement Jcilns.
You contend that Gearite fits the definition of "oil" and
not "grease" because it lacks the saponification agent necessary
to classify it as a grease (as described in the Agency's
Development Document for Effluent Limitation Guideline*). You
also referred to the Agency's November 29, 1913 definition of
used oil, which included spent "gear oils." Although SPA ham net
yet finalized the used oil definition proposed oa November 29,
1985, the Agency agrees with your interpretation that spent
Gearite should be classified as a used oil.
Am yoo indicated, used oils that exhibit the characteristics
of hazardous waste an either exempt when recycled or subject t*
• ri'liVnisail oil standards under 40 CTR 266 Subpart S when bunted
for eneoear recovery in industrial furnaces) and boilers per 40 cm
26l.6(a*(3)(iii) and (a)(2)(iii). state regulations for used
oil, however-, may be more stringent than the? Federal standard*
and should be» consulted.
-------
Shoaidtyou have any further questions on used oil, please
feel free*-to contact Ms. Denise Wright of ay staff at
(202) 245-3519.
Sincerely,
Sylvia K. Lovrance .
Director
Office of Solid Waste
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. O.C. 20460
JAN 28 1293
SOLIO WA«TI AND IMCMOfNCV
Dennis Redlngton
Director, Regulatory Management
Monsanto Company
800 N. Lindbergh Boulevard
St. Louis, Missouri 63167
Dear Mr. Redington,
TiianJc you for writing your letter regarding Monsanto
products sold as hydraulic fluids and heat transfer fluids.
This is. to confirm that although nonpolymer-based oils are
not specifically discussed in the used oil management standards
rule under the definition of used oil, it was the- intent of EPA
to include all synthetic oils that function similar to petroleua
based lubricants, oils, and surface agents in the definition of
used oil. EPA believes that your hydraulic fluids and transfer
fluids meet this criterion and will be regulated under 40 CFR 279
in lieu of Parts 260-272 of the hazardous waste program once the
regulations become effective in the various states. We- expect
most states to adopt the rule over the next two to three years.
If you have any further questions please contact Bryan
Groce at (202) 260-9550.
Sincerely,
Director
Office of Solid Waste
•2.
-------
Monsanto
ENVMOMMfNT. SA^fTY 4 H&»
-------
to MonsantOfr.af.Ur they have been used so that we can reclaim and reuse the
fluids. The** Monsanto fluid products are synthetic chemicals, but some of them
would not beiT considered polymers. Some of the fluids are based on phosphate
esters, others are based on diphenyl oxide, and still others are formulated from
alkylated benzenes, for instance. (I have attached two Material Safety Data
Sheets describing some of these products.) Confirmation that these fluids are
synthetic oils for purposes of the used oil program will greatly facilitate
reclaiming and reuse.
Mr. Groce has assured me that it is the Agency's intention that all synthetic
oils are captured in the definition of used oil, not just those that are
polymers. To be certain that we are basing our recycling initiatives on solid
ground, I would like to request that the Agency provide written confirmation that
non-polymeric synthetic fluids which are used as hydraulic fluids and heat
transfer fluids, such as those based on phosphate esters, diphenyl oxide or
alkylated benzenes, are "used oil1* as defined in the final rule on used oil. A
clear direction in this regard would provide support for Pollution Prevention and
resource recovery under RCRA.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response.
Respectfully yours,
0. B. Redington
Director, Regulatory Management
cc: J. E. Downes
J. P. Hyland
C. E. Hartmann
P. C. Wright
oi!3.1t6
-------
MARK V. STANGA Z
Attorney At Law KD D - Q IS~
3188 Key Boulevard
Arlington, Virginia 22201
^" .. (703)243-5038
(703) 243-1033 (fax)
April 9, 1993
Mike Petniska (OS-332)
Waste Characterization Branch
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
United States Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Mr. Petniska:
This letter requests your opinion on whether a particular material is subject to EPA's
recently-issued used oil management rules at 40 C.F.R. Part 279.
I represent a client that uses Isopar H, a substance refined from synthetic oil that Ke
resembles naptha, inside cables that send data from distant, instruments back to ships. [The "
"cable" is a heavy plastic sheath that protects the enclosed data-transmitting wires.] Because
Isopar H is lighter than water and is non conductive, the company fills the cables with Isopar H to
make them buoyant. Occasionally, the plastic sheath breaks and saltwater or other impurities
(such as dirt) enter the cable. When this occurs, company personnel remove the Isopar H from
the cable on the ship and transfer the contaminated Isopar-H onshore to a company vehicle.
The vehicle takes the contaminated Isopar H to a company facility, where company
personnel remove the Isopar H from the vehicle and then filter it to remove the impurities. Tht
company then disposes of the filtered impurities as hazardous waste, and places the reclaimed
Isopar H in a supply tank for reuse in another cable.
The company initially purchases the Isopar H from another company that refines it from
crude oil. My client does not use the Isopar-H u a solvent or a lubricant. The only purpose for
the Isopar H is to make cables float on the ocean surface.
EPA*Used Oil Management rules define 'used oil" in 40 C.F.R. § 279.1 as "any oil thtt
has been refined from crude oil, or any synthetic oil, that has been used and as a result of such u»
is contaminated by physical or chemical impurities.' EPA's explanation of the final used oil
management rules includes a discussion of the Agency's rationale that underlies the used oil
definition. See 57 Fed. Reg. 41,573-75 (September 10, 1992). Part of this discussion indicates
that the purpose for which a material is used is relevant in determining whether a particular
material is used oil under the used oil management rules. For example, the final rule preambk
says [in a discussion of whether synthetic oils should be regulated as used oil]: "For the large part.
the definition of used oil includes used lubricants of all lands that are used for a purpose of
-------
Used Oil Opinion Request
Pagc2
lubricatum ndbecome contaminated as a result of such use." Id. at 41,574. fEmpfios^ added.]
The prcarob%ontinu«: "The A-.-ncys position continues to be that synthetic oils shou;a be
included in thidefinhion of used oil due to the fact that these oils are generally used for the
same purposes as petroleum-derived oils...." Id {Emphasis added]
The preamble to the final used oil management rules also indicates that some synthetic oils
that are not used for traditional petroleum-based oil purposes are not used oil under these rules.
The preamble states that "[the used oil definition] does not include oil-based products used as
solvents refined from crude oil or manufactured from synthetic materials." Id. The same
discussion also excludes used oil residues resulting from the storage, processing, or re-refining of
used oil from the definition.
The most reasonable conclusion to draw from EPA's discussion summarized above is that
synthetic oils that are not used for lubrication, or for other traditional purposes for which
petroleum-based oil are used, are not "used oil" under 40 C.F.R, § 279.1. My client does not use
Isopar H as a lubricant He uses it to make cables float on water 'his is not a traditions use of
petroleum-derived oils. EPA's reasoning summarized above supp s the conclusion tha sopar
H which is used to make cables float, and which becomes contaminated with saltwater or other
impurities, is not used oil under 40 C.F.R. § 279.1.
I request your confirmation that EPA agrees that contaminated Isopar H used in the
manner described above is not used oil under 40 C.F.R. § 279.1, and therefore is not subject to
the used oil management rules in 40 CJ.R. Part 279. Please call me if you have any questions
about my inquiry. Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Mark V. Stanga
542LFMD3
-------
/l/^\
PATRICK M. SNYDER, P.E., ESQ.
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER AND ATTORNEY
4O7 CORTT-VXD SAVINGS BANK BLOO.
I NOWTN MAIM STRUT
COKTLA.XD. NBW YOMC I3O4S
(607) 753-8050
Sept. 29. 1993
Ms. Rajanl 0. Joglekar,
Office of Solid Waste,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
401 M Street, SW.
Washington. O.C., 20460.
Dear Ms. Joglekar,
I represent a small machine shop that produces small
steel parts by drilling and cutting. The by-product of this
operation 1s a small quantity of steel turnings which may
have a light coating of cutting oil on them. (The oil 1s
drained and re-used as much as possible.)
The cutting oil 1s.a petroleum product. The Material
Safety Data Bulletin supplied by Mobil Oil Corporation, the
cutting oil manufacturer, states that 1t does not contain any
potentially hazardous Ingredients.
The steel turnings, with a small amount of residual
cutting oil, are kept separate from any other waste material.
That 1s. neither solvents nor any other wastes are added to
the turnings.
Can you pleas* tell me whether these steel turnings
and/or cutting oil are regulated by the EPA? Does this
material meet the definition of a hazardous waste under RCRA
or CERCLA? Also, could you orovlde me with any Information
you may have regarding used cutting oil, and Its status as •
regulated substance?
P>Tea>e> let me> know 1f you need any additional Infor-
mation^. Thank you very much for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Patrick M. Snyder
PMS/nl
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
NOY I T 1993
OFFICE OF
SOUO WASTE ANO EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
Mr- Patrick M. Snyder, P.2.
Environmental Engineer and Attorney
407 Cortland Savings Bank Bldg.
1 North Main Street
Cortland, New York 13045
^
Dear Mr. Snyder:
Thank you for your letter of September 29, 1993, to
Ms. Rajani Joglakar requesting clarification of whether used
cutting oils and used oil coated steel turnings generated during
machining operations are regulated by the Environmental
Protection Agency as hazardous waste under the Resource
Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) or the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
Generally, these materials are not regulated as hazardous waste
by EPA. The remainder of this letter explains in more detail how
these materials are regulated.
Used oil is regulated by EPA under the 40 CFR Part 279
standards for the management of recycled used oil (September 10,
1992 57 FR 41586-41626). However, the Federal used oil
regulations will not become effective in New York until the State
adopts them as .State law. New York is currently in the process
of adopting standards equivalent to EPA's used oil standards. In
the meantime, the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC) regulates the management of used oil under
recently issued State standards. You should contact Michelle
Ching at*(518) 485-8988 or Bill Mirabile (518) 457-8829 for
information on the New York state used oil regulations.
Under- the Federal used oil management standards, the cutting
oils generated by the machine shop referred to in your letter
would be regulated as used oil. This would include cutting oils
removed from the steel turnings. The machine shop would be
considered a used oil generator subject to regulation under tn«
used oil generator standards (40 CFR 279.20). I have enclosed a
copy of the used oil regulations for your information.
Regarding regulation of the used oil coated steel turning*.
under 40 CFR 279.10(c) of the used oil standards, materials
containing or otherwise contaminated with used oil would be
-------
regulated as used oil until the* used oil is removed from the
material» In technical amendments and corrections to the used
oil rule^gublished on May 3, 1993, EPA clarified that "materials
containin^ynr otherwise contaminated with used oil, from which
the used oil. has been properly drained or removed to the extent
possible such that no visible signs of free-flowing oil remain in
or on the material are not considered used oil unless they are to
be burned for energy recovery" (58 PR 26420). Therefore, the
steel turnings referred to in your letter would be regulated as
used oil if they were visibly dripping with used oil but not if
all the oil had been drained off.
If the steel turnings are not regulated as used oil, it is
possible that they may still be regulated as hazardous wastes
under the RCRA hazardous waste regulations. Steel turnings are
considered "scrap metal" and are exempt from regulations if
recycled. If disposed of, the generator has to determine if the
turnings exhibit any characteristics of hazardous waste (e.g.
toxicity). If so, they must be managed as *a hazardous waste.
New York is authorized by EPA to implement the RCRA- hazardous
waste program. You should contact the Division of Hazardous
Substance Regulation of the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC) at (518) 485-8988 to determine
how the State hazardous waste regulations may apply. You may
also contact the RCRA hotline at (800> 424-9346 to learn more
about how the federal waste regulations may apply. Pleasa note,
however, that authorized states generally implement the RCRA
hazardous waste regulations and State regulations may be more
stringent than the Federal regulations.
If you have any further questions about the Federal used oil
management standards, you can call Eydie Pines of my staff at
(202) 260-3509.
Sincerely,
R. Weddl*
Acting Director
Office of Solid Waste
Enclosuri
-------
I § 1993*
Ref: 8HWM-HW .
Mr. Marion Loomis
Executive Director
Wyoming Mining Association
Hitching Post Inn
P.O. Box 366
Cheyenne, Wyoming, 82003
Re: Regulatory Compliance Issues affecting
the Wyoming Mining Association, second
response regarding the questions raised
during the Pollution Prevention seminar
Dear Mr. Loomis:
This is an additional response to the questions raised in
the WMA regulatory clarification letter and during the pollution
prevention/waste minimization seminar. This response addresses
the questions raised regarding waste grsaaes, the Clean Air Act,
and OSHA 1910 training requirements for SARA, CERCLA and RCRA.
The staff responding to the questions have requested
clarification on some of the questions. The questions are
answered in the order asked, beginning with the waste grease
questions from the original WMA letter and concluding with the
questions asked at the seminar. .
GREASE
In determining whether grea.se fits within the definition of
used oil, we referred to the preamble to Part 275 (57
Federal Register 41574, September 10, 1992) used oil
recycling rules. In this, section, EPA refers to a three -
part teat to determine whether a. particular material fits
within the definition of used oil:
A. Used for the same purpose as used oil
According to the new used oil regulations, the
definition of. used oil includes "lubricants of all
kinds' that are used for a purpose- of. lubrication and
become contaminated as a result of such use. Grease is
used to lubricate moving parts to avoid friction and
wear, ouch the same as oil.
3. Usually mixed and managed in the same manner after us*
Assuming used grease may legally be defined as. a used
oil, it would be managed in- the same manner as used
-------
oil, and in many cases, be put directly into the used
oiJL storage container.
C. Prsaents the same level of hazard
A revfew of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) and
analytical data for grease indicates that both the
product form and the waste form (at least as generated
by coal mining operations) present the same level of
hazard.
On this basis, we think used grease may properly be treated
as used oil. Is this interpretation consistent with your
reading of the Part 279 rules?
ANSWER Yes, we agree with your interpretation that the used
grease may be considered as a used oil fuel provided
that the management practice employed is recycling in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 279- and not disposal. In
addition, the used grease must meet the 1000 ppm total
halogen criteria in 40 CFR 279.10 and 279.11.
2. In the preamble to the solvent mixture rule, EPA states that
a waste is not regulated by the "F" List if the "F* List
substance is an ingredient in the formulation of commercial
chemical products not covered by the listing (50 Federal
Register 53316, December 31, 1985) . The EPA Hotline has
said that products covered by the listing are limited to
commercial chemical products used as solvents. Examples
such as methanol used to prevent freeze-ups of cooling-
systems have been held by EPA to not fall within *F"
Listing. On this basis, is it correct to say that grease
which is formulated by the manufacturer to contain 10fr or
more of an "F" List ingredient is not regulated by the "F"
List since it is used as a lubricant rather than a solvent?
ANSWER According to Ms. Eydie Pines at tJ.S. EPA Headquarters,
this interpretation is similar to that applied to the
ingredients used in paints and is valid unless the
manufacturer has indicated in the product information
that the "F" list ingredienc is used for .its solvent
properties. When provided by U. S. EPA Headquarters, a
written reference for this interpretation as it relates
to-paints will be forwarded.
3. Some greases used by the industry are formulated to contain
ingredients which are Included on. the "F" List. These
• ingredients are part of the product as manufactured and do
not exist because of mixing spent solvents into the grease.
Assuming we can document this fact, la this sufficient to
rebut the presumption raised by cesc results showing total
halogens to be 1000 ppm or more (40 CFR 279. 10 (b) (1) (11))?
-------
ANSWER. Yes, if you can document the use o£ "F" list solvents
used, as ingredients by the manufacturer of the grease
products for other than their solvent properties as
discussed in the answer to question 2 above.
SEMINAR QUESTIONS
1. How will tie Clean Air act affect used oil burners?
ANSWER The responding staff, Mr. Cory Potash, Air programs
section, did not fully understand the question and
requested clarification. Based upon the information in
the question, he offered this response:
If the facility is burning the used oil in an
incinerator as a means of disposal, in terms of the
Clean Air Act a facility such as this would most likely
be affected by the MACT standards for hazardous waste
incinerators which is scheduled tojbe promulgated by
November 15, 2000. This depends upon the size of the
facility and how the waste oil is categorized prior to
burning, (spec, oil, off spec, oil, hazardous waste
fuel etc...). There are many other factors that may
affect this regulatory interpretation relating to the
CAA and used oil burners. For additional information
please contact Mr. Cory Potash at 1 800 227-8917
extension 1886.
2. What is happening- to the contaminated de&ris regulations?
ANSWER The Land Disposal .Restrictions for Newly Listed Waste
and Hazardous Debris Rule was issued on Tuesday,
August 18, 1992, Federal Register Vol. 57, No. ISO,
pages 37194-37282. We have.enclosed a copy of these
regulations.
3. What are the training requirements for SARA, CERCLA,
OSHA 1310 inclusion in SARA and RCRA?
ANSWER The OSHA. 1910 training requirements are an. OSHA
requirement not an EPA requirement. -OSHA 1910.120
training is required on all CERCLA listed sites, RCRA
permitted sites, and all uncontrolled hazardous waste
sites, including any emergency response sites.
The SARA Title III and OSHA Hazardous Communication
Standards (HAZCOM) relate to Che public's right to know
what hazardous chemicals are being; used in the work
place and in the community. Each statute has separata
training requirements for facility personnel working
within a defined workspace. These requirements are
statute specific and do not overlap between statutes
-------
additional information regarding the statute and
situation in which the regulations are being applied is
needed,
^
-------
f
5*
I
s*
i
Appendix 3
Used O\\ Correspondence
and Memoranda
Rebuttable Presumption
-------
9495.1986(08)
April 8, 1986
A. R. Tarrer, P.E.
Professor and Director, AWORL
Auburn University
College of Engineering
Auburn University, Alabama 36849-3501
Dear Mr. Tarrer:
Thank you for your March 18, 1986, letter concerning the
possibility of separating chlorides from used oil. As explained
in more detail below,"you may strip used oil to reduce its
halogen content, but any futi produced by treating a listed
hazardous waste is still considered a hazardous waste.
Used oil used as fuel (or to produce fuel) that contains
over 1000 ppm total halogens is presumed to be mixed with
halogenated hazardous wastes listed in 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart
D. (See 40 CFR 266.40(c).) Such used oil is thus also a listed
hazardous waste. Persons may rebut this presumption by
demonstrating that the used oil does not contain hazardous waste
(for example, by showing that the used oil does not contain
significant concentrations .of halogenated hazardous constituents
listed in 40 CFR Part 261, Appendix VIII). Absent such a
showing, the used oil is regulated as hazardous waste fuel under
40 CFR Part 266, Subpart D, not the used oil fuel rules of Part
266, Subpart E. You could treat such used oil with steam or air
stripping to reduce the halogen content. You would need a RCRA
hazardous waste permit to do so. Under 40 CFR 261.3(c)(2)(i),
any fuel produced by treating hazardous waste is still considered
hazardous waste. (In contrast, if a lubricant is produced, the . •
lubricant is not a hazardous waste because under 40 CFR 261.2 it
is not a solid waste.) To market the fuel as an exempt material,
you would have to obtain a "delisting" decision under the
petition process under 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22 by showing that
the resultant fuel is not hazardous.
Commenters on EPA's November 29, 1985, proposal to extend
the 1000 ppm halogen limit beyond used oil fuels to include all
used oils being recycled (see 50 FR 40217-49218) have indicated
that, for a variety of reasons, the 1000 ppm limit is too
restrictive. They have suggested that it be raised to 2500,
3000, or 4000 ppm. We are considering these comments, and, in
This has been retyped from the original document.
-------
-2-
fact, are presently conducting studies to determine if some
unmixed used crankcase oils may contain over 1000 ppm halogens.
Although EPA may raise the limit as a result of those studies,
the rule described above applies in the interim.
I suggest you contact the generators who have been sending
you used oil with over 1000 ppm halogens either to obtain
documentation that they are not mixing hazardous waste with the
used oil or to make sure they properly manifest their shipment.
It is possible that some of these generators may previously have
been exempt from hazardous waste regulations as "small quantity
generators" under 40 CFR 261.5. EPA recently lowered the
exemption limit from 1000 to 100 kilograms per month, however,
and these generators will be required to comply with the
hazardous waste rules by September 22, 1986 (51 FR 10146). We
would be very interested in learning what you find out about the
waste management practices of each of the generators from whom
you receive used oil.
If you have further questions on our used oil rules, please
contact Mike Petruska of my office at (202) 382-7917.
Sincerely,
Marcia E. Williams
Director
Office of Solid Waste (WH-562)
bcc: Mark Greenwood
Steve Silverman
Tom Devine, Region IV
Hazardous Waste Division Director
This has been retyped from the original document.
-------
2989 Mokumoa StrMt
Unitek Environmental Services, Inc.
• Fax Phone: (808) 839-0786
June 22. 1992
Mr. Stan Brown, H-2-3 \
United Stales Environmental Protection Agency. ;
Region IX j
75 Hawthorne Street !
San Francisco, CA 84105 I
!
Subject: Regulation of Used OH Containing Greater Thar) 1,000 ppm Total Halogens
Reference: (a) Federal Register Volume 50. Number 230. dated November 29, 1985
Dear Mr. Brown: , !
* . !
j
Unitek Environmental Services, Inc. is a marketer of used! oil. recycling approximately
600,000 gallons of waste oil per year throughout the .stjateiof Hawaii. Unitek utilizes the
Dexsil Clor-D-Tect 1 000 Chlorine Halogen Screening Kit' to iscreen all used oil picked up for
total halogens. If the Kit indicates that a customers oil1 contains greater than 1 ,000 ppm
total halogens, the customer is notified that his used oil mafc be contaminated with hazardous
waste and he is given the option of having the screening test verified by laboratory analysis
(i.e.. by EPA method 9252). If the laboratory analysis confirms the results of Iho Clor-D-
Tect screening, then the customer is notified mat his waste; oil must bo piestimed to have
been mlxod with halogenated hazardous waste and must \h0reforo be considered a hazardous
waste unless the presumption of mixing can be rebutted (afc per 40 CFR 266.40(c}). Unitek
requests that EPA provide come clarification as to what constitutes an adequate* rebuttal of
the presumption of mixing. I
Reference (a) proposes that one approach to rebutting the jpresumption of mixing Is to chow
that tho used oil does not contain significant levels (defined as "on the order of 100 ppm of
any individual hazardous halogenated compound llsiod as si hazardous spent solvent", but
much more vaguely defined tor nonsolyent halogonatod Imzardous wasto) of halogonatod
hazardous constituents listed in 40 CFR 261 Appendix D. The sheer number of compounds
which must be analyzed for In order to utilize this approach, however, is tuch thai the lab
analysis necessary to rebut tho presumption may actually ibe more expensive for the
customer than disposing of the oil ac a hazardous waste. Unitek belinvos that an equally
acceptable alternative would be to determine whether all oV most of ihe halogen
contamination in the oil is from Inorganic chloridss (for example, inorganic salts from
seawaler). The Intent, of course, is to show that tho oil ijs not contaminated with organic
halogen compounds and therefore could not have boon mixid with halogatialad hazardous
waste. Although EPA has not as yet officially recommended a procedure for washing waste
oil samplos to remove inoiganic halogens for analysis, the; Office of Solid Waste Methods did
suggest to Unltok a number of ways in which this anaiysiaj could be reliably dona.
EPA rejected the Idoa of using organic halogens instead of total halogen* as the indicator of
mixing with a hazardous wasto based on analytical difficulties (there exists no quick, simple
method of determining organically bound halogen levals in iused oil) and because their data
indicated that inorganic halogen levels in used oil are generally lower than 1,000 ppm. It Is
therefore important to note that Unitek proposes testing fir inorganic halogens only as a
moans of rebutting the presumption once it has been tripped. The quick and simple Clor-D-
Tect would continue to be used to screen tho oil for tola! halogens, and the more complicated
analysis would be performed only in casos whero this screening Indicates greater than 1.000
ppm total halogens. Furthermore, notwithstanding tht> wealth of analytical data which EPA
-------
United States Environmental Protection Agancy • Region IX \
Regulation of Used Oil Containing Greater Than 1.000 ppm Total Halogens
June 22, 1992; Page 2 of 2
took into account in forming Its position on inorganic halogen contamination, Unitek hae found
through 17 years of experience recycling waste oil In an Island environment that in cases
where waste oil is found to contain greater than 1,000 ppm total halogens, the concentration
of total organic halogens is often much lower (in one instance, a. used oil sample was found to
contain approximately 1,200 ppm total halogens, yet the total organic halogen concentration
was only 83 ppm). This discrepancy may be attributed.to any of a number of factors, many
of thorn unique to the Island environments in which Unitek operates. For example,
emulsifiers commonly added to lubricating oils by the manufacturers to keep water from
separating from the oil in engine crankcases can result in halogenated emulsions being formed
when air saturated with moisture and ocean salt is ingested by the engines. In addition,
waste oil collected from ship bilges will normally have been In direct contact with seawatef
for a prolonged period of time, resulting in similar emulsions containing high levels of
inorganic salts. Leakage otbrackish groundwater into underground used oil storage tanks can
result in the same occurrence in oil from these tanks. Whatever the cause, there does exist
in Hawaii a distinct posslblity of inorganic halogen contamination leading to false-positive
results when testing used oil for total halogens. j
In reference (a), EPA established that the total halogen concentration in usod oil at which
mixing with a halogenated hazardous waste must be presumed to have occurred is 1,000
ppm. In Its arguments against setting this indicator level fit some higher concentration, EPA
stated that "very few used oils will trip the presumption due to inorganic halogen content of
over 1,000 ppm", and that "used oil will generally contain; less than 1,000 ppm of total
halogens unless it Is mixed with hazardous chlorinated solvents". Based on these arguments,
a total halogen concentration of less than 1,000 ppm in used oil should not ba sufficient to
trip the presumption of mixing with a hazardous waste even if the oil contained no inorganic
halogens. It is therefore consistent with EPA's intention jto say that, for oil with a total
halogen concentration greater than 1,000 ppm. the presumption of mixing could be rebutted
by showing that the total organic halogen concentration is less than 1,000 ppm (I.e., that the
presumption was, in fact, tripped by Inorganic halogen content).
Unitek therefore proposes to implement the following procedure for used oil which hae been
found to contain greater than 1,000 ppm total halogens by a Clor-D-Tect field test:
(1) determine the total halogen concentration by laboratory analysis; (2) determine the
inorganic halogen concentration by laboratory analysis; (3) compare the total and inorganic
halogen concentrations to determine the concentration of j organic halogens; (4) if the organic
halogen concentration exceeds 1.000 ppm, dispose of the oil as a hazardous waste; (5) If the
organic halogen concentration Is less than 1.000 ppm, consider the presumption of mixing to
have been rebutted and. in the absence of any other evidence of mixing with a hazardous
waste, consider the used oil to be suitable for recycling, J Unitek requests that you inform us
as to whether, in EPA's judgement, this procedure Is acceptable under 40 CFR 266.40(c) for
demonstrating that used oil containing more than 1,000 ppm of total halogens does not
contain hazardous waste. j
i
:
Your timely attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions
regarding this issue, please do not hesitate to contact me at (808) 682-1355/834-1444.
Sincerely,
Sean M. O'Keefe
Manager, Waste Management Facility
Unitek Environmental Service*. Inc.
-------
! J2J22J UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
**i**fT REGION IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, Ca. 94105-3901
OCT301992
Sean M. O'Keefe
Manager, Waste Management Facility
Unitek Environmental Services, Inc.
2889 Mokumoa Street
Honolulu, HI 96819
Dear Mr. O'Keefe: ^
This is in response to your letter of June 22, 1992 to Stan
Brown regarding the rebuttal of the presumption of illegally
mixing used oil with hazardous waste. Specifically, you propose
to determine the inorganic halogen concentration after the oil
has been found to exceed 1,000 ppm total halogens using a Clor-D-
Test field test and subtract the inorganic halogens to arrive at
a figure for the organic halogens. This last figure would
supposedly indicate if spent solvents had been mixed with the
used oil. The Federal Register/Volume 50, No. 230/Friday,
November 29, 1985 page 49178 clearly discusses why the Agency
stipulates the requirement for testing for total halogens:
"We know of no quick, simple method for determining
organically-bound halogen levels in used oil. The sample
must be "washed" to remove inorganic halogens before
determining organic halogen levels. Moreover, we have only
just .recently investigated techniques for washing to remove
inorganic halogens from used oil and are not yet ready to
recommend a procedure. Even if an acceptable technique were
available, washing would add substantially to the time
required to determine halogen levels ...
In addition, organic halogens would be a more accurate
measure of presence of hazardous halogenated solvents than
total halogens only if used oil often contains more than
1000 ppm of inorganic halogens. We have discussed above,
however, that the data indicate that inorganic halogen
levels are generally lower than 1000 ppm. Finally use of
organic halogens rather than total halogens does not avoid
the problem of occasional false-positives caused by
nonhazardous organic chlorine additives found in
metalworking oils."
Printed on Kecycled Paper
-------
Finally, in 40 CFR 266 Subpart E (Used Oil Burned for Energy
Recovery), there is no provision for the Regions to grant a
variance from testing used oil for total halogens. Use of other
testing procedures could jeopardize a facility's compliance
status with federal regulations and statutes.
If you have questions, you may call Stan Brown of my staff
at (415) 744-2098.
Sincere!
RicK/Vaine, dhief
State Programs Branch
Hazardous Waste Management Division
-------
Appendix 3
s
Q
Q.
O
Used Oil Correspondence
and Memoranda
Used Oil Mixtures
-------
s
safBtyiiieen.
May 22, 1992
Mr. Don R. Clay
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.V.
Washington, DC 20460
Safety-Kleen Corporation is a leader in the recycling of waste
parts cleaning'solvents and used oils. As such, Safety-Kleen has worked
hard to develop safe and environmentally sound methods of collecting and
recycling these materials into products that may be reused for their
original purpose. In 1991, Safety-Kleen serviced over 500,000
generators of liquid wastes, recycling more than 40 million gallons of
waste solvents and 130 million gallons of used oils.
Recently, confusion has developed throughout the regulated
community regarding the legally available options, as well as the most
desirable environmental option, for management of these two types of
wastes. Generators are now asking whether the regulations allow them to
mix their waste solvents into their used oil and manage the entire
mixture as used oil.
One reason generators are interested in this waste management
approach is that it appears to be a cost-effective option. Furthermore,
generators are required to certify that they are minimizing their
hazardous waste. Several waste management companies and trad*
associations are currently advising generators that if they mix their
waste solvents into their used oils and manage the entire mixture as
used oil this constitutes waste minimization. A copy of one such
publication is attached for your information.
Safety-Kleen believes chat this mixing practice raises two
critical regulatory questions and one important policy question. The
regulatory questions are:
o What is the regulatory status and the regulatory
requirements for a mixed used oil/waste solvent stream?
o Does the practice of mixing waste solvents with used oil
constitute waste minimization if the resulting mixture is
used and on-specification used oil fuel?
777 8IO TIMBER ROAO ILQIN. ILLINOIS 80123 PHONE 70ftV8B7-»4eO FAX 70eV«7-««
-------
Mr. Don Clay
May 22, 1992
Page 2
The policy question is also important:
o How does
-------
Mr. Don Clay
May 22, 1992
Page 3
Safecy-Kleen vanes to use the answers to this inquiry to provide
our customers with a clear interpretation of the regulations.governing
the mixing of hazardous waste solvents into used oils. Thus, we would
appreciate it if you could respond to each individual question. More
and more waste solvent generators are seriously considering Che blending
option, thus a timely response to these questions is critical. Thank
you for your help in this..matter. If you have any questions regarding
this submission or require any additional information, please contact
me. I would also be pleased to meet with your or your staff if that
would help expedite a response.
Sincerely,
Basil G. Constantelos
Director, Environmental Affairs
Enclosure
-------
Mr. Don Clay
May 22, 1992
Page 4
I. Vasts Stream Descriptions
Provided below is a brief description of the waste streams of
concern.
Waste Parts Cleaning Solvents
Typically, parts cleaning solvent is mineral spirits or a similar
nonhalogenated petroleum based solvent. Unused parts cleaning solvents
may have a flash point above or below 140oF. These solvents are not
listed as hazardous waste under 40 CFR part 251 subpart 0. However,
waste solvents may exhibit one or more of the characteristics identified
in 40 CFR part 261 subpart C. Ignitability is a common hazardous
characteristic-. Waste solvents may also exhibit a TC characteristic
such as lead, chromium, or benzene.
It is clear under the regulations that a used parts cleaning
solvent that exhibits any hazardous characteristic is a hazardous waste
and subject to the RCRA regulations.
Used Otis
The characteristics of used oils vary depending on the source of
the oil and the generator's waste management procedures. Typically,
used oils will be contaminated with water and solids. Used oils that
are not segregated from other wastes may also contain gasoline, mineral
spirits, antifreeze and chlorinated solvents. Used oils typically
exhibit a hazardous characteristic for lead, and may exhibit other
characteristics such as ignitability and benzene.
Used oils that have not been mixed with a hazardous waste and are
destined for recycling are extapt from most RCRA regulations. See, 40
CFR 261.6(a)(2)(iii) and (a)(3)(iii). Used oils destined to be burned
for energy recovery are regul»c«d as used oil fuels under 40 CFR pare
266 subpart E. .-.
I. QUESTIONS ON WASTE CHARACTERIZATION REQUIREMENTS
Background: It is clear chat generators may mix their
nonhazardous waste* Into their used oil and manage the
mixture as used oil. However, confusion exists regarding
the amount of testing that is required to ensure that waste
parts cleaning solvents (e.g., mineral spirits) is ooc a
hazardous waste. Often, generators rely on the-
characteristics of the unused clean solvents to determine
-------
Mr. Don Clay
May 22. 1992
Page 5
whether the waste solvent will exhibit a hazardous waste
characteristic.
• •*» *
Question 01: What degree of testing, or burden of proof
with respect to knowledge of the waste is needed to
ensure that waste mineral spirits is not a hazardous
waste?
Question #2: If the waste solvent does not exhibit the ,.
characteristic of ignitability, is a generator
required to test the waste for the TCLP
characteristics prior to classifying the waste as
rionhazardous?
Question #3: If the waste solvent exhibits the
characteristic of ignitability, oust a generator also
test his waste for the TCLP characteristics in order
to comply with the land ban restrictions?
Question #4: Can a generator rely on an analysis of his
unused mineral spirits (e.g., for ignitability and TC
characteristics) plus knowledge of his operations to
conclude that the resulting waste solvent will not
exhibit any hazardous characteristic?
Question 05: If a generator can rely on an analysis of his
unused mineral spirits, and knowledge of his
operations to conclude that his waste solvent is not
hazardous, can Safety-Kleen, as a transporter, storer,
and recycler rely on the generator's certification?
Question #6: If the waste mineral spirits contains a listed
hazardous waste (e.g., waste brake cleaner or some
other chlorinated solvent), and the mineral
spirits/lijcid waste mixture is blended into used oil,
is the entire mixture defined as a listed hazardous
waste? ..
-------
Mr. Don Clay
May 22, 1992
Page 6
II. QUESTIONS ON WASTE MINIMIZATION
Question-#7: ..Is the practice of diluting a
/ characteristically hazardous waste into used oil to
render the mixture nonhazardous considered waste
minimization? That is, is this practice allowed to be
certified as waste minimization on a hazardous waste
manifest, may generators use this practice as waste
minimization in thef¥ annual reports, and is-it .
considered waste minimization with respect to the SARA
Title III and Pollution Prevention Control Ace
V requireme4||R?-
-------
Mr. Don Clay
May 22. 1992
Page 7
III. QUESTIONS ON THE REGULATORY STATUS OF MIXTURES OF WASTE SOLVENTS
AND USED OIL . ...- •
Scenario 1:
Waste 01; Waste mineral spirits solvent exhibiting a hazardous
characteristic-(e.g., any hazardous characteristic including
but not limited to ignitability or TC Characteristic). • .
Wasce 02; Used Oil
Mixture: Used oil/solvent mixture that exhibits a hazardous
characteristic.
. *
Discussion: It is difficult to determine whether a used oil
exhibiting a hazardous characteristic has been mixed with a
characteristic hazardous waste. Often used oil will exhibit
a characteristic of its own (e.g., lead, benzene, etc.).
However, this question assumes that knowledge exists that
the generator has purposely mixed waste mineral spirits into
the used oil. The resulting mixture may exhibit the
characteristic of the mineral spirits or of the used oil.
Question #8: If a generator1 mixes its characteristic
hazardous wasue into its used oil, and the resulting
mixture continues to exhibit a hazardous waste
characteristic, is the resulting mixture regulated as
a hazardous waste or as a.used oil? [Note: does the
answer to this question depend on the characteristic
exhibited by the solvent and rile oil. For example, if
the solvent is hazardous due to ignitability, and the
mixture is hazardous only for lead.]
Question 09: If the mixture is regulated as a hazardous
waste, and is destined to be burned for energy
recovery, is It regulated in accordance with 40 CFB.
part 266 subpart H?
Question #10: If the mixture, is regulated as a used oil. !•
it subject to che used oil exclusion in 40 CFE
261.6(a)(2)(iii)7 That is, if the mixture is destined
1. • Note: The tern 'generator' as used in each question excludes
conditionally exempt small quantity generators. It is clear fro* the
regulations that CESQGs are allowed under the current regulations to «L»
their hazardous wastes into their used oils, and manage the entire
mixture as a used oil. See 40 CFR part 266 subpart E.
-------
nr. uon
May 22, 1992
Page 8
/
Co be burned for energy recovery it is excluded from
most of Che RCRA regulations and managed in accordance
with 4Q..CFR pare 266 subparc E?
Quescion #11: If che mixture is regulated as a used oil. is
ic also subject to che used oil exclusion in
261.6(a)(3)(iit)? That is, if che mixture is descined
Co be recycled in some manner other chan burning for
energy recovery ic is essentially excluded from
regulation under RCRA?
Scenario 02
Waste 01: Waste mineral spirits solvent exhibiting a hazardous
waste characteristic (e.g., any hazardous characteristic
including but not limited Co ignitability or TC
Characteristic).
Waste 02: Used Oil
Mixture: Used oil/solvent mixture that no longer exhibits a
hazardous characteristic. The mixcure is descined Co be
recycled either by burning for energy recovery or re-
refining.
Discussion.: The US EPA has s -;red chae "mixing a characteristic
hazardous waste with . :her material Co render che waste
nonhazardous constitu::.- creatmenc of hazardous waste,
subject to applicable standards under 40 CFR Parts 264-265
and 270, and che notification requirements of section 3010
of RCRA." See, 50 FR 49180 (Nov. 29, 1985) However,
confusions exists regarding which standards apply to
generators treating their characteristically hazardous waste
on-sice.
Question 012: Is the resulting mixture regulated as a
hazardous waste or as a used oil?
Question 013: If che resulcing mixture is regulated as a
used oil, is Ic subject Co Che used oil exclusions
included in 40 CFR 261.6(a)(2)(iii) and
Question 014: If a generator mixes her characceriscic
hazardous" waste with used oil to generate A
nonhazardous mixture descined for recycling, does chis
conscicuce treatment? (Ic may be assumed Chat Chis
-------
Mr. Don Clay
May 22, 1992
Page 9
activity is caking place in a 90-day accumulation
tank.)
Question //13: If the practice of mixing hazardous waste
mineral'spirits with used oil is considered treatment,
is this type of treatment regulated under RCRA? That
is, are generators allowed to treat their hazardous
wastes on-site without a permit?
Question #16: If generators are allowed to treat their
hazardous wastes on-site-without a permit, what burden
of proof must the generator have to ensure that the •
resulting mixture is no longer a hazardous waste? Is
analysis required to ensure that the
characteristically hazardous waste has been treated
such that it no longer exhibits the characteristic?
Question #17: Does the treatment of mineral spirits
exhibiting a hazardous, waste characteristic in used
oil to render the mineral spirits nonhazardoua
constitute dilution? . If so, is this practice
prohibited under 40 CFR 268.3?
-------
I • rrc
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
OCT281992
Office, of
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Mr. Basil 6. Constantelos, Director
Environmental Affair* "'
Safety-Kleen
777 Big Timber Road
Elgin, 1111110^60123.
Dear Mr. Co
telos:
Thank you for your letter of May 22, 1992 requesting
clarification on the regulatory requirements pertaining to the
management of waste solvents and used oil. We understand your
desire to provide your customers with a clear interpretation of
the federal regulations governing the mixing of hazardous waste
solvents into used oils. Of course, as you know, state
regulations can be more stringent and broader in scope than the
federal program. The enclosures to this letter individually
address your series of questions regarding characterization
requirements, waste minimization definitions, and the regulatory
status of mixtures of waste solvents and used oil. Our responses
reflect only EPA's federal regulations, and not individual state
regulatory provisions.
Thank you for your interest in the safe and effective
management of used oil. If you have any further questions,
please contact Michael Petruska of my staff at (202) 260-9888.
Sincerely yours,
ance',' DT
solid Wast*
Enclosures
Printed on flecycwe *
-------
3
Z. QUESTIONS 0* WASTE CHARACTERIZATION REQUIREMENTS
Question Hi what degree of testing, or burden of proof with
respect to knowledge of the waste is needed to
ensure that waste mineral spirits is not a
hazardous waste?
Persons who generate solid waste are not specifically required to
test their wastes to determine whether it exhibits any of the
hazardous waste characteristics. Instead solid waste generators
are required to make a determination as to'whether or not their
wastes are hazardous (40 CFR 262.11). This determination may be
made either by testing the waste or by applying knowledge of the
characteristics of the waste, in light of the materials or the
processes used in its generation. If a waste is determined to be
hazardous, the generator mrrt keep records establishing the basis
for that determination (40 CFR 262.40(c)). These records must be
maintained for at least three years from the date that the waste
was last sent to on-site or off-site treatment, storage, or
disposal.
Question 12t If the waste solvent does not exhibit the
characteristic of ignitability, is a generator
required to test the waste for the TCLP
characteristic prior to classifying the waste as
nonhazardous?
If the waste solvent does not exhibit the characteristic of
ignitability, the generator is not specifically required to test
the wastes to determine whether the waste solvent exhibits any of
the other hazardous waste characteristics identified in Subpart C
of 40 CFR Part 261 (corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity).
Instead solid waste generators are required to make a
determination as to whether or not the wastes are hazardous (40
CFR 262.11). This determination may be made either by testing
the waste or by applying knowledge of the characteristics of the
waste, in light of the materials or the processes used in its
generation. If a wast* is determined to be hazardous, the
generator must keep records establishing the basis for that
determination (40 C7R 262.40(c)). These records must be
maintained for at least three years from the date that the waste
was last sent to on-site or off-site treatment, storage, or
disposal.
Question 13: If the waste solvent exhibits the characteristic
of ignitability, must a generator also test his
waste for the TCLP characteristic in order to
comply with the land ban restrictions?
If the waste solvent exhibits the characteristic of ignitability,
the generator must determine whether the waste exhibits any of
the other characteristics of hazardous waste identified in
-------
Subpart C of 40 CFR Part 261. This is the case because the
generator Bust determine each EPA hazardous waste number (waste
code) applicable to the waste in order to comply with the land
disposal restrictions (40 CFR 268.9(a)). In addition, you may be
aware of the recent D.C. Circuit opinion concerning the "Third
Third" land disposal restrictions regulations. While there are
no obvious implications of that decision for the scenario you
have described here, we have not concluded our analysis of the
case, so it is possible there could be some implications for your
situation.
Question 44s Can a generator rely on an analysis of his unused
mineral spirits (e.g., for ignitability and TC
characteristics) plus knowledge of his operations
to conclude that the resulting waste solvent will
not exhibit any hazardous characteristic?
A generator can rely oh analysis of unused mineral spirits plus
knowledge of the operation to determine whether or not the
resulting waste solvent exhibits any hazardous characteristic
provided that he/she has sufficient information to make an
accurate determination. Persons who generate solid waste are not
specifically required to test their wastes to determine whether
it exhibits any of the hazardous waste characteristics. Instead
solid waste generators are required to make a determination as to
whether or not their wastes are hazardous (40 CFR 262.11). This
determination may be made either by testing the waste or by
applying knowledge of the characteristics of the waste, in light
of the materials or the processes used in its generation.
Question #5i If a generator can rely on an analysis of his
unused mineral spirits, and knowledge of his
operations to conclude that his waste solvent is
not hazardous, can Safety-Kleen, as a transporter,
storer, and recycler rely on the generator's
certification?
Transporters, storers and recyclers who use knowledge or
information supplied by others are still responsible for the
accuracy of the determination. If transporters accept a waste,
e.g., mineral spirits, that is sometimes hazardous, the
transporters should discuss with either generator whether their
particular wastestream is or isn't hazardous. In some cases,
analysis may be appropriate to help make this determination.
Question lit If the waste mineral spirits contains a listed
hazardous waste (e.g., waste brake cleaner or some
other chlorinated solvent), and the mineral
spirits/listed waste mixture is blended into used
oil, is the entire mixture defined as a listed
hazardous waste?
-------
If the entire mineral spirits/listed waste mixture is blended
into used oil, the entire mixture is subject to regulation as a
hazardous waste under 40 CFR Parts 260 through 266, 268, 270, and
124 rather than as a used oil (see 40 CFR 261.3(a)(2)(iv), and
the new 40 CFR 279.10(b)(1)(i)).
II. QUSSTIOHS OH WABT1 MIHIMHATIOH
Question «7i Is the practice of diluting a characteristically
hazardous waste into used oil to render the
mixture nonhazardous considered waste minimization
on a hazardous waste manifest, may generators use
this practice as waste minimization in their
annual reports, and is it considered waste
minimization with respect to the SARA Title III
and Pollution Prevention Control Act requirements?
Waste minimization, as defined by HSWA, means (1) reduction of
the total volume or quantity of hazardous waste; (2) reduction
in the toxicity of hazardous waste; or (3) both, as long as the
reduction is consistent with the goal of minimizing present and
future threats to human health and the environment. Source
reduction is the reduction or elimination of hazardous waste at
the source, usually within a process. Recycling is the use or
reuse of waste as an effective substitute for a commercial
product, or as an ingredient or feedstock in an industrial
process (1991 National Biennial RC~A Hazardous Waste Report).
This type of dilution does not reduce volume and does not appear
to reduce the amount of toxic constituents in the mixture.
III. QUESTIONS OH THB UQULATORY STATUS 07 HIXTUMS 07 WXJT1
SOLVENTS AMD USED OIL
Question ft: If a generator mixes its characteristic hazardous
waste into its used oil, and the resulting mixture
continues to exhibit a hazardous waste
characteristic, is the resulting mixture regulated
as a hazardous waste or as a used oil? [Note:
does the answer to this question depend on the
characteristic exhibited by the solvent and the
oil. For example, if the solvent is hazardous due
to ignitabil*ty, and the mixture is hazardous only
for lead.]
If a generator mixes characteristic hazardous waste into used oil
and the resultant mixture exhibits a hazardous waste
characteristic, the resultant mixture is subject to regulation • -
hazardous waste under 40 CFR Parts 260 through 266, 269, 270, anc
124 rather than as a used oil (40 CFR 261.3(a)(2)(iii)). when
the new Part 279 used oil management standards become effective,
mixtures of used oil and waste which is hazardous solely because
it exhibits the characteristic of ignitability will b« subject to
-------
regulation as used oil provided that the resultant aixture does
not exhibit the characteristic of ignitability (40 CFR
Question I9i If the mixture is regulated as a hazardous waste,
and is destined to be burned for energy recovery,
is it regulated in accordance with 40 CFR Part 266
Subpart H?
If the used oil/solvent" mixture is regulated as a hazardous
waste, and is destined to be burned for energy recovery, it must
be managed in accordance with the requirements in 40 CFR Part 266
Subpart H.
Question 110: If the mixture is regulated as a used oil, is it
subject to the used oi" exclusion in 40 CFR
261.6(a)(2)(iii)? That is, if the mixture is
destined to be burned for energy recovery it is
excluded from most of the RCRA regulations and
managed in accordance with 40 CFR Part 266 Subpart
E?
If the used oil/solvent mixture is subject to regulation as used
oil, and is destined to be burned for energy recovery, it must be
managed in accordance with 40 CFR Part 266 Subpart E. When the
new Part 279 standards become effective, 40 CFR Part 261.6(a)(4)
will indicate that mixtures which are regulated as used oil and
recycled (destined for energy recovery as veil as recycled in
some other manner) are subject to Part 279 rather than Parts 260
through 268. The new Part 279 standards will replace 40 CFR Part
266 Subpart E.
Question 111: If the mixture is regulated as a used oil, is it
also subject to the used oil exclusion in
26l.6(a) (3) (iii)? That is, if the mixture is
destined to be recycled in some manner other than
burning for energy recovery it is essentially
excluded from regulation under RCRA?
If the used oil/solvent mixture is subject to regulation as used
oil, and is destined to be recycled in some manner other than
burning for energy recovery, it is not subject to regulation
under Parts 262 through Parts 266 or Parts 268, 270 or 124 and is
not subject to the notification requirements of Section 3010 of
RCRA. When the new Part 279 standards become effective, 40 CFR
Part 261.6(a)(4) will exclude mixtures which are regulated as
used oil and recycled (destined for energy recovery as well as
recycled in some manner other than burning for energy recovery)
from the requirements of Parts 260 through 268. Rather, such
recycled used oil mixtures will be subject to the requirements of
Part 279.
-------
Question #12t Is the resulting mixture regulated as a haza.
waste or as a used oil?
If the resultant used oil/solvent mixture no longer exhibits a
hazardous characteristic, it is subject to regulation as a used
oil (40 CFR Part 261. 3 (a) (2) (iii)) .
Question #13 t if the resulting mixture is regulated as a used
oil, is it subject to the used oil exclusions
included in 40 CFR 261. 6 (a) (2) (iii) and
261. 6 (a) (3) (iii)? '-
If the resultant mixture is subject to regulation as used oil and
the used oil is destined for energy recovery or recycled in some
manner other than burning for energy recovery, the used oil ,.
mixture is eligible for the exclusions
-------
8
262.34 and 268.7(a)(4) as well as Part 279, Subpart C when it
becomes effective.
Question fill if generators are allowed to treat their hazardous
wastes on-site without a permit, what burden of
proof must the generator have to ensure that the
resulting mixture is no longer a hazardous waste?
Is analysis required to ensure that the
characteristically hazardous waste has been
treated such that it no longer exhibits the
characteristic?
Regardless of whether or not hazardous waste is being treated on-
site without a permit, generators are required to make a
determination as to whether or not their wastes are hazardous (40
CFR 262.11). This determination may be made either by testing
the waste or by applying knowledge of the characteristics of the
waste, in light of the materials or the processes used in its
generation.
Question 117: Does the treatment of mineral spirits exhibiting a
hazardous waste characteristic in used oil to
render the mineral spirits nonhazardous constitute
dilution? If so, is this practice prohibited
under 40 CFR 268.3?
The treatment standard for nonwastewater ignitable wastes
containing greater than or equal to 10 percent total organic
carbon is fuel substitution, recovery of organics, or
incineration (40 CFR 268.42 Table 2). Mixing mineral spirits
exhibiting a hazardous waste characteristic with used oil that
will ultimately be treated by the specified treatment technology
is aggregation of like wastestreams and therefore not
impermissible dilution (55 £B 22532). As mentioned in our answer
to Question 3, there was a new D.C. Circuit opinion on the Third
Third regulations, and while we saw no obvious connection to your
question here, we have not fully concluded our analysis of that
case, so we cannot be completely definitive at this time.
-------
Post Office Box 34595 Bethesda, Maryland 20827 301-897-3191
Ms. Sylvia Lowrance, Director July 24, 1992
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection"Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Ms. Lowrance:
In the coming weeks, EPA will issue the second half of its final used oil
rulemaking. This regulation is of great interest to CASI, as our member
companies are all involved in the quick oil change and lubrication business.
Among other things, the final rule will likely include language pertaining to
the mixture of hazardous waste and used oil. CASI wishes to raise one issue in
advance of EPA's action in order to ensure that our members fully and correctly
understand the regulatory requirements that will affect them.
Specifically, our concern centers on the practice of mixing mineral spirits, a
non-halogenated, petroleum-based solvent, with used oil that is destined for
recycling. From a process standpoint, such a mixture would cause no problems
for recyclers of used oil. However, there is some controversy surrounding the
regulatory status of generators who mix these materials prior to recycling.
It is our belief that used oil generators should be allowed to mix spent mineral
spirits with used oil in their storage tanks without filing for TSD permits so
long as the resulting mixture has a flash point higher than the characteristic
threshold of 140 degrees F. Once these materials are combined, the resultant
mixture should be treated as used oil under Part 266 Subpart E and not as a
hazardous waste fuel.
We believe our position is consistent with current regulations and base this
assessment on the following:
1. Although some mineral spirits would be considered hazardous waste by virtu*
of ignitability, the resultant mixture of used oil and mineral spirits
typically found at automotive service centers (2-4Z mineral spirits as a
percent of the total mixture) would not fall below the Agency's 140 degree
threshold for the characteristic of ignitability. Attached are test results
that confirm this.
-------
2. According to the September 1991 Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
"Since the mixture [mineral spirits and used oil] no longer exhibits the
characteristic of ignitability, the burning of such a mixture- for energy
recovery is subject to Part 266, Subpart E as a used oil fuel, and is not
subject to Part 266, Subpart 0 as a hazardous waste fuel." This clearly
indicates that the Agency contemplated the mixing of .used oil with mineral
spirits that are hazardous soley by the characteristic of ignitability.
Moreover, it confirms that such a mixture can be managed as used oil fuel.
3. The question then becomes, are generators "treating" their mineral spirits
by mixing them with used oil? According to a prior EPA pronouncement
regarding On-site Storage*Requirements (51 FR 10168 - March 24, 1986),
"...no [TSO] permitting would be required if a generator chose to treat-'
their hazardous waste in the generator's accumulation tanks or containers in
conformance with the requirements of 262.34 and Subparts J or I of Part
265." The regulation continues, "Since the same standards apply to treat-
ment in tanks as applies to storage in tanks, and since EPA allows for
limited on-site storage without the need for a permit or interim status
(90 days for over 1000 kg/mo generators and 180/270 days for 100-1000 kg/mo
generators), the Agency believes that treatment in accumulation tanks or
containers is permissible under existing rules provided the tanks or
containers are operated stricly in compliance with all applicable standards.
4. Typically, quick oil change facilities generate over 1000 kg of used oil per \
month. Because of this large volume, used oil tanks are drained every 14-30
days and hence fall well within the Agency's 90-day accumulation window for /
exempt treatment units. It is important to note that these quick oil change '
facilities already comply with all applicable provisions of 262.34 and Part
265 Subparts I and J.
Our concern stems from the May 20, 1992 used oil rulemaking, which stated in a
footnote that, "...mixing spent mineral spirits used as a solvent (exhibiting
the characteristic of ignitability or toxicity) with used oil to render the
mineral spirits nonhazardous constitutes treatment." Based on the above
regulatory citations, we believe this statement is inconsistent with previous
rulings.
To avoid considerable confusion with the release of the second half of the used
oil rulemaking, we suggest that EPA reiterates its existing TSD exemption for
facilities that "treat" by mixing their used oil with characteristic wastes in
storage tanks for less than 90 days. In addition, the Agency should specify
whether the May 20 ruling was even intended to cover used oil that is recycled
or if its scope was limited to used oil destined for disposal.
These clarifications would allow operators to continue the sound management
practice of accumulation and timely recycling of mineral spirits used in their
parts washing sinks. There would then be absolutely no incentive to mismanage.
the material and every incentive to handle it properly.
-------
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please feel free to call if
um «* an Ka rt^ ^Ifr^Ko** •ea4ci>*n«*A
0 « * *
we can be of further assistance
Sincerely
Larry Northup
Executive Director
cc: Mr. William K. Reilly
Mr. Donald Clay
Ms. Karen Brown
Rep. Billy Tauzin
Rep. Al Swift
Mr. Robert E. Grady, OMB
CASI Environmental Committee
Used Oil Recycling Coalition
Attachments: (1) Summary of Mixing and Treatment Regulations
(2) Results of Used Oil/Mineral Spirits Flash Point Study
-------
REGULATORY CITATIONS RELATED TO USED OIL / SOLVENT MIXING
Mixtures and Treatment. Opinion;
From Used Oil Ruleaaking - May 20, 1992
"...used oil mixed with a characteristic hazardous waste must be managed as a
hazardous waste if it still exhibits a characteristic (5)."
"(5) It should be noted that mixing a characteristic waste with another material
to render the waste non-hazardous constitutes treatment of hazardous waste
subject to applicable standards under 40 CFR Parts 264-265 and 270 and
notification requirements of section 3010 of RCRA. For example, mixing spent
mineral spirits used as a solvent (exhibiting the characteristic of ' .-
ignitability or toxicity) with used oil to render the mineral spirits non-
hazardous constitutes treatment."
Confirmation of Mixture Rule;
From 50 FR 49179 - November 29, 1985
"Thus when used oil has been mixed with a characteristic hazardous waste, the
mixture is regulated as hazardous waste fuel if it continues to exhibit a
characteristic. If the resultant mixture no longer exhibits a characteristic of
hazardous waste, it is regulated as used oil. This is merely a restatement of
the 'mixture rule' in 261.3."
From Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking - Sept. 1991
"Mineral spirits, when mixed with used oil, no longer exhibit the characteristic
of ignitability and the resultant mixture is subsequently burned for energy
recovery. Since the mixture no longer exhibits the characteristic of
ignitability, the burning of such a mixture for energy recovery is subject to
Part 266, Subpart E as a used oil fuel, and is not subject to Part 266 Subpart 0
as a hazardous waste fuel."
Refutation of Treatment Opinion;
From 51 FR 10168 - March 24, 1986
"Of course no permitting would b« required if a generator chose to treat their
hazardous waste in the generator's accumulation tanks or containers in
confonuance with the requirements of 262.34 and Subparts J or I of Part 265.
Nothing in 262.34 precludes a gentrttor from treating waste when it is in an
accumulation tank or container cov«r«d by that provision."
"Since the same standards apply to trtatment in tanks as applies to storage in
tanks, and since EPA allows for limited on-site storage without the need for a
permit or interim status (90 days for over 1000 kg/mo generators and 180/27 days
for 100-1000 kg/mo generators), the Agency believes that treatment in
accumulation tanks or containers is permissible under the existing rules,
provided the tanks or containers art operated strictly in compliance with all
applicable standards."
-------
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF USED OIL/STODDARD SOLVENT
FLASHPOINTS
• Tag Closed Cup I I PM Closed Cup
! Cleveland Open Cup
102 108
Sloddard
Solvent
215
146
Sloddard
Solvent/Used
Oil 15/85
Ratio
420
• Stoddard
Solvent/Used
Oil IO/K5
Ratio
Used Motor
Oil
-------
Ignitability Tests for: Mineral Spirits and Used Oil Mixtures
Performed by Quaker State Corp. - April 1992
Flash Point. *f.
Mr« Potnt. *E.
Heterlsl
Chwksentrsit Stoddsrd Solvent •
Used Motor Oil*
Used Motor 0(1
Cluuscentrsl Stoddard Solvent
Used Motor Oil
Cheacentral Stoddard Solvent
• viscosity a 2lo*r.( sus 56.2
Viscosity a 100'F.. SUS 315
Viscosity Index 120
Fuel Dilution. Z 2.0
•• S**ple did not Hash, but caught firo.
4
Sanole Mon
SV 0010
ff assr
F» 2879
tf 2680
Cosexwltton
Vol. K,
100
100
90
to
85
IS
tag Closed Cup PM Closed Cup Clove 1 sod Open Cup Cleveland Open Cup
flS|H 0 S4 ASTM 0 93 MIM D 92 ASIN 0 92
102
6reet*r Than 2SO
160
U»
100
33S
168
154
130
-------
KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART
BARRY M. HARTMAN
U02) 778-9301
SOUTH LOBBY • 9TH FLOOR
1800 M STWET. N.W. BOSTON. MA
WASHINGTON. DC 20036-5891 HAWUS8URC. PA
mauoNt am TTMOOO WAMI. FL
TEl£X 440U9 & DC HI PITTSBURGH. PA
WCSMILE am 7714100
January 8, 1993
VIA FACSIMILE. ORIGINAL TO FOLLOW
The Honorable Lisa K. Friedman
Associate General Counsel
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, N.W.
Washington, O.C. 20460
Re: Clarification of Used Oil Management Standard
Dear Ms. Friedman:
On Thursday, September 10, 1992 the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) promulgated a final rule amending 40 CFR Part 260 et
al., "Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and
Listing of Hazardous Waste; Recycled Used Oil Management Stand-
ards; Final Rule." 57 Fed. Reg. 41566. Several provisions of
the rule discuss its application to "used oil contaminated with
chloroflourocarbons (CFCs)". These include 40 CFR $$261.3(a)(2)
(v)(B); 279.10(b)(ii)(B); 279.44(c)(2); 279.53(c)(2); and
279.63(c)(2).
During a series of conversations with your associate,. Randy
Hill, I asked if these management standards also apply to used
oil contaminated with hydrochloroflourocarbons (HCFCs) as opposed
to CFCs, since, as you know, CFCs are being phased out and
replaced with HCFCs. Mr. Hill indicated that the regulations
apply to used oil contaminated with HCFCs in the same way they
apply to used oil contaminated with CFCs. Mr. Hill's conclusion
is logical, appropriate, and one with which we agree.
Since the regulation and preamble are ambiguous on this
point, we respectfully request written clarification and
confirmation that used oil contaminated with HCFCs is covered by
these regulations in the same manner and to the same extent as
-------
KIRKPATRJCK & LOCKHART
The Honorable Lisa K. Friedman
January 8, 1993
Page 2
used oil contaminated with CFCs, and that EPA will interpret the
rule in that manner.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this request.
Sincerely,
Barry M. Hartman
cc: Randy Hill
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OP
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
NOV 5 1992
Mr. Larry Northup
Executive Director
Convenient Automotive Services Institute
Post Office Box 34595
Bethesda, Maryland 20827
Dear Mr. Northup:
Thank you for your letter of July 24, 1992 regarding the regulatory status of mixtures
of mineral spirits and used oil. We understand your desire to provide your members with a
clear interpretation of the regulations governing the mixing of hazardous waste solvents into
used oil.
On August 11, 1992, the Agency promulgated management standards for recycled
used oil. If a generator mixes characteristic hazardous waste into used oil and the resultant
mixture exhibits a hazardous waste characteristic, the resultant mixture is subject to
regulation as hazardous waste under 40 CFR Parts 260 through 266, 268, 270, and 124
rather than as a used oil (40 CFR 261.3(a)(2)(iii)).
When the new Part 279 used oil management standards become effective, a mixture
of used oil and waste which is hazardous solely because the mixture exhibits the
characteristic of ignitability will be subject to regulation as used oil provided that the
resultant mixture does not exhibit the characteristic of ignitability (40 CFR 279.10(b)(2)(iii))
Because this rule is less stringent than the previous rule, states are not compelled to pick up
the rule. In fact, states may choose to develop their own rules that are more stringent.
If the generator's mineral spirits and used oils are placed in the same accumulation
tank (or container), the tank is regulated both as a hazardous waste tank under Section
262.34 and as a used oil tank under the new Section 279.22 standards when the new Part 2"*9
standards become effective. Regardless of whether the resultant mixture is used oil or
hazardous waste, both sets of sets of standards apply as the used oil and hazardous waste trt
being mixed in the same tank. However, the only additional requirement that is added in
Section 279 is that the tank must be labelled with the words "used oil". This mixing may be
considered treatment, since the purpose of the mixing is to make the waste more amenabfc
for recovery (i.e., energy recovery), and/or to make the waste less hazardous (i.e., to
remove the solvent's ignitable characteristic) (40 CFR 260.10). However, as a matter of
-------
policy (51 FR 10168, March 24, 1986), EPA does not require a permit to treat in
accumulation tanks, provided the generator meets the requirements of Sections 262.34 and
268.7(a)(4) as well as Part 279, Subpart C when it becomes effective.
Thank you for your interest in the safe and effective management of used oil. If you
have any further questions, please contact Mike Petruska of my staff at (202) 260-9888.
Sincerely yours,
Sylvia K. Lowrance
Director
Office of Solid Waste
-------
ion.*
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
APR 5 1393
of
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Mr. Barry M. Hartman
Kirkpatrick & Lockhart
1800 M Street, N.W. 20036
Dear Mr. Hartman,
Thank you for your letter of January 8, 1993 to Lisa
Friedman requesting written clarification on a particular
application of the used oil management standards under 40 CFR
Part 279.
In your letter, you asked how the used oil management
standards apply to used oil contaminated with HCFCs. EPA
intends to apply the used oil management standards to used oil
contaminated with CFCs and used oil contaminated with HCFCs in
the same manner and to the same extent.
In order to qualify for exemption from the rebut table
presumption, used oils contaminated with HCFCs must be removed
from refrigeration units and the HCFCs must be destined for
reclamation. The HCFC contaminated used oil can not be mixed
with used oil from sources other than refrigeration units.
I trust this will be responsive to your concerns. If you
have any further questions, please contact Michaelle Wilson of my'
staff at (202) 260-4669.
Sincerely,
Sylvia K. Lowrance
Director
Office of Solid Waste
-------
National Oil Becyclers Association
Christopher Harris, General Counsel
The Evening Star Building, Suite 800 • 1101 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004 • (202) 639-6320 • FAX (202) 628-4912
July 19,1993
Ms. MichaeUe D. Wilson
ChieC Special Programs Section
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Off.~e of Solid Waste fOS-3.10)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Ms. Wilson:
On behalf of the members of the National Oil Recyclers Association, I am writing
to seek confirmation that EPA's used oil regulations, set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 279, allow the
mixing of used oil and hazardous waste that solely exhibits one or more hazardous waste
characteristics (or hazardous waste that is listed in Subpart D solely because it exhibits one or
more hazardous waste characteristics.) Such mixtures are regulated as used oil under section 279
if the resultant mixture does not exhibit any hazardous waste characteristic. See 40 C.F.R.
§ 279.10(bX2). In addition, I would like to confirm that this regulatory provision applies to all
entities including processors and marketers, not just generatots.
Finally, 1 would like to confirm that the regulatory policy set forth in 40 C.F.R.
§ 279.10(bX2) does not constitute a new policy but merely restates existing regulatory polic>.
If you have any questions concerning this inquiry, please let me know.
A. t*b*ilrl «rU A^r *YVWr tej31 jllulWw.
Sincerely,
/ if «
H#^*+-^-
i
^ J Christopher Harris
1 General Counsel
John J. Nolan Kathryn McWillianu
President . Executive Director
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
FILE COPY
SEP 2 4 .~~ OFFCEOF
SOLO WASTE AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
Mr. Christopher Harris
General Counsel
National Oil Recyclers Association
The Evenin Star Building
Suite 800
1101 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20004
Dear Mr. Harris:
Thank you for your letter dated July 19, 1993 regarding the
Recycled Used Oil Management standards. Specifically, you
requested confirmation of your interpretation' of the used oil
management standards as they pertain to mixtures of used oil and
characteristic hazardous waste.
In response to your request, this letter provides
clarification of the used oil regulations applicable to mixtures
of used oil and characteristic waste. The used oil regulations
distinguish between mixtures of used oil and ignitable-only
characteristic waste and all other used oil/characteristic
hazardous waste mixtures. Under section 279.10(b)(2)(ii),
mixtures.of used oil and a characteristic hazardous waste that
solely exhibits one or more hazardous waste characteristics
identified in 40 CFR Part 261 subpart C (other than ignitable-
only characteristic waste) and mixtures, of used oil and hazardous
waste that is listed in subpart D solely because it exhibits one
or more of the characteristics of hazardous waste identified in
subpart C (other than ignitable-only characteristic waste) are
regulated as used oil if the resultant mixture does not exhibit
any hazardous waste characteristics. On the other hand, these
mixtures are regulated as hazardous wastes if they display any
characteristic of hazardous waste.
Under section 279.10(b)(2)(iii), mixtures of used oil and
ignitable-only characteristic hazardous waste (e.g. mineral
spirits) are regulated as used oil provided that they do not
exhibit the characteristic of ignitability. The rationale for
distinguishing between ignitable only solvents and other
characteristic hazardous waste is as follows. If the solvents
are hazardous only because of ignitability, then mixing the
solvents with used oil should not affect the chemical
constituents or other properties of the used oil. The solvents'
R«cycl«d/R»eyeUbi«
-------
in question (e.g., mineral spirits) are petroleum fractions that:''
are typically used by the same businesses that generate used oil'
and are managed in a manner similar to used oil (e.g., burning
for energy recovery or distillation to recover the solvent).
Therefore, EPA believes these mixtures can and will be properly
managed as ^used oil. If the mixture exhibits ignitability,
however, .th'is can mean that the mixing has changed the nature of
the hazards involved in managing the used oil, and the mixture
should remain subject to hazardous waste controls.
Regarding the applicability of section 279.lo(b)(2), as
correctly stated in your letter, the provisions are not limited
to generators but apply also to marketers, processors/re-
refiners, transporters, and burners.
Finally, you are correct in stating that the used oil
regulations promulgated at section 279.10(b)(2)(ii) do not
establish new pol.''-:y but reiterate existing EPA policy. However,
the section 279.10(b)(2)(iii) provisions pertaining to ignitable
only characteristic waste do constitute a change from (or
expansion of) previous regulatory policy. If you have any further
questions on these or other matters pertaining to the used oil
management standards, please call Eydie Pines at (202) 260-3509.
Sincerely,
0. Denit
Director
Office of Solid Waste
-------
CAPITOLINE
INTERNATIONAL GROUP. LTD.
March 22, 1993 .
Ms. Sylvia Lowrance
Director, Office of Solid Waste
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dear Ms. Lowrance:
I am writing at the suggestion of your staff to request a formal confirmation of their
interpretation of a portion of EPA's final "Recycled Used Oil Management Standards" (57
FR 41566 et seq., September 10, 1992) for use in providing guidance to clients covered by
the rule.
I would draw your specific attention to the following paragraph as it relates to requirements
for managing disposable wipers and shop towels that are contaminated with used oil
exhibiting a hazardous characteristic:
After separating used oils from other materials or solid wastes, the remaining
materials or solid waste must be managed in accordance with any and all applicable
RCRA requirements. The generator must determine whether or not the materials that
previously contained used oil exhibit a characteristic of hazardous waste...and, tfso,
manage them in accordance with existing RCRA controls. If the material does not
exhibit a hazardous characteristic (and is not mixed with a listed hazardous waste)
then the material can be managed u a solid waste. (Page 41585, third column.)
(Emphasis added.)
Discussions with your staff led to the conclusion that the proper interpretation of this
statement was thai if either a wiper or a rag exhibited a hazardous characteristic after used
oil (that exhibited a hazardous characteristic) was removed, the wiper or rag would have to
be managed in.accordance with applicable Subtitle C regulations.
For practical purposes, this would mean a contaminated wiper or rag could only be disposed
of in a Subtitle C hazardous waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility (TSDF).
Likewise, if one wished to re-use the rag, it would have to be Jzeajejl in a TSDF to remove
the contamination. This would mean that a rag from which used oil (exhibiting a hazardous
characteristic) was removed exhibited the same characteristic, it could only be sent to an
industrial laundry having a TSDF permit.
1615 L Street, N.W. • Washington, D.C. 20036 • (202) 467-3900 Fax (202) 833-1349
• luu* Advoucy • Cofl""un>cjtiont
-------
Ms. Sylvia Ix>wrance
March 22, 1993
Page 2
I would note parenthetically that in coming to this conclusion, we considered whether the
domestic sewage exclusion (DSE) in RCRA would eliminate the permit requirement for a
laundry wishing to accept this type of hazardous waste. This interpretation was rejected,
however, because the DSE applies only at the point a waste is generated which, in this
instance, is not at the laundry. In fact^we noted that applying the DSE in this case, by
logical extension, would put EPA in the seemingly insupportable position of sanctioning the
shipment of any and all hazardous wastes (even, e.g., from Superfund sites) to any industrial
laundry, regardless of that facility's regulatory status or, indeed, its capability of actually
treating the. waste. We agreed that neither this interpretation nor its implementation in the
real world could be supported by the statute or the agency's own rules.
I am informed that the agency plans to publish a clarification of several aspects of the rule in
the Federal Register, but was told that this issue would not be addressed at that time. For
that reason, I am requesting your specific confirmation of the guidance outlined above.
Please permit me to express my appreciation in advance for your assistance. Feel free to call
if I can provide additional information.
Sincerely,
Catherine A. Marshall
Senior Principal
-------
WITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
f// T Hnn
' *» C 6 (/ /^ K
SEP 27 1993
OFFICE OF
SOUO WASTE ANO EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
Catherine A. Marshall
Capitoline International Group, Ltd
1615 L Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
Dear Ms. Marshall:
Thank you for your letter of March 22, 1993, to Sylvia K. Lowrance concerning
the used oil regulations, and the management of rags and wipers under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). I apologize for the delay in responding to
your questions.
" • M "
In your letter, you requested concurrence from the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) regarding your interpretation of the status under RCRA of disposable and
launderable industrial wipers, based upon specific preamble language from the
September 10, 1993, final rule on used oil management (57 £R 41566), and subsequent
conversations with EPA staff. The specific preamble you referred to (57 FR 41585)
stated:
After separating used oils from other materials or solid wastes, the
remaining materials or solid waste must be managed in accordance with
any and all applicable RCRA requirements. The generator must
determine whether or not the materials that previously contained used oil
exhibit a characteristic of hazardous wasteland, if so, manage them in
accordance with RCRA controls. If the material does not exhibit a
hazardous characteristic (and is not mixed with a listed hazardous waste)
then the material can be managed a solid waste.
In your letter you stated that our interpretation of this preamble language was that "if
either a wiper or a rag exhibited a hazardous characteristic after used oil (that exhibited
a hazardous characteristic) was removed, the wiper or rag would have to be managed in
accordance with applicable Subtitle C regulations." (Emphasis original). (It is our
understanding that you are using the term "wiper" to mean disposable items and "rag" to
mean launderable items.) I would like to clarify that in this preamble language, EPA
Mm** no< JorCwou mi r »»tm •<•
-------
was describing the regulatory status under RCRA of any material or waste' that at one
point is mixed with (or otherwise contains) used oil, but which has subsequently been
separated from the used oil. In this preamble language, EPA was trying to clarify that
when a material is no longer regulated as used oil, the generator has a continuing
responsibility to determine a material's status under the RCRA hazardous waste
regulations. In other words, just because a material was once regulated as used oil does
not mean if cannot subsequently become subject to the hazardous waste regulations. On
the other hand, materials do not automatically become regulated as hazardous waste
simply because they once contained used oil and now exhibit a characteristic. The
materials must first meet the definition of solid waste, which may not include materials,
for example, that are immediately reusable after used oil has been removed from them,
or certain by-products or sludges that are going to be reclaimed.
With regard to the regulatory status of wipers and rags, whether or not a used
wiper or rag contains 'isted hazardous waste, is mixed with listed hazardous waste, only
exhibits a characteristic of hazardous waste, or is not a waste at all, is dependent on site-
specific factors; this is not a new policy. There are currently several ongoing activities
within EPA that may affect wipers or rags. In the Office of Solid Waste (OSW), the
Definition of Solid Waste Task Force is examining the definition of solid waste
regulations. As pan of our ongoing dialogue with industry, environmental groups, State
agencies, and EPA Regions, the Task Force has been evaluating the RCRA regulations
affecting launderable wipers, as well as disposable wipers. In addition, OSW has been
dealing with the issue of wipers as we continue our efforts with the Hazardous Waste
Identification Rule. As you may recall, EPA requested and received comment on
alternative approaches for addressing wipers contaminated with listed solvent (May 20,
1992 Federal Register: 57 FR 21474); this proposal was later withdrawn, but OSW is
continuing work on health-based criteria for "entry" and "exit" to the RCRA
requirements. Finally, the Office of Water will be gathering data to support the
development of effluent guidelines for industrial launderers, which handle certain types
of reusable wipers. Information obtained from this effort may provide OSW with a
better understanding of the laundering associated with reusable wipers.
Your discussion about the domestic sewage exclusion, in the context of whether or
not RCRA permits are required by industrial laundries receiving launderable wipers, was
not entirely clear. You stated in your leiter that the domestic sewage exclusion applies
"only at the point a waste is generated." In fact, the domestic sewage exclusion applies to
domestic sewage, and to hazardous waste that mixes with domestic sewage and is
conveyed by a sewer system to a Publicl>-0\vned Treatment Works (POTW). The
domestic sewage exclusion could potentially apply to wastewater discharges from an
industrial laundry (or any facility) that arc conveyed through a sewer system to a POTW.
Alternatively, because industrial laundries are not defined as POTWs, hazardous waste
mixed with domestic sewage conveyed by a sewer system to an industrial laundry would
not be excluded.
'In other words, not solely rags or wipers.
-------
I hope that this information has been helpful. If you have any additional
questions on the used oil regulations, please call Ross Elliott at (202) 260-3152. If you
have any questions on the issue of industrial wipers/towels, please contact Charlotte
Mooney at (202) 260-8551. Thank you for your interest in the safe management of
hazardous wdste.
Sincerely,
Jeffery,
/ Actin
Office of Sdlid Waste
-------
MAKERS OF ENVIRONMENTALLY
SAFE PRODUCTS FROM
RECYCLED MATERIALS
• CMutoM (nwUtton Sptvn*
• MuitrtM fftan
July 18, 4993
Office of Solid Waste
Office of Program Management & Support
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency .
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
RE: Disposal of Oily Rags and Absorbents
Dear Sir or Madam: *•
I recently read with interest your bulletin entitled "USED OIL
RECYCLING," and congratulation are in order for what is being done
in this regard and for your agency's leadership and support.
However, after reading this bulletin, a question on the use of
collection and disposal of oil and other liquids came to mind. The
oil and liquids I am referring to are those that are spilled or
leaked from machinery, cars, trucks, etc., that are then picked up
usually by an aborbent (clay particulate or rags for example), and
then tossed in a refuge container for disposal at a municipal
landfill.
My understanding is that liquids such as motor oil, anti-freeze,
grease, etc. are classified hazardous,, and as such they are not to
be disposed of in a municipal landfill. Yet, this is the way, I
believe, most such stabilized liquids are being disposed of since
there is not another practical (i.e. this is the least costly)
method. Further,, it seems that if such stabilized liquids are
incidental to the refuse load and is not dripping the absorbed
liquid, the landfill managers accept the refuse load with oily rags
or oil-laced clay absorbent.
I am particularly interested in this subject since my company
manufacturers a paper-based line of absorbents (made from recycled
newspaper). Most of the absorbents I manufacture are used for
stabilizing toxic/hazardous liquids prior to incineration.
However, I am very much interested in selling to other industries
where I will need to instruct the user on how to dispose of the
oily paper-based absorbent.
Corporitt Oftie*: 7607F«lrvl«w • Houston, TCIM 77041 . TEL (719) 937-0900 • FAJC (713) 937-1496
Bwicn Offlcr 3721-lFE*»t Rowdait • Fort Worth. TMM 76118 • TEL (•17J4J9-3563
-------
Since it is very important that I more clearly understand pertinent
regulations and Agency philosophy about this subject, would you
refer me to a bulletin and/or person who could provide me the
appropriate education and insight on this matter. In particular,
I would like to personally talk via telephone to someone about this
subject.
Thanks in advance for your attention to this matter.
Cordially,
V , ••
(im Adamoli
President
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
... _ _
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 FILE C 0 F
NOV ! 7 1993 SOLO WASTE AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
Mr. Jim Adamoli
President
Tascon, Inc.
7607 Fairview Drive
Houston, Texas 77041
Dear Mr. Adamoli,
Thank you for your letter dated July 18, 1993, concerning the regulation and safe
management of certain types of liquids, and absorbent materials containing these liquids.
I apologize for the delay in our response.
You indicated that your company manufactures paper-based sorbents used for
stabilizing liquids prior to incineration, and that you were interested in marketing your
products to other users. You requested guidance on instructing the users of your
products on how to properly dispose of these materials after use. Because of the
numerous types of liquids that could potentially end up in a sorbent material, it would be
difficult for us to describe in a generic way how a used sorbent would be regulated.
Also, the differing ways in which states may be regulating some of these liquids
contained in the sorbents is also extremely important (e.g., some states may regulate
used oil more stringently than others). Before explaining this issue in more detail,
however, I would like to clarify some points you made in your letter concerning the
hazardous waste regulations.
Under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations,
certain wastes are defined as hazardous waste, while others remain subject to non-
hazardous solid-waste regulations. In general, a solid1 waste is defined as hazardous
waste if it either 1) is listed as hazardous waste in Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Part 261 Subpart D. or 2) exhibits one or more of the hazardous
characteristics in 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart C. You stated that liquids such as used
motor oil, ami-freeze, and grease are classified as hazardous. This is not always true;
'As you may know, the term "solid" here does not refer to the physical form of the
waste, but rather to the universe of garbage, refuse, industrial waste, wastewater, and other
wastes regulated by the U.S. EPA.
Wnt* wtm SoyCwxw* in* on p«P»» m«
-------
under the federal RCRA regulations, these liquids you mentioned are not specifically
listed as hazardous wastes, although these materials might exhibit a characteristic of
hazardous waste. It is the responsibility of the generators of these wastes to make this
determination in accordance with 40 CFR 262.11.
It appears that the wastes that your potential customers will be generating, for
which you are seeking guidance on disposal, are actually the used sorbents that have
been used to clean up spills or leaks of various liquids. Unless the sorbents are being
used to clean up spills of listed hazardous wastes (or chemicals that when spilled become
listed hazardous wastes), the usedjorbents would only be defined as hazardous waste if
they exhibit any of the characteristics of hazardous waste. I have enclosed some
materials that describe both listed and characteristic hazardous wastes. Your potential
customers should be aware that the EPA has specifically prohibited the placement of
bulk and containerized liquid wastes, or wastes containing free liquids2, into a hazardous
waste landfill. An" EPA rulemaking published on November 18, 1992 (57 Federal
Register 54452), prohibits the direct placement into hazardous waste landfills of liquids
that have been sorbed with "biodegradable" sorbents (see 40 CFR 264314(e)). However,
this rule does not in any way prohibit or restrict the use of sorbents, organic or
otherwise, to address wastes or products being sent to a non-hazardous waste landfill
(see discussion below on municipal solid waste landfills); nor does this rule affect the use
of sorbents that are not landfilled (e.g., they are burned or incinerated). I have enclosed
a copy of this rulemaking, as well as three letters written by EPA that further clarify
certain issues regarding this rule. Should you have any questions specific to this
rulemaking, you may contact Ken Shuster at (703) 308-8759.
In addition, there are other restrictions on the land disposal of hazardous waste
(including hazardous waste/sorbent mixtures), known as the "Land Disposal
Restrictions", or LORs. These restrictions mandate that hazardous wastes be treated
prior to land disposal to meet certain criteria, specific to each type of hazardous waste.
Such treatment of hazardous waste prior to land disposal is often performed by
commercial waste management companies, and may include incineration or stabilization
Potential users of your products should already be familiar with the land disposal
restrictions if they are already generating and disposing of hazardous wastes.
I would also point out that used sorbents that do not meet the definition of
hazardous waste still need to be managed m accordance with any applicable federal.
State, and local solid waste regulations (e g . some states may have a category of "specuT
waste for certain petroleum-contaminated, non-hazardous waste). EPA regulations
pertaining to municipal solid waste landfills (40 CFR 258.28) prohibit the disposal of
bulk or containerized liquid wastes and \vastes containing free liquids (see October 9.
.1991 Federal Register. 56 FR 51021). I have enclosed a copy of this rule. You shoo*
note that these federal regulations regarding sorbed liquids placed into municipal solid
waste landfills do not have a biodegradabilicy criteria like that described above for
! As defined by the Paint Filter Liquids Test. EPA Method 9095.
-------
sorbed liquids placed in hazardous waste landfills.
With regard to the disposal of sorbents containing liquids defined as used oil,
EPA addressed this issue in tie final rule on used oil management standards (September
10, 1992 Federal Register. 57 £B 41566), and in a subsequent technical correction (May
3, 1993 Federal' Register. 58 FR 26t20). I have enclosed copies of these two final rules.
Assuming that sorbents containing used oil will not be burned for energy recovery, these
sorbents would be subject to the EPA's used oil management standards only if free-
flowing used oil is visible3. (Sorbents containing used oil that will be burned for energy
recovery are subject to the used oil regulations regardless of whether or not free-flowing
oil is visible per 279.10(c)(2)). Assuming that the sorbents are defined as used oil and
will not be burned for energy recovery, EPA presumes that used oil is going to be
recycled (even if the generator is planning to dispose of the used oil), until the used oil
is actually disposed of on site, or sent off site for disposal. Prior to being sent off site
for disposal, sorbents meeting the definition of used oil, even sorbents exhibiting a
characteristic of hazardous waste, would only be subject to*the used oil standards. Once
disposed of on site or sent off site for disposal, these sorbents would then be regulated
under either hazardous or non-hazardous solid waste regulations.
-*t:.
I would like to reiterate that generators of sorbents containing various liquids
should be advised to contact their state solid and hazardous waste agencies, with a
description of the material for which they are seeking disposal. State regulators are
typically most familiar with the location and acceptance criteria of disposal facilities
within their states, as well as with any particular state regulations that may impact the
disposal requirements for these types of materials. I have enclosed a listing of state
agencies, as well as some other information on solid and hazardous waste that I hope
you will find useful. If you have any questions on this information, please contact Ross
Elliott of my staff at (202) 260-8551. Thank you for your interest in the safe
management of solid and hazardous waste.
Sincerely,
'"t^i
BruceR. Weddle
enclosures (13)
£ Actmg Director
Office of Solid Waste
3 See amended 40 CFR 279.10(c) at 58 FR 26425; see also preamble discussion at 57 f_B
41581 and 41585.
4 See 40 CFR 279.10(a); see also preamble discussion of used-oil recycling presumption
at 57 ffi 41578.
-------
Appendix 3
Used Oil Correspondence
and Memoranda
Used Oil Transportation
I
I
-------
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
DEFENSE REUTILI2ATION AND MARKETING SERVICE
74 WASHINGTON AVE N
BATTLE CREEK. Ml 49017-3092
'91 JUL 1993
DRMS-SHP (Mr. R. Da.v is/(6 16) 96 1-5922X (FAX) (6 16) 96 1-584 1/nmb)
SUBJECT: New Used Oil Management Standards
Mr. Mike Petruski
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code: OS332
401 M Street , SW
Washington D.C. 20460
Dear Mr. Petruski:
This letter is a follow up to a conversation on 28 Jun 93, between
Mr. Bryan Qroce, of your office, and Mr. Roscoe Davis, of my staff
subject as above.
As explained to Mr. Qroce, our Defense Reuti1ization and Marketing
Offices (DRMOs) located throughout the United States, are tenants
on Department of Defense (DoD) military installations. We manage
surplus property generated by the military services including
hazardous materials, hazardous waste, and used oil. Hazardous
property is reused, to the extent possible, throughout DoD and by
other publ ic/'quas 1 -pub 1 ic Government agencies or sent to an
ultimate disposal facility, when necessary. Our DRMOs operate
under their host military installation's Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) identification number.
Because our DRMOs operate on-site of the used oil generator,
Mr. Qroce agreed that 40 CFR 279.24, Off-site Shipments Regulation,
does not apply. This means, our DRMOs receiving used oil on-site,
may receive more than 55 gallons of used oil at one time. DRMOs
located on DoD property across the street from its host military
installation and operating under the host installation's EPA
identification number are also considered as receiving used oil
o r. -site.
We believe the above accurately represents the discussion between
Mr. Groce and Mr. Davis regarding on-site management of used oil a-.
our DRMOs. Request you provide us a w^-TTTeTx confirmation. Should
you have any questions, please contact Mr. D/avis at (616) 961-5922.
S incerely./
0 •/
/ J. W. E.GyQfNBER<0ER
C'ir*cto-r, Directorate of
•s Disposal Management and
Environmental Protect ion
D/?/VfS -- Committed to customer service and environmental leadership
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460 _ . . p A ft B V
FILL bun
of Fee of
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
July. 28, 1993
Mr. J.W. Eggenberger
Director, Directorate of
Disposal Management and _ -
Environmental Protection
Defense Logistics Agency
Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service
74 Washington Ave., N
Battle Creek, Michigan 49017-3092
Dear Mr. Eggenberger,
Thank you for your letter of July 9, 1993 requesting
clarification of the RCRA Used Oil Management Standards as they
pertain to used oil that is generated and managed on-site.
Per your request, this letter confirms your interpretation
of EPA's Used Oil Management Standards regarding off-site
shipments of used oil (40 CFR 279.24). The used oil
transportation standards do not apply to "on-site" movement of
used oil (see 40 CFR 260.10 for the definition of "on-site").
Accordingly, used oil may be transported anywhere on-site in any
quantity without being subject to compliance with either the
section 279.43 transporter standards or the section 279.24
requirements for off-site shipments. More specifically, as
correctly stated in your letter, a Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Office (DRMO) may receive more than 55 gallons of used
oil at one time as long as the used oil being received by the
DMRO is generated on the site on which the DMRO is located.
You also requested confirmation of your interpretation of
what constitutes an "on-site" DMRO. According to the section
260.10 definition, DMRO's located on property owned by but
located "across the street" from the used oil generator would be
considered on-site if either: 1) the property is contiguous and
the entrance and exit between the properties on either side of
the street is at a cross-roads intersection, and access is by
crossing as opposed to going along the right of way; or 2) the
property is non-contiguous but connected by a right-of-way which
the owner controls and which is inaccessible to the public.
R«cycl«d/R«cycUbi«
PtimWwWiSOY'C«noi«in«onaJO»'!n»i
contain a MMt SO* r*eyei«e "w
-------
If you have any further questions on these or other
provisions of the Used Oil Management Standards, please contact
Eydie Pin«« (202) 260-3509 or Bryan Groce (202) 260-9550.
Sincerely,
Michael J. Petruska
Chief, Regulatory
Development Branch
-------
s
April 5, 1993
elved
Ms. Sylvia K. Lowrance
Director, Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
*Jy /r/i
Dear Ms.iLowra"h~ce:
Attached is a copy of comments we provided to DOT on. Regulation Docket No.
HM-214. Since this regulation may negatively impact the collection of used
oil, I thought you might find our comments useful for any discussions EPA may
be having with DOT.
Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Bas/1 G. Constantelos
Director - Environmental Affairs
/bb
Attachment
received
nx//^ 79 j
777 BIG TIMBER ROAD ELGIN, ILLINOIS 60123 PHONE 708/697-8460 FAX 708/697-4295
-------
s
April 2, 1993
Dockets Unit
Research & Special Programs Administration
Department of Transportation, Room 8421
400 7th Street SW
Washington DC 20590-0001
Docket f hM-214
To Whom It May Concern:
Safety-Kleen Corp. would like to submit comments on Docket
HM-214. Safety-Kleen is the world's largest re-refiner of used
oil from various origins. Safety-Kleen's, and the industries
collection system involves the pickup of used oil from local
service stations using tank trucks, many of which are greater
than 3500 gallons rated capacity. Oil is commingled from various
customers into one single tank. This oil is then bulked at a
transfer location and sent on to our re-refineries in East
Chicago, Indiana; or Breslau, Ontario, Canada.
Safety-Kleen is concerned about the new regulation calling
the previously non-regulated used oils, a class 9 material. The
concern comes from the fact that several small "offerers11 of this
used oil will now be subject to the US DOT registration
requirement as an offerer of a regulated material even though
they ship significantly less than 3500 gallons. This would cause
a large number of otherwise exempt oil collection facilities to
fall under this registration requirement and have to pay S300 per
year. The US EPA's Used Oil Management regulations were crafted
in a manner so as to promote the improved capture and recovery of
used oil. It is estimated that 400 million gallons per year of
used oil are not collected for recycling programs and makes its
way into the environment. Adding this $300 fee to generators and
collection centers that ship less than 3500 gallons per shipment
(commingled in a truck larger than 3500 gallons) would be counter
productive and might discourage the recycling of this material.
777 BIG TIMBER ROAD ELGIN. ILLINOIS 60123 PHONE 708/697-6460 FAX 708/697-4295
-------
Docket HM-214 - 2 - April 2, 1993
Safety-Kleen has 55,000 customers with an average oil
collection size of only 421 gallons per pickup. This represents
only 11 per cent of the used oil market. Throughout the market
these various oil pickups are commingled into one tank truck.
This commingling of different customers' oil can cloud the issue
of that oil customer being the "offerer" of a hazardous material.
Safety-Kleen would like to suggest that "OIL, N.O.S. 9
NA9277 PGIII" be specifically excepted from the hazardous
material registration program when offered in quantities less
than 3500 gallons, because of it's discouraging effect on
promoting the recycling of used oil. This change would still
require shippers of large quantities of the regulated material to
be subject to the registration requirement.
This similar issue was not made during the hazardous
material registration fee comment period since it was not
anticipated that used oil would be considered to be hazardous
material.
If you would like further information on the operation of
our oil facilities, please feel free to call me at 1-800-669-5840
extension 2165.
Sincerely,
Denis H. Padovani
Transp. Compliance Mgr.
Safety-Kleen Corp.
777 Big Timber Rd.
Elgin, XL 60123
DP/kre
-------
Appendix 3
Used Oil Correspondence
and Memoranda
Definition of Used Oil Processor
•05-:
3§
89,
Q.
o
-------
04 •• 27'93 14.33 ©216 791 6047 N.O.R.A.
.£003
/'
American Automobile Manufacturers Association
7430 Second Avenue. Suite 300 • Detroit Michigan 48202
Tel. No. 313-872-4311 • Fax No. 313-8?2-5400
March 31, 1993
Mr. Cliff Hilderley
Chairman
Used Oil Recycling Coalition
1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 507
Washington D.C. 42036
Dear Mr. Hilderley:
RE: EPA Used Oil Final Rule
Interpretation of "Processor vs Generator" Application
Reference - 40 CFR Part 279
The American Automobile Manufacturers Association (AAMA), formerly the Motor
Vehicle Manufacturers Association of the U.S., Inc. (MVMA) recently met with the National
Oil Recyclers Association (NORA) and the National Association of Metal Finishers (NAMF)
to discuss mutual concerns regarding inconsistent oral EPA interpretation of the applicability
of the term "processor" in the Pan 279 Used Oil Rule.
A review of the "Summary of Cost and Economic Impacts" in the September 23.
1991 Proposed Rule indicates that EPA/OMB did not consider how common oil/water
separators, filters and oil management equipment are in commercial and industrial facilities.
Use of this type of equipment in industrial facilities encourages the reclaimation and
unnecessary disposal of oil. The inappropriate application of "processor" standards co
mctalworking facilities, operations incidental to metalworking (e.g. storage, oil/water
separators, oil mist collectors and scrap metal handling) and wastewater pretreatment p!a.nu
will have widespread economic and technical impacts.
AAMA requests that the Used Oil Recycling Coalition (UORC) survey its key
members regarding this issue and arrange a meeting with EPA to discuss this matter fur.ier
You are probably aware that the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the Edison Elec-j-.c
Institute (EEI) have filed petitions in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on this issue.
AAMA and NORA have reason to believe that the Agency may want to discuss this nutte:
soon to avoid the potential involvement of other groups in this litigation.
Chrysler Corporation • Ford Motor Company • General Motors Corporation
-------
L - ...\.jL . -_ - . , -.
14:39 ©216 791 6047 N.Q.R.A.
•£004
AAMA Letter to UORC
March 31, 1993
Page 2
Enclosed are three explanations of the issues of concern for typical oil management
activities in our members' facilities, along with diagrams of equipment used in metalworking
and wastewater pretreatment plant operations.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 313/872-4311.
Sincerely,
Donald L. Edmunds
Pollution Reduction Manager
Technical Affairs Division
Enclosures
cc: K. McWilliams, NORA
W. Sonntag, NAMF
-------
04.'27-93 14:39 ©216 791 6047 N.O.R.A.
£003
EPA USED OIL FINAL RULE
ISSUES OF CONCERN
MetaIworking Operations:
The following information is provided to clarify that recirculating oil in metalworking
operations is not processing:
• Section 1004 of RCRA defines 'solid waste' as "any garbage, refuse, sludge from a
wastewater treatment plant ... and other discarded material ..." Lubricating fluid
which has not been discarded does not meet this criteria, and therefore is not a solid
waste.
• Section 9001 of RCRA excludes flow-through process tanks from the definition of
underground storage tanks. Central systems, which are designed to distribute cutting
fluid to machining and grinding operations are "an integral part of the production
process and are included in the statutory exemption for flow-through process tanks"
(Reference • July 6, 1989 EPA letter to General Motors Corporation).
• Metalworking lubricants used in machining operations include chips, metal fines,
tramp oil and/or water removal and additive adjustment as an integral part of the
manufacturing operation (Figures 1A and IB). The removal of these extraneous
materials extends the life of the cutting fluid or drawing lubricant.
• Machined parts are passed through washers to remove machining oil prior to the next
.operation. The oil removed from the parts in the washer is separated from the wash
water as an integral part of the production process. This oil is transferred through
industrial sumps with industrial waste water to the pretreatment facility (Figure 3).
Metal working facilities are continuing to pursue process-side waste minimization in
manufacturing operations by the utilization of mobile units, auxiliary tanks and other
innovative methods for removal of extraneous materials (Figure 2). These units are designed
to prolong the life of the usable metalworking fluids, thus should be considered incidental to
the production process. Any consideration of these as "used oil processing" will be
counterproductive to waste minimization initiatives.
Sourte; AAMA
Much 31. 1991
-------
\ ^..^
04-27'93 14:39 ©216 791 6047 "" ' .S . 0. R. A.
EPA USED OIL FINAL RULE
ISSUES OF CONCERN
Incidental Operations
. "Unintentional" physical separation of used oil, incidental to other operations should
be considered "processing" under the used oil management standards (40 CFR 279).
mnl^« of th^«» inrirlfnral nnftratinn* inrlitH*-
not be considered processing under the used o
Examples of these incidental operations include:
Storage of used oil in tanks or containers prior to shipment may result in some
physical separation. These activities would be subject to the used oil generator
requirements for tanks and containers.
• Separation of used oil from wastewater in oil/water separators is intended to make
wastewater or storm water acceptable for discharge to POTW or stream. Any oil
removed from separator units would be subject to the used oil generator standards.
They were extensively considered in the development of UST regulations, and were
excluded under the Subtitle I requirements. It would be inconsistent for EPA to
regulate them differently under used oil management regulations.
• Oil mist collectors physically remove small droplets of oil present from in-plam air
resulting from machining operations. This activity is intended to make plant air
suitable for continued ^circulation. Any oil removed from these collectors would be/
subject to the used oil generator standards.
• Metal chips are typically accumulated prior to off-site shipment to scrap metal
recyclers. During this accumulation/storage period excess coolant oil present on the
metal chips from machining activities drains by gravity and is typically collected by
the plant sewer system and treated at the waste water pretreatment plant. This
physical separation is intended to make the chips meet scrap metal recycler
specifications for low oil content, and to minimize transportation related issues
associated with excessive oil.
• Some facilities are exploring more innovative chip handling processes, such u
centzifuging. to remove excess coolant, and reduce chip handling costs.
These operations/activities/processes are not "designed" to make used oil more
amenable to production of used oil products, but rather are intended to accomplish otner
purposes. The resultant physical separation of used oil is incidental and should not J*
subject to the used oil management standards for processors.
Some: AAMA
1. 1973
-------
04'27'93 14:40 ©216 791 6047 N.O.R.A.
•600:
EPA USED OIL FINAL RULE
ISSUES OF CONCERN
Wastewater Pretreatrnent Plants
Wastewater pretreatment plants should be excluded from the standards for
processors/re-refiners under the used oil management standards (40 CFR 279), for the
following reasons:
• Industrial wastewater pretreatment plants are regulated under the CWA. and exempt
from RCRA hazardous waste requirements under 40 CFR 265.1(c)(10) and 40 CFR
270.1(c)(2)(v).
• The pretreatment of oily wastewater is designed to separate the oil from the
wastewater, in order to meet the limits for water discharge to the POTWs, and not to
produce used oil or to make it more amenable for the production of used oil derived
products.
• The preamble of the used oil management standards of September 10, 1992 describes
the products of processing and re-refining as the following:
• specification fuel
- reconstituted lubricant oils/fluid
• distillate fuel
• lube feedstock
• asphaltic bottoms
• other non-fuel derived products
Used oil generated at the wastewater pretreatment plant of metalworking industries is.
not any of the above products; rather it is shipped to a processor or re-refiner who
then produces and markets a product for end use customers. Generators of used oil
may pay, or be paid, for their oily waste, depending on world oil market values,
which fluctuate routinely.
Soiuttt AAMA
Minsk 31. 1993
-------
90 i 1 •
MACH#1
TANK
WITH
FILTER
PROCESS
Under Prtssure
Figure 1A Typical Central System Layout
-------
PIT COVER
»0
^—
o>
CHIP
ORACOUT
LEVELING BCAMS
GRAVITY TYI-b OF Ct.JTRAL SYSTEM
riLTCH TVPC OF CENTRAL S¥STCH
Figure ID
o
o
-------
Figure 2 RECYCLING OPERATION
USED CUTTING OIL
to
-I
NEW OIL-
MAKE-UP
,1600 GALLON
IERVICE TANK
FILTERED OIL
1LTER
12OO GALLON
HEATED TANK
USED OIL
DRAIN TO
WASTEWATER
TREATMENT
9!
'X
o
yo
o
I—
o
-------
Figure 3
TYPICAL OIL MANAGEMENT AT A METALWORKiNG PLANT
"Fitter media
chaiacteriied
Metal chips io, disposal
lo lecycter 1
1 1
1
CENTRAL
COOLING
SYSTEM
Metal chips
to recycler
t
CENTRAL
OIL
SYSTEM
WF^»»» ' 1
PANTS
WASH! ft
r" - • '
i
Industrial
Wasmvwalitr „,
Sump
* •
i PRIMARY
! Waste
* Floteti
i
tV
1
OTHER
PROCESSES
Stamping
Metal f inishing
-\
MAINTENANCE
Aw Scruaeers
Floor Scfubkws
Janitwial
f
•
1
Induewtai waste water
r TRTMT
ion
Water phase
: J
liealcd KMJuMnal
wale* lo POTW
OILA
SEPA
OH
VATER
RATOR
phase
Water phase
Sludge
•
3 C
J
ACID/CAUS
COOK
* OH plus
TIC
e
Water phase
t
i
ACCUMULATK)
TANK
OH phase
STORM WATER
COLLECTION
SYSTEM
Oil OIL/WATER
SEPARATOR
1
Water to
storm sewer
system
Oil off -site
to Processor or
Re-refiner
14 RECLAIMED OIL
— • Oil phasa
Water phase Water phasa
* i
• t
"^
Sludge characterized
lor disposal
IX
o
'S.
o
50
ArMACHFLT.OAW 3/3O/93
-------
CERTIFIED MAIL
3 November 1992
Ms. Rajani D. Joglekar
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. EPA
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Re: Request for Clarification "Recycled Used Oil"
Dear Ms. Joglekar:
This communication is a request for a response and clarification on
the Recycled Used Oil Standards for Generators, as published in the
Federal Register, Vol. 57, No. 176, September 10, 1992. I
represent and am the environmental coordinator for AVM, Inc.
("AVM"), Gabriel Ride Control Products, Inc. ("Gabriel") and
Maremont Exhaust Products, Inc. ("Maremont Exhaust") and, Maremont
Corporation ("Maremont"). These companies are operating entities
directly, or indirectly owned by Arvin Industries, Inc. and are
engaged primarily in the manufacture of transportation equipment
under SIC 3714.
I would like the Agency to confirm that generators of used oil do
not become subject to Processing/Refining Standards when th«
following activities are conducted at a used oil generators sit«:
- Recycling of Coolant
- Oil/Water Separation
- EPA ID Transporter Requirement for Scrap Haulers
COOLANT RECYCLING
The recycling of coolant and lubricants is often accomplished e,
utilizing a media filter (often a paper product). This process
removes dirt, metal fines and other non-RCRA regular*3
contaminants. Oils are returned to the process. Solids generate
as a result of these processes are disposed of in accordance w;t~
State and Federal Subtitle D requirements after having been test«i
to determine if the wastes exhibit RCRA characteristics.
In regard to the aforementioned process, it appears that tr«
regulatory citation of 40 CFR 279.10(e) (1)(i) exempts this type :•
lubricant cleaning and re-use process because they ..."ar«
reclaimed from used oil that are used beneficially and are r.c*
burned for energy recovery or used in a matter constitut:- .-
disposal." Therefore, it is Maremont's opinion that generator*
-------
who avail themselves of these waste minimizing activities are not
subject to Recycled Used Oil Regulations.
OIL/WATER SEPARATION
""Some of our facilities utilize an oil/water separator used
specifically for the removal of wastewaters of oil/water mixtures
and stormwater/oil mixtures collected from containment areas. The
resultant oils are mixed with other oils prior to shipment to an
appropriate oil recycler who generally brokers the material to be
burned for energy recovery in compliance with 40 CFR 266.40
(current cite) and other requirements applicable to Used Oil.
Wastewaters are either sent to an appropriate disposal company or
disposed of in compliance with local, state and federal rules and
regulations pertaining to pretreatment, stormwater, solid and
hazardous wastes, etc.
It appears that 40 CFR 279.10(f) exempts this oil/water separation
activity from the Used Oil Standards found elsewhere in this part
because the wastewaters -»fce we»tewa«ers contain Nde minimus"
quantities of oils.
Additionally, each facility scraps a certain amount of damaged or
otherwise rejected metal scrap. . Small quantities of oil cannot
reasonably be removed from the scrap prior to disposal. Therefore,
our scrap haulers should be exempt from EPA ID requirements because
they also fall under the exemption of "de minimus" quantities of
oil which are defined in 40 CFR 279.10(f) as "small spills, leaks,
or drippings from pumps, machinery, pipes and other similar
equipment during normal operations...."
To summarize, it is AVM, Gabriel and Maremont Exhaust's
interpretation that generators, which are manufacturing facilities,
do not fall under the definition of Processing or Re-refining
because generators of used oil are not normally engaged in the
"production of fuel oils, lubricants, or other used oil derived
products" as a normal course of our business or those operations
required to make our products. Rather, they are a by-product of
manufacturing activities and ««ch facility determines whether it is
beneficial to recycle or reclaim oils and other lubricants during
the particular process generating the oils. Finally, small amounts
of oil left on metal scrap should not be the determining factor in
requiring EPA ID numbers for haulers of our scrap steels.
-------
Please respond at your earliest convenience. if you have any
questions, please do not hesitate -to call me at 812/379-3577.
Sincerely,
~
Environmental Coordinator - AVM, Gabriel, Maremont Exhaust
Arvih Industries, Inc.
1531 13th Street
Columbus, IN 47201
cc: Tim Grogg
Julie Becker.
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OCT - 7 1993
OFFICE Of
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
Ms. Mary Anne Hunter
Environmental Coordinator
AVM, Gabriel, Maremont Exhaust
Arvin Industries, Inc.
1531 13th Street
Columbus, IN 47201
Dear Ms. Hunter:
Thank you for your letter dated November 3, 1992, requesting
clarification of the September 10, 1992, Recycled Used Oil
Management Standards. Specifically, you asked for clarification
of the used oil processing standards as they apply to coolant
recycling and oil/water separation activities and for
clarification of used oil transporter standards as they apply to
transport of metal scrap containing small quantities of oil.
Regarding the applicability of the processor standards, EPA
is aware that the term "processor," as defined in the used oil
management standards, can be broadly construed to include a
number of basic on-site recycling activities that the Agency did
not necessarily intend to cover (e.g., coolant recycling and
oil/water separation).
EPA intended to include as processing only those used oil
filtering and/or separation activities whose primary purpose is
to produce used oil or to make it more amenable for the
production of used oil derived products. Under this
interpretation, neither the coolant recycling or the oil/water
separation activities referred to in your letter would be
considered used oil processing because, in these cases, the
filtering and separation activities are incidental or ancillary
to the normal manufacturing process, i.e., used oil processing is
not their primary purpose. The primary purpose of the oil/water
separation activity described in your letter, for example, would
be to remove used oil from wastewater to make the wastewater
acceptable for discharge.
Although EPA believes that the current definition of
"processor" can be properly read not to encompass oil/water
separation or coolant recycling performed on-site at an
industrial facility, we are, nonetheless, currently considering
amendments to the used oil regulations to clarify the Agency's
R*cyctod/R«cyclabi«
PfllttM tftth Sey/CinoU Ink on paper intt
oonttfn* MIMM 80% ncydM fib*r
-------
intent to exclude activities'such as these from the requirements
for used oil processors.
You also asked for clarification regarding the applicability
of the used oil transporter requirements to metal scrap haulers.
Generally, under section 279.10(c), materials containing or
otherwise contaminated with used oil are regulated as used oil
until the used oil is removed from the material. However, as
clarified in the May 23, 1993, Technical Amendments and
Corrections to the Final Rule, materials containing or otherwise
contaminated with used oil, from which the used oil has been
properly drained or removed to the extent possible such that no
visible signs of free-flowing oil remain in or on the material
are not considered used oil unless they are to be burned for
energy recovery (58 FR 26420). Therefore, if the scrap referred
to in your letter meets the "no free flowing oil" standard
described in the May*23, 1993, technical correction notice at 58
FR 26420, it would not be considered used oil subject to the
transporter standards. However, the used oil removed from the
metal would be covered under the used oil management standards.
I hope that this addresses your concerns. If you have other
questions regarding the used oil management standards, please
contact Eydie Pines at (202) 260-3509.
Sincerely,
f.Jef'fe'ry D. Denit
Acting Director
, Office of Solid Waste
-------
JOHN DEERE WATERLOO WORKS
t
* o. acx era vuJEft.OO. :0¥* soro*-057n 'J.S.A
15 April 1993
Sylvia KAowrance
Director, Office of Solid Waste
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M. Street SW.
Washington, D.C. 20460 '
DearMs. Lowrance:
John Deere manufacturing facilities in the State of Iowa are concerned with some of the interpretations
of the new Used Oil Management Standards that were finalized on September 10,1992 and became
effective on March 8,1993. Since Iowa is not an authorized sate under RCRA, then rules became
effective on March 8, 1993. We have contacted the RCRA Hot Lire, EPA Region VII, and EPA
Washington O.C. to answer questions concerning these new rules. Our concerns center on a strict
interpretation of these rules such that they can be more restrictive than RCRA, by reguiating processing
used oil on-site. The following are concerns that have not been fully addressed. We request a review
of these regulations b determine if the following activities were intended to be regulated. If not. we
request changes to the used oN rules to incorporate an exemption for these facilities. We also request
a written determination of how these facilities are regulated.
Are Clean Water Act fadHNe* regulated under Section 402 or 307(b) exempted from the Used OU
Processor Management Standards, as waste treatment and collection systems are exempted
under RCRA?
From the September 10,1992 final rule for used oil management the definition of a
used oil processor can be interpreted to be very broad and inclusive. Using the
interpretation of a Wastewatar Treatment Facility and Collection System in the
September 2, 1988 Federal Reoister, one would expect that this definition and
interpretation could be transferred to the new used oil processing rules. Are these
facilities intended to have an exemption similar to the RCRA wastewater treatment
exemption, under the new used a' processing standards?
Within John Deere there are several wastewater treatment facilities regulated unoer
the Clean Water Act to treat on-site generated waste, that are able to handle a variety
olf hazardous and non-hazardous waste sreams. One facility treats a combination of
oily wastewaters, some wastewaters may be considered used oils and others contain
de minimus quantities of used oHs in one of four treatment systems. A significant
portion of this oily wastewater is a water soluble metal working fluids which are
typically between (part product and 20 to 3d parts water. The product used is either a
mineral oil or a synthetic base to make the emulsion. This system uses oil water
separation, chemical, and physical metnods to break the oil/water emulsion and
recover oil from the wastewater. This system is a continuous flow operation ma:
typically treats 100,000 gallons oer day of this oily wastewater.
-------
WORKS
Sylvia K. Lowrance I
15 April 1993 f
Page 2
Another system treats the used oils recovered from the above system, used oils generated
from within the facility and used oils received from off-site facilities, by removing water with
oil/water separation, chemical addition and heat to break the oil/water emulsion. This is a
batch system that treats 6500 gallons of the waste oil per batch. Typically the waste oils that
are treated contain 50% water. The used oils that are recovered are burned in an on-site
industrial boiler. This toatoy is in compliance with the used oil burning requirements under the
previous 40 CFR 266 Subpart E, now under 40 CFR 279 Subpart 6. The new used oil rules
imply that the above operations are defined as used oil processing.
Was the intent of the used oil management rules to regulate these Clean Water Act facilities in
the used oil processing standards? The September 23,1991 Supplemental Rule Making on
this issue only identified 169 used oil processors or re-refiners in operation in 1990. mat
suggests that the original intent of these rules was not to regulate these Clean Water Act
Are mground tanks at Clean Walt? Act fecillNes that treat/process used oils regulated as Underground
Storage Tanks (USTs)?
If the wastewater treatment facilities are regulated as a used oil processor; then are the
inground equalization, transfer and oil separation tanks associated with the collection and
treatment systems regulated as USFs? According to the new used oil rules processing
facilities that nave underground tanks are referred to 40 CFR 280 for UST requirements. ,-c(
Under the UST rules these wastewater treatment and collection tanks are exempted, H k/"
280.lO(b)(2) and 280.12 Underground Storage Tank or UST (f). We assume that this
exemption still applies to these facilities, and reqtest your determination if this is stili the case.
Do orvstte recycling activities of used oils require notification and compliance with the processing
management standards?
As stated above, the definition of a used oil processor can include a large number of facilities
if strictly interpreted. For instance, one of tne factories recovers ail of the used oil it
generates; ie, from de minimus oily wastewaters, soluble oils, water contaminated cutting oils
and hydraulic ofe, using on/water separation, chemical and physical methods. This recovered
oil is converted into a metal working cutting oil that is used at the plant. This recovery
operation is an example of what has been done to minimize the impact of generating used oils
without any regulatory directives. If, however, oy tneir recovery and reuse of these Otis, the
Agency places on-site processes into trie regulated ream, they will no longer be encouraged
to continue their recycling efforts. The process.^ rules, if applied to on-site recycling, will
effectively discourage this and similar efforts to recover and reuse used oils by the introduction
of these additional regulatory burdens.
At most of the manufacturing facilities there are several central filtration systems of various
sizes that extend the life of water soluble metal working fluids used in machining, grinding, and
boring metals. These filter systems are closed loop on-are systems that filter metal crips and
swarfT metallic and grinder fines, continuously from the netal working fluid as it is being used
in a machining center. Tramp oils are also removed Vom the fluid with a skimmer or
separator. Similar to these central filters are transmission oils, nydraulic oils that are filtered
and reused; neat treatment quenchants that are cemnfugefl and reused; and enoine test
stands redrculate and fiter a coolant similar to a water soluble synthetic metal wortong fluid.
These are all closed-loop systems. Since these systems are removing contaminants from the
-------
JOHN DEERE WATERLOO WORKS
Sylvia K. Lcwrance
15 April 1993 .
Page 3
fluid by separation and physical methods, are they used oil processing units? Each of these
processes are not currently regulated by RCRA nor are the materials that are used in each
unit as they are being used. The November 29, 1965 Proposed Standards for Used CM
Recycling under RCRA proposed no standards for on-site used oil recydinpymdaimation.
There are no simitar exemptions in the September 10, 1992 final rule.
lftfcet«on*ftfactfvitfttf/tcontMsfwd>
each facflKy required ID subrnft Msmiaf rtpofla for these used oflacOMtfet?
Most of these on-site activities do nor have any process data associated with them, nor is
such data readily available, since they have not been viewed as regulated activities
previously. To calculate volumes lor these closed-loop systems, if every gallon sent to the
filter Is 'used', then (he used on volumes will add up quickly. Most coolant systems are
designed for a four minute retention. A 100 gaiion sump would generate 12,000 gallons of
'used oil" in an eight hour shift even though you have reused the same 100 gallons. What
information do you require if reporting is required?
. These used oil issues have an impact on our fedttes that may not have origfneJy been
intended when these rules were first developed. We have not commented previously on these
rules since the above on-site activities were not interpreted to be regulated. The firm' rules
that were promulgated were much different that what had been previously proposed for the
processing of used oils.
/e appreciate your timely response to these concerns. Please contact me at the above address, or by
>lephoneat3l&292-«753.
ncerely,
NVIRONMENTALAFFAIRS & RESOURCES
redrickA. VanSchepen
ngineer
O.T.Rodger, JOWW
R. L Bums, JOWW
6. R. Douglas, JOWW
J. V. CaWar, EPA Region VII
Q. K. Hetfert JDOW
M. A. Hlgley, JOOW
M. E. McQuire, Deere ft Company
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
NOV | 1993
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY
RESPONSE
Mr. Fredrick A. Van Schepen
Environmental Affairs and Resources
John Deere Waterloo Works
P.O. Box 270
Waterloo, Iowa 50704-0270
Dear Mr. Van Schepen:
Thank you for your letter dated April 15, 1993, to Sylvia
Lowrance requesting clarification of the September 10, 1992,
Recycled Used Oil Management Standards. Specifically, you asked
for clarification of the used oil processing standards as they
apply to on-site recycling of used oil recovered from a
facility's wastewater treatment system.
EPA is aware that the term "processor," as defined in the
used oil management standards, can be broadly construed to
include a number of basic on-site recycling activities that the
Agency did not necessarily intend to cover (e.g., metal working
fluid recycling and oil/water separation activities). EPA
believes that the current definition of "processor" can be
properly read not to encompass oil/water separation or recycling
of metal working oil performed on-site at an industrial facility,
(provided that the recovered used oil is not being burned for
energy recovery). Nevertheless, we are currently considering
amendments to the used oil regulations to clarify the Agency'*
intent to exclude activities such as these from the requirements
for used oil processors.
EPA intended to include as processing only those used oil
filtering or separation activities whose primary purp9se is to
produce used oil, or to make used oil more amenable for the
production of used oil derived products or burning for energy
recovery. Under this interpretation, the oil/water separation
activities described in your letter may or may not be regulated
under the used oil processing standards, depending on the
ultimate use of the recovered used oil.
In situations where used oil recovered from the facility*
wastewater treatment system is being reused, (e.g., as metal
working fluid) the oil/water separation activity would not b«
considered used oil processing because it is incidental or
ancillary to the normal manufacturing process, i.e., used oil
processing is not its primary purpose. As described in your
ftocydrt/focycaft*
PilnM wtth 9oyCw«» -.-«•»«•
-------
letter, the primary purpose of the oil/water separation activity
would be to remove used oil from wastewater to make the
wastewater acceptable for discharge. In cases where used oil
recovered from a facility's wastewater treatment system is being
burned for energy recovery, however, the oil/water separation
activity would be subject to the used oil processing standards
(see subpart G section 279.60(b)(3)) .
You also requested clarification of how underground
equalization, transfer, and separation tanks associated with
wastewater treatment systems are regulated under the used oil
management standards. As you correctly note in your letter,
storage of used oil in underground tanks is regulated under the
40 CFR Part 280 standards for underground storage tanks (USTs).
If the equalization, transfer, and separation tanks referred to
in your letter are considered underground storage tanks as
defined in 40 CFR Part 280, they are fully subject to the USTs
standards. The used oil management standards in no way change
the manner in which USTs (including those that contain used oil)
are regulated under 40 CFR Part 280. It is important to note,
however, that underground storage tanks that contain used oil are
subject to the UST standards in addition to being subject to the
used oil management standards. In other words, regulation under
the UST standards does not exempt the tank owner or operator from
compliance with applicable used oil regulations (e.g., labeling
of fill pipes used to transfer oil into USTs, etc.).
I hope that this addresses your concerns. If you have other
questions regarding the used oil management standards, please
contact Eydie Pines at (202) 260-3509. If you have questions
regarding the UST standards, you can contact John Heffelfinger at
(703) 308-8881.
Sincerely,
Bruce R. Weddle
Acting Director
Office of Solid Waste
-------
Appendix 3
Used Oil Correspondence
and Memoranda
Used Oil Burning
I
0.
q
i
-------
t '_
.-••l° >•••',.
^^ *.
i
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
APR I 1992 Gfticcot
SO'.!? WAST ANr'I;v?HG?NC' "6SOCNSE'
Honorable Bob element
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr. Clement:
Thank you for your letter of January 21, 1992, regarding
the Hazardous Waste Treatment Council's report entitled,
'•Burning Used Oil — America's Undiscovered Lead Threat." It
is my understanding that the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA's) Office of Air and Radiation will address your questions
regarding the lead content of fuels in a separate response.
The enclosures to this letter address your remaining questions
(3-5, 8-12) regarding used oil.
In an effort to ensure that the current regulations for
burning used oil are sufficiently protective, EPA is developing
a plan to reexamine several important aspects of the issue: the
risks associated with burning used oil, the protectiveness of the
100 ppm lead specification level, the sources of lead in used
oil, potential ways to control or reduce the sources of lead in
used oil, the need for emissions standards for used oil burners
and the proper level of control necessary for used oil burning
units. As part of this analysis', we will evaluate issues raised
in the Hazardous Waste Treatment Council's report on burning used
oil.
Thank you for your interest in the safe and effective
management of used oil. If you have any further questions,
please have your staff contact Mike Petruska at (202) 260*9888.
Sincerely yours,
Administrator
Enclosures
-------
Question 3: How much used motor oil was generated by vehicles in the last 3 years for
which information is available?
Volume of Used Oil Generated bv Transportation Vehicles (in millions of gallon*}}
YEAR
. 1983 +
1988*
Estimated
1990»
BUSINESSES
WITH
GASOLINE-
POWERED
VEHICLES
BUSINESSES
WITH
DIESEL
VEHICLES
505
311
317
294
300
DO-IT-
YOURSELFERS
194
193
197
TOTAL
.699
798
814
Source: Composition and Management of Used Oil Generation in the United
States. U.S. EPA, September 1984. (No division available for automotive and
diesel vehicles.)
Source: "Revised 1988 Used Oil Flows in the U.S." (January 1991) and "Revised
1988 Gasoline Crankcase Used Oil Flows in the U.S." (February 1992),
Unpublished EPA estimates.
Assumes standard 2% across-the-board increase over 1988 amounts in generation
based in general industrial growth.
-------
Question 4: How much used oil was generated by non-automotive sources in those
years?
Volume nf Used Oil Generated bv Industrial Sources (in millions of gallons)
Year
1983 +
1988*
1990s
Industrial Used
Oil Sources
507
553
565
Source: Composition and Management of Used Oil Generation in the United
States. U.S. EPA, September 1984. (No division available for automotive and
diesel vehicles.)
Source: "Revised 1988 Used Oil Flows in the U.S." (January 1991) and "Revised
1988 Gasoline Crankcase Used Oil Flows in the U.S." (February 1992),
Unpublished EPA estimates.
Assumes standard 2% across-the-board increase in generation over 1988 amounts
based in general industrial growth.
-------
Question 5: How much used oil was collected and recycled for (1) energy recovery and
(2) rerefining, and how much was (3) dumped or mishandled in the last three years for
which information is available?
For the purposes of the following chart, "dumped11 is an estimate of the used oil
that was placed in sewers, drains, or disposed of on land and excludes used oil sent for
disposal in permitted landfills.
Volume of Used Oil Managed by Specific Systems (in millions of gallons)
Year
1983+
1988*
1990*
Energy Recovery
590
799
815
Rerefining
63
56
114
Dumped'
241
260
265
NOTE: Between 1983 and 1988, the volume of used oil road oiled decreased from 69 to
24 million gallons. It is assumed that this used oil is being burned for energy recovery.
The drop in rerefining is attributable to closure of facilities (some of which may reopen
in next two to three years).
+ Source: Composition and Management of Used Oil Generation in the United
States. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1984. (No division
available for automotive and diesel vehicles.)
# Source: "Revised 1988 Used Oil Flows in the U.S." (January 1991) and "Revised
1988 Gasoline Crankcase Used Oil Flows in the U.S." (February 1992),
Unpublished EPA estimates.
Assumes standard 2% across-the-board increase in generation based in general
industrial growth.
-------
Question 8: What is the average lead content of used motor oil in parts per million?
What is the average lead content of other used oil?
Source: Used Oil Characterization Sampling and Analysis Pm^m: Final Report. U.S
Environmental Protection Agency, August 30, 1991.
-------
Average Lead Content (and Confidence
(in
million)
for Categories of Used Oil
Used Oil Category
Automotive Crankcase
Oil- Unleaded Gasoline
Automotive Oil/Fluids •
Storage Tanks
Marine Oil - Marine
Used Oil Storage Tanks
Aircraft Engine Oil - All
Types
• Aircraft Engine Oil •
Piston-engine Aircraft
• Aircraft Engine Oil -
Turbojet Aircraft
Aircraft Oil/Fluids -
Storage Tanks
Diesel Engine
Crankcase Oil - Trucks
and Buses
Diesel Trucks and Buses
- Storage Tanks
Diesel Engine
Crankcase Oil - Heavy
Equipment
Diesel Engine
Crankcase Oil -
Railroad
Hydraulic Oils/Fluids
Metalworking
Oils/Fluids
Electrical Insulating Oil
Natural Gas-Fired
Engine Oil
No. of
Samples
12
8
7
10
(5)
(5)
7
10
10
10
10
.
Total
Analysis
Mean1
(ppm)
32.1
89.1
193.3
2398.0
(4795.4)
(0.5)
1318.6
7.3
40.1
7.91
49
12 :.j
12
10
15
48
00
5 1
80%
Confidence
Limit - Lower
Bounds
17.1
383
1363
974
(2695)
(05)
7492
53
27.8
3.6
1.0
1.15
1.45
05
23
80% Confidence
Limit - Upper
Bounds
47.1
139.9
250.6
3822
(6895)
(05)
1888.0
9.3
57.2
12.2
8.8
2.45
8.15
0.7
7.9
Note: We are 80% confident that upper a^d lower confidence interval encompasses the mean
'Means calculated using one-hdf the detection limit for non-detects.
-------
Question 9: What percent of used oil's lead content is emitted from modern space
heaters? industrial furnaces?
EPA currently does not have the data requested, although a worst-case scenario
as used in the HWTC report would assume 100 percent emission. In the past,
assumptions have been made regarding the percent of lead emitted from burning devices.
In 1984, EPA estimated that 75-95 percent of the lead in used oil fuel would be emitted
from boilers and space heaters; the assumption was based on technical data from the
early 1980*5. There is a great deal of uncertainty in the data underlying the estimates.
For example, estimations of the percent of lead emitted from space heaters ranged from
5 percent to 95 percent depending on the type of device used.
Sources:
A Risk Assessment of Waste Oil Burning in Boilers and Space Heaters: Final Report
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, August 1984.
EnvirQnmental Characterization of Disposal of Waste Oils in, $maJU Combustors. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, May 1984.
-------
Question 10: The report estimates that burning used oil emits
588/000 pounds of lead annually, is this a reasonable estimate?
what is EPA'a estimate of annual lead emissions from burning used
oil (separating motor oil and other used oil, if possible)?
EPA estimates, as shown in the table below, that annual lead
emissions from devices burning used oil are approximately 261,000
pounds, 2.3 times less than the emission of 588,000 pounds cited
by the Hazardous Waste Treatment Council. The differences result
from two factors. First, EPA's lead concentrations (based on
sampling and analysis conducted in 1989/90 ) are lower than
those used by HWTC. Second, EPA's emission rate for lead is 75
percent not 100 percent, as used by HWTC, as it includes all
types of units burning used oil, many of which emit less than loo
percent.
Gasoline Crankcase
Diesel Crankcase
Aircraft Engine Oil
Metalworking
Industrial Hydraulic
Industrial Process
Used Oil Con-
centration mg/L
Lead
89.1
40
2398
5
2
0
Volume Used Oil Burned
in million gaL per year
Onsite Offsite
61.5 137.4
63.8 125.4
0 22
4.1 66.1
48.5 167.5
2 28.6
Subtotals
Mass of Used Oil
Contaminant Burned (fl».)
Lead
Onsite
45700
21284
0
171
809
0
67964
Lead Offsite
91818
37620
39567
2479
2513
0
193483
Total Lead
261447
'used Oil Characterization Sampling and Analysis Report,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, August 30, 1991.
-------
Question 11: What are the biggest sources of airborne lead?
While used oil burners do not constitute an SIC code, the amount of lead emitted
by these units would place them fourth in the ranking of industries releasing lead and
lead compounds.
CODE
3339
3312
3341
3331
3229
3691
2869
3253
3315
2851
1989 TRI LEAD AND LEAD COMPOUNDS
TOP 10 SIC CODES
DESCRIPTION
Smelt/Refine Non-ferrous
Metals
Steel Works and Blast
Furnaces
Secondary Non-ferrous Metals
Smelt/Refine Copper
Pressed/Blown Glassware
Storage Batteries
Industrial Organic Chemicals,
N£C
Ceramic Wall and Floor Tile
Steel
Wiredrawing/Nails/Spikes
Paint/Varnish/Other Products
TOTAL
FUGITIVE
AIR VALUE
141,191
220,950
82,550
58,690
17,886
12,442
5,391
1,518
36,619
17,015
594,252
STACK
AIR
VALUE
484,736
105,647
170,436
136,477
118,199
107,501
105,647
40,336
4,704
19,440
1,293,123
TOTAL
625,927
321,920
252,986
195,167
136,085
119,943
111,038
41,884
41,323
36,455
1,882,7:*
Source: TRI Database, 1989.
-------
„
»' 9£RT GORE. JR. ,,, ,
193 3usst-.. 3l»«-t -it -i
- -1
'•oil :;:-::<.4j4
Bnittd States &cnate
WASHINGTON. OC 20510-4202
January 22, 1992
Mr. Don Clay
Assistant Admininstrator
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response OS 100
US EPA
401 M Street S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20406
Dear Mr. Clays
The Hazardous Waste Treatment Council published a report on
November 13, 1991 entitled, "Burning Used Oil - America's Undiscovered
Lead Threat.* This report indicates that burning used oil in the
largest single cause of lead air emissions and that all of the used
oil collected and burned averages 100 ppm of lead and 100% emissions.
Their report states 588,000 pounds of lead is emitted each year.
I am concerned about the report's conclusions. I understand
however, that your agency's response to the report's publication was
that it was not accurate and that used oil is not a significant cause
of lead air emissions.
I would greatly appreciate any further information you can
provide on this matter as well as your analysis of the report's
conclusions. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely
Lbert C?ore Jr.
United States Senator
AG/km
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. O.C. 20460
SOLiO WASTE ANO 6M6«GENCV
Honorable Albert Gore, Jr.
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Gore: .*
Thank you for your letter of January 22, 1992, regarding the
Hazardous Waste Treatment Council's report entitled, "Burning
Used Oil - America's Undiscovered Lead Threat."
On November 29, 1985, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) finalized regulations allowing burning of used oil fuel in
non-industrial burners (e.g., apartment and office buildings),
but only if the used oil meets specification limits for certain
hazardous constituents including lead. EPA's risk assessment
showed that used oil containing a maximum lead level of 100 ppm
would not pose undue risks to the general population in most
situations. The 100 ppm specification level ensured that non-
industrial boilers would not cause ambient levels to exceed the
national ambient air quality standards for lead in densely
populated areas. EPA believed that used oil fuels meeting the
specification would not pose hazards significantly greater than
virgin fuel oil when burned.
In an effort to ensure that the current regulations for
burning used oil are sufficiently protective, EPA is reexanirunq
the risks associated with burning used oil, the protectiveness = f
the 100 ppm lead specification level, the sources of lead in used
oil, potential ways to control or reduce the sources of lead ;n
used oil, the need for emissions standards for used oil burners.
and the proper level of control necessary for used oil burnxrq
units. As part of this analysis, we will evaluate issues ra:s»J
in the Hazardous Waste Treatment Council's report on burninq .»«i
oil.
Thank you for your interest in the safe and effective
management of used oil.
Sincerely yours,
7X
Assistant Administrator
Pnnrw .
-------
PIPER & MARBURY
I2OO NINETEENTH STREET, N.W.
WASHINGTON. O. C. 20036-2430
202
LONDON
* CASTON. MO
VIA HAND DELIVERY
August 18, 1992
Ms. Sylvia R. Lowrance
Director
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W., OS 300
Washington, D.C. 20460
Re: Regulatory Status off Oil Aah
Dear Ms. Lowrance:
I write on behalf of the Utility Solid Waste
Activities Group ("USWAG") to request clarification regarding
the regulatory status of combustion residuals from the burning
of."specification" used oil fuel when co-fired with virgin fuel
oil.I/ This issue is of the upmost importance to the electric
utility industry and was specifically noticed for comment in
EPA's supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking for used oil
management standards, published on September 23, 1991 (56 Fed.
Reg. 48000, 48026). SPA, however, failed to address the
status of these materials in its recently issued used oil
recycling rules signed by the Administrator on August 12.
In its September 1991 supplemental notice, EPA
proposed to clarify that combustion residuals generated from
burning "specification* used oil fuel qualify for exclusion
from RCRA Subtitle C regulation under the "Bevill Amendment.*
By the term "specification- used oil fuel, USWAG is
referring to used oil fuel that does aat exceed the
specification levels for used oil fuel established under
40 C.F.R. Subpart E (standards for "Used Oil Burned for Energy
Recovery").
-------
PIPER & MARBURY
Ms. Sylvia K. Lowrance
August 18, 1992
Page 2
Id. at 48026 (Attachment 1). As the Agency knows, utility
combustion wastes currently are excluded from regulation under
Subtitle C of RCRA by virtue of the Bevill Amendment. See. RCRA
§ 3001(b) (3) (A) . in proposing this clarification, EPA
explained that the burning of specification used oil with
virgin fuel oil is consistent with RCRA's goal of encouraging
the recycling and reuse of used oils in an environmentally
sound manner.
EPA was motivated to make this clarification because
of earlier regulatory interpretations that caused some
uncertainty regarding whether residuals from burning
specification used oil qualified for the Bevill Amendment
exclusion. To eliminate any further uncertainty regarding this
matter, EPA specifically proposed to make clear that
specification used oil fuel should be considered equivalent to
a fossil fuel (i.e.. virgin fuel oil) for purposes of the
Bevill Amendment and, as a result, combustion residuals
generated from co-burning specification used oil fuel with
virgin fuel oil should qualify for the Bevill Amendment
exclusion. Id. USWAG strongly supported this clarification in
its comments on the proposed regulations submitted on
November 7, 1991 (Attachment 2).
In addition to USWAG 's comments, Florida Power and
Light Company ("FPL"), a USWAG member company, has been
extremely active for the last several years in seeking the
above clarification. In addition to commenting on the
September 1991 supplemental used oil proposal, FPL also has
provided detailed written requests on this matter (as well as
numerous follow-up telephone calls) to both Denise Wright and
more recently to Rajni Joglekar in EPA's Office of Solid Waste.
As noted above, the final used oil recycling rules do
not address the clarification -- as was done in the
supplemental proposal — regarding the regulatory status of
combustion residuals from co-firing specification used oil fuel
with virgin fuel oil. In a telephone conversation with Rajni
Joglekar on August 14, 1992 with Alan Benedict (a
representative of FPL) and me, there was a general
understanding that EPA's clarification was non-controversial
and apparently was not the subject of comments by any party
except USWAG, which strongly endorsed the clarification.
Nevertheless, because the clarification was not included in the
final used oil rules, a significant degree of uncertainty still
exists regarding the regulatory status of these materials.
-------
PIPER & MARBURY
Ms. Sylvia R. Lowrance
August 18, 1992
Page 3
It seems clear that EPA continues to believe that
specification used oil fuel should be deemed equivalent to
virgin oil for purposes of the Bevill Amendment. Prompt ,
issuance of this clarification will help to encourage the
important and environmentally sound practice of burning
specification used oil fuels for energy recovery. Thus, we
request that EPA provide written clarification confirming the
Bevill exempt status of combustion residuals from burning
specification used oil fuel with virgin fuel oil as soon as
possible.
Thank you for your prompt consideration of this
important matter. If there are any questions, please do not
hesitate to telephone me at (202) 861-3847.
Very truly yours
ougl^tf H. Green
Counsel to the Utility
Solid Waste Activities Group
DHGrrrj
Attachments
cc: Ms. Rajni Joglekar, EPA
Mr. Alan Benedict, FP&L
-------
Florida Power & Light Company, P.O. Box 088801, North Palm Boach, FL 33408-8801
October 30, 1992
Ms. Rajni D. Joglekar
Office of Solid Waste
USEPA
401 M Street S.W.
Washington, D.C 20460
Re: Regulatory State of Oil Ash
Under the BevtD Amendment
Dear Ms. Joglekar:
The enclosed information is a follow-up to correspondence sent to you by Florida Power and Light
Company (FPL) on October 6, 1992, regarding the regulatory status of combustion by-products (ash)
resulting from the co-firing of on-specification used oil fuel and virgin fuel oil in FPL's oil-fired boilers.
FPL's concern continues to be the loss of the Bevill exclusion for the resultant combustion by-products
when used oil is co-fired in oil-fired units.
As you have requested, the following information should help to illustrate the relationship between on-
specification used oil fuel and virgin fuel oil co-fired for energy recovery at a typical FPL plant
Assuming an 800 megawatt unit co-firing fuel oil and on-specification used oil fuel, the following
relationships would exist If the 800 megawatt unit is operating at full load and z. 100% oil, the unit
would burn approximately 1200 barrels (42 gallons/barrel) of oil per hour or approximately 1,209,600
gallons of oil in a 24-hour period. If the same unit were to co-fire 6000 gallons of on-specification used
oil fuel in that same 24 hour period, the used oil would be approximately 0.5% of the total fuel flow.
However, since each FPL plant typically generates 3000 to 6000 gallons of used oil throughout the year,
6000 gallons used in this example is actually a far greater amount than would typically be available to be
burned in any plant in any single 24 hour penod. If the same generating unit were to be operating at 50%
(400 megawatts) load on z. 100% oil (oil bun nie of approximately 604,800 gallons/24 hours), 6,000
gallons of on-specification used oil fuel, as a percentage of total oil fuel flow, would be less than 1.0%.
However, to reiterate, because FPL's used oil n generated randomly and in relatively small amounts ai
any plant, it is highly improbable that any plui »««ld bum more than a few hundred gallons on any one
day. Consequently, the actual amount of on-*p*ofkauou used oil routinely burned would be at least an
order of magnitude lower than these hypothetical eumples.
As presently configured, on-specification used <*l lucl to be burned at FPL plants would be managed m
"blow-back tanks". These tanks, when pressurized, force oil into large fuel oil storage tanks, which
subsequently feed the boilers. Thus, FPL's used oj will he mixed with virgin fuel oil in large tanks called
metering tanks and be fired in the normal fuel oil feed process. To illustrate another hypothetical fuel
flow relationship, if 500 gallons of used oil fuel were to be placed, at one time, into a metering tank.
which for FPL's 800 megawatt units have a capacity »( 24.000 barrels (1,008,000 gallons), the used ml
would constitute only approximately 0.05% of the t»ul nl volume in this tank. Thus, the on-specificaimi
used oil would be only 0.05% of total fuel flow. In xtujlity, the metering tank from which the virgin
an FPL Group company
-------
fuel oil and used oil are co-burned in this example is also continuously being filled from a 500,000-barrel
virgin fuel oil storage tank. As a result, the actual ratio of used oil to virgin fuel oil would routinely be
much lower than even the extremely small percentage demonstrated by this example.
With regard to the key issue FPL is requesting EPA to resolve, i.e., the regulatory status of ash resulting
from co-firing on-specification used oil fuel and virgin fuel oil, it is important to understand that the ash
generated from the burning of used oil will be an extremely small percentage of the total ash generated.
For example, our February 4, 1988, correspondence to EPA noted that the amount of used oil ash
generated from burning 7000 gallons of used oil would only be about 4-8 pounds annually as compared
to virgin fuel oil ash annual generation of 500 to 1500 tons per plant. Clearly, it would be impossible to
distinguish used oil fuel ash from virgin fuel oil ash in FPL s typical co-firing mode.
* w
As you know, Florida Power and Light Company has worked with EPA on these matters since December
of 1987. As we have noted in correspondence to EPA several times, onsite burning of small amounts of
on-specification used oil fuel, in lieu of offsite shipping for recycling or disposal, makes practical sense
and certainly is beneficial from several environmental perspectives Further, EPA has consistently held,
particularly in the latter stages of our 5 year dialogue, that the regulatory clarification FPL has pursued
has not resulted in any regulatory controversy within or from outside the agency.
Resolution of this issue is of the utmost importance to FPL and we assume at other oil-fired utilities as
well. We would appreciate EPA's attention to this matter and request a speedy response. If there are any
questions please telephone me at (407) 625-7612.
Alan D. Benedict
Principal Specialist
cc: Douglas Green - Piper and Marbury
Van Houseman - EPA Special Waste Section
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, O.C. 20480
APR 29 1993
OMICI or
SOUO WASTI AND tMIHGINCV MS'ONSI
Mr. Douglas Green
Pipar 4 Narbury
1200 Ninataanth St., NW
Washington, D.C. 20036-2430
Dear Mr. Green:
ThanX you for your letter dated August 14, 1992, sent on behalf of
the Utility Solid Wasts Activities Group. This rasponsa elariflas tha
ragulatory status of combustion rasiduals ganaratad from co-burning of
"specification" used oil fual and virgin fusl oil in utility
boilars/furnaces."
Undar tha conditions dascribad in tha supplemental information
providad in tha Octobar 30, 1992 lattar fro* Florida Power t Light
Company, thara will ba no impact on Bavill status for rasiduals whan
usad oil is introducad into utility boilars or furnacas. Tha data
providad in this lattar indicatas that tha amount of usad oil ganaratad
on-sita is minimal in comparison to tha amount of virgin oil with which
tha usad oil is co-fired. You hava indicatad that tha parcantaga of
usad oil co-firad'is in most cases wall balov 1% of tha total aixture.
Our understanding is that Florida Light and Povar doaa not intand to co-
fire off-spacification usad oil, and that tha parcantaga of on-
spacification usad oil is vary low. Thar af or a, it is claar that tha
contamination levels of residuals will not ba affected By the
introduction of small quantities of usad oil.
The effect of this regulatory interpretation can be appl.ti -a
other utilities that, similarly to Florida Power and Light, plan •: :-
fire minimal amounts of on-spec:fication used oil that is gen«r»*.•:
site. Pleasa note that this letter does not affect any other -»«i
management requirements under 40 CFR Parts 266 and 279.
ThanX you for your concern on this issue, and please cor- » • -.
office if you have any further questions.
Sin
SyjViaK. LoVrance
Director
Office of Solid Waste
-------
I
Q.
Appendix 3
Used Oil Correspondence
and Memoranda
Used Oil Filters
-------
Appendix 3
Used Oil Correspondence
and Memoranda
O
1
Miscellaneous
-------
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY fll C PflPY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460 I I L L U U I I
JUN'-5 1991,
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Determination on the Regulatory Status of Two Waste oil
Management Practices Utilized by Wyoming Coal Companies
TO: Robert L. Duprey, Director
Hazardous Waste Management^pivision
Region VIII
FROM: Sylvia K. Lo
Office of Solid w
This memorandum responds to your March 4, 1991 request for
regulatory determinations ^regarding two different scenarios in
which waste oil is utilized by Wyoming coal companies. These
determinations concern: 1) whether the waste oil is a solid
waste when used in certain ways, 2) whether the waste oil is
being legitimately recycled (rather than disposed of) when used
in these ways, and 3) whether the management of the waste oil is
subject to Part 266 Subpart E. Although your memorandum does not
specify what type of waste the "waste oil" is, our" response
assumes it is "used oil." The responses to your questions say
change based on what the "waste oil" is. For example, a listed
oily waste or an unused off-specification product oil could have
a different regulatory status than used oil under the different
recycling scenarios you describe.
1. Coal Treating.*
In the -first scenario, the coal companies mix/spray
approximately three gallons of used oil per ton/cubic yard of
pea-coal (coal crushed to pea size) during railroad car loading.
The used oil is used to suppress coal dust while in transit to
power plants and, to a lesser extent, to increase the BTU value
of the coal. It is my understanding that this is a standard
practice in the coal industry and that the pea-coal is burned ••
fuel.
Because the used oil is being burned for energy recovery
(assuming the oil is a spent material rather than an unused
commercial fuel oil product), the used oil is a solid waste (»e«
40 CFR 261.2(c)(2)). Because the coal/oil is ultimately used as
a fuel, the material is subject to regulation as a "used oil*
being burned for energy recovery (see 40 CFR Part 266 Subpart t) •
-------
The toxicity characteristic and TCLP are not applicable as
long as the used oil is legitimately recycled. (See the
exemption- at Section 261.6(a) (2) (iii))..
Insofar as such use of the used oil is a standard practice
within the coal industry, our concerns regarding whether this is
a legitimate recycling practice focus on the amounts of used oil
being used and on the hazardous constituents contained in the
waste oil itself. (If such use was not a standard practice, the
Agency would be concerned about the actual use of the waste oil
for this purpose.) More specifically, if used oil is used in
excess of the amounts necessary (e.g., if the oil leaks out of
the railroad cars while in transit), such use could be considered
sham recycling, subject to regulation as a hazardous waste
management activity if the used oil exhibits a hazardous
characteristic.
2. Use in making explosives*
In the second scenario, the used oil is used as an
ingredient to produce ANFO (an acronym for an explosive normally
made by combining ammonium nitrate and a fuel oil, such as a
product #1/12 diesel oil blend or product |2 diesel oil) that is
used to remove overburden/coal from the earth. The key
determination is whether such use of'the used oil is legitimate
recycling (i.e., is the waste oil a legitimate ingredient in the
production of ANFO).* If the used oil is not a legitimate
ingredient, the used oil is a solid waste (and hazardous if it
exhibits a characteristic of a hazardous waste), and the use of
the used oil to produce the ANFO, as well as the use of the used
oil-derived ANFO, would be subject to permitting requirements.
A key factor in evaluating whether the used oil is a
legitimate ingredient is a comparison of the constituents found
in the used o'il to the constituents found in the analogous raw
material, i.e. fuel oil. To the extent that there are hazardous
constituents in the oil that are not found in the fuel oil (or
that are present in the fuel oil, but in significantly lower
concentrations), the oil is not a legitimate ingredient in the
production of ANFO (unless it can be demonstrated that such
hazardous constituents are actually useful in the production of
the product or to the product itself). [Note: other factors to
consider include an assessment of: 1) how the oil is managed
(i.e., whether the oil is handled in a manner similar to the fuel
oil before use and whether it is handled in a manner to prevent
release to the environment), 2) whether the oil is as effective
as the fuel oil when used as an ingredient in ANFO production
(i.e., whether more used oil must be used to replace the,fuel oil
and whether the waste oil-derived ANFO performs as well as the
fuel oil-derived ANFO), and 3) whether excessive amounts of oil
are used (i.e., excessive amounts of oil being used could
indicate an intent to discard)].
-------
If: the used oil is not a legitimate ingredient in the
production of ANFO, then it is a solid waste being treated by
mixing with ammonium nitrate and the toxicity characteristic is
applicable. And, if hazardous, the used oil may be subject to
the "open burning and detonation" requirements of 40 CFR 265.382.
[Note: Whether the used oil-derived ANFO itself performs as well
as the fuel oil-derived ANFO is not the determining factor in
considering the regulatory status of the waste oil. In other
words, just because a secondary material can be used as an
ingredient and still result in a usable product does not, by
itself, mean that the secondary material is not a solid waste and
nor does it mean, necessarily, that the processing is legitimate
recycling. Rather, the determining factors must include the
consideration of the constituents in the secondary material and
the role these constituents play in the production of the
product.]
You mentioned in your letter that the Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA) is currently allowing/monitoring this
practice at Bridger Coal Company from a health and safety
standpoint. It should be noted that although there is agency
overlap between EPA and MSHA regarding health, safety and
environmental considerations, neither agency's jurisdiction
supersedes the other's. For example, if EPA determined that the
used oil is a legitimate ingredient in the production of ANFO,
this would not absolve the coal company from its regulatory
obligations under the MSHA. Likewise, if MSHA grants approval of
the use of used oil as an ingredient in ANFO, this does not
absolve the company from its regulatory obligations under RCRA.
Nonetheless, you may find it useful to share this response with
your colleague from MSHA, Mr. Dick Fischer, whom you mention in
your letter.
I hope this has helped to resolve the issues you have
presented regarding the current regulatory status of used oil
used as a dust suppressant in the transportation of pea-coal and
as an ingredient in the production of ANFO. As you know, we are
currently developing regulations applicable to the management of
used oil. If you have any further questions regarding the
regulation of used oil or the determination of legitimate vs.
sham recycling, your staff should contact Oenise Wright (for used
oil) or Mitch Kidwell (for recycling) at FTS 475-8551.
-------
LITTLE.RIVER.HDUE
.= .01
PAX*:
OATS: / / 5?
PAGES INCLUOING
THIS PAGE:
PHOT«»:
Oils Unlimited, Inc.
P. 0. Box 130
Mentone, AL 35984
September 8, 1993
Mr. Jeffery Denit, Acting Director
Office of Solid Waste, E.P.A.
401 "M" Street
O "S" - 330
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Sir:
We propose to use E.P.A. Specification Used Oil Fuel in
substitutiion of the currently formulated No. 2 fuel oil in the
manufacture of ANFO blasting agents and request your review of
this.
Please find attached favorable ruling on this proposed used
oil use from the Alabama Department of Environmental Management
for your perusal.
All E.P.A. required documentation, analysis and regulation
adherence is to be incorporated into this proposed use.
Additionally, the Auburn University's Waste, Oil Recovery
Laboratory will be the source and first declarer of this proposed
oil.
We appreciate your review and await your comments.
Sincerely,
William P. Patterson, President
Oils Unlimited, Inc.
-------
I- I T T L E . R I V E R . H-D U E
1993 09*30 FRQn rtJ-Chem. Eng. Dept.
17S1CMO.W.C
w
O«S)27t-770e
C«n-79t*
270-MU
110 Vukanftoatf
Wn*ingtem.At
3S20M7Q3
SSM2
FAX34O4SM
1104 P«f taMur Hood
MoM*.AL
StttS-1191
OOS)4SO-JAOO
FAX 47949**
TO 61362241912053456336 P. 32
ALABAMA
DEPARTMENT OP ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
June 8, 1993
Iff Ann Fox
Auburn Unlvtrilty
Dtpt. of ChtMlcal Engineering
230 Rots H«n
Auburn University. AUbtM 36849-5)27
Oc&r Ms. Fox:
Rt: Substituting spceirtc«t1oft isod oil for
nltrmtw blasting agent.
f«t1 oil in MI
Tht Oepartnent has reviewed your letter requesting A ruling on whether
the use of specification grade used oil as a substitute for f2 fuel
oil In an amonlu* nitrate blasting agent. Under the current state
regulations, Rule 33S-14-2-.01 (6> of the AOEM Administrative
code specifically exeitfs used oil that Is destined for recycling
other than burning for energy recovery fro* regulation as a hazardous
waste, even If the used oil exhibits one or wore of the
characteristics of hazardous waste. In addition, Rule
335-14-2-.OlU>(e)l.(l1> excludes materials which are used or reused
as effective substitutes for coenerelal products froa the definition
of solid waste, which means that the nterlals sl»o cannot be a
hazardous waste. Since the used oil is being used as an effective
substitute for #2 fuel oil In the uwonlun nitrate blasting agent, the
used oil 1s not a hazardous waste and Us use Is not regulated under
RCRA. The used oil management standards promulgated by the EPA In
volune 57 of the Federal Register, page 41565, on September 10. 1992,
do not directly address the substitution of used oil for a coae*rcial
product, so they will not alter this exemption.
Should further questions arise regarding this natter, please contact
Terry Shlpmrv at (205)271.7743.
Robert H. Barr. Chief
South Unit
RCRA Compliance Branch
land Division
RHB/OTS/rt:5EW97(19)
File: Info Request
Xflle: Naste Oil
TOTPL
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. O.C. 20460
fll T Of) Hi/
JAN I 0 1994 OF,,CEOP
SOLID WAST6 AND 6M6RG8NCV flESPONM
Mr. William Patterson
President
Oils Unlimited, Inc.
P.O. Box 130
Mentone, Alabama 35984
Dear Mr. Patterson:
Thank you for your letter dated September 8,1993^ to Jeffery Denit regarding
the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards(40 CFR Part279). Specifically, you requested a regulatory determination on
whether the used oil management standards allow the use of on-speciflcsflon used oil
fuel as a substitute for #2 fuel oil in the manufacture of ANFO blasting agents.
In its November 29,1985, used oil rule, EPA discussed the matter of how virgin
fuel oil compares to specification used oil fuel. In the preamble to that rule, the
Agency stated that "[specification] used oil fuel poses no greater risk than virgin fuel
oil and, once it enters the commercial fuel oil market, should not be regulated
differently than virgin fuel oil.'(50 FR 49189). In other words, EPA considers
commercially available on-specJfication used oil fuel to be equivalent to virgin fuel oil
for regulatory purposes. On this basis, we would consider the substitution of
specification used oil fuel for #2 fuel oil in the production of ANFO to be allowed as a
legitimate recycling activity under the Part 279 Recycled Used Oil Management
Standards. It should be noted, however, that use of off-specification used oil as a
virgin fuel oil substitute in ANFO would not be permitted under the used oil regulations.
If you have any further questions about the used oil. management standards,
you may catt Eydie Pines of my staff at (202) 260-3509.
Sincerely,
Michael Shapiro, Director,
Officeof Solid waste
bcc: Alan Farmer, Region IV
John Works, Region VII
Printea 0*
-------
Mr Pore* CtHHr For CrMronmortel FTrrnHmti
»10ea>«nn»u> M.. Bjdg. 116t
June 09-, 1993
Ms. Silvia Lowrance
Director of Office of Solid Waste
401 M Street SW OS 300
Washington, DC 20460
Request for Disposal Information on Hydraulic Fluid Filters
Dear Ms. Lowrance:
Please provide an Interpretation on the proper disposal methods for hydraulic
fluid filters used on aircraft.
Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 279, EPA Standards for Managing
Used 011, March 3, 1993, provides Information on handling used oil which
Includes heat transfer fluid and hydraulic fluid. If lij-jraullc fluid 1s
handled in the same manner as used oil, can used hydraulK fluid filters be
handled 1n the same manner as used oil filters (re: 40 C>? 261)?
If used hydraulic fluid filters are considered specialty r-lters, please
provide the appropriate disposal Information.
If you have any questions, or 1f we can be of further assistance, please do
not hesitate to contact Mr. J1m Lanoue or me at (210) 536-4214.
Sincerely,
L. frawford
PRO-ACT Project Manager
SLC/Jel
cc: Senior Master Sergeant Mark McNatt
T«l«plw»: 2108364814 To* Prw: i400-ZB*)ea oSJT
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY • t U £, '
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
JAN I 2 1994
OFFICE OF
SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Sharon L. Crawford
Project Manager
Pro-Act
Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence
Pollution Prevention Division
8106 Chennault Rd., Bldg. 1161
Brooks AFB, TX 78235-5318
Dear Ms. Crawford
This letter responds to your request for information on the
proper disposal methods for hydraulic fluid filters used in
aircrafts.
You ask whether hydraulic fluid filters are regulated in the
same manner as used oil filters destined for disposal. Non-terne
plated used oil filters from light duty vehicles and destined for
disposal, are exempt from identification as a hazardous waste
under regulations promulgated on May 20, 1992 (40 CFR
261.4(b)(15)). Light duty vehicles include automobiles,
passenger vans, and light duty trucks (e.g., small pickup
trucks). EPA decided to categorically exempt non-terne plated
used oil filters destined for disposal from being identified as a
hazardous waste based upon available toxicity characteristic
data. However, EPA did not receive hydraulic fluid filter data
to make a determination on hydraulic fluid filters in aircrafts.
Therefore, hydraulic fluid filters are not included in the us«d
oil filter exemption at 40 CFR 261.4(b)(15). However, a
hazardous waste determination ran be made for the hydraulic flu:l
filters (40 CFR 262.11). If t*e hydraulic fluid filters are
determined not to be hazardous and cannot be recycled under Pirt
279, the hydraulic fluid filters rust be disposed in accordant*
with the requirements of 40 :rs Parts 257 and 258. See secticn
279.81(b).
As stated in your letter, nydraulic fluid is regulated js
used oil. Materials containing or otherwise contaminated wit.-.
used oil (e.g., hydraulic fluid filters), from which the usod :..
has been properly drained or removed to the extent possible ar«
not considered used oil under the Part 279 used oil management
standards. There is one exception to this provision; hydraul..-
fluid filters from which used oil i-.as been removed continue '.-
regulated as used oil if they are -i ce burned for energy
recovery, regardless of the degree ~t removal (see page 2642:
-------
the May 3, 1993 Final rule). Otherwise, once the used oil has
been removed, the hydraulic fluid filters are no longer subject
to the used oil regulations, but may be regulated as hazardous
waste if they, are listed or exhibit a characteristic of hazardous
waste. Usad oil that has been removed from the hydraulic fluid
filters continues to be regulated as used oil and must be managed
according to the Part 279 used oil management standards.
If you have any further questions regarding this matter,
please contact Bryan Groce of my staff at (202) 260-9550.
Sincerely,
Ai>-
0
Jtc*~fi
^Michael H. Shapiro, Director
Office of Solid Waste
-------
Appendix 4
Questions and Answers
From the RCRA Hotline
88
If
-------
NOTE
Hie following is a draft document that has not been completed by EPA. Readers are
cautioned that the document is a draft only and is likely to change before it is finalized. While the
document provides useful insight into how EPA interprets certain provisions of the management
standards, it should not be relied upon as definitive guidance. If mere is a contradiction between this
appendix and Sections 1 to 6, please use the information in Sections 1 to 6. If you have any
questions, see the end of Section 6 for where to get more information.
-------
United States / "
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
(OS-305)
EPA/530-X-94-XXX
February 1994
xvEPA Used Oil Questions
and Answers DRAFT
A Collection of Questions
Compiled by the Hotline
-------
RCRA, UST, Superfund. and EPCRA Hotline
(800) 424-9346
(703)412-9810
This document is prepared by Booz, Allen & Hamilton and submitted In
support of Contract No. 68-WO-0039.
EPA Project Officer: Carie VanHook Jasperse, (202) 260-7388
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washignton, DC 20460
DRAFT
-------
INTRODUCTION
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Underground Storage
Tanks (UST), Superfund, and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-
Know Act (EPCRA) Hotline was established to respond to inquiries from the
regulated community, the public, and others concerning waste management
and disposal regulations. ,
One of the regulatory areas addressed by RCRA is used oil management and
recycling. On September 10,1992, EPA published new recycled used oil
management standards in the Federal Register. This document is a
compilation of questions received on the Hotline, and their answers, during
the period of September 1992 through June 1993 dealing with these standards.
The questions are organized within the document by general topic headings
and indexed by key words.
While these questions and answers cover a wide variety of used oil issues, it
is important that the reader be aware of the purpose and limitations of this
document. It does not replace the regulations; instead, it augments them. For
a complete understanding of the new federal used oil management standards
under RCRA, the reader is directed to 40 CFR Part 279, the Federal Register
preamble associated with it (57 FR 41566,58 FR 26420, and 58 FR 34977), and
any related guidance. In addition, to obtain a regulatory determination
regarding any specific scenario, the reader should contact his or her
enforcement agency. A list of used oil state contacts (updated through
February 1994) is included in Appendix I of this document
'* e -
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GENERAL .„ 1
EFFECTIVE DATE/STATE AUTHORIZATION 1
APPLICABILITY 3
Definition 3
Mixtures 4
Diesel fuel 6
Recycling presumption 6
Recycling 7
Rebuttable presumption 7
Specification 9
DIYoil 10
Wastewaters 10
Pipelines. 10
PCBs 10
TESTING 11
NOTIFICATION 1 11
STORAGE 12
Secondary containment 13
Surface impoundments 14
GENERATORS . 14
COLLECTION CENTERS AND AGGREGATION POINTS.. 15
TRANSPORTATION 16
PROCESSING 17
Filters 17
BURNING 18
MARKETERS 19
USE CONSTITUTING DISPOSAL ...19
CERCLA INTERFACE . ..........20
FILTERS.. 21
KEY WORD INDEX .....23
D
iii
-------
Pagel
GENERAL
1. What are the major provisions of the new recycled used oil management standards?
The major provisions are management standards for used oil handlers which include used oil
generators, used oil transporters, used oil processors and re-refiners, used oil marketers, and
burners of off-specification used oil.
2. What section of the hazardous waste regulations refers to the requirements for used oil in Part 279?
Under requirements for recyclable materials, §261.6(a)(4) exempts used oil that exhibits a
hazardous characteristic from regulation as hazardous waste and subjects it to Part 279 when
recycled. The Part 279 standards, though, apply to all used oil, characteristic or not.
EFFECTIVE DATE/STATE AUTHORIZATION
3. What is the effective date of the new recycled used oil management standards?
As stated in the September 10,1992, Federal Register (57 FR 41604), §3014(a) is a RCRA provision
that predates the 1984 amendments. This provision, which directs EPA to regulate recycled used
oil, represents statutory authority for the Part 279 standards. As such, the new standards became
effective March 8,1993, in unauthorized states (Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Wyoming, American Samoa,
Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands). In states that have already
received final authorization for the RCRA program, the rules will be applicable only after the state
program is revised to adopt equivalent standards (57 FR 41605). The only exception to this regards
the standards for marketers and burners which were essentially transferred from the existing
regulations in Part 266, Subpart E. These provisions continue to be effective in all states; they are
federally enforceable in states that have not adopted them and state and federally enforceable in
those states that have received authorization for those sections. The following table illustrates this
concept.
Status of State
Non-authorized
RCRA Base
Program
Authorized RCRA
Base Program
Non-authorized
Part 266, Subpart E
Authorized RCRA
Base Program
Authorized
Part 266, Subpart E
Before 3/8/93
40 CFR Part 266,
Subpart E is
Federally enforceable
40 CFR Part 266,
Subpart E is
Federally enforceable
40 CFR Part 266,
Subpart E is state
and Federally
enforceable
As of 3/8/93
40 CFR Part 279 is Federally
enforceable
40 CFR Part 279, Subparts A-F and I
are not Federally enforceable until
state is granted authorization
40 CFR Part 279 Subparts G and H are
Federally enforceable
40 CFR Part 279, Subparts A-F and I
are not Federally enforceable until
state is granted authorization
40 CFR Part 279 Subparts G and H are
state and Federally enforceable*
• 40 CFR Part 279, Subparts G and H contain certain provisions which were not in Part 266, Subpart E. The state will
continue to enforce only those provisions for which it obtained authorization.
DRAFT
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Pae 2
4. Will a state that is authorized for the provisions in Part 266, Subpart E, lose its authorization for this
when it is removed and replaced with the Part 279 requirements?
States that are authorized for Part 266, Subpart E are automatically authorized for the equivalent
provisions in Part 279, Subparts G and H. As of March 8, 1993, Part 266, Subpart E has been
removed. The table below shows a comparison of these sections.
Former Provisions of
40 CFR Part 266, Subpart E
§266.40(a)
§266.40(b)
§266.40(c)
§§266.40(d)(l) and (2)
§266.40(e)
§§266.41(a)(l) and (2)
§§266.41(b)(l) and (2)
§266.42(a)
§266.42(b)
§266.42(c)
§266.43(a)(l)
§266.43(a)(2)
§266.43(b)(l)
§266.43(b)(2)
§266.43(b)(3)
§§266.43(b)(4)(i)-(v)
§266.43(b)(4)(vi)
§§266.43(b)(5)(i) and (ii)
§266.43(b)(6)(i)
§266.43(b)(6)(ii)
§266.44(a)
§266.44(b)
Recodif ied Provisions in
40 CFR Part 279
§279.60(a)
§279.1!
§§279.63(a), (b), and (c)2
§§279.10(b)(2) and (3)
§§279.11 and 279.60(c)
§279.71
§§279.23(a) and 2 79. 61 (a)
§279.60(a)
§279.70(a)
§279.60(a)
§§279.70(a) and (b)(l)
§279.70(b)(2)
§279.72(a)
J279.71
§279.73(a)
§279.74(a)
not included
§279.75(a)
§§279.74(b) and (c)
§279.72(b)
§§279.74(a) and 279.75(b)
§§279.23(a) and 279.61(a)
§279.62(a)
1 Contains additional new definitions that were not included in the 1985 rule.
2 Paragraphs (c)(l) and (2) of §279.63 contain new exemptions from the rebuttable presumption that were not part of
the 1985 rule.
5. Which states are not authorized for the base RCRA program and which states are authorized for the
base program and Part 266, Subpart E?
As of February 1,1994, the following states and territories are not RCRA-authorized: Alaska,
Hawaii, Iowa, Wyoming, American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and Virgin
Islands. In those states, the Part 279 standards became effective on March 8,1993. As of November
30,1993, the following states are authorized for the RCRA program including Part 266, Subpart E:
Arkansas, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri,
Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Vermont, and
Guam. In these states, the marketer and burner standards remain state and federally enforceable
and the remainder of the Part 279 requirements will not be in effect until the state adopts them. The
remaining 28 states are authorized for the base program but are not authorized for Part 266,
Subpart E. In these states, the burner and marketer standards remain federally enforceable, whi^
the rest of Part 279 does not go into effect until the state adopts the requirements. (See Appendix I
for a list of state used oil contacts).
Used Oil Questions and Answers
DRAFT
-------
; Page 3
APPLICABILITY
6. Is used oil a hazardous waste?
According to rulemakings on May 20,1992 (57 FR 21524), and September 10,1992 (57 FR 41566),
used oil is not a listed hazardous waste. It is only a hazardous waste if it displays a characteristic of
hazardous waste or if it has been mixed with a hazardous waste. This is only relevant, however, if
the used oil is being disposed of, because EPA has developed special management standards for
used oil that is recycled. State regulations concerning used oil may differ from the federal program.
To obtain specific information about state used oil regulations, refer to the state used oil contacts
listed in Appendix I of this document.
DEFINITION
7. Has the new rule changed the definition of used oil?
Yes, used oil is defined in §279.1 as "any oil that has been refined from crude oil, or any synthetic
oil, that has been used and as a result of such use is contaminated by physical or chemical
impurities." Synthetic oil has been added to the definition. For a material to meet the definition of
used oil, it must first be derived from crude or synthetic oil. Second, it must be used as a lubricant,
heat transfer fluid, hydraulic fluid, or for similar uses. Lubricants include, but are not limited to,
used motor oil, greases, metalworking lubricants, and emulsions. Heat transfer fluids include, but
are not limited to, coolants, heating media, refrigeration oils, and electrical insulation oils.
Hydraulic fluids include but are not limited to, transmission fluids and brake fluids. Third, it must
be contaminated from use with chemical and physical impurities.
8. Are all petroleum derived products (e.g., antifreeze, kerosene) included in the definition of used oil?
While the definition of used oil does not include all petroleum derived products, it does cover the
majority of oils that are used as lubricants, heat transfer fluids, hydraulic fluids, emulsions, or for
similar uses and that are likely to be contaminated through use (57 FR 41574) (see also Question 7).
9. Does the definition of used oil include animal and vegetable oils which are used as lubricants in
hydraulic pumps?
No, animal and vegetable oils used as lubricants do not meet the definition of used oil because they
are not synthetic or derived from crude (§279.1).
10. Are residues from storage, processing, and re-refining used oil considered used oil?
Residues burned for energy recovery are regulated as used oil under Part 279. Residues that are
beneficially reused (e.g., as a lubricant) are considered products and are not regulated under RCRA.
Materials derived from used oil that are disposed of or used in a manner constituting disposal, with
the exception of re-refining distillation bottoms that are used as feedstock to manufacture asphalt
products, are solid wastes and are subject to a hazardous waste determination. The preamble to the
September 10,1992, Federal Register (57 FR 41574), incorrectly states that residues or sludges from
the processing of used oil are not regulated under Part 279. This issue is clarified in the May 3,
1993, Federal Register (58 FR 26420), which is a technical correction to that rule. In the Federal
Register of September 23,1991 (56 FR 48000), the Agency proposed four listings for wastes from the
processing and re-refining of used oil (K152, K153, K154, and K155). The final listing decision
regarding these has been deferred.
AFT
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Page 4 .
11. Are used oil and waste oil the same thing?
No, though commonly confused, the terms "used oil" and "waste oil" are different. Used oil has a
specific regulatory definition, which defines the scope of Part 279. Waste oil or oily wastes do not
have specific regulatory definitions but are generally understood to include wastes, such as bottom
clean-out waste from virgin fuel oil storage tanks, or virgin fuel oil spill clean-up, which are not
used oil because they have never been used (50 FR 49174; November 29,1985).
12. Would a petroleum distillate used as a solvent be considered used oil?
No, used oil includes those oils that have been used as lubricants, coolants, emulsions, or for similar
uses. It does not include materials derived from crude or synthetic oils and used as cleaning agents
or solely for their solvent properties (57 FR 41574). This material would have to be classified as
hazardous or nonhazardous under §262.11. In other words, the generator would have to make a
determination as to whether the material is listed as a hazardous waste or exhibits any
characteristics of hazardous waste.
13. Is used grease considered used oil?
As long as it has been refined from crude or synthetic oil, contaminated from use, and used as a
lubricant, grease meets the definition of used oil in §279.1.
MIXTURES
14. How are mixtures of used oil and wipes, rags, and absorbent materials regulated? Does the "free
flowing" concept for removing used oil apply to wipes, rags, and absorbent materials? What
regulations apply to the material (e.g., absorbent materials or wipers) after the used oil is removed?
Generally under §279.10(c) (58 FR 26420; May 3,1993), materials containing or otherwise
contaminated with used oil are regulated as used oil until the used oil is removed from the
material. Materials containing or otherwise contaminated with used oil, from which the used oil
has been properly drained or removed to the extent possible such that no visible signs of free-
flowing oil remain in or on the material are not considered used oil under Part 279. There is one
exception to this provision: materials from which used oil has been removed continue to be
regulated as used oil if they are to be burned for energy recovery, regardless of the degree of
removal. Otherwise, once the used oil has been removed, these materials are no longer subject to
the used oil regulations, but may be regulated as hazardous waste if they are listed or exhibit a
characteristic of hazardous waste. Used oil that has been removed from such material continues to
be regulated as used oil and must be managed according to the Part 279 standards. EPA does not
consider the removal of used oil from materials containing or otherwise contaminated with used oil
to be processing.
15. Can soil contaminated with used oil be burned in a boiler or industrial furnace?
Under §279.10(c) (58 FR 26240; May 3,1993), materials containing or otherwise contaminated with
used oil are regulated as used oil until the used oil is removed from the material. If the material is
going to be burned for energy recovery, however, it is still regulated as used oil regardless of the
amount of used oil that may remain in the material when it is burned. If soil does not have a
significant heating value (i.e., over 5,000 Btu/lb.), it is not considered to be burned for energy
recovery; and if the contaminated soil is a hazardous waste, it can only be burned in accordance
with hazardous waste regulations.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
• PageS
16. Does mixing used oil and characteristic hazardous waste constitute hazardous waste treatment?
Yes, mixing a characteristic hazardous waste with used oil to render the waste nonhazardous
constitutes treatment of hazardous waste, if the purpose of the mixing is to make the waste more
amenable for recovery (e.g., energy recovery) and/or to make the waste less hazardous (50 FR
49180; November 29,1985, and §260.10). EPA does not require a permit, however, if this treatment
is performed in accumulation tanks or containers, provided that the generator stores the waste
according to the used oil (§279.22) and the hazardous waste regulations in §262.34 and meets the
waste analysis plan requirements in §§262.34 and 268.7(a)(4) (51 FR 10168; March 24,1986).
17. How are mixtures of used oil and characteristic hazardous waste regulated? How are mixtures of
used oil and ignitable-only hazardous wastes regulated?
Mixtures of used oil and characteristic hazardous waste (other than ignitable-only waste) are
regulated as hazardous waste if they display any characteristic of hazardous waste. On the other
hand, mixtures of used oil and characteristic waste are regulated as used oil if they are free of all
characteristics.
Mixtures of used oil and ignitable-only hazardous waste (e.g., mineral spirits*) are regulated as
hazardous waste if they retain the ignitability characteristic and as used oil if they are not ignitable
(§279.10(b)(2)(iMiii)). The rationale for this distinction is as follows: if the solvents are hazardous
only because of ignitability, then mixing the solvents with used oil should not affect the chemical
constituents or other properties of the used oil. The solvents in question (e.g., mineral spirits) are
petroleum fractions, are typically used by the same businesses that generate used oil, and are also
usually managed in a manner similar to used oil (e.g., burning for energy recovery or distillation to
recover the solvent). As such, efficient and sound management can include mixing with used oil
and management by used oil recyders. If the mixture exhibits the characteristic of ignitability,
however, this can mean that the mixing has changed the nature of hazards involved in managing
the used oil, and this mixture should remain subject to hazardous waste controls (56 FR 48060;
September 23,1991).
^Mineral spirits are generally ignitable-only before use; however, after being used, mineral spirits may contain some
constituents that would cause them to fail the TCLP.
18. What land disposal restriction (LDR) notification would apply to used oil that exhibits a
characteristic?
According to §261.6(a)(4), used oil that exhibits a characteristic and is going to be recycled is
exempt from the requirements of Parts 260 through 268 (including LDR notification) and is instead
regulated in Part 279 (57 FR 41612). Used oil that is disposed of on-site or being sent off-site for
disposal is subject to a hazardous waste determination, and if hazardous, any applicable LDR
requirements.
19. How are mixtures of used oil and a hazardous waste listed in Subpart D of Part 261 solely because it
exhibits the characteristic of ignitability (e.g., F003) regulated?
According to §279.10(b)(2) (58 FR 26420; May 3,1993), hazardous wastes listed in Subpart D of Part
261 solely because they exhibit a characteristic of hazardous waste are handled as though they were
characteristic wastes for purposes of compliance with Part 279. Thus, the mixture of F003 and used
oil would be regulated in the same manner as mixtures of used oil and ignitable-only characteristic
hazardous waste.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Page 6
20. A used oil generator decides to mix some of her used oil with gasoline product fuel sold at her
facility. How is a mixture of used oil and product fuel regulated?
According to §279.10(d), a mixture of used oil and product fuel is regulated as used oil. The
exception to this is that mixtures of used oil and diesel fuel are excluded from regulation under Part
279, according to §279.10(d)(2) (see also Question 23).
21. How is a container of solvent being used as a parts washer at an automotive repair shop regulated?
While the solvent is part of a process and still in use, it would not be considered material containing
or otherwise contaminated with used oil. Once the solvent is spent and removed from the process,
it would become subject to regulation as hazardous waste if it is listed or exhibits any
characteristics of hazardous waste. If it is not a hazardous waste, the solvent would be regulated as
a material containing or otherwise contaminated with used oil (§279.10(c)) (58 PR 26420; May 3,
1993) (see also Question 14).
DIESEL FUEL
22. Does used oil fuel being burned in a diesel or marine engine have to meet the used oil fuel
specification? Is a person who sends the used oil fuel to be burned in a diesel or marine engine
considered a marketer?
Since it is not clear that diesel and marine engines meet the definition of boiler, they are not subject
to the regulations for used oil burned for energy recovery in boilers or industrial furnaces (50 FR
49193; November 29,1985). Therefore, the used oil fuel specification does not apply and the
marketers and burners of this fuel are not regulated. A person that processes used oil to create a
product diesel fuel, however, is considered a processor and subject to the requirements of Part 279,
Subpart F, except as provided by §279.10(d)(2) (see also Question 23).
23. How is a mixture of used oil and diesel fuel regulated under the new standards?
If the used oil and diesel fuel is blended by a generator for use in his or her own vehicles as a fuel,
then the mixture is not regulated under the Part 279 standards (§279.10(d)(2)). Prior to mixing,
however, the generator is subject to the generator standards of Part 279, Subpart C. If the used oil
and diesel fuel is blended by anyone other than the generator or for any other reason than for use in
the generator's vehicles (i.e., selling as a fuel), then the mixing would be considered processing and
subject to all applicable provisions of Part 279, specifically Subpart F.
RECYCLING PRESUMPTION
24. What is the recycling presumption?
The recycling presumption states that EPA presumes that used oil is to be recycled unless a used oil
handler disposes of used oil or sends it for disposal (§279.10(a)). Therefore, aU used oil handlers are
subject to the Part 279 standards, until the used oil is disposed of or sent for disposal.
25. Can nonhazardous used oil be disposed of in a Subtitle D landfill?
Used oil that does not exhibit any characteristics of hazardous waste and that has not been mixed
with hazardous waste can be disposed of as a solid waste. Although no federal regulations
specifically restrict used oil disposal in a Subtitle D landfill, any applicable state or local
requirements must be met (for contacts regarding state regulation of used oil, see Appendix I). In
addition, 40 CFR §258.28 restricts the placement of liquid wastes in municipal solid waste landfills.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
D.'—"i .-• •: ••
'&MIT i
-------
Page 7
26. What regulations apply to used oil that is destined for disposal? At what point does used oil
become subject to Part 279, Subpart I?
Before it is disposed of or sent for disposal, all used oil is subject to the Part 279 standards, even if it
is "intended" for disposal. When used oil is disposed of or sent for disposal, it becomes a solid
waste and is subject to hazardous waste determination. If the used oil exhibits a characteristic of
hazardous waste, it must be handled in accordance with all applicable provisions of Subtitle C,
including the land disposal restrictions (§279.10(a». If used oil does not exhibit any characteristics
of hazardous waste, it is not subject to RCRA Subtitle C regulation, including standards for used oil
transporters in Part 279, Subpart E. Nonhazardous used oil may be disposed of in a Subtitle D
facility and is subject to any applicable state regulations for the management of solid waste
RECYCLING
27. Is burning used oil for energy recovery considered a legitimate form of recycling?
Yes, generally burning a material with significant heating value (e.g., over 5,000 Btu/lb) is a
legitimate type of recycling (OSWER Directive 9441.30(84), October 22,1984).
28. Used oil is heated and poured down an oil production well to remove contaminants (paraffin) from
the inside of the well. The used oil is eventually pumped into the raw refining stream. How is this
activity regulated?
Because this activity would qualify as use constituting disposal, the used oil becomes subject to
regulation as a solid waste. If the used oil does not exhibit a characteristic of hazardous waste,
neither the Part 279 nor the Part 266, Subpart C regulations place any restrictions on this type of
activity. Used oil employed in this manner that does exhibit a characteristic is a hazardous waste.
If the used oil is considered more product-like than waste-like, however, the use of the used oil
product would not be regulated under RCRA. A memo from the Office of Solid Waste states that a
substance is more product-like than waste-like when it 1) is as effective as any alternative product
used in the same manner, 2) contains no more hazardous constituents than any analogous product,
and 3) is managed in a manner that is commensurate with the management of a valuable
commodity. Decisions on this issue are made by the Region or authorized state (Denit to Muno;
September 9,1993).
REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION
29. What is the rebuttable presumption?
The rebuttable presumption is an objective test used by the Agency to determine if used oil has
been mixed with a hazardous waste. If used oil exceeds 1,000 ppm total halogens, it is presumed to
have been mixed with a listed hazardous waste. The presumption may be rebutted by showing
that the used oil has not been mixed or that it does not contain significant concentrations of
halogenated hazardous constituents listed in Appendix VIE of Part 261 (§279.10(b)(l)(ii)) (see also
Question 32).
30. If a used oil contains more than 1,000 ppm total halogens as-generated, is it allowable to mix the
used oil with another used oil that is lower in total halogens, and in effect, dilute to rebut the
presumption of mixing?
No, blending is not an acceptable form of rebuttal. The used oil must be evaluated for total
halogens at the point of generation. Because the used oil is presumed to be mixed with a listed
hazardous waste, it would itself be considered a listed hazardous waste. Any activity to decrease
the total halogen content would be considered treatment of a hazardous waste and may require a
RCRA hazardous waste permit (OSWER Directive 9495.1986(08); April 8,1986).
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Page 8
31. Which used oil handlers are responsible for determining used oil halogen content in conjunction
with the rebuttable presumption?
The rebuttable presumption applies to generators, transporters, processors, re-refiners, and
burners. In addition, EPA has expanded the rebuttable presumption to cover all used oil (with two
exceptions) (§279.10(b)(l)(ii)). Despite the fact that the wording in §279.21 is different from
§§279.10(b)(l)(ii), 279.44,279.53, and 279.63, the Agency's intent is that generators must comply
with all provisions of the rebuttable presumption. Handlers need not test the oil; they may rely on
their knowledge of whether mixing has occurred. Should EPA find that the oil exceeds 1,000 ppm
total halogens, however, the burden of proof lies with the handler to document that mixing has not
occurred.
32. According to §279.10(b)(l)(ii), persons may rebut the presumption that their used oil has been mixed
with a hazardous waste by showing that the used oil does not contain significant concentrations of
halogenated constituents. How is "significant concentrations" defined?
There is no formal regulatory definition of significant concentrations. According to OSWER
Directive 9495.1986(04) (February 28,1986), the "significant concentration" that would indicate
mixing has taken place would depend on the type of halogenated compound found in the used oil.
For hazardous halogenated solvent constituents, for example, EPA has stated that a handler whose
oil has concentrations below 100 ppm can generally rebut the presumption (50 FR 49176; November
29,1985).
33. Is there a halogen level over which it is impossible to rebut the mixing presumption? Can a handler
still rebut if the used oil exceeds the specification level of 4,000 ppm total halogens?
There is no level over which it is impossible to rebut the presumption of mixing. Essentially, if the
used oil is burned for energy recovery, three situations are possible. Used oil that is below 1,000
ppm total halogens and has not been mixed with hazardous waste is considered used oil and m
meet specification if all other parameters are met. Used oil that is above 1,000 ppm but below 4,000
ppm total halogens may be regulated as used oil if the presumption is successfully rebutted and
may meet specification if all other parameters are met. Finally, used oil that exceeds 4,000 ppm
total halogens may be regulated as used oil if the presumption is successfully rebutted, but will be
considered off-specification used oil.
34. Can the presumption of mixing be rebutted by documenting the level of inorganic halogens?
No, according to the Federal Register of November 29,1985 (50 FR 49178), the Agency uses a
measurement of total halogens for the following reason. "We know of no quick, simple method for
determining organically-bound halogen levels in used oil. The sample must be 'washed' to remove
inorganic halogens before determining organic halogen levels. Moreover, we have only just
recently investigated techniques for washing to remove inorganic halogens from used oil and are
not ready to recommend a procedure. Even if an acceptable technique were available, washing
would add to the time required to determined halogen levels...
"In addition, organic halogens would be a more accurate measure of presence of hazardous
halogenated solvents than total halogens only if used oil often contains more than 1,000 ppm of
inorganic halogens. [D]ata indicate, [however,] that inorganic halogen levels are generally lower
than 1XXX) ppm."
35. Used oil exceeds 1,000 ppm total halogen content and the source of the halogens is known to be
DIY-generated used oil. Can the presumption of mixing with hazardous waste be rebutted by
documenting that the used oil was only mixed with DIY-generated used oil?
If it can be demonstrated that the used oil has not been mixed with a regulated hazardous waste,
the presumption may be successfully rebutted.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Paue9
36. How is used oil contaminated with CFCs from a refrigeration unit regulated?
Under §279.10(5), CFC-contaminated used oil is exempt from the rebuttable presumption as long as
the CFCs are to be reclaimed from the used oil and the used oil has not been mixed with used oil
from sources other than refrigeration units. If the CFCs will be reclaimed from the used oil to the
fullest extent possible and the used oil has not been mixed with used oil from other sources, then
the used oil contaminated with CFCs from a refrigeration unit is subject to the same standards as
other used oil. If the CFC-contaminated used oil does not meet these conditions, however, the
rebuttable presumption may still be applied.
37. A generator mixes her CFC-contaminated used oil with used oil from automobile servicing. The
resulting mixture exceeds 1,000 ppm total halogens. Would the mixture of the used oils be subject to
the rebuttable presumption or would it be excluded under 40 CFR §279.10(b)(l)(ii)(B)7
The mixture would be fully subject to the rebuttable presumption. The exemption in
§279.10(b)(l)(ii)(B) for CFC-contaminated used oil does not carry through if the used oil is mixed
with used oil from other sources (see also Question 36).
38. For purposes of the exemption from the rebuttable presumption for metalworking oils containing
chlorinated paraffins in §279.53(c)(l), how is the term "tolling arrangement" defined?
A tolling arrangement is a contractual agreement pursuant to which reclaimed oil is returned by
the processor or re-refiner to the generator. It must indicate the type of used oil and the frequency
of shipments, that the vehicle used to transport the oil is owned by the processor, and that the
reclaimed oil will be returned to the generator (§279.24(c)).
SPECIFICATION
39. Is used oil that meets specification subject to any Part 279 standards?
The used oil specification criteria outlined in §279.11 apply only to used oil that is to be burned for
energy recovery. Used oil that is intended for re-refining or processing is subject to the full Part 279
requirements regardless of whether or not it meets specification.
40. What are the criteria for used oil specification? Have the criteria changed from the Part 266
standards?
The criteria in §279.11 are the same as in Part 266 and include: 100 degree minimum flashpoint, 5
ppm maximum arsenic, 2 ppm maximum cadmium, 10 ppm maximum chromium, 100 ppm
maximum lead, and 4,000 ppm maximum total halogens. In addition, standards for the burning of
used oil containing PCBs imposed by 40 CFR §761.20(e) are referenced in §279.11 (see also
Questions 46 and 50).
41. If used oil that has been documented to meet specification is processed or re-refined into a fuel, and
the resultant fuel is off-specification, would the mixture be subject to the burning requirements of Part
279, Subpart G?
All processing and re-refining should be completed before determining if the used oil meets the
specification criteria. If the used oil, a resultant mixture of the used oil and a fuel, or any processed
derivative of the used oil does not meet the specification criteria, as in the scenario above, then the
buning requirements of Part 279, Subpart G would apply.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Page 10 •
DIYOIL
42. Does this rule affect the way DIY used oil is regulated?
This rule affects DIY used oil to a limited extent. Used oil that is generated by individuals in their
home or through servicing their personal vehicles is still not subject to regulation. Once collected,
however, the DIY used oil is subject to all applicable Part 279 standards and used oil collection
centers an aggregation points that accept DIY used oil are subject to the requirements for used oil
generators in Part 279, Subpart C (57 FR 41587).
WASTEWATERS
43. How is de minimi's defined for purposes of §279.12(f) regarding mixtures of used oil and
wastewater?
De minimis means small spills, leaks, or drippings from pumps, machinery, pipes, and other similar
equipment during normal operations or small amounts of oil lost to the wastewater treatment
system during washing or draining operations. Wastewaters contaminated with de minimis
quantities of used oil are exempt from Part 279 as long as they are discharged pursuant to either
§402 or §307(b) of the Clean Water Act. This exception will not apply if used oil is discarded as a
result of abnormal manufacturing operations resulting in substantial leaks, spills, or other releases,
or to used oil recovered from wastewaters.
44. Is oil/water separation of a de minimis used oil/wastewater mixture considered used oil processing?
This activity is not considered used oil processing because the de minimis mixture is not considered
used oil. Any used oil recovered from such a mixture, however, would be fully subject to Part 279
standards.
PIPELINES
45. Under §279.10(g), used oil is exempt when it is placed directly into a crude oil or natural gas
pipeline. Is used oil exempt if it is placed into a crude oil stock tank attached to the pipeline?
Yes, used oil is exempt if it is mixed with crude oil in a stock tank attached to the crude oil pipeline.
EPA understands that it is common practice to first mix small amounts of used oil (typically less
than one percent) with crude oil or natural gas liquids in stock tanks, production separators, or
other tank units that are connected via pipeline to the petroleum refining facility. According to a
memo from the Office of Solid Waste, EPA is expecting to issue a rule by January 30,1994 to
address issues raised in the proposed rule (56 FR 48000,48026,48042; September 23,1991) and to
clarify and expand the scope of the pipeline exclusion (Denit to Waste Management Division
Directors; September 3,1993)
PCBs
46. What regulations apply to used oil contaminated with PCBs?
Marketers and burners of used oil fuel containing any quantifiable level of PCBs (2 ppm) are subject
to the applicable standards on marketing and burning used oil containing PCBs found at 40 CFR
§761.20(e), which require used oil with 2 to 50 ppm of PCBs to be handled according to the
prohibitions for off-specification used oil. Used oil that contains greater than 50 ppm PCBs is fully
subject to TSCA regulations in 40 CFR Part 761. Blending for the purposes of reducing the
concentration of PCBs to below 50 ppm or the level of detection is prohibited (§§279.10(i) and
761.20(e)).
Used Oil Questions and Answers £>r
-------
. Page 11
TESTING
47. Is testing used oil for characteristics required prior to sending it for recycling?
Used oil that is destined for recycling is subject to the management standards of Part 279 whether it
exhibits a characteristic or not as long as it is not mixed with a hazardous waste; therfore, no
characteristic determination is required (57 FR 41581) (§261.6(a)(4)>.
48. Which EPA test methods should be used to determine whether a used oil meets specification? Are
the used oil specification levels based on totals analysis or TCLP?
Although the September 10,1992, final rule does not specify any test methods, SW-846 and the CFR
list a variety of methods that may be employed to test for the specification constituents and for
flashpoint. According to SW-846, method 8010 can be used to test for total halogens and method
0200 can be used to test for all the metal constituents. According to 40 CFR 2§61.21, ASTM method
D-93-79 can be used to test for flashpoint. All constituent methods are totals analyses, not leaching
procedures.
49. Why does EPA require total halogen testing or application of knowledge in light of the materials or
process used to determine whether the used oil is hazardous waste when a variety of other
contaminants could cause used oil to be considered hazardous?
The Agency found, through sampling and analysis performed making a used oil listing decision for
used oil ami through enforcement experience, that used oil containing more than 1,000 ppm total
halogens has most likely been mixed with a hazardous waste. (50 FR 49176; November 29,1985).
50. Are there any EPA-approved test methods for determining total halogen content in used oil?
Although no test method is specifically required, SW-846 method 8010 is suggested.
NOTIFICATION
51. How is the notification required under Part 279 accomplished?
The notification requirement in Part 279 serves as the mechanism for obtaining an EPA ID Number
and can be accomplished by submitting to the Regional Administrator either EPA Form 8700-12 in
accordance with §3010 of RCRA or a letter stating the location of the facility and the types of used
oil management activities that take place there (57 FR 41594).
52. After March 8,1993, does a transporter that picks up used oil in an authorized state have to notify
EPA if the oil is delivered to an unauthorized state? What about a transporter who picks up used oil in
an unauthorized state and delivers it in an authorized state?
In both cases the transporter must obtain an EPA ID number. According to the new standards
generators must ensure that their used oil is transported only by transporters that have ID numbers
(§279.24). Likewise, processors, re-refiners, marketers, and burners must keep track of the ID
number of any transporters who deliver to them a shipment of used oil (§279.56(a)(3), §279.65(a)(3),
and§279.74(a)(3)).
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Page 12 ______ ,
53. Would a local or county government that collects DIY-used oil be required to obtain an EPA ID
number?
No, a municipal government that collects DIY-used oil would not have to notify according to the
regulation for coSection centers and aggregation points found in Part 279, Subpart D. They would,
however, have to comply with the standards for used oil generators in Part 279, Subpart C.
54. Are facilities that have already obtained an EPA ID number for management of hazardous waste
required to notify EPA again when they are transporting or processing used oil or as marketers or
burners of used oil?
According to §§279.42(a)(l), 279.51 (a)(l), 279.62(a)(l), and 279.73(a) (as revised at 58 FR 26420; May
3,1993 and 58 FR 33342; June 17,1993), only used oil transporters, processors, re-refiners, burners,
and marketers that have not previously notified EPA of hazardous waste and other used oil
management activities and not previously obtained a EPA ID number must notify to identify then-
used oil management activities. This requirement increases the types of used oil handlers that must
obtain an EPA ID number.
STORAGE
55. Is there an accumulation time limit for storing used oil on-site prior to sending it off-site for
recycling?
Transfer facilities have a 35-day limit on the storage of used oil on-site and if the limit is exceeded,
the transfer facility is subject to the processor and re-refiner requirements in Subpart F. If storage
takes place for less that 24 hours, the transporter would not have to comply with the transfer
facility requirements (§279.45(a)). Generators, processors, re-refiners, and burners, however, have
no time limits for storing used oil on-site, according to requirements in Part 279, Subpart C for
generators, Subpart F for processors and re-refiners, and Subpart G for burners.
56. Are containers holding used oil required to be closed?
Although there is no explicit requirement to keep containers holding used oil closed, it is EPA's
policy that facilities employing containers should keep them closed as a matter of good operating
procedures (45 FR 33199; May 19,1980). The hazardous waste regulations specify that containers
holding hazardous waste must be closed (§§264/265.173(a)). If used oil needs to be managed in
accordance with the hazardous waste regulations, then the used oil must be kept in a closed
container.
57. Is a generator who stores used oil in an underground tank subject to regulation under 40 CFR Part
280 underground storage tank standards?
Yes, any used oil handlers that store used oil in an underground storage tank are subject to Part 280
requirements.
58. What are the standards applicable to the storage of used oil at a processing facility?
The standards applicable to storage of used oil at processing facilities are found in §279.54. Used
oil can be stored in tanks and containers that are in good condition, with no visible leaks.
Secondary containment is required for these units, as are labels with the words "Used Oil." In
addition, processors must comply with requirements for response to releases. Unlike other
handlers of used oil, processing facilities must also comply with closure requirements to remove
contaminated soils and structures before closing the facility.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
. f;'
-------
: Page 13
59. How is a tank regulated if it holds used oil that exhibits a characteristic of hazardous waste?
Section 261.6(a)(4) exempts used oil destined for recycling that is hazardous solely because it
displays a characteristic from the hazardous waste regulations and subjects it to Part 279. Pursuant
to the recycling presumption, a tank that contains used oil exhibiting a characteristic is regulated by
the used oil management standards in Part 279, not by hazardous waste regulations, if the
characteristic comes solely from the use of the oil. Requirements for tanks storing used oil can be
found in §279.22 for generators, §279.45 for transporters and transfer facilities, §279.54 for
processors and re-refiners, and §279.64 for burners. For generators, these standards include making
certain the tanks are in good condition, not leaking, and labeled "Used Oil." Along with these
requirements, the other types of handlers must have secondary containment for their tanks storing
used oil.
60. How big does the used oil label on a storage tank have to be?
Although no label size is mandated in the Part 279 standards, the regulations in §§279.45,279.54,
and 279.64 require that the labels be clearly marked with the words "Used Oil."
61. Do storage tanks holding processed or re-refined oil have to be labeled used oil?
The storage of used oil, after being re-refined or meeting specification (when being burned for
energy recovery), is not regulated in the new Part 279 standards (§279.10(e)). Oil which has not
been processed into specification used oil fuel must be stored in containers or tanks which are
labeled with the words "Used Oil."
62. What standards apply to releases of used oil?
Requirements for responses to releases under Part 279 standards are detailed under the specific
requirements for individual handlers (e.g., generators and transporters). Basically, they entail
stopping and containing the release, cleaning up and properly managing the released oil, and, if
necessary to prevent future releases, repairing or replacing any leaking used oil storage containers
and tanks prior to returning them to service (§279.22(d)).
63. How are sumps that hold used oil regulated? Do they meet the definition of a tank and therefore
require secondary containment?
A tank is defined in §260.10 as "a stationary device, designed to contain an accumulation of
hazardous waste which is constructed primarily of non-earthen materials which provide structural
support." Sumps may meet this definition as discussed in the July 14,1986 Federal Register, (51FR
25440). If a sump meets this definition, then it would be regulated as a used oil storage tank. This
tank would need secondary containment unless the sump is already part of a system that is serving
as secondary containment.
SECONDARY CONTAINMENT
64. Are there any suggested materials or criteria to use as guidelines in constructing secondary
containment areas?
The regulations in §§279.45,279.54, and 279.64 outline requirements for the construction of
secondary containment areas. The requirements include dikes, berms, or retaining walls and a
floor that are impervious to used oil in order to prevent migration of the oil into soil, groundwater,
and surface water, or an equivalent secondary containment system. Examples of secondary
containment descibed in the Cost and Economic Impact of the 1992 Used Oil Management Standards
include a 3.5-inch bituminous sealed asphalt ring around an existing tank or concrete block walls
covered with two coats of bituminous asphalt sealant.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Page 14
65. Is there a requirement that secondary containment systems be able to contain a specific percentage
of the contents of the primary containment system?
No, there is no specific percentage requirement for secondary containment in the new Part 279
standards. According to the regulations pertaining to the storage of hazardous waste in containers
(§264.175(b)(3)>, secondary containment should hold 10 percent of the total volume of all the
containers or 100 percent of the volume of the largest container, whichever is greater.
SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS
66. Hydraulic oil is comprised of a mixture of 5% oil and 95% water. Spills and leaks of the used
hydraulic oil go through a pipe to the sewer where it is loaded into a truck which disposes of the used
hydraulic oil generated from spills and leaks in an unlined surface impoundment If the used oil does
not exhibit any characteristics of hazardous waste, can it be disposed of in this manner?
Section 279.12(a) prohibits the storage of used oil in surface impoundments unless the unit is in full
compliance with the standards in 40 CFR Part 264 of 265, Subpart K (57 FR 41586). Once used oil is
disposed of or sent for disposal, however, it is no longer subject to used oil regulation; instead, it is
considered a solid waste and must be evaluated for characteristics. If it does not exhibit any
characteristics of hazardous waste, it is not regulated under Subtitle C of RCRA. Individual state
regulations, though, may restrict this type of disposal.
67. According to §279.12(3), used oil cannot be managed in surface impoundments or waste piles unless
the units are subject to regulation under 40 CFR Part 264 or 265. Does this mean that a surface
impoundment managing only used oil is actually subject to regulation as a hazardous waste surface
impoundment, or can used oil be managed only in surface impoundments that also handle hazardous
waste?
Used oil can only be managed in a surface impoundment that is subject to Part 264 or 265. In
words, a surface impoundment that is permitted or operating under interim status.
GENERATORS
68. When equipment is being drained of used oil by a service contractor, who is considered the
generator for purposes of complying with Part 279 - the owner of the equipment or the contractor?
Based on §279.20(a) and the general principles of the hazardous waste program (45 FR 72026;
October 30,1980), both the owner and contractor would meet the definition of used oil generator
and would be considered co-generators of the used oil. Together, they are both responsible for its
proper management.
69. A ship generator sends bilge water through an oil/water separator once the ship arrives in port Is
this considered processing? Who is the generator of the used oil?
Separation of oil and water that takes place on the ship would not be regulated as processing under
Part 279. According to §279.20(a)(2), used oil on a vessel at port or at sea is not regulated until it is
removed from the ship. If separation occurs off the ship or vessel, then the activity is regulated
under Part 279. The owner and operator of the ship and the person removing the used oil from the
ship both meet the definition of used oil generator and, therefore, could be considered co-
generators of the oil (57 FR 41585) (see also Question 68).
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Page 15
COLLECTION CENTERS AND AGGREGATION POINTS
70. What standards apply to collection centers accepting DIY-generated used oil?
Collection centers accepting DIY-generated used oil must comply with the generator standards
outlined in §279.30(b).
71. The definition of "used oil aggregation point" in §279.1 includes "...any facility that accepts,
aggregates, and/or stores used oil collected only from other generation sites owned or operated by the
owner or operator of the aggregation point...." If the owner of an aggregation point owns property
which he leases to the operator of a service station, may the owner of the aggregation point accept used
oil from the operator of the service station?
According to the aggregation point requirements in §279.32(a), the owner of the aggregation point
can accept the used oil from the service station who leases the land.
72. Do the used oil transporter requirements apply to shipments of used oil from curbside collection
programs to used oil collection centers?
No, the transporter regulations in Part 279, Subpart E do not apply to transportation of used oil
collected from household do-it-yourselfers to regulated used oil generators, collection centers,
aggregation points, processors and re-refiners, or burners (§279.40(a)(4)). The used oil transporter
requirements do apply, however, to transporters of collected DIY used oil from regulated used oil
generators, collection centers, aggregation points, or others facilities where DIY used oil is
collected.
73. The new used oil management standards allow a generator to transport up to 55 gallons of used oil
in the generator's own vehicle to an aggregation point or collection facility without an EPA ID number.
A person wishes to start a business changing automotive oil at customers' residences. After removing
the used oil, the operator will place the oil in a mobile 55 gallon tank in the business truck. What
transportation regulations will apply to the tank in the truck? Who is the generator of the used oil?
Removing the used oil from personal vehicles constitutes generation so that the business owner or
operator will be considered the generator of the used oil. As long as he transports the oil in
shipments of no more than 55 gallons and he delivers the oil to a collection center or aggregation
point, this activity would fit under the provisions for self-transportation and the generator would
not have to comply with the transporter standards (§§279.24(a) and (b)). If the shipments exceed 55
gallons, the generator would also be classified as a used oil transporter and the oil could only be
delivered to another used oil transporter, a used oil processing or re-refining facility, an off-
specification used oil burner, or an on-specification used oil burner (§279.43).
74. Can a used oil transporter (with an EPA ID number) transport shipments of used oil totaling 55
gallons or less from a generator to a used oil aggregation point owned by the generator?
No, the transporter may only deliver the used oil to another transporter with an EPA ID number, a
processor or re-refiner with an EPA ID number, an off-specification used oil burner with an EPA ID
number, or an on-specification used oil burner (§279.43(a)). EPA feels, however, that any quantity
of used oil less than 55 gallons cannot be collected and transported by a used oil transporter in an
economically feasible manner. Generators, therefore, are allowed to self-transport small quantities
(up to 55 gallons) so as not to discourage the generator from recycling used oil.
75. Is there a time limit for storage of used oil at a collection center or aggregation point?
No, according to the standards for generators, collection centers, and aggregation points in Part
279, Subpart C and D, no time limits exist for the storage of used oil.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
\ 4*3 'ij
\* Li
-------
Page 16 ^
TRANSPORTATION
76. Are transfer facilities required to obtain EPA identification numbers?
Yes, owners or operators of transfer facilities are considered transporters, as defined in §279.1, and
would need to have an EPA ID number in accordance with §279.42(a) (58 FR 34977; June 17,1993).
77. Does the transportation of used oil require the use of a manifest?
No, although records of acceptance and delivery must be kept by the transporter, processor, re-
refiner, and off-specification used oil burner (§§279.46,279.56, and 279.65), there is no requirement
for manifesting used oil desined for recycling. Only if the used oil is being sent for disposal and it
meets the definition of hazardous waste would a manifest be required. In addition, if used oil is
being sent for disposal and it does not exhibit any characteristics of hazardous waste, it does not
require a manifest nor is the transportation covered by Part 279. In any case, used oil handlers
must comply with any applicable Department of Transportation (DOT) requirements.
78. At a transfer facility, does the 35-day transporter holding time begin for drums containing used oil
when the first drum or the last drum (of a shipment of drums containing used oil) is moved from the
transportation vehicle into the transfer facility?
The 35-day period begins when the first barrel is placed in storage at the facility. If the used oil
remains on the vehicle, the 35 days begin when the truck enters the facility.
79. What are the recordkeeping or tracking requirements for importing on-specification used oil?
The first person in the United States to claim the used oil meets specification is considered the used
oil marketer and would have to comply with the standards for on-specification used oil in Part 279.
SubpartH.
80. Used oil shipments totaling more than 55 gallons are picked up from various fossil fuel plants and
trucked off-site to a central location. Is the tanker truck considered a transfer facility required to have
secondary containment while it is parked waiting for a sample to be analyzed for specification,
constituents, or properties?
The central location would be considered a transfer facility if the truck sits at the central location for
more than 24 hours. Assuming that is the case, the transfer facility would also be required to have
a secondary containment system consisting of berms, dikes or retaining walls, and a floor or an
equivalent system.
81. According to §279.40(a)(l), the standards for used oil transporters do not apply to on-site
transportation. How is on-site defined?
Section 279.1 specifically states that terms defined in §260.10 have the same meaning when used in
Part 279. Section 260.10 defines on-site to mean, "the same or geographically contiguous property
which may be divided by a public or private right-of-way, provided the entrance and exit between
the properties is at a cross-roads intersection, and access is by crossing as opposed to going along
the right-of-way. Non-contiguous properties owned by the same person but connected by a right-
of-way which he controls and to which the public does not have access, is also considered on-site
property."
Used Oil Questions and Answers r—s ~~ -,
t^* C's*.
-------
Page 17
82. If a rail car transporting used oil sits at a station for more than 24 hours, it becomes a transfer
facility according to §279.45(a). What type of secondary containment is required?
Transfer facilities must have a secondary containment system consisting of berms, dikes or
retaining walls, and a floor. They can be equipped with an alternate but equivalent system
(§279.45(d». This system may include the use of a double-walled rail car, overfill protection
alarms, or other secondary containment measures.
PROCESSING
83. What is the definition of a used oil processor?
A used oil processor is defined in §279.1 as a facility that processes used oil using chemical or
physical operations designed to produce from used oil or to make used oil more amenable for
production of fuel oils, lubricants, or other used oil-derived products. Processing includes, but is
not limited to, blending, filtration, simple distillation, chemical or physical separation, and re-
refining.
84. Would a person conducting used oil/water separation be considered a processor?
This activity would not be considered processing when the separation of used oil from wastewater
in oil/water separators is solely for the purpose of making wastewater or stormwater acceptable for
discharge pursuant to either §402 or §307(b) of the Clean Water Act. This activity is not designed to
produce used oil or make it more amenable for the production of used oil-derived products, but
rather for the purpose of making wastewater acceptable for discharge. Any used oil recovered
from such activities would be fully subject to Part 279 (Denit to Hunter; October 7,1993) (see also
Question 85).
FILTERS
85. Are generators who conduct on-site processing activities with either their own used oil or Dry-
generated used oil subject to the used oil processor requirements of Part 279, Subpart F?
The Agency issued a rule in February 1994 to clarify the definition of used oil processor. Used oil
generators who only process used oil on-site will not be considered processors. To prevent
classification as a processor, however, generators cannot send the used oil directly to a burner or
burn the used oil on-site, except in a used oil fired space heater (Denit to Waste Management
Division Directors; Septermber 3,1993).
86. Is the act of removing used oil from a filter considered processing?
According to a regulatory clarification in the May 3,1993, Federal Register (58 FR 28421), EPA states
that the act of physically separating used oil from a non-terne plated filter does not foil under the
processing definition. The separation must be conducted for the purpose of removing the used oil
and managing it under the Part 279 standards (see also Questions 105 through 109).
87. If a generator filters used oil prior to burning it in an on-site space heater, is the generator subject to
regulation as a processor?
According to November 29,1985, Federal Register (50 FR 49194), EPA excluded generators who burn
used oil in used oil fired space heaters from regulation. The Agency does not believe that the small
amounts of used oil burned in the used oil fired space heaters poses any significant risks. In
conjunction with this exemption, EPA also believes that any filtering conducted by the generator
prior to burning in a used oil fired space heater is also exempt from regulation.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Page 18
88. Used oil is generated in an industrial process. As part of this process the used oil is filtered and
returned to its original use through a recycling system that is enclosed and directly attached to the
manufacturing process. Does this activity meet the definition of processing? What if the process
involved removing the oil and introducing it back into the same or similar system?
In the above scenarios, the activities described would not be considered processing since they are
an integral part of the production process. Filtering, cleaning, or otherwise reconditioning the used
oil before returning it to the same or similar system is designed to prolong the life of the oil. These
activities are considered incidental to the production process and are, therefore, not regulated.
BURNING
89. Do the new used oil management standards allow a used oil generator to bum his/her used oil in an
oil-fired space heater?
Yes, the regulations allow generators to burn their own and DIY-generated used oil in used oil-
fired space heaters on-site in accordance with §279.23 as long as he complies with three conditions.
The heater must bum only used oil generated by the owner or operator of the space heater or
received from DIY generators; the heater must be designed with a maximum capacity of 0.5 million
Btu per hour; and, the combustion gases from the heater must be vented to the ambient air
(§279.23). These conditions remain unchanged from the Part 266 standards.
90. Does a generator who bums his/her own used oil on-site in a used oil-fired space heater, in
accordance with §279.23, need to test the used oil for specification or meet the burner requirements in
Part 279, SubpartG?
No, generators would not have to test for specification, because §279.23 allows them to burn both
on- and off-specification used oil in their own used oil-fired space heaters. In addition, the
regulations in §279.23 exempt the generator from the burner management standards when
conducting this activity.
91. An off-specification used oil burner receives off-specification used oil which is aggregated in a tank
with virgin oil. As a result of this aggregation, the used oil meets specification. However, the used oil
is being burned as off-specification. Is the burner subject to regulation as a processor and/or marketer?
No, according to §279.61 (b), a used oil burner may aggregate off-specification used oil with virgin
oil or on-specification used oil for purposes of burning, without complying with Subpart F
requirements for processors and re-refiners, as long as they are not aggregating for purposes of
producing on-specification used oil. In addition, this burner would not be considered a marketer
because he or she is not directing a shipment of off-specification used oil to a burner, nor is he or
she claiming that the used oil meets specification (§279.70(a)).
92. What regulations apply to the burning of used oil in an incinerator?
Burning used oil in an incinerator is allowed under the restrictions on burning found in §279.12 (58
FR 26425; May 3,1993) and §279.61. The incinerator, however, must be a hazardous waste
incinerator subject to regulation under Parts 264 or 265, Subpart O. Prior to being burned in an
incinerator, off-specification used oil is subject to the Part 279, Subpart G standards.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
• Page 19
MARKETERS
93. If a generator sends used oil fuel to a facility that both blends and bums the fuel, is that generator
considered a marketer?
Yes, according to the definition of used oil marketer in §279.1, the generator who directs a shipment
of off-specification used oil for burning is considered a marketer.
94. Can a used oil handler be just a marketer?
No, it would be logically impossible for a handler to only be a used oil fuel marketer. EPA believes
that a marketer must have either generated, transported, stored at a transfer facility, or processed
the used oil prior to any marketing activity (57 FR 41601).
95. How is the sale of used oil tracked between a marketer and an intermediary broker (i.e., a
middleman who does not physically handle the used oil and does not meet the definition of marketer)?
What records should be kept?
According to the standards for marketers in Part 279, Subpart H, no regulations exist for the
tracking of used oil transactions between brokers. Under the Part 279 standards, however, used oil
handlers (i.e., only those who physically handle the used oil) must keep records of all used oil
shipments. In addition, used oil must be transported in accordance with any applicable DOT
requirements.
96. If a generator burns on-specif ication used oil on-site, is he or she also considered a marketer and/or
a burner? What if the used oil is off-specification?
A generator who bums on-sperification used oil on-site would be considered a marketer because he
or she is the first to claim the oil meets specification. He or she would not be subject to the
requirements in Part 279, Subpart G because they apply only to off-specification used oil
(§279.60(a)). On the other hand, a generator who bums off-specification used oil on-site would not
be considered a marketer because he or she neither directs a shipment to a burner nor is the first to
claim the used oil meets specification; however, this generator would be a burner (§279.1). If the
generator is burning either type of used oil in a used oil-fired space heater in accordance with
§279.23, then her or she is neither a burner nor a marketer.
USE CONSTITUTING DISPOSAL
97. Section 279.82 prohibits the use of used oil as a dust suppressant How does this section relate to
the existing §266.23(b) on use constituting disposal? Will §266.23(b) be removed or amended?
Section 279.82 prohibits the use of all used oil as a dust suppressant, while §266.23(b) only prohibits
the use of used oil (or any material) as a dust suppressant if it has been contaminated with dioxins
or is either a listed or characteristic hazardous waste. According to Part 279, used oil contaminated
with a characteristic waste (except ignitable only waste) that still exhibits the characteristic or used
oil contaminated with a listed waste are both considered hazardous waste, not used oil, and are
prohibited from land disposal or use as a dust suppressant. Used oil that exhibits a characteristic
through use and not by mixing is not considered a hazardous waste, but is still prohibited from
land disposal or use as a dust suppressant. Section 279.82 was promulgated under the authority of
RCRA and is only enforceable in states that do not have base authorization, while §266.23(b) was
issued under HSWA and is enforceable in all states and territories. Although the new Part 279
standards are more stringent, they do not replace §266.23.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Page 20
98. Under §279.82(b), a state may petition EPA to allow the use of used oil as a dust suppressant in that
particular state. For purposes of this section, how is the term "petition" defined and what information
must the state include in this petition?
Currently/ no guidance is available/ nor is there any plan to develop guidance on how states should
petition the Agency. A state does not have to be authorized for RCRA base program in order to
petition the Agency, but can do so as part of an authorization petition.
99. Asphalt that is manufactured with used oil as an ingredient is used as a dust suppressant How is
this activity regulated and does this activity qualify as road oiling for the purposes of complying with
the new Part 279 standards?
According to §279.10(e)(3), materials derived from used oil that are used in a manner constituting
disposal are not regulated as used oil but instead are considered solid wastes and must be
characterized and handled accordingly. Therefore, if the used oil does not exhibit a characteristic
of hazardous waste, it is not subject to regulation. Similarly, the asphalt is not subject to regulation
if it does not exhibit any characteristics of hazardous waste (50 FR 628; January 4,1985). If the
asphalt does exhibit a hazardous characteristic, it is subject to the requirements of 40 CFR Part 266,
Subpart C regarding recyclable materials used in a manner constituting disposal. Finally, re-
refining distillation bottoms that are used as feedstock to manufacture asphalt products are exempt
from regulation under Part 279 and Parts 260 through 266,268,270, and 124 (§279.10(e)(4)).
CERCLA INTERFACE
100 What conditions does a service station dealer (SSD) need to meet to be eligible for the CERCLA
liability exemption of CERCLA §114(e)?
The service station must be in compliance with the new used oil standards and meet the definitio^fc
of SSD in CERCLA §101(37). The SSD cannot mix used oil with any hazardous substance and musr
accept DIY-generated used oil for recycling (57 FR 41583).
101 How does the CERCLA petroleum exclusion apply to used oil?
CERCLA excludes petroleum substances, including used oil, from both the reporting and the
liability requirements of CERCLA. However, hazardous substances that are added to petroleum or
that result from contamination of the petroleum are not part of the petroleum, and thus are not
excluded (57 FR 41606).
102. Are curbside collectors considered SSDs?
According to the definition of SSD in CERCLA §101(37), curbside collectors are not considered
SSDs.
103. Do authorized states have to adopt the CERCLA liability exemption in order for SSDs in that state
to be eligible for it?
No, the liability exemption is a CERCLA statutory provision, which becomes effective when the
Part 279 standards do. In other words, the liability exemption is effective on March 8,1993, in
unauthorized states and when authorized states adopt the new standards. Prior to state adoption
as a matter of EPA policy, an SSD may be eligible for the exemption if it can demonstrate
compliance with the new used oil management regulations (57 FR 41583).
Used Oil Questions and Answers
fc'
K.
-------
Page 21
104. An SSD mixes a characteristic hazardous waste with used oil and the resultant mixture no longer
exhibits any characteristics of hazardous waste. Is this practice considered mixing used oil with a
hazardous substance?
Yes, all hazardous wastes, characteristic and listed, are also listed in 40 CFR §302.4 as hazardous
substances.
FILTERS
105. What regulatory framework embraces oil filters that are not used in traditional motor vehicles (Le.,
specialty filters)? How are filters used in air compressors and other machinery that often have either
removable cartridges or no metal casings dealt with in the new regulations?
The regulations for used oil filters can be found in the May 20,1992, Federal Register (57 FR 21524).
The exemption in §261.4(b)(13) applies to non-terne plated filters that have been properly drained
of their used oil. The exemption does not apply to fuel filters, transmission oil filters, or specialty
filters such as cloth or railroad filters (57 FR 21532). Used oil filters not covered by the exemption
must be evaluated for hazardous waste characteristics when going for disposal or can be handled
as scrap metal going for recycling (see §261.6(a)(3)(iii)).
106. Do the new Part 279 standards affect the scrap metal provisions for teme-plated and specialty oil
filters?
No, the new Part 279 standards do not affect the scrap metal provisions. Specifically,
§261.6(a)(3)(iii) sets forth an exemption from the hazardous waste management standards for
hazardous scrap metal that is being recycled. A drained or crushed filter can be considered scrap
metal if the filters are dismantled (OSWER 9442.1990(05)).
107. How can terne-plated filters be distinguished from non teme-plated filters?
Terne is an alloy of tin and lead. The manufacturer of the filter is the best source for distinguishing
terne- from nonterne-plated filters.
108. How are teme-plated used oil filters regulated?
Teme-plated used oil filters do not automatically qualify for the exemption in §261.4(b)(13).
becuause they typically have a TCLP lead concentration level of 30 ppm before use (57 FR 21531;
May 20,1992). If these types of filters fail the TCLP for any constituents (not just lead), they must
be managed as hazardous waste. Terne-plated filters are, however, still eligible for the scrap metal
exemption if they will be recycled (§261.6(a)(3)(iii)). The May 20,1992, Federal Register (57 FR 21534)
established the exemption from hazardous waste regulation for properly drained non teme-plated
filters in §261.4(b)(15); however, the May 3,1993, Federal Register (58 FR 26424) corrects the citation
to§261.4(b)(13).
109. How is used oil at the bottom of a drum of used oil filters regulated?
Used oil that has collected in the bottom of a drum of filters should be regulated in accordance with
the new Part 279 standards. In the September 10,1992, Federal Register (57 FR 21532), the Agency
states that it encourages used oil generators to recycle filters and oils from the filtering process as
used oil.
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
_Ea*e23
KEY WORD INDEX
Keyword: Question number
Aggregation point: 42,71,75
Antifreeze: 8
Asphalt: 99
Broker 95
Burning for energy recovery: 27,39,41,89,90,
91,92
CERCLA liability exemption: 100,101,103
Characteristic hazardous waste: 6,16,17,19,
47, 59, 66, 97, 104
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs): 36
Collection center 42,70,75
Containers: 56
De minimis: 43,44
Definition of used oil: 7, 8,9,10,11,12,13
Diesel fuel: 22,23
Disposal: 6, 25, 26
Do-it-yourself (DIY) used oil: 35,42, 53, 70,
72
Dust suppression/petitions: 97,98,99
Effective date: 3
EPA identification number 51,52, 53, 54, 76
Filtering: 85,87,88,109
Filters: 86, 87,105,106,107,108
Gasoline product: 20
Generators: 68,69,73,93
Grease: 13
Halogens: 29,30,33,34,35,48
Hazardous substance: 104
Hazardous waste: 2, 6,10,16,17,19,32, 47,
49,59,66,97,104
Incinerators: 92
Ignitable: 17,19
Labeling: 60,61
Land disposal restrictions (LDR): 18, 26
Listed hazardous waste: 6,10,17, 19, 49, 66
Lubricants: 7
Manifest: 77
Marketers: 22,91,93,94,95
Metal 48,106
Metalworking oil: 7
Notification: 51,54,76
Oil production well: 28
Oil/water separation: 44, 82
On-site: 81
Petroleum distillate: 12
Petroleum exclusion: 101
Petroleum products: 8
Pipelines: 45
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs): 46
Processing: 23,83,84,85,86,87,88
Product fuel: 20,91
Rail car. 82
Rebuttable presumption: 29,30,31,32,33,
34, 35, 36, 37, 38
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Recordkeeping requirements: 77,79
Recycling: 27,88
Recycling presumption: 24
Residues: 10
Releases: 62
Secondary containment: 63, 64, 65, 80, 82
Self-transportation: 73, 74, 81
Service station dealer (SSD): 100,102,103
Ships/vessels: 69
Soil: 15
Solvent: 17,19,21
Space heater: 87,89,90
Specification: 39, 40, 41, 90, 91, 96
State authorization: 3, 4, 5, 52, 97,103,104
Storage: 55, 57, 58, 59, 61, 63
Storage time limits: 55,75
Subtitle D landfill: 25
Sump: 63
Surface impoundments: 66,67
Synthetic oil: 7
Toxirity characteristic leaching procedure
(TCLP): 48
Test methods: 48,50
Tolling arrangement: 38
Transfer facility: 76, 78, 80, 82
Transporter: 52, 72, 77, 81
Underground storage tanks (USTs): 57
Use constituting disposal: 28,97,98
Used oil handler. 1,31,94
Used oil mixed with other material: 14
Vegetable oil: 9
Waste oil: 11
Wastewaters: 43, 44, 84
Used Oil Questions and Answers
-------
Appendix 5
Additional Used Oil
Information
.1
2.5
0) '
A k
=
O
to
-------
CONTENTS
APPENDIX 5 ADDITIONAL USED OIL INFORMATION
State Used Oil Contacts
Environmental Fact Sheet: Management Standards Issued to Control Potential Risks from
Recycled Used Oil—No Hazardous Waste Listing
Environmental Fact Sheet: No Hazardous Waste Listing for Used Oil That Is Being Disposed
Total Nonhousehold Facilities Handling Used Oil in 1991
Revised 1988 Used Oil Flows in the U.S.
Automobile Oil Flow Chart
-------
STATE USED OIL CONTACTS
ALABAMA
Terry Shipman
Land Division
Department of Environmental Management
1751 Congressman W. L. Dickinson Drive
Montgomery, AL 36130
(205) 271-7726
CALIFORNIA (contU)
Inquiries on used oil recycling depositories:
Integrated Waste Management Board
8800 Cal Center Drive
Sacramento, CA 95826
(916) 342-1781
(800) 553-2962 - California only
ALASKA
Dan Garcia
SoliJ and Hazardous Waste
Department of Environmental Conservation
410 Willoughby Avenue
Juneau, AK 99801-1795
(907) 465-5161
COLORADO
Public Assistance Hotline
Hazardous Materials and Waste Management
Department of Health
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South
Denver, CO 80222
(303) 692-3320
ARIZONA
Robert Verville
Waste and Water Quality
Department of Environmental Quality
2005 North Central Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85004
(602) 207-4140
CONNECTICUT
George Dews
Waste Management Bureau
Department of Environmental Protection
165 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06106
(203) 566-4869
ARKANSAS
James Shumate '
Hazardous Waste Division
Department of Pollution Control and Ecology
P.O. Box 8913
Little Rock, AR 72219
(501)570-2888
CALIFORNIA
Lief Peterson
Alternative Technology
Department of Toxic Substances Control
P.O. Box 806
Sacramento, CA 95812-0806
(916)322-1005
DELAWARE
Robert Palmer
Hazardous Waste Management Branch
Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control
P.O. Box 1401
Dover, DE 19903
(302) 739-3689
Inquiries from households:
Delaware Solid Waste Authority
P.O. Box 445
Dover, DE 19901
(302) 739-5361
(800) 404-7080 - Delaware only
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ILLINOIS
Carl Williams
DC Energy Office
Department of Public Works
613 G Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 727-1800
FLORIDA
Raoul Clark
Hazardous Waste Management Division
Department of Environmental Protection
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400
(904) 488-0300
GEORGIA
Generator Compliance
Hazardous Waste Management Branch
Department of Natural Resources
Floyd Towers East, 205 Butler Street, SE
Atlanta, GA 30334
(404)362-2684
HAWAII
Roger Harte
Solid and Hazardous Waste Branch
Department of Health
5 Waterfront Plaza, Suite 250
500 Ala Moana Boulevard
Honolulu, HI 96813
(808) 586-8143 (recycling)
(808) 586-4227 (disposal)
IDAHO
Matt Garringer
Permits and Enforcement
Department of Environmental Quality
1410 North Hilton Street
Boise, ID 83720
(208) 334-5879
Doug Clay
Disposal Alternatives Unit
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
2200 Churchill Road
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62794-9276
(217) 524-3300
INDIANA
Jim Huiit
Hazardous Waste Branch
Department of Environmental Management
105 South Meridian Street
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
(317) 232-4535
IOWA
Scott Cahail
Waste Management Division
Department of Natural Resources
Wallace State Office Building
DesMoines,IA 50319
(515)281-8263
KANSAS
Joe Cronin
Solid Waste Section
Department of Health and the Environment
Forbes Field, Building 740
Topeka, KS 66620
(913) 296-1667
KENTUCKY
Steven Brigand!
Division of Waste Management
Department of Environmental Protection
14 Reilly Road
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502) 564-6716
-------
LOUISIANA
MICHIGAN
John Glenn
Division of Solid Waste
Department of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 82178
Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2178
(504) 765-0249
MAINE
Rick Kaselis/Peter Blanchard
Hazardous Material and Solid Waste Control
Environmental Protection Department
State House Station 17
Augusta, ME 04333
(207) 287-2651
Lonnie Lee
Waste Management Division
Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 30241
Lansing, MI 48909
(517) 373-4735
(517)373-2730
MINNESOTA
Glen Skuta
Hazardous Waste Program Development
Pollution Control Agency
520 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155-3898
(612) 297-8319
MARYLAND
Herbert Meade
Oil Control Program
Department of the Environment
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
(410) 631-3442
Inquiries on used oil recycling:
Maryland Environmental Services
2011 Commerce Park Drive
Annapolis, MD 21401
(410) 974-7282
(800) 473-2925
MASSACHUSETTS
Dikran Kaligiam
Division of Hazardous Waste
Department of Environmental Protection
One Winter Street, 7th Floor
Boston, MA 02108
(617) 556-1022
MISSISSIPPI
David Lee (disposal)
Chris Bowen (recycling)
Office of Pollution Control
Department of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 10385
Jackson, MS 39285-0385
(601) 961-5377 (disposal)
(601) 961-5321 (recycling)
MISSOURI
June Sullons
Hazardous Waste Program
Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 176
Jefferson City, MO 65102
(314) 751-3176
(800) 334-6946
MONTANA
Bill Potts
Department of Health & Environmental Science
Solid and Hazardous Waste Bureau
Cogswell Building
Helena, MT 59620
(406) 444-1430
-------
NEBRASKA
NEW MEXICO
Lance Pinfield
Hazardous Waste Section
Department of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 98922
Lincoln, ME 68509-8922
(402)471-4210
NEVADA
Hazardous Waste Hotline
University of Nevada at Reno
(702) 784-1717
(800) 882-3233 - Nevada only
Waste Management Bureau
Department of Conservation and
Natural Resources
333 West Nye Lane
Carson City, NV 89710
(702) 687-5872
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Christopher Way
Waste Management Division
Department of Environmental Services
6 Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03301-6509
(603) 271-2942
NEW JERSEY
Office of Communications
Solid Waste Management
Department of Environmental
Protection and Energy
CN414
Trenton, NJ 08625-0414
(609) 530-8593
Greg Baker
Solid Waste Bureau
Environment Department
1190 Saint Francis Drive
P.O. Box 26110
Santa Fe,NM 87502
(505) 827-2780
NEW YORK
Bill Mirabile
Division of Solid Waste
Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolfe Road, Room 200
Albany, NY 12233-4015
(518) 457-8829
NORTH CAROLINA
Margaret Babb
Hazardous Waste Section
Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
(919) 733-2178
NORTH DAKOTA
Steve Herda (disposal)
Robert Tubbs (recycling)
Waste Management Division
Department of Health
1200 Missouri Avenue
P.O. Box 5520
Bismark, ND 58502-5520
(701)221-5166
-------
OHIO
Art Coleman
Division of Hazardous Waste Management
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
1800 Water Mark Drive
Columbus, OH 43266-0149
(614) 644-2968(614) 644-2917
OKLAHOMA
Bryce Hulsey (recycling)
Glen Wheat (disposal)
Solid Waste Management
Department of Health
1000 Northeast Tenth Street
Oklahoma City, OK 73117
(405) 271-7160 (recycling)
(405) 271-7114 (disposal)
OREGON
Peter Spendelow (households)
Rick Volpel (regulations)
Hazardous and Solid Waste Quality Division
Department of Environmental Quality
811 Southwest Sixth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 229-5253 (households)
(503) 229-6590 (regulations)
PENNSYLVANIA
William LaCour
Waste Minimization and Planning
Department of Environmental Resources
400 Market Street
P.O. Box 8472
Harrisburg, PA 17105-8472
(717) 783-6004
RHODE ISLAND
Eugene Pepper (households)
Office of Environmental Coordination
Beverly Midliore (regulations)
Division of Waste Management
Department of Environmental Management
83 Park Street
Providence, RI 02903
(401) 277-3434 (households)
(401) 277-2797 (regulations)
SOUTH CAROLINA
Robert Fairy
Solid Waste, Reduction, and Recycling
Department of Health and
Environmental Control
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201
(803) 734-5195
SOUTH DAKOTA
Terry Kelly
Office of Waste Management
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
319 South Coteau
500 East Capitol Avenue
Pierre, SD 57501-5070
(605) 773-3153
TENNESSEE '
Jeff Norman
Solid Waste Management Division
Department of Environment and Conservation
L & C Tower, 5th Floor
401 Church Street
Nashville, TN 37243-1535
(615) 532-0838
TEXAS
Gary Davis
Recycling and Waste Minimization Division
Natural Resource Conservation Commission
P.O. Box 13087
Austin, TX 78711
(512) 239-6750
-------
UTAH
WEST VIRGINIA
Sandy Hunt
Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste
Department of Environmental Quality
288 North, 1460 West
P.O. Box 144880
Salt Lake City, UT 84114
(801) 538-6170
VERMONT
Andrea Cohen
Solid Waste Management Division
Department of Environmental Conservation
Laundry Building
103 South Main Street
Waterbury,VT 05671-0407
(802) 244-7831
VIRGINIA
Steve Frazier
Waste Division
Department of Environmental Quality
Monroe Building, llth Floor
101 North 14th Street
Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 225-2667
(800) 552-3831 - Virginia only
Olie Harvey
Hazardous Waste Management Section
Department of Commerce, Labor, and
Environmental Resources
1356 Hansford Street
Charleston, WV 25301
(304) 558-3370
Inquiries from households:
(800) 472-8286 - West Virginia only
WISCONSIN
Andy Swartz
Solid and Hazardous Waste
Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 7921 (SW-3)
Madison, WI 53707-7921
(608)266-2111
WYOMING
Tim Link
Solid and Hazardous Waste
Department of Environmental Quality
Herschler Building
122 West 25th Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307) 777-7162
WASHINGTON
Steve Barret
Solid Waste Services
Department of Ecology
P.O. Box 47600
Olympia,WA 98504-7600
(206) 459-6286
(206) 438-7541
-------
United States Solid Waste and
Environmental Protection Emergency Response EP/530-F-92-018
Agency (OS-305) August 1992
*
Office of Solid Waste
&EPA Environmental
Fact Sheet
Management Standards Issued
To Control Potential Risks from
Recycled Used Oil—No Hazardous
Waste Listing
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued
management standards for recycled used oil that protect
human health and the environment while promoting recovery
of this valuable commodity. These management standards
avoid unnecessary regulatory and financial burdens on the
used oil recycling industry—particularly service station
dealers.
Action
EPA has issued management standards for recycled used oil that
provide strong safeguards against any potential types of mishandling
that may occur. The management standards address potentially unsafe
practices associated with improper storage of used oil, road oiling, and
contamination of used oil from hazardous waste. By controlling these
practices with management standards, listing recycled used oil as a
hazardous waste is unnecessary.
The management standards cover all segments of the used oil
recycling system, and are codified in a new Part 279 of Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). While generators are the largest
segment of this industry, the most stringent standards apply to used
oil processors and re-refiners because they handle the largest
quantities of used oil. The standards are not expected to cause major
economic impacts, but are designed to correct and control certain
practices. They prohibit storage in unlined surface impoundments and
road oiling (except in states authorized to manage their own hazardous
waste programs).
Requirements for Service Stations and Other Generators
A generator is any business which produces used oil through
commercial or industrial operations, or that collects it from these
operations or private households. Besides vehicle repair shops and
service stations, some of the more common examples of used oil
-------
generators are military motorpools; taxi, bus, and delivery companies;
and shipyards. People who change their own oil (do-it-yourselfers) are
not covered, nor are farmers who generate an average of 25 gallons or
less of used oil per month in a calendar year. Approximately 700,000
facilities qualify as generators.
Generators simply must:
• Keep storage tanks and containers in good condition;
• Label storage tanks, "used oil";
• Clean up any used-oil spills or leaks to the environment; and
• Use a transporter with an EPA identification (ID) number when
shipping used oil off-site.
Service station dealers that comply with these requirements, that
send used oil for recyclng, and that accept used oil from do-it-
yourselfers are not liable for emergency response costs or damages
resulting from threatened or actual releases of used oil from
subsequent handling of the oil. EPA believes relief from this particular
regulatory burden will encourage more service station dealers to collect
used oil, thereby increasing used oil recycling by the consumer sector.
Requirements for Processors and Re-refiners
Used oil processors and re-refiners handle and store large quantities
of used oil for a wide variety of purposes. Consequently, data suggest
that damage from mismanagement of used oil at these facilities is not
uncommon, and that stronger controls are necessary. Approximately
300 facilities must comply with these management standards.
Requirements for these facilities include:
• Obtaining an EPA ID number and notifying the Agency of any
activities concerning used oil;
• Maintaining storage tanks and containers in good
condition, and labeling them "used oil";
• Processing and storing used oil in areas with oil-impervious
flooring and secondary containment structures (such as berms,
ditches, or retaining walls);
• Clean up any used oil spills or leaks to the environment;
• Preparing a plan and a schedule for testing used oil for halogen
content;
• Tracking incoming used oil and out-going recycled used oil
products;
• Maintaining certain records and biennial reporting;
• Managing used oil processing and re-refining residues safely; and
• Ensuring that the facility is properly closed when recycling
operations cease.
Requirements for Transporters, Collectors, and
Burners of Off-Specification Used Oil
A used oil transporter or collector is any person who transports
used oil to another site for recycling. Transfer facilities that are holding
-------
areas, such as loading docks and parking and storage areas, must
comply with the transporter requirements when used oil shipments are
held for more than 24 hours in route to their final destination.
Generators who transport less than 55 gallons of their own used oil are
exempt from the transporter requirements.
Approximately 400 transporters and collectors also must obtain an
EPA ID number and notify the Agency of any activities concerning used
oil; maintain storage tanks and containers in good condition, and label
them "used oil"; process and store used oil in areas with oil-impervious
flooring and secondary containment structures (such as berms or
ditches); clean up any used oil spills or leaks to the environment; and
track incoming used oil and out-going used oil. In addition,
transporters and collectors must:
• Limit storage at transfer facilities to 35 days and
• Test waste in storage tanks that are no longer in service for
hazardous characteristics, and, if wastes are hazardous, close
them according to existing hazardous waste management
requirements.
Used oil burners must comply with the same storage requirements
as transporters. Less than 1,000 facilities burn off-specification used
oil. Standards for these burners are recodified from 40 CFR Part 266 to
40 CFR Part 279. The Agency plans additional study on used oil
burned as fuel.
Requirements for Used Oil Marketers
Marketers of used oil were regulated in 1985. These standards are
recodified from 40 CFR Part 266, Subpart E to 40 CFR Part 279. There
are no major changes to existing requirements.
Conclusion
In May 1992, EPA determined that listing used oil destined for
disposal as a hazardous waste was unnecessary. Combined with that
rule, this action fulfills EPA's statutory mandate under the Used Oil
Recycling Act of 1980. These management standards—working in
tandem with existing laws and regulations—effectively control potential
risks while promoting used oil reycling.
Contact
For additional information or to order a copy of the Federal Register
notice, contact the RCRA Hotline, Monday-Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 7:30
p.m. EST. The national, toll-free number is (800) 424-9346; TDD (800)
553-7672 (hearing impaired); in Washington, D.C., the number is (703)
920-9810, TDD (703) 486-3323.
Copies of documents applicable to this rule may be obtained by
writing: RCRA Information Center (RIC), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Solid Waste (OS-305), 401 M Street SW, Washington,
D.C. 20460.
-------
United States Solid Waste and
Environmental Protection Emergency Response EPA530-F-92-006
Agency (OS-305) May 1992
>
Office of Solid Waste
&EPA Environmental
Fact Sheet
No Hazardous Waste Listing for
Used Oil that Is Being Disposed
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that
listing of used oil as hazardous waste is not necessary because the
toxicity characteristic (TC) rule controls the disposal of hazardous waste.
The Agency believes this approach is the most practical one for protecting
human health and the environment while encouraging and promoting
recycling of this valuable resource.
Background
In November 1985, EPA proposed to list all used oils as hazardous
waste. Due to the potential stigma that might be attached to a hazardous
waste, EPA issued a decision in 1986 not to list as hazardous used oil that
is being recycled. The Agency thought that listing could discourage
recycling, resulting in increased incidences of improper disposal of used oil.
The basis for the 1986 rule was legally challenged in 1988. The court
ruled that EPA had to make a listing decision based on the statutory
criteria which relate to whether a material is toxic. Subsequently, the
Agency re-evaluated the basis for making a listing determination for used
oil, and issued a Supplemental Proposal in September 1991 that presented
three options for listing used oil, and proposed exempting used oil filters
from hazardous waste regulation.
Action
The Agency has determined that it is unnecessary to regulate as
hazardous waste used oil and used oil filters that are being disposed.
Used Oil. EPA has been collecting and analyzing data on the
composition of various types of used oils since 1988. The Agency believes it
is also important to consider the effects of other regulations issued since
that time. EPA has issued regulations on hazardous waste storage tanks
and underground storage tanks. The 1973 Spill Prevention Control
Countermeasure requirements are being revised per the Oil Pollution Act of
1990. The toxicity characteristic (TC) rule, issued in 1990, subjected many
-------
more wastes to federal hazardous waste regulations, including used oil
being disposed.
Relying on existing laws and regulations, the Agency has revised some
of its conclusions. EPA recognizes the variability of constituent
concentrations between different used oil streams, and believes it is not
appropriate to list used oil as hazardous. The Agency also believes that
used oil which becomes hazardous through use or adulteration can be
controlled through the TC when it is destined for disposal. Therefore, this
rule makes the determination that listing of used oil as hazardous waste is
not necessary since the toxicity characteristic rule controls the disposal of
hazardous solid waste.
The TC provides regulatory limits on lead, benzene, and other
contaminants that may be present when used oil is produced. Under
current regulations, a used oil handler must determine (through testing or
knowledge) that the used oil does not exceed the regulatory limits for TC
constituents. Used oil that fails the TC must be disposed according to
hazardous waste regulations. Used oil that does not exceed the toxicity
characteristic is not a hazardous waste.
Used Oil Filters. As proposed in September 1991, the Agency has
determined that properly drained used oil filters do not exhibit the toxicity
characteristic. Therefore, it is not necessary to list used oil filters as a
hazardous waste. EPA continues to encourage recycling of used oil
removed from filters, and recycling of the filters and their components
Contact
For additional information or to order a copy of the Federal Register
notice, contact the RCRA Hotline, Monday-Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.
EST. The national, toll-free number is (800) 424-9346; TDD (800) 553-
7672 (hearing impaired); in Washington, D.C., the number is (703) 920-
9810, TDD (703) 486-3323.
Copies of documents applicable to this rulemaking may be obtained by
writing: RCRA Information Center (RIC), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Solid Waste (OS-305), 401 M Street SW, Washington, D.C.
20460.
-------
TOTAL NONHOUSEHOLD FACILITIES HANDLING USED OIL IN 1991*
Facility Type
Total Number of Facilities
GENERATORS TOTAL
693,200
Nonindustrial Subtotal
335,200
Service Stations
Repair Shops
New and Used Dealers
Fleets
Farms"*
Nonservice Retailers
Air/Marine/RR
Public Collection Centers
45,000
100,000
56,000
75,200
50,100
400
7,500
1,000
Industrial Subtotal
INDEPENDENT COLLECTORS TOTAL
358,000
383
PROCESSORS, REREFINERS, BLENDERS TOTAL
Major Processors
Minor Processors
Rerefiners
Fuel Oil Dealers Blending Used Oil with Virgin Oil
211-286
112
70
4
25-100
BURNERS***
Off-Spec
Space Heaters
On-Spec
1,155
60,000
"From Cost and Economic Impact of 1992 Used Oil Management Standards, prepared for
Regulatory Analysis Branch, Office of Solid Waste, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, August 4,
1992.
"Farms generating more than 300 gallons per year are the only ones affected by the final rule.
Household and small agricultural generators are exempt
"""According to RCRIS, 1,155 off-specification burners of used oil have notified FJ»A of this
practice since 1985. An additional 60,000 facilities are estimated to bum used oil for fuel hi space
heaters; however, used oil burned for this use is exempted from regulation under this rule. Burners of
on-spec used oil include general fuel oil customers, and face no new requirements.
-------
183
Industry
Automotive
Fleet Oils
7
48
In-House
Recycle
Generators'"
Disposal
58
Revised 1988 Used OH Rows In the U.S.
Reflects adjustments to road ofbig, residuals, and rwssWng*
Intermediaries
Fuel Sales 61
Disposition'"
Dumping
118
Burning
DIYers
193
RoadOBlng
OVtsr TisncpofUjluH
663
390
On-SMe Fuel Use
109
RoadOWng
Dumping
143
Disposal
Industrial
560 •—
385
On-SMe Fuel Use
41
Disposal
71
Road Offing
Indneratton
14
70
Major
PR
519
114
Non-Fuel Ind
5
RoadOilng 1
On-Stte Fuel Use
Disposal
3
1
LubaQI
Non-Fud
Industrial
Total
799
Fuel Sales
456
Non-Fuel Ind
28
Road Oiling
On-Ste Fuel Use 28
Disposal
Burning
->
->
->
->
->
Bailers and
Furnaces
Cement KHm
Diesel Engines
Space Healers
On Site Boilers"
Lube Oil
56
Fuel Sales
Non-Fuel Ind.
On-Stte Fuel Use
Disposal
30
26
1
1
140
14
260
RoadOMng
Disposal
->
->
->
Landfill
Incineration
Dumping
Total Generation-
1,351
Adfuatod tor 1001 assumption* about aftoci
Include* me hi on-U« botora at hdurtrtal«
i beta
end praooMon). rtocrimod roed ottkig, and pi
. mBkary bese*. UMd oi prooMears. and r»r«llner*.
Total Disposition ••
1.351
ddual generation.
Ta(ilUO0anen«onanddtap
-------
Chart,,,
1.2 million gallons
automobile lubricating
oil produced
annually
...'losf through
evaporation/
combustion
' throughout
process of use
600 mflon Qcrions
Used Motor
OH
. ...disposed in landfills, poured on
grounds, into storm drains, sewers
. Water Supply
Estimated Annual DIY Uncontrolled Disposal
as compared to that of the Exron Valdez Spill
2OO million
gallons :
uncontrolled
disposal
Exxon Vaidez...
IT million gallons
....recycled
lubricating
oil
...fuel burning
for energy recovery,
e.g. industrial
furnaces, cement
Wins and other
. burners
For the above flow chart...! inch in width
equals 600 mlon gallons of dl
im.
2ln.
3ln.
8.
a
I
lln. .
21n.
3ln.
'Figures are approximate:. Despite disparities in anilable data
(assodan'on/agency 'sourcesT these .figures generally illustrate t1
.'market, flow of used oil ...
Copyright 1992 f-HMl Rc:Source ...All Rights Reserved
------- |