[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 162 (Tuesday, August 23, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49187-49193]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16688]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[SW-FRL-7957-6]
Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Final Exclusion
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is granting petitions
submitted by Shell Oil Company (Shell Oil Company) to exclude (or
delist) certain wastes generated by its Houston, TX Deer Park facility
from the lists of hazardous wastes. This final rule responds to
petitions submitted by Shell Oil Company to delist F039 and F037
wastes. The F039 waste is generated from the refinery wastewater
treatment plant, North Effluent Treater (NET) and
[[Page 49188]]
primary solids from Shell Chemical and the South Effluent Treatment
(SET). The F037 waste North Pond Sludge is generated from the process
wastewater, gravel and road base that has settled from storm water flow
to the pond.
After careful analysis and use of the Delisting Risk Assessment
Software (DRAS), EPA has concluded the petitioned wastes are not
hazardous waste. The F039 exclusion applies to 3.36 million gallons per
year (16,619 cubic yards) of multi-source landfill leachate. The F037
exclusion is a one time exclusion for 15,000 cubic yards of the sludge.
Accordingly, this final rule excludes the petitioned wastes from the
requirements of hazardous waste regulations under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 23, 2005.
ADDRESSES: The public docket for this final rule is located at the
Environmental Protection Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,
Texas 75202, and is available for viewing in EPA Freedom of Information
Act review room on the 7th floor from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. Call (214) 665-6444 for
appointments. The reference number for this docket is F-04-TEXDEL-Shell
Oil. The public may copy material from any regulatory docket at no cost
for the first 100 pages and at a cost of $0.15 per page for additional
copies.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Banipal, Section Chief of the
Corrective Action and Waste Minimization Section, Multimedia Planning
and Permitting Division (6PD-C), Environmental Protection Agency Region
6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202. For technical information
concerning this notice, contact Michelle Peace, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202, at (214) 665-
7430, or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information in this section is organized
as follows:
I. Overview Information
A. What action is EPA finalizing?
B. Why is EPA approving this action?
C. What are the limits of this exclusion?
D. How will Shell Oil Company manage the wastes, if they are
delisted?
E. When is the final delisting exclusion effective?
F. How does this final rule affect states?
II. Background
A. What is a delisting?
B. What regulations allow facilities to delist a waste?
C. What information must the generator supply?
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Waste Information and Data
A. What waste did Shell Oil Company petition EPA to delist?
B. How much waste did Shell Oil Company propose to delist?
A. How did Shell Oil Company sample and analyze the waste data
in these petitions?
IV. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Exclusions
A. Who submitted comments on the proposed rules?
B. Where were the comments and what are EPA's responses to them?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Overview Information
A. What Action Is EPA Finalizing?
After evaluating the petitions for Shell Oil Company, EPA proposed,
on December 28, 2004 and February 9, 2005, respectively, to exclude the
wastes from the lists of hazardous waste under Sec. 261.31. EPA is
finalizing:
(1) The decision to grant Shell Oil Company's delisting petition to
have its F039 multi-source landfill leachate underlying the Minimum
Technology Requirements (MTR) hazardous waste landfill excluded, or
delisted, from the definition of a hazardous waste; and subject to
certain verification and monitoring conditions; and
(2) The decision to grant Shell Oil Company's delisting petition to
have its North Pond F037 sludge excluded, or delisted, from the
definition of a hazardous waste, once it is disposed in a Subtitle D
landfill.
B. Why Is EPA Approving This Action?
Shell Oil Company's petitions request a delisting from the F039 and
F037 wastes listing under 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22. Shell Oil Company
does not believe that the petitioned waste meets the criteria for which
EPA listed it. Shell Oil Company also believes no additional
constituents or factors could cause the waste to be hazardous. EPA's
review of these petitions included consideration of the original
listing criteria, and the additional factors required by the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). See section 3001(f) of RCRA,
42 U.S.C. 6921(f), and 40 CFR 260.22 (d)(1)-(4) (hereinafter all
sectional references are to 40 CFR unless otherwise indicated). In
making the final delisting determination, EPA evaluated the petitioned
wastes against the listing criteria and factors cited in Sec.
261.11(a)(2) and (a)(3). Based on this review, EPA agrees with the
petitioner that the wastes are nonhazardous with respect to the
original listing criteria. (If EPA had found, based on this review,
that the waste remained hazardous based on the factors for which the
waste was originally listed, EPA would have proposed to deny the
petition.) EPA evaluated the wastes with respect to other factors or
criteria to assess whether there is a reasonable basis to believe that
such additional factors could cause the wastes to be hazardous. EPA
considered whether the wastes are acutely toxic, the concentrations of
the constituents in the wastes, their tendency to migrate and to
bioaccumulate, their persistence in the environment once released from
the waste, plausible and specific types of management of the petitioned
waste, the quantities of waste generated, and waste variability. EPA
believes that the petitioned wastes do not meet the listing criteria
and thus should not be listed wastes. EPA's final decision to delist
wastes from Shell Oil Company's facility is based on the information
submitted in support of this rule, including descriptions of the wastes
and analytical data from the Deer Park, TX facility.
C. What Are the Limits of This Exclusion?
This exclusion applies to the waste described in the Shell Oil
Company petitions only if the requirements described in 40 CFR part
261, Appendix IX, Table 1 and the conditions contained herein are
satisfied.
D. How Will Shell Oil Company Manage the Wastes, If They Are Delisted?
If the multi-source landfill leachate is delisted, Shell Oil
Company will make piping modifications to allow the leachate to be
routed to the North Effluent Treater (NET) for treatment. After its
treatment, the multi-source landfill leachate will be discharged
through a TPDES-permitted outfall in compliance with its TPDES permit.
If F037 North Pond Sludge is delisted, Shell Oil Company will dispose
of it in a Subtitle D landfill which is permitted, licensed, or
registered by a state to manage industrial waste.
E. When Is the Final Delisting Exclusion Effective?
This rule is effective August 23, 2005. The Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 amended section 3010 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C.
6930(b)(1), allow rules to become effective in less than six months
after the rule is published when the regulated community does not need
the six-month period to come into compliance. That is the case here
because this rule reduces, rather than increases, the existing
requirements for persons generating hazardous waste. This reduction in
existing requirements also provides a
[[Page 49189]]
basis for making this rule effective immediately, upon publication,
under the Administrative Procedure Act, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
F. How Does This Final Rule Affect States?
Because EPA is issuing this exclusion under the Federal RCRA
delisting program, only states subject to Federal RCRA delisting
provisions would be affected. This would exclude states which have
received authorization from EPA to make their own delisting decisions.
EPA allows states to impose their own non-RCRA regulatory
requirements that are more stringent than EPA's, under section 3009 of
RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6929. These more stringent requirements may include a
provision that prohibits a Federally issued exclusion from taking
effect in the state. Because a dual system (that is, both Federal
(RCRA) and State (non-RCRA) programs) may regulate a petitioner's
waste, EPA urges petitioners to contact the State regulatory authority
to establish the status of their wastes under the State law.
EPA has also authorized some states (for example, Louisiana,
Oklahoma, Georgia, Illinois) to administer a RCRA delisting program in
place of the Federal program, that is, to make state delisting
decisions. Therefore, this exclusion does not apply in those authorized
states unless that state makes the rule part of its authorized program.
If Shell Oil Company transports the petitioned waste to or manages the
waste in any state with delisting authorization, Shell Oil Company must
obtain delisting authorization from that state before it can manage the
waste as nonhazardous in the state.
II. Background
A. What Is a Delisting Petition?
A delisting petition is a request from a generator to EPA or
another agency with jurisdiction to exclude or delist, from the RCRA
list of hazardous waste, waste the generator believes should not be
considered hazardous under RCRA.
B. What Regulations Allow Facilities To Delist a Waste?
Under 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22, facilities may petition EPA to
remove their wastes from hazardous waste regulation by excluding them
from the lists of hazardous wastes contained in Sec. Sec. 261.31 and
261.32. Specifically, Sec. 260.20 allows any person to petition the
Administrator to modify or revoke any provision of 40 CFR parts 260
through 265 and 268. Section 260.22 provides generators the opportunity
to petition the Administrator to exclude a waste from a particular
generating facility from the hazardous waste lists.
C. What Information Must the Generator Supply?
Petitioners must provide sufficient information to EPA to allow EPA
to determine that the waste to be excluded does not meet any of the
criteria under which the waste was listed as a hazardous waste. In
addition, the Administrator must determine, where he/she has a
reasonable basis to believe that factors (including additional
constituents) other than those for which the waste was listed could
cause the waste to be a hazardous waste and that such factors do not
warrant retaining the waste as a hazardous waste.
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Waste Information and Data
A. What Wastes Did Shell Oil Company Petition EPA To Delist?
On January 29, 2003, Shell Oil Company petitioned EPA to exclude
from the lists of hazardous waste contained in Sec. 261.31, multi-
source landfill leachate (F039) generated from its facility located in
Deer Park, TX. Then on December 30, 2003, Shell Oil Company petitioned
EPA to exclude from the lists of hazardous waste contained in
Sec. Sec. 261.31 and 261.32, F037 North Pond Sludge.
B. How Much Waste Did Shell Oil Company Propose To Delist?
Shell Oil Company requested that EPA grant an exclusion for 3.36
million gallons (16,619 cu. yards) per year of the multi-source
landfill leachate in its January 29, 2003 petition. In the December 30,
2003 petition, Shell Oil Company requested that EPA grant a one time
exclusion for 15,000 cubic yards of the F037 North Pond Sludge.
C. How Did Shell Oil Company Sample and Analyze the Waste Data in These
Petitions?
To support its petitions, Shell Oil Company submitted:
(1) Historical information on past waste generation and management
practices including analytical data from eleven samples collected in
September 2003 for the F037 North Pond Sludge and four samples of
combined leachate data for the F039 multi-source landfill leachate;
(2) Results of the total constituent list for 40 CFR part 264,
Appendix IX volatiles, semivolatiles, metals, pesticides, herbicides,
dioxins and PCBs for the F037 North Pond Sludge and the F039 multi-
source landfill leachate;
(3) Results of the constituent list for 40 CFR part 264, Appendix
IX on Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) extract for
volatiles, semivolatiles, and metals for the F037 North Pond Sludge and
the F039 multi-source landfill leachate;
(4) Analytical constituents of concern for F037 and F039;
(5) Results from total oil and grease analyses;
(6) Multiple pH testing for the petitioned wastes.
IV. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Exclusions
A. Who Submitted Comments on the Proposed Rules?
No comments were received on the proposed rule for the F037 wastes.
Comments were submitted by Shell Deer Park Refining Company (Shell) to
correct information contained in the proposed rule for F039.
B. What Were the Comments and What Are EPA's Responses to Them?
Shell noted that Chloronated Plate Interceptor should be Corrugated
Plate Interceptor. EPA has noted this and made appropriate changes in
the final rule and exclusion language to reflect this change.
Shell noted that: (1) the compound p-cresol (4-methlyphenol) should
be added to Table I; and (2) the compound trichloropropane should be
deleted from Table I as this constituent was not detected in any of the
samples above the reporting level.
The compound p-cresol (4-methlyphenol) appears in Table 1.--Waste
Excluded From the Non-Specific Sources as ``Cresol, p.'' EPA has made
the appropriate change to read p-Cresol. The compound trichloropropane
estimated value of 0.00025 mg/l was reported in the revised analyses on
October 11, 2004, Combined Leachate Data, and thus it will not be
deleted.
Shell requested: (1) that the following constituents be deleted
from Table 1--Wastes Excluded from Non-Specific Sources in the
exclusion language to be consistent with Table I in Section III. D in
the preamble of the proposed rule: Thallium, Acrylonitrile, Bis (2-
chlorethyl) ether, Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthlate, Dichlorobenzene 1,3,
Dimethoate, Dimethylphenol 2,4, Dinitrophenol, Dinitrotoluene 2,6,
Diphenylhydrazine, Dichloroethylene 1,1, Kepone, Methacrylonitrile,
Methanol, Nitrobenzene, Nitrosodiethylamine, Nitrosodimethylamine,
Nitrosodi-n-butylamine, N-Nitrodi-n-propylamine, N-Nitrosopiperdine, N-
[[Page 49190]]
Nitrosopyrrolidine, N-Nitrosomethylethylamine, PCBs, Pentachlorophenol,
Pyridine, Trichloropropane, Vinyl Chloride; and (2) that the compound
phenanthrene should be added with a delisting level of 1.36 mg/L to be
consistent with Table I in Section III. D.
EPA has made the deletions as prescribed. EPA has added the
compound phenanthrene with a delisting level of 1.36 mg/L to Table 1.--
Waste Excluded From Non-Specific Sources. EPA also added compounds
toluene, fluorene, and vanadium because they were inadvertently left
off of Table 1--Wastes Excluded from Non-Specific Sources.
Shell noted that in the exclusion language paragraph (3)(A)(i) of
Table 1--Waste Excluded from Non-Specific Sources, the number of
samples to be collected within the first 60 days should be changed from
eight to four. Also in paragraph (3)(B) for subsequent verification
sampling, Shell Oil Company requested that the number of samples per
quarter be changed from two to one. Previous discussions between EPA
and Shell Oil Company were based on two different waste streams. Since
this is one stream, EPA will allow the changes in the number of samples
collected and the number of samples taken per quarter.
In addition, on October 30, 2002, (67 FR 66251), EPA proposed the
Methods Innovation Rule to remove from the regulations unnecessary
requirements other than those considered to be Method Defined
Parameters (MDP). An MDP is a method that, by definition or design, is
the only one capable of measuring the particular property (e.g. Method
1311-TCLP). Therefore, EPA is no longer generally requiring the use of
only SW-846 methods for regulatory applications other than those
involving MDPs. The general purpose of this rule is to allow more
flexibility when conducting RCRA-related sampling and analysis
activities. We retained only those methods considered to be MDPs in the
regulations and incorporate them by reference in 40 CFR 260.11. EPA is
changing Shell's delisting exclusion language found in paragraph (3) of
the F039 exclusion language to reflect the generic language placed in
all delisting exclusions as a result of the Methods Innovation Rule (70
FR 34537) which was finalized on June 14, 2005.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this rule is not of general applicability
and therefore is not a regulatory action subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) because it applies to a
particular facility only. Because this rule is of particular
applicability relating to a particular facility, it is not subject to
the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), or to sections 202, 204, and 205 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA). Because this rule will
affect only a particular facility, it will not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as specified in section 203 of UMRA.
Because this rule will affect only a particular facility, this final
rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this
rule. Similarly, because this rule will affect only a particular
facility, this final rule does not have tribal implications, as
specified in Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. This rule also is
not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it is not economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not have reason to
believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this
action present a disproportionate risk to children. The basis for this
belief is that the Agency used the DRAS program, which considers health
and safety risks to infants and children, to calculate the maximum
allowable concentrations for this rule. This rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866. This rule does not involve technical
standards; thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do
not apply. As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform,'' (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule,
EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and
ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal
standard for affected conduct. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C.
801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take
effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report
which includes a copy of the rule to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. Section 804 exempts from
section 801 the following types of rules (1) rules of particular
applicability; (2) rules relating to agency management or personnel;
and (3) rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice that do
not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency
parties 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not required to submit a rule report
regarding today's action under section 801 because this is a rule of
particular applicability.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 261
Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Recycling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: Sec. 3001(f) RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921(f)
Dated: August 10, 2005.
Carl E. Edlund,
Director, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, Region 6.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 261 is to be
amended as follows:
PART 261--IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
0
1. The authority citation for Part 261 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, 6922, and 6938.
0
2. In Table 1 of Appendix IX of Part 261 add the following waste stream
in alphabetical order by facility to read as follows:
Appendix IX to Part 261--Waste Excluded Under Sec. Sec. 260.20 and
260.22
[[Page 49191]]
Table 1.--Waste Excluded From Non-Specific Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Address Waste description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Shell Oil Company.......... Deer Park, TX........ North Pond Sludge
(EPA Hazardous
Waste No. F037)
generated one time
at a volume of
15,000 cubic yards
August 23, 2005 and
disposed in a
Subtitle D
landfill. This is a
one time exclusion
and applies to
15,000 cubic yards
of North Pond
Sludge.
(1) Reopener:
(A) If, anytime
after disposal of
the delisted waste,
Shell possesses or
is otherwise made
aware of any
environmental data
(including but not
limited to leachate
data or ground
water monitoring
data) or any other
data relevant to
the delisted waste
indicating that any
constituent
identified for the
delisting
verification
testing is at level
higher than the
delisting level
allowed by the
Division Director
in granting the
petition, then the
facility must
report the data, in
writing, to the
Division Director
within 10 days of
first possessing or
being made aware of
that data.
(B) If Shell fails
to submit the
information
described in
paragraph (A) or if
any other
information is
received from any
source, the
Division Director
will make a
preliminary
determination as to
whether the
reported
information
requires EPA action
to protect human
health or the
environment.
Further action may
include suspending,
or revoking the
exclusion, or other
appropriate
response necessary
to protect human
health and the
environment.
(C) If the Division
Director determines
that the reported
information does
require EPA action,
the Division
Director will
notify the facility
in writing of the
actions the
Division Director
believes are
necessary to
protect human
health and the
environment. The
notice shall
include a statement
of the proposed
action and a
statement providing
the facility with
an opportunity to
present information
as to why the
proposed EPA action
is not necessary.
The facility shall
have 10 days from
the date of the
Division Director's
notice to present
such information.
(D) Following the
receipt of
information from
the facility
described in
paragraph (C) or if
no information is
presented under
paragraph (C), the
Division Director
will issue a final
written
determination
describing the
actions that are
necessary to
protect human
health or the
environment. Any
required action
described in the
Division Director's
determination shall
become effective
immediately, unless
the Division
Director provides
otherwise.
(2) Notification
Requirements: Shell
must do the
following before
transporting the
delisted waste:
Failure to provide
this notification
will result in a
violation of the
delisting petition
and a possible
revocation of the
decision.
(A) Provide a one-
time written
notification to any
state regulatory
agency to which or
through which they
will transport the
delisted waste
described above for
disposal, 60 days
before beginning
such activities.
(B) Update the one-
time written
notification, if
they ship the
delisted waste to a
different disposal
facility.
(C) Failure to
provide this
notification will
result in a
violation of the
delisting variance
and a possible
revocation of the
decision.
Shell Oil Company.......... Deer Park, TX........ Multi-source
landfill leachate
(EPA Hazardous
Waste No. F039)
generated at a
maximum annual rate
of 3.36 million
gallons (16,619 cu.
yards) per calendar
year after August
23, 2005 and
disposed in
accordance with the
TPDES permit.
The delisting levels
set do not relieve
Shell Oil Company
of its duty to
comply with the
limits set in its
TPDES permit. For
the exclusion to be
valid, Shell Oil
Company must
implement a
verification
testing program
that meets the
following
paragraphs:
(1) Delisting
Levels: All total
concentrations for
those constituents
must not exceed the
following levels
(mg/l). The
petitioner must
analyze the aqueous
waste on a total
basis to measure
constituents in the
multi-source
landfill leachate.
Multi-source
landfill leachate
(i) Inorganic
Constituents
Antimony-0.0204;
Arsenic-0.385;
Barium-2.92; Copper-
418.00; Chromium-
5.0; Cobalt-2.25;
Nickel-1.13;
Selenium-0.0863;
Thallium-0.005;
Vanadium-0.838
(ii) Organic
Constituents
Acetone-1.46;
Acetophenone-1.58;
Benzene-0.0222; p-
Cresol-0.0788;
Bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthlate-
15800.00;
Dichloroethane, 1,2-
0.0803;
Ethylbenzene-4.51;
Fluorene-1.87;
Napthalene-1.05;
Phenol-9.46;
Phenanthrene-1.36;
Pyridine-0.0146;
2,3,7,8-TCDD
equivalents as TEQ-
0.0000926; Toluene-
4.43;
Trichloropropane-
0.000574; Xylenes
(total)-97.60
(2) Waste
Management:
(A) Shell Oil
Company must manage
as hazardous all
multi-source
landfill leachate
generated, until it
has completed
initial
verification
testing described
in paragraph (3)(A)
and (B), as
appropriate, and
valid analyses show
that paragraph (1)
is satisfied.
(B) Levels of
constituents
measured in the
samples of the
multi-source
landfill leachate
that do not exceed
the levels set
forth in paragraph
(1) are non-
hazardous. Shell
Oil Company can
manage and dispose
of the non-
hazardous multi-
source landfill
leachate according
to all applicable
solid waste
regulations.
(C) If constituent
levels in a sample
exceed any of the
delisting levels
set in paragraph
(1), Shell Oil
Company can collect
one additional
sample and perform
expedited analyses
to verify if the
constituent exceeds
the delisting
level. If this
sample confirms the
exceedance, Shell
Oil Company must,
from that point
forward, treat the
waste as hazardous
until it is
demonstrated that
the waste again
meets the levels in
paragraph (1).
(D) If the facility
has not treated the
waste, Shell Oil
Company must manage
and dispose of the
waste generated
under Subtitle C of
RCRA from the time
that it becomes
aware of any
exceedance.
[[Page 49192]]
(E) Upon completion
of the Verification
Testing described
in paragraph 3(A)
and (B) as
appropriate and the
transmittal of the
results to EPA, and
if the testing
results meet the
requirements of
paragraph (1),
Shell Oil Company
may proceed to
manage its multi-
source landfill
leachate as non-
hazardous waste. If
Subsequent
Verification
Testing indicates
an exceedance of
the delisting
levels in paragraph
(1), Shell Oil
Company must manage
the multi-source
landfill leachate
as a hazardous
waste until two
consecutive
quarterly testing
samples show levels
below the delisting
levels in Table I.
(3) Verification
Testing
Requirements: Shell
Oil Company must
perform sample
collection and
analyses, including
quality control
procedures, using
appropriate
methods. As
applicable to the
method-defined
parameters of
concern, analyses
requiring the use
of SW-846 methods
incorporated by
reference in 40 CFR
260.11 must be used
without
substitution. As
applicable, the SW-
846 methods might
include Methods
0010, 0011, 0020,
0023A, 0030, 0031,
0040, 0050, 0051,
0060, 0061, 1010A,
1020B, 1110A,
1310B, 1311, 1312,
1320, 1330A, 9010C,
9012B, 9040C,
9045D, 9060A, 9070A
(uses EPA Method
1664, Rev. A),
9071B, and 9095B.
Methods used must
meet Performance
Based Measurement
System Criteria in
which the Data
Quality Objectives
demonstrate that
representative
samples of the
Shell-Deer Park
multi-source
landfill leachate
are collected and
meet the delisting
levels in paragraph
(1).
(A) Initial
Verification
Testing: After EPA
grants the final
exclusion, Shell
Oil Company must do
the following:
(i) Within 60 days
of this exclusions
becoming final,
collect four
samples, before
disposal, of the
multi-source
landfill leachate.
(ii) The samples are
to be analyzed and
compared against
the delisting
levels in paragraph
(1).
(iii) Within sixty
(60) days after
this exclusion
becomes final,
Shell Oil Company
will report initial
verification
analytical test
data for the multi-
source landfill
leachate, including
analytical quality
control information
for the first
thirty (30) days of
operation after
this exclusion
becomes final. If
levels of
constituents
measured in the
samples of the
multi-source
landfill leachate
that do not exceed
the levels set
forth in paragraph
(1) are also non-
hazardous in two
consecutive
quarters after the
first thirty (30)
days of operation
after this
exclusion become
effective, Shell
Oil Company can
manage and dispose
of the multi-source
landfill leachate
according to all
applicable solid
waste regulations.
(B) Subsequent
Verification
Testing: Following
written
notification by
EPA, Shell Oil
Company may
substitute the
testing conditions
in (3)(B) for
(3)(A). Shell Oil
Company must
continue to monitor
operating
conditions, and
analyze one
representative
sample of the multi-
source landfill
leachate for each
quarter of
operation during
the first year of
waste generation.
The sample must
represent the waste
generated during
the quarter. After
the first year of
analytical sampling
verification
sampling can be
performed on a
single annual
sample of the multi-
source landfill
leachate. The
results are to be
compared to the
delisting levels in
paragraph (1).
(C) Termination of
Testing:
(i) After the first
year of quarterly
testing, if the
delisting levels in
paragraph (1) are
being met, Shell
Oil Company may
then request that
EPA not require
quarterly testing.
After EPA notifies
Shell Oil Company
in writing, the
company may end
quarterly testing.
(ii) Following
cancellation of the
quarterly testing,
Shell Oil Company
must continue to
test a
representative
sample for all
constituents listed
in paragraph (1)
annually.
(4) Changes in
Operating
Conditions: If
Shell Oil Company
significantly
changes the process
described in its
petition or starts
any processes that
generate(s) the
waste that may or
could significantly
affect the
composition or type
of waste generated
as established
under paragraph (1)
(by illustration,
but not limitation,
changes in
equipment or
operating
conditions of the
treatment process),
it must notify EPA
in writing; it may
no longer handle
the wastes
generated from the
new process as
nonhazardous until
the wastes meet the
delisting levels
set in paragraph
(1) and it has
received written
approval to do so
from EPA.
(5) Data Submittals:
Shell Oil Company
must submit the
information
described below. If
Shell Oil Company
fails to submit the
required data
within the
specified time or
maintain the
required records on-
site for the
specified time,
EPA, at its
discretion, will
consider this
sufficient basis to
reopen the
exclusion as
described in
paragraph 6. Shell
Oil Company must:
(A) Submit the data
obtained through
paragraph 3 to the
Section Chief,
Region 6 Corrective
Action and Waste
Minimization
Section, EPA, 1445
Ross Avenue,
Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733, Mail Code,
(6PD-C) within the
time specified.
(B) Compile records
of operating
conditions and
analytical data
from paragraph (3),
summarized, and
maintained on-site
for a minimum of
five years.
(C) Furnish these
records and data
when EPA or the
state of Texas
request them for
inspection.
(D) Send along with
all data a signed
copy of the
following
certification
statement, to
attest to the truth
and accuracy of the
data submitted:
Under civil and
criminal penalty of
law for the making
or submission of
false or fraudulent
statements or
representations
(pursuant to the
applicable
provisions of the
Federal Code, which
include, but may
not be limited to,
18 U.S.C. 1001 and
42 U.S.C. 6928), I
certify that the
information
contained in or
accompanying this
document is true,
accurate and
complete.
As to the (those)
identified
section(s) of this
document for which
I cannot personally
verify its (their)
truth and accuracy,
I certify as the
company official
having supervisory
responsibility for
the persons who,
acting under my
direct
instructions, made
the verification
that this
information is
true, accurate and
complete.
[[Page 49193]]
If any of this
information is
determined by EPA
in its sole
discretion to be
false, inaccurate
or incomplete, and
upon conveyance of
this fact to the
company, I
recognize and agree
that this exclusion
of waste will be
void as if it never
had effect or to
the extent directed
by EPA and that the
company will be
liable for any
actions taken in
contravention of
the company's RCRA
and CERCLA
obligations
premised upon the
company's reliance
on the void
exclusion.
(6) Reopener:
(A) If, anytime
after disposal of
the delisted waste,
Shell Oil Company
possesses or is
otherwise made
aware of any
environmental data
(including but not
limited to leachate
data or groundwater
monitoring data) or
any other data
relevant to the
delisted waste
indicating that any
constituent
identified for the
delisting
verification
testing is at a
level higher than
the delisting level
allowed by the
Division Director
in granting the
petition, then the
facility must
report the data, in
writing, to the
Division Director
within 10 days of
first possessing or
being made aware of
that data.
(B) If the annual
testing of the
waste does not meet
the delisting
requirements in
paragraph 1, Shell
Oil Company must
report the data, in
writing, to the
Division Director
within 10 days of
first possessing or
being made aware of
that data.
(C) If Shell Oil
Company fails to
submit the
information
described in
paragraphs
(5),(6)(A) or
(6)(B) or if any
other information
is received from
any source, the
Division Director
will make a
preliminary
determination as to
whether the
reported
information
requires EPA action
to protect human
health and/or the
environment.
Further action may
include suspending,
or revoking the
exclusion, or other
appropriate
response necessary
to protect human
health and the
environment.
(D) If the Division
Director determines
that the reported
information does
require action, he
will notify the
facility in writing
of the actions the
Division Director
believes are
necessary to
protect human
health and the
environment. The
notice shall
include a statement
of the proposed
action and a
statement providing
the facility with
an opportunity to
present information
as to why the
proposed action by
EPA is not
necessary. The
facility shall have
10 days from the
date of the
Division Director's
notice to present
such information.
(E) Following the
receipt of
information from
the facility
described in
paragraph (6)(D) or
if no information
is presented under
paragraph (6)(D),
the Division
Director will issue
a final written
determination
describing the
actions that are
necessary to
protect human
health and/or the
environment. Any
required action
described in the
Division Director's
determination shall
become effective
immediately, unless
the Division
Director provides
otherwise.
(7) Notification
Requirements: Shell
Oil Company must do
the following
before transporting
the delisted waste.
Failure to provide
this notification
will result in a
violation of the
delisting petition
and a possible
revocation of the
decision.
(A) Provide a one-
time written
notification to any
state regulatory
agency to which or
through which it
will transport the
delisted waste
described above for
disposal, 60 days
before beginning
such activities.
(B) Update the one-
time written
notification if it
ships the delisted
waste into a
different disposal
facility.
(C) Failure to
provide this
notification will
result in a
violation of the
delisting exclusion
and a possible
revocation of the
decision.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 05-16688 Filed 8-22-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P