vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
DIRECTIVE NUMBER: 9433.02(84)
TITLE:
Response to Questions from State Pesticide Personnel:
Deregulating Decontaminated Water
APPROVAL DATE: 8-8-84
EFFECTIVE DATE: 8-8-84
ORIGINATING OFFICE: Office of Solid Waste
0 FINAL
D DRAFT
STATUS:
[ 1
{ 1
A- Pending OMB approval
B- Pending AA-OSWER approval
C- For review &/or comment
D- .In development or circulating
headquarters
REFERENCE (other documents):
OS WER OS WER OS WER
/£ DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE Di
-------
PART 260 SUBPART C - RULEMAKING PETITIONS
DOC: 9433.02(84)
Key Words: Delisting
Regulations: 40 CFR 260.22
Subject:
Addressee:
Response to Questions from State Pesticide Personnel:
Deregulating Decontaminated Water
N/A
Originators: John H. Skinner, Director, and Amy E. Schaffer, Program Analyst,
Office of itelid Waste and Emergency Response
Source Doc: See Miscellaneous [9560.07(84)]
Date: 8-8-84
Summary:
If the contaminated water is listed as a hazardous waste, the generator
that decontaminates it must submit a delisting petition to OSW before the water
can be unregulated.
-------
8
Response to Questions from State Pesticides Control Officers
John H. Skinner
Director
''Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (WH-562)
Amy E. Schaffer
Program Analyst
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (WH-527)
The following responses are presented for the questions and
issues posed by the State Pesticides Control Officers concerning
RCRA. Some of the questions were quite difficult to interpret
and were answered to the best of our ability. If additional
information or clarification is required, please contact
Francine Jacoff at 475-8551.
(1) NEW MIXING, LOADING AND TEMPORARY STORAGE STANDARDS -
Currently no standards exist which indicate acceptance
methods. Society must lay out its level of accepta-
bility if actions taken today are not to result in
similar concerns to the old sites issue.
RCRA does have existing standards that apply to
temporary storage, that is, for less than 90 days.
(2) Are there reasons which would justify the "economically and
technically feasible" standards for some pesticide disposal?
The question is taken out of context and is difficult
to answer. None of the RCRA disposal standards are
based on economics but instead are based on a "protect
human health and the environment" study. They may be
referring to tailored standards for particular pesticides.
RCRA either requires compliance with Subtitle C standards
for listed hazardous wastes or excludes them for specified
reasons.
(3) Container disposal, particularly ULV products and in
impregnated fertilizer situations. What if triple rinsing
is impossible?
Section 261.7 is pertinent only if the product is
listed in §261.33. Section 261.7, Residues of
hazardous waste in empty containers, is explicit.
(4) Bulk pesticide storage standards - are.they needed?
RCRA is concerned with waste storage, not product
storage. OPP should answer this question.
».*.
-------
(5) Old products disposal - A reasonable policy to rid the
storage area of "unusable" material is needed with emphasis
on recycling.
RCRA encourages recycling of ha2ardous wastes by
exempting them from Subtitle C standards when recycled.
Old products disposal are only regulated by RCRA if
product is listed in §261.33.
(6) Small dip tanks associated with local lumber facilities
accumulate sludge (PCP). A policy which allows annual
purging of the system requires the material to be landfilled
in a regulated hazardous waste site but removes the require-
ment of being a generator would assure better disposal.
Is such a policy obtainable?
OSW is presently studing the wood preserving industry
in order to determine additional listings of hazardous
waste. It should be noted though, that there is an
existing exclusion for generators of small amounts of
hazardous waste. «1000 ks/ma)
(7) What aid for developing recycling incentatives exist? What
— funding is available?
RCRA does not provide for; financial assistance. However
if unique ideas are presented to BPA's OKD, there might
be a possibility of a research and development grant. ;
(8) Is use of a pesticide regulated under KCRA?
No.
(9) At what level (if any) does decontaminated water become
unregulated?
If the contaminated water is listed as a hazardous waste,
the generator that "decontaminates" it must submit a
delisting petition to the OSW.
(10) what analysis has been done of existing disposal techniques
and systems to determine their acceptability for decontamina-
tion? For example, the Purdue System causes operators to
become generators. Is that the intent of proper disposal
policy?
EPA is constantly interested in updating their disposal
standards. This issue may be better addressed by OPP.
-------
(11) Pits used for breaking down residual chemicals are now
considered to be disposal sites and are regulated as such.
Many sites forced applicators to adopt this "new" technology
several years ago. Now these sites have caused individuals
to be regulated the same as major hazardous waste sites.
is a lesser classification reasonable and obtainable?
It depends on whether the pit is a tank or a surface
impoundment. If a tank* the waste stream is exempt
from RCRA when subject to an NPDES permit. If a surface
impoundment/ and the waste stream is hazardous/ it is
'regulated by RCRA. Lesser classification would be
cumbersome and confusing and would not be in keeping
with the intent of RCRA which is to protect human health
and the environment.
(12) What EP toxicity testing is required when chemicals which are
intended for disposal are mixed together?
EP toxicity testing is the same for all wastes that are
meant for disposal. See SW-846.
(13) When a waste contains only one active ingredient/ how does
disposal criteria differ from more than one active ingredient
waste?
Discarded commercial chemical products are only regulated
as hazardous waste where the chemical listed in §261.33
is the sole active ingredient.
(14) We seem to be indicating storage of types of pesticide
wastes, i.e., herbicide waste or insecticide waste/ together
is acceptable procedure today. Is that correct?
Yes/ if there is no reactivity between the wastes and
the wastes are compatible with the container.
(15) Exemptions/ are they fair and do the existing standards
really safeguard the environment?
This is a rhetorical question, EPA regulations and concerns
are dynamic and always subject to change if warranted.
------- |