[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 130 (Thursday, July 9, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32846-32856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16272]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA-R06-RCRA-2009-0108; SW FRL-8922-9]
Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Proposed Exclusion
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to grant a petition submitted by Occidental
Chemical Corporation (OxyChem) to exclude (or delist) a certain solid
waste generated by its Ingleside, Texas, facility from the lists of
hazardous wastes. EPA used the Delisting Risk Assessment Software
(DRAS) Version 3.0 in the evaluation of the impact of the petitioned
waste on human health and the environment.
DATES: We will accept comments until August 10, 2009. We will stamp
comments received after the close of the comment period as late. These
late comments may not be considered in formulating a final decision.
Your requests for a hearing must reach EPA by July 24, 2009. The
request must contain the information prescribed in 40 CFR 260.20(d)
(hereinafter all CFR cites refer to 40 CFR unless otherwise stated).
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R06-
RCRA-2009-0108 by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
2. E-mail: [email protected].
3. Mail: Wendy Jacques, Environmental Protection Agency, Multimedia
Planning and Permitting Division, RCRA Branch, Mail Code: 6PD-F, 1445
Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Wendy
Jacques, Environmental Protection Agency, Multimedia Planning and
Permitting Division, RCRA Branch, Mail Code: 6PD-F, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Dallas, TX 75202.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-RCRA-
2008-0456. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
[[Page 32847]]
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your
e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket. All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, RCRA Branch, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202. The
hard copy RCRA regulatory docket for this proposed rule, EPA-R06-RCRA-
2009-0108, is available for viewing from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. 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. EPA requests
that you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The interested persons
wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the
office at least 24 hours in advance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further technical information
concerning this document or for appointments to view the docket or the
OxyChem facility petition, contact Wendy Jacques, Environmental
Protection Agency, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, RCRA
Branch, Mail Code: 6PD-F, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202, by
calling 214-665-7395 or by e-mail at [email protected].
Your requests for a hearing must reach EPA by July 24, 2009. The
request must contain the information described in Sec. 260.20(d).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OxyChem submitted a petition under 40 CFR
260.20 and 260.22(a). Section 260.20 allows any person to petition the
Administrator to modify or revoke any provision of Sec. Sec. 260
through 266, 268 and 273. Section 260.22 (a) specifically provides
generators the opportunity to petition the Administrator to exclude a
waste on a ``generator specific'' basis from the hazardous waste lists.
The Agency bases its proposed decision to grant the petition on an
evaluation of waste-specific information provided by the petitioner.
This proposed decision, if finalized, would conditionally exclude the
petitioned waste from the requirements of hazardous waste regulations
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
If finalized, we would conclude the petitioned waste from this
facility is non-hazardous with respect to the original listing criteria
and that the waste process used will substantially reduce the
likelihood of migration of hazardous constituents from this waste. We
would also conclude that the processes minimize short-term and long-
term threats from the petitioned waste to human health and the
environment.
The information in this section is organized as follows:
I. Overview Information
A. What action is EPA proposing?
B. Why is EPA proposing to approve this delisting?
C. How will OxyChem manage the waste, if it is delisted?
D. When would the proposed delisting exclusion be finalized?
E. How would this action affect states?
II. Background
A. What is the history of the delisting program?
B. What is a delisting petition, and what does it require of a
petitioner?
C. What factors must EPA consider in deciding whether to grant a
delisting petition?
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Waste Information and Data
A. What waste did OxyChem petition EPA to delist?
B. Who is OxyChem and what process do they use to generate the
petition waste?
C. What information did OxyChem submit to support this petition?
D. What were the results of OxyChem's analysis?
E. How did EPA evaluate the risk of delisting this waste?
F. What did EPA conclude about OxyChem's analysis?
G. What other factors did EPA consider in its evaluation?
H. What is EPA's evaluation of this delisting petition?
IV. Next Steps
A. With what conditions must the petitioner comply?
B. What happens, if OxyChem violates the terms and conditions?
V. Public Comments
A. How may I as an interested party submit comments?
B. How may I review the docket or obtain copies of the proposed
exclusion?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Overview Information
A. What action is EPA proposing?
EPA is proposing to grant the delisting petition submitted by
OxyChem to have its wastewater treatment biosludge (K019, K020, F025,
F001, F003, and F005 listed hazardous waste) excluded, or delisted,
from the definition of a hazardous waste.
B. Why is EPA proposing to approve this delisting?
OxyChem's petition requests a delisting for the wastewater
treatment biosludge derived from the treatment of hazardous wastewater
listed as K019, K020, F025, F001, F003, and F005. OxyChem does not
believe that the petitioned waste meets the criteria for which EPA
listed it. OxyChem also believes no additional constituents or factors
could cause the waste to be hazardous. EPA's review of this petition
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). In making the initial delisting determination,
EPA evaluated the petitioned waste against the listing criteria and
factors cited in Sec. Sec. 261.11(a)(2) and (a)(3). Based on this
review, EPA agrees with the petitioner that the waste is non-hazardous
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 waste with respect to other
factors or criteria to assess whether there is a reasonable basis to
believe that such additional factors could cause the waste to be
hazardous. EPA considered whether the waste is acutely toxic, the
concentration of the constituents in the waste, their tendency
[[Page 32848]]
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 waste does not
meet the listing criteria and thus should not be a listed waste. EPA's
proposed decision to delist waste from the facility is based on the
information submitted in support of this rule, including descriptions
of the waste and analytical data from the OxyChem, Ingleside, Texas
facility.
C. How will OxyChem manage the waste, if it is delisted?
OxyChem will dispose of the wastewater treatment biosludge in a
Subtitle D landfill.
D. When would the proposed delisting exclusion be finalized?
RCRA section 3001(f) specifically requires EPA to provide notice
and an opportunity for comment before granting or denying a final
exclusion. Thus, EPA will not grant the exclusion unless and until it
addresses all timely public comments (including those at public
hearings, if any) on this proposal.
RCRA section 3010(b)(1), at 42 USCA 6930(b)(1), allows rules to
become effective in less than six months after EPA addresses public
comments when the regulated facility does not need the six-month period
to come into compliance. That is the case here, because this rule, if
finalized, would reduce the existing requirements for persons
generating hazardous wastes.
EPA believes that this exclusion should be effective immediately
upon final publication because a six-month deadline is not necessary to
achieve the purpose of section 3010(b), and a later effective date
would impose unnecessary hardship and expense on this petitioner. These
reasons also provide good cause for making this rule effective
immediately, upon final publication, under the Administrative Procedure
Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
E. How would this action affect the 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 the 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. Delisting
petitions approved by EPA Administrator under 40 CFR 260.22 are
effective in the State of Texas only after the final rule has been
published in the Federal Register.
II. Background
A. What is the history of the delisting program?
EPA published an amended list of hazardous wastes from nonspecific
and specific sources on January 16, 1981, as part of its final and
interim final regulations implementing section 3001 of RCRA. EPA has
amended this list several times and published it in Sec. Sec. 261.31
and 261.32. EPA lists these wastes as hazardous because: (1) They
typically and frequently exhibit one or more of the characteristics of
hazardous wastes identified in Subpart C of Part 261 (that is,
ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity) or (2) they meet
the criteria for listing contained in Sec. 261.11(a)(2) or (a)(3).
Individual waste streams may vary, however, depending on raw
materials, industrial processes, and other factors. Thus, while a waste
described in these regulations generally is hazardous, a specific waste
from an individual facility meeting the listing description may not be
hazardous.
For this reason, Sec. Sec. 260.20 and 260.22 provide an exclusion
procedure, called delisting, which allows persons to prove that EPA
should not regulate a specific waste from a particular generating
facility as a hazardous waste.
B. What is a delisting petition, and what does it require of a
petitioner?
A delisting petition is a request from a facility to EPA or an
authorized State to exclude wastes from the list of hazardous wastes.
The facility petitions EPA because it does not believe the wastes
should be hazardous under RCRA regulations.
In a delisting petition, the petitioner must show that wastes
generated at a particular facility do not meet any of the criteria for
which the waste was listed. The criteria for which EPA lists a waste
are in Part 261 and further explained in the background documents for
the listed waste.
In addition, under Sec. 260.22, a petitioner must prove that the
waste does not exhibit any of the hazardous waste characteristics and
present sufficient information for EPA to decide whether factors other
than those for which the waste was listed warrant retaining it as a
hazardous waste. See Part 261 and the background documents for the
listed waste.
Generators remain obligated under RCRA to confirm whether their
waste remains non-hazardous based on the hazardous waste
characteristics even if EPA has ``delisted'' the waste.
C. What factors must EPA consider in deciding whether to grant a
delisting petition?
Besides considering the criteria in Sec. 260.22(a) and section
3001(f) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921(f), and in the background documents for
the listed wastes, EPA must consider any factors (including additional
constituents) other than those for which EPA listed the waste, if a
reasonable basis exists to determine that these additional factors
could cause the waste to be hazardous.
EPA must also consider as hazardous waste mixtures containing
listed hazardous wastes and wastes derived from treating, storing, or
disposing of listed hazardous waste. See Sec. 261.3(a)(2)(iii) and
(iv) and (c)(2)(i), called the ``mixture'' and ``derived-from'' rules,
respectively. These wastes are also eligible for exclusion and remain
hazardous wastes until excluded. See 66 FR 27266 (May 16, 2001).
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Waste Information and Data
A. What waste did OxyChem petition EPA to delist?
OxyChem petitioned EPA on September 20, 2007, to exclude from the
lists of hazardous waste contained in Sec. 261.31, the wastewater
treatment biosludge from its wastewater treatment plant.
The wastewater treatment biosludge is generated from the OxyChem
facility located in Ingleside, Texas. The wastewater treatment
biosludge is listed under EPA Hazardous Waste No. K019, K020, F025,
F001, F003, and F005, because it is generated in the bioreactors that
can, on occasion, treat incinerator offgas treatment water.
Specifically, in its petition, OxyChem requested that EPA grant
exclusion for 7,500 cubic yards per calendar year of K019, K020, F025,
F001, F003, and F005 waste resulting from the treatment of waste waters
from the manufacturing processes at its facility.
[[Page 32849]]
B. Who is OxyChem and what process do they use to generate the petition
waste?
OxyChem produces ethylene dichloride (EDC), vinyl chloride monomer
(VCM), chlorine, and caustic. The facility is comprised of the Chlor-
Alkali plant which produces chlorine and caustic, and the EDC/VCM
plant. Other processes with the VCM unit include vent incineration,
wastewater treatment, VCM storage and loading (railcar and ship), EDC
and intermediate storage and loading, cooling towers and refrigeration
and compressors.
The manufacturing processes that contribute waste and vent gases to
the incinerators are the VCM plant and the support plants (shop and
rail loading, product storage tanks, RCRA tank and wastewater storage
tanks). The former EDC unit in the Chlor-Alkali Plant once contributed
waste streams, but was idled in 2002.
OxyChem intends to dispose of the delisted wastewater treatment
biosludge at a Subtitle D Landfill. Treatment of the waste waters,
which result from the manufacturing process, generates the wastewater
treatment biosludge that is classified as K019, K020, F025, F001, F003,
and F005 listed hazardous wastes pursuant to 40 CFR 261.31. The 40 CFR
Part 261 Appendix VII hazardous constituents which are the basis for
listing K019, K020, F025, F001, F003, and F005 hazardous wastes are:
K019--ethylene dichloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, 1,1,2-
tricholoroethane, tetrachloroethanes (1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane and
1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane), trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene,
carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, vinyl chloride, and vinylidene
chloride; K020--ethylene dichloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, 1,1,2-
tricholoroethane, tetrachloroethanes (1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane and
1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane), trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene,
carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, vinyl chloride, and vinylidene
chloride; F025--chloromethane, dichloromethane, trichloromethane,
carbon tetrachloride, chloroethylene, 1,1-dichloroethane, 1,2-
dichloroethane, trans-1,2-dichloroethylene, 1,1-dichloroethylene,
1,1,1-trichloroethane, 1,1,2-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene,
1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane,
tetrachloroethylene, pentachloroethane, hexachloroethane, allyl
chloride (3-cholopropene), dichloropropane, dichloroprene, 2-chloro-
1,3-butadiene, hexachloro-1,3-butadiene, hexachlorocyclopentadiene,
benzene, chlorobenzene, dichlorobenzene, 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene,
tetrachlorobenzene, pentachlorobenzene, hexachlorobenzene, toluene, and
naphthalene; F001--tetrachloroethylene, methylene chloride
trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, carbon tetrachloride, and
chlorinated fluorocarbons; F003--N.A.; F005--toluene, methyl ethyl
ketone, carbon disulfide, isobutanol, pyridine, 2-ethoxyethanol,
benzene, and 2-nitropropane.
C. What information did OxyChem submit to support this petition?
To support its petition, OxyChem submitted:
(1) Analytical results of the toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure and total constituent analysis for volatile and semivolatile
organics, pesticides, herbicides, dioxins/furans, PCBs and metals for
four wasterwater treatment biosludge samples;
(2) Analytical results from multiple pH leaching of metals; and
(3) Description of the wastewater treatment process.
D. What were the results of OxyChem's analysis?
EPA believes that the descriptions of OxyChem's waste, and the
analytical data submitted in support of the petition show that the
wastewater treatment biosludge is non-hazardous. Analytical data from
OxyChem's wastewater treatment biosludge samples were used in the
Delisting Risk Assessment Software (DRAS). The data summaries for
detected constituents are presented in Table 1. EPA has reviewed the
sampling procedures used by OxyChem and has determined that they
satisfy EPA's criteria for collecting representative samples of the
variations in constituent concentrations in the wastewater treatment
biosludge. The data submitted in support of the petition show that
constituents in OxyChem's wastes are presently below health-based risk
levels used in the delisting decision-making. EPA believes that OxyChem
has successfully demonstrated that the wastewater treatment biosludge
is non-hazardous.
Table 1--Analytical Results and Maximum Allowable Delisting Concentrations of the Wastewater Treatment Biosludge
\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum total (mg/ Maximum TCLP (mg/ Maximum allowable TCLP delisting
Constituent kg) l) level (mg/l)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antimony............................. 0.349 0.00263 0.111
Acetone.............................. 0.069 0.170 533
Arsenic.............................. 3.62 0.0265 0.178
Barium............................... 27.7 0.204 36.9
Benzoic Acid......................... <0.170 0.0024 2370
Beryllium............................ 0.0623 <0.0100 0.0799
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate........... <0.170 0.0095 6.15
Cadmium.............................. 0.124 0.000616 0.0933
Chromium............................. 10.4 0.0304 2.32
Cobalt............................... 0.787 0.00744 14.00
Copper............................... 44.1 0.274 26.5
Ethylbenzene......................... <0.005 0.048 11.1
Lead................................. 2.70 0.00220 0.719
Mercury.............................. 0.00813 0.00005 0.0696
Methylene Chloride................... 0.0058 0.0058 0.0809
Naphthalene.......................... <0.0066 0.00066 0.0335
Nickel............................... 25.1 0.290 13.8
Phenanthrene......................... <0.0066 0.00028 2.72
Selenium............................. 0.633 0.00770 0.912
Silver............................... 0.0981 <0.0100 5.0
[[Page 32850]]
Silvex (2,4,5,-TP)................... 0.011 <0.0001 0.789
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) 3.86E-04 5.92E-08 4.30E-05 mg/kg
2,3,7,8-.
Thallium............................. 0.0962 0.00203 0.0851
Tin.................................. 1.59 <0.0100 3.97E+07
Toluene.............................. <0.005 0.001 15.5
Trichloroethane...................... 0.0018 0.008 11900
Trichloroethylene.................... <0.005 0.012 0.0794
Vanadium............................. 6.62 0.00586 1.00
Xylenes.............................. <0.015 <0.001 9.79
Zinc................................. 44.1 0.240 202
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These levels represent the highest concentration of each constituent found in any one sample. These levels
do not necessarily represent the specific levels found in one sample.
< Denotes that the constituent was below the detection limit.
E. How did EPA evaluate the risk of delisting this waste?
The worst case scenario for management of the wastewater treatment
biosludge was modeled for disposal in a landfill. EPA used such
information gathered to identify plausible exposure routes (i.e.,
ground water, surface water, soil, air) for hazardous constituents
present in the wastewater treatment biosludge. EPA determined that
disposal in a Subtitle D landfill is the most reasonable, worst-case
disposal scenario for OxyChem's wastewater treatment biosludge. EPA
applied the DRAS described in 65 FR 58015 (September 27, 2000), 65 FR
75637 (December 4, 2000) and 73 FR 28768 (May 19, 2008), to predict the
maximum allowable concentrations of hazardous constituents that may be
released from the petitioned waste after disposal and determined the
potential impact of the disposal of OxyChem's petitioned waste on human
health and the environment. In assessing potential risks to ground
water, EPA used the maximum estimated waste volumes and the maximum
reported extract concentrations as inputs to the DRAS program to
estimate the constituent concentrations in the ground water at a
hypothetical receptor well down gradient from the disposal site. Using
the risk level (carcinogenic risk of 10-\5\ and non-cancer
hazard index of 0.1), the DRAS program can back-calculate the
acceptable receptor well concentrations (referred to as compliance-
point concentrations) using standard risk assessment algorithms and
Agency health-based numbers. Using the maximum compliance-point
concentrations and EPA Composite Model for Leachate Migration with
Transformation Products (EPACMTP) fate and transport modeling factors,
the DRAS further back-calculates the maximum permissible waste
constituent concentrations not expected to exceed the compliance-point
concentrations in ground water.
EPA believes that the EPACMTP fate and transport model represents a
reasonable worst-case scenario for possible ground water contamination
resulting from disposal of the petitioned waste in a landfill, and that
a reasonable worst-case scenario is appropriate when evaluating whether
a waste should be relieved of the protective management constraints of
RCRA Subtitle C. The use of some reasonable worst-case scenarios
resulted in conservative values for the compliance-point concentrations
and ensured that the waste, once removed from hazardous waste
regulation, will not pose a significant threat to human health and/or
the environment. The DRAS also uses the maximum estimated waste volumes
and the maximum reported total concentrations to predict possible risks
associated with releases of waste constituents through surface pathways
(e.g., volatilization or wind-blown particulate from the landfill). As
in the above ground water analyses, the DRAS uses the risk level, the
health-based data and standard risk assessment and exposure algorithms
to predict maximum compliance-point concentrations of waste
constituents at a hypothetical point of exposure. Using fate and
transport equations, the DRAS uses the maximum compliance-point
concentrations and back-calculates the maximum allowable waste
constituent concentrations (or ``delisting levels'').
In most cases, because a delisted waste is no longer subject to
hazardous waste control, EPA is generally unable to predict, and does
not presently control, how a petitioner will manage a waste after
delisting. Therefore, EPA currently believes that it is inappropriate
to consider extensive site-specific factors when applying the fate and
transport model. EPA does control the type of unit where the waste is
disposed.
EPA also considers the applicability of ground water monitoring
data during the evaluation of delisting petitions. In this case, no
representative data exists. Therefore, EPA has determined that it would
be unnecessary to request ground water monitoring data.
EPA believes that the descriptions of OxyChem's wastewater
treatment biosludge and analytical characterization which illustrate
the presence of toxic constituents at lower concentrations in these
waste streams provide a reasonable basis to conclude that the
likelihood of migration of hazardous constituents from the petitioned
waste will be substantially reduced so that short-term and long-term
threats to human health and the environment are minimized.
The DRAS results, which calculated the maximum allowable
concentration of chemical constituents in the wastewater treatment
biosludge are presented in Table 1. Based on the comparison of the DRAS
results and maximum TCLP concentrations found in Table 1, the
petitioned waste should be delisted because no constituents of concern
are likely to be present or formed as reaction products or by products
in OxyChem's waste.
F. What did EPA conclude about OxyChem's analysis?
EPA concluded, after reviewing OxyChem's processes that no other
hazardous constituents of concern, other than those for which OxyChem
tested, are likely to be present or formed as reaction products or by-
products in OxyChem's wastes. In addition, on the basis of explanations
and analytical data provided by OxyChem, pursuant to
[[Page 32851]]
Sec. 260.22, EPA concludes that the petitioned waste, wastewater
treatment biosludge, does not exhibit any of the characteristics of
ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity. See Sec. Sec.
261.21, 261.22, 261.23, and 261.24 respectively.
G. What other factors did EPA consider in its evaluation?
During the evaluation of this petition, in addition to the
potential impacts to the ground water, EPA also considered the
potential impact of the petitioned waste via non-ground water exposure
routes (i.e., air emissions and surface runoff) for the wastewater
treatment biosludge. With regard to airborne dispersion in particular,
EPA believes that exposure to airborne contaminants from the petitioned
waste is unlikely. No appreciable air releases are likely from the
wastewater treatment biosludge under any likely disposal conditions.
EPA evaluated the potential hazards resulting from the unlikely
scenario of airborne exposure to hazardous constituents released from
the wastewater in an open landfill. The results of this worst-case
analysis indicated that there is no substantial present or potential
hazard to human health and the environment from airborne exposure to
constituents from the wastewater treatment biosludge.
H. What is EPA's evaluation of this delisting petition?
The descriptions by OxyChem of the hazardous waste process and
analytical characterization, with the proposed verification testing
requirements (as discussed later in this notice), provide a reasonable
basis for EPA to grant the petition. The data submitted in support of
the petition show that constituents in the waste are below the maximum
allowable concentrations (See Table 1). EPA believes that the
wastewater treatment biosludge generated by OxyChem contains hazardous
constituents at levels which will present minimal short-term and long-
term threats from the petitioned waste to human health and the
environment.
Thus, EPA believes that it should grant to OxyChem an exclusion
from the list of hazardous wastes for the wastewater treatment
biosludge. EPA believes that the data submitted in support of the
petition show the OxyChem's wastewater treatment biosludge to be non-
hazardous.
EPA has reviewed the sampling procedures used by OxyChem and has
determined they satisfy EPA's criteria for collecting representative
samples of variable constituent concentrations in the wastewater
treatment biosludge. The data submitted in support of the petition show
that constituents in OxyChem's wastes are presently below the
compliance-point concentrations used in the delisting decision-making
process and would not pose a substantial hazard to the environment and
the public. EPA believes that OxyChem has successfully demonstrated
that the wastewater treatment biosludge is non-hazardous.
EPA, therefore, proposes to grant an exclusion to OxyChem for the
wastewater treatment biosludge described in its September 2007
petition. EPA's decision to exclude this waste is based on analysis
performed on samples taken of the wastewater treatment biosludge.
If EPA finalizes the proposed rule, EPA will no longer regulate
7,500 cubic yards/year of wastewater treatment biosludge from OxyChem's
Ingleside facility under Parts 262 through 268 and the permitting
standards of Part 270.
IV. Next Steps
A. With what conditions must the petitioner comply?
The petitioner, OxyChem, must comply with the requirements in 40
CFR Part 261, Appendix IX, Table 2 as amended by this notice. The text
below gives the rationale and details of those requirements.
(1) Delisting Levels
This paragraph provides the levels of constituent concentrations
for which OxyChem wastewater treatment biosludge, below which these
wastes would be considered non-hazardous.
EPA selected the set of inorganic and organic constituents
specified in paragraph (1) and listed in 40 CFR Part 261, Appendix IX,
Table 2, based on information in the petition. EPA compiled the
inorganic and organic constituents list from descriptions of the
manufacturing process used by OxyChem, previous test data provided for
the waste, and the respective health-based levels used in delisting
decision-making. These delisting levels correspond to the allowable
levels measured in the leachable concentrations of the wastewater
treatment biosludge.
(2) Waste Holding and Handling
Waste classification as non-hazardous cannot begin until compliance
with the limits set in paragraph (1) has occurred for four consecutive
weekly sampling events. For example, if OxyChem is issued a final
exclusion in August, the four weekly samples can be collected in
September. If EPA deems that the four representative composite samples
meet all the indicator constituent delisting limits, classification of
the waste as non-hazardous can begin in October. If constituent levels
in any annual sample (and retest, if applicable) taken by OxyChem
exceed any of the delisting levels set in paragraph (1), OxyChem must:
(i) notify EPA in accordance with paragraph (6), and (ii) manage and
dispose of the wastewater treatment biosludge as hazardous waste
generated under Subtitle C of RCRA.
(3) Verification Testing Requirements
OxyChem must complete a verification testing program on the
wastewater treatment biosludge to assure that the wastes do not exceed
the maximum levels specified in paragraph (1). If EPA determines that
the data collected under this paragraph does not support the data
provided in the petition, the exclusion will not cover the tested
waste. This verification program operates on two levels.
The initial part of the verification testing program consists of
testing four composite samples from four consecutive weeks of
wastewater treatment biosludge for specified indicator parameters as
described in paragraph (1). Levels of constituents measured in the
samples of the wastewater treatment biosludge that do not exceed the
levels set forth in paragraph (1) can be considered non-hazardous after
all four sets of sampling data meet the levels listed in paragraph (1).
The second part of the verification testing program is the annual
testing of a representative composite sample of the wastewater
treatment biosludge for all constituents specified in paragraph (1). If
any delisting levels are not met in an annual test sample, then a
second composite sample shall be collected within 10 days of becoming
aware of the failure, and it must be analyzed expeditiously for the
TCLP constituent(s) that exceeded Delisting Levels.
If the annual testing of the wastes, and the retest, do not meet
the delisting levels in paragraph (1), OxyChem must notify EPA
according to the requirements in paragraph (6). EPA will then take the
appropriate actions necessary to protect human health and the
environment as described in paragraph (6). OxyChem must provide
sampling results that support the rationale that the delisting
exclusion should not be withdrawn.
The exclusion is effective upon publication in the Federal Register
but the change in waste classification as ``non-hazardous'' cannot
begin until the four weekly initial verification samples
[[Page 32852]]
comply with the levels specified in paragraph (1). The waste
classification as ``non-hazardous'' is also not authorized, if OxyChem
fails to perform the testing as specified herein. Should OxyChem
conduct the yearly testing as specified herein, then disposal of
wastewater treatment biosludge as delisted waste may not occur in the
following year(s) until OxyChem obtains the written approval of EPA.
(4) Changes in Operating Conditions
Paragraph (4) would allow OxyChem the flexibility of modifying its
processes (for example, changes in equipment or change in operating
conditions) to improve its treatment processes. However, OxyChem must
prove the effectiveness of the modified process and request approval
from EPA. OxyChem must manage wastes generated during the new process
demonstration as hazardous waste through verification sampling within
30 days of start-up.
(5) Data Submittals
To provide appropriate documentation that the OxyChem facility is
correctly managing the wastewater treatment biosludge, OxyChem must
compile, summarize, and keep delisting records on-site for a minimum of
five years. OxyChem must keep all analytical data obtained pursuant to
paragraph (3), including quality control information, for five years.
Paragraph (5) requires that OxyChem furnish these data upon request for
inspection by any employee or representative of EPA or the State of
Texas.
If the proposed exclusion is made final, then it will apply only to
7,500 cubic yards per calendar year of wastewater treatment biosludge
generated at the OxyChem facility after successful initial verification
testing.
EPA would require OxyChem to submit additional verification data
under any of the following circumstances:
(a) If OxyChem significantly alters the waste treatment system
except as described in paragraph (4).
(b) If OxyChem uses any new manufacturing or production
process(es), or significantly changes the current process(es) described
in its petition; or
(c) If OxyChem makes any changes that could significantly affect
the composition or type of waste generated.
OxyChem must submit a modification to the petition complete with
full sampling and analysis for circumstances where the waste volume
changes and/or additional waste codes are added to the waste stream.
EPA will publish an amendment to the exclusion if the changes are
acceptable.
OxyChem must manage waste volumes greater than 7,500 cubic yards of
wastewater treatment biosludge as hazardous waste until EPA grants a
revised exclusion. When this exclusion becomes final, the management by
OxyChem of the wastewater treatment biosludge covered in this petition
would be relieved from Subtitle C jurisdiction. OxyChem may not
classify the waste as non-hazardous until the revised exclusion is
finalized.
(6) Reopener
The purpose of paragraph (6) is to require OxyChem to disclose new
or different information related to a condition at the facility or
disposal of the waste, if it is pertinent to the delisting. OxyChem
must also use this procedure if the waste sample (and retest, if
applicable) in the annual testing fails to meet the levels found in
paragraph (1). This provision will allow EPA to reevaluate the
exclusion, if a source provides new or additional information to EPA.
EPA will evaluate the information on which it based the decision to see
if it is still correct or if circumstances have changed so that the
information is no longer correct or would cause EPA to deny the
petition, if presented.
This provision expressly requires OxyChem to report differing site
conditions or assumptions used in the petition in addition to failure
to meet the annual testing conditions within 10 days of discovery. If
EPA discovers such information itself or from a third party, it can act
on it as appropriate. The language being proposed is similar to those
provisions found in RCRA regulations governing no-migration petitions
at Sec. 268.6.
It is EPA's position that it has the authority under RCRA and the
Administrative Procedures Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 551 (1978) et seq., to
reopen a delisting decision. EPA may reopen a delisting decision when
it receives new information that calls into question the assumptions
underlying the delisting.
EPA believes a clear statement of its authority in delisting is
merited in light of EPA's experience. See the Federal Register notice
regarding Reynolds Metals Company at 62 FR 37694 (July 14, 1997) and 62
FR 63458 (December 1, 1997) where the delisted waste leached at greater
concentrations into the environment than the concentrations predicted
when conducting the TCLP, leading EPA to repeal the delisting. If an
immediate threat to human health and the environment presents itself,
EPA will continue to address these situations on a case-by-case basis.
Where necessary, EPA will make a good cause finding to justify
emergency rulemaking. See APA 553(b)(3)(B).
B. What happens if OxyChem violates the terms and conditions?
If OxyChem violates the terms and conditions established in the
exclusion, EPA will start procedures to withdraw the exclusion. Where
there is an immediate threat to human health and the environment, EPA
will evaluate the need for enforcement activities on a case-by-case
basis. EPA expects OxyChem to conduct the appropriate waste analysis
and comply with the criteria explained above in paragraph (1) of the
exclusion.
V. Public Comments
A. How may I as an interested party submit comments?
EPA is requesting public comments on this proposed decision. Please
send three copies of your comments. Send two copies to the Chief,
Corrective Action and Waste Minimization Section, Multimedia Permitting
and Planning Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6,
1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202. Send a third copy to the
Industrial Hazardous Waste Permits Division, Technical Evaluation Team,
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, TX
78711-3087. Identify your comments at the top with this regulatory
docket number: EPA-R06-RCRA-2009-0108. You may submit your comments
electronically to Wendy Jacques at [email protected].
B. How may I review the docket or obtain copies of the proposed
exclusion?
You may review the RCRA regulatory docket for this proposed rule at
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Dallas, TX 75202. It is available for viewing in the EPA Freedom of
Information Act Review Room from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. Call (214) 665-6444 for
appointments. The public may copy material from any regulatory docket
at no cost for the first 100 pages and at fifteen cents per page for
additional copies.
VI. 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
[[Page 32853]]
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) (Pub. L. 104-4). 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 proposed
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 proposed 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 this action under section 801 because this is a rule of
particular applicability.
Lists 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: June 10, 2009.
Troy C. Hill,
Acting Director, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 261 is
proposed to be 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, 6922, and 6938.
2. In Table 2 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
Table 2--Waste Excluded From Specific Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Address Waste description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
OxyChem Corporation........... Ingleside, TX.... Wastewater treatment
biosludge (EPA
Hazardous Waste
Number K019, K020,
F025, F001, F003,
F005) generated at a
maximum rate of
7,500 cubic yards
per calendar year
after [publication
date of the final
rule].
For the exclusion to
be valid, OxyChem
must implement a
verification testing
program that meets
the following
paragraphs:
(1)(A) Delisting
Levels: All
concentrations for
those constituents
must not exceed the
maximum allowable
concentrations in mg/
l specified in this
paragraph.
Wastewater treatment
biosludge Leachable
Concentrations (mg/
l): Antimony--0.111;
Acetone--533;
Arsenic--0.178;
Barium--36.9; Bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate
-6.15; Chromium--
2.32; Copper--26.5;
Ethylbenzene--11.1;
Methylene Chloride--
0.0809; Naphthalene--
0.0355; Nickel--
13.8; Phenanthrene--
2.72; Toluene--15.5;
Trichloroethane--119
00;
Trichloroethylene--0
.0794; Vanadium--
1.00; Zinc--202.
(B) Total
Concentration Limits
in mg/Kg:
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin (TCDD)
2,3,7,8 Equivalent--
4.3E-05.
(2) Waste Holding and
Handling:
[[Page 32854]]
(A) Waste
classification as
non-hazardous can
not begin until
compliance with the
limits set in
paragraph (1) for
wastewater treatment
biosludge has
occurred for four
consecutive weekly
sampling events.
(B) If constituent
levels in any annual
sample and retest
sample taken by
OxyChem exceed any
of the delisting
levels set in
paragraph (1) for
the wastewater
treatment biosludge,
OxyChem must do the
following:
(i) Notify EPA in
accordance with
paragraph (6) and
(ii) Manage and
dispose the
wastewater treatment
biosludge as
hazardous waste
generated under
Subtitle C of RCRA.
(3) Testing
Requirements:
Upon this exclusion
becoming final,
OxyChem must perform
analytical testing
by sampling and
analyzing the
wastewater treatment
biosludge as
follows:
(A) Initial
Verification
Testing:
(i) Collect four
representative
composite samples of
the wastewater
treatment biosludge
at weekly intervals
after EPA grants the
final exclusion. The
first composite
sample may be taken
at any time after
EPA grants the final
approval. Sampling
must be performed in
accordance with the
sampling plan
approved by EPA in
support of the
exclusion.
(ii) Analyze the
samples for all
constituents listed
in paragraph (1).
Any composite sample
taken that exceeds
the delisting levels
listed in paragraph
(1) indicates that
the wastewater
treatment biosludge
must continue to be
disposed as
hazardous waste in
accordance with the
applicable hazardous
waste requirements
until such time that
four consecutive
weekly samples
indicate compliance
with delisting
levels listed in
paragraph (1).
(iii) Within sixty
(60) days after
taking its last
weekly sample,
OxyChem will report
its analytical test
data to EPA. If
levels of
constituents
measured in the
samples of the
wastewater treatment
biosludge do not
exceed the levels
set forth in
paragraph (1) of
this exclusion for
four consecutive
weeks, OxyChem can
manage and dispose
the non-hazardous
wastewater treatment
biosludge according
to all applicable
solid waste
regulations.
(B) Annual Testing:
(i) If OxyChem
completes the weekly
testing specified in
paragraph (3) above
and no sample
contains a
constituent at a
level which exceeds
the limits set forth
in paragraph (1),
OxyChem must begin
annual testing as
follows: OxyChem
must test a
representative
composite sample of
the wastewater
treatment biosludge
for all constituents
listed in paragraph
(1) at least once
per calendar year.
If any measured
constituent
concentration
exceeds the
delisting levels set
forth in paragraph
(1), OxyChem must
collect an
additional
representative
composite sample
within 10 days of
being made aware of
the exceedence and
test it
expeditiously for
the constituent(s)
which exceeded
delisting levels in
the original annual
sample.
(ii) The samples for
the annual testing
shall be a
representative
composite sample
according to
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 must
meet Performance
Based Measurement
System Criteria in
which the Data
Quality Objectives
are to demonstrate
that samples of the
OxyChem wastewater
treatment biosludge
are representative
for all constituents
listed in paragraph
(1).
(iii) The samples for
the annual testing
taken for the second
and subsequent
annual testing
events shall be
taken within the
same calendar month
as the first annual
sample taken.
(iv) The annual
testing report
should include the
total amount of
delisted waste in
cubic yards disposed
during the calendar
year.
[[Page 32855]]
(4) Changes in
Operating
Conditions: If
OxyChem
significantly
changes the process
described in its
petition or starts
any processes that
generate(s) the
waste that may or
could affect the
composition or type
of waste generated
(by illustration,
but not limitation,
changes in equipment
or operating
conditions of the
treatment process),
it must notify EPA
in writing and it
may no longer handle
the wastes generated
from the new process
as non-hazardous
until the wastes
meet the delisting
levels set in
paragraph (1) and it
has received written
approval to do so
from EPA.
OxyChem must submit a
modification to the
petition complete
with full sampling
and analysis for
circumstances where
the waste volume
changes and/or
additional waste
codes are added to
the waste stream.
(5) Data Submittals:
OxyChem must submit
the information
described below. If
OxyChem 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).
OxyChem must:
(A) Submit the data
obtained through
paragraph 3 to the
Chief, Corrective
Action and Waste
Minimization
Section, Multimedia
Planning and
Permitting Division,
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Region 6, 1445 Ross
Ave., Dallas, Texas
75202, within the
time specified. All
supporting data can
be submitted on CD-
ROM or comparable
electronic media.
(B) Compile records
of analytical data
from paragraph (3),
summarized, and
maintained on-site
for a minimum of
five years.
(C) Furnish these
records and data
when either EPA or
the State of Texas
requests 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. Sec. 1001
and 42 U.S.C. Sec.
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.
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
OxyChem 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 either the
annual testing (and
retest, if
applicable) of the
waste does not meet
the delisting
requirements in
paragraph 1, OxyChem
must report the
data, in writing, to
the Division
Director within 10
days of first
possessing or being
made aware of that
data.
[[Page 32856]]
(C) If OxyChem 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 requires
action by EPA, 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
receipt 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 initial receipt
of information
described in
paragraphs (5),
(6)(A) or (6)(B),
the Division
Director will issue
a final written
determination
describing EPA
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:
OxyChem 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 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 variance
and a possible
revocation of the
decision.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E9-16272 Filed 7-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P