[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 30, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69028-69035]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-30994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA-R05-RCRA-2009-0908; SW-FRL-9096-7]
Hazardous Waste Management System; Exclusion for Identifying and
Listing Hazardous Waste
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA (also, ``the Agency'' or ``we'' in this preamble) is
taking direct final action to grant a petition submitted by
Professional Plating, Inc. (PPI), in Brillion, Wisconsin to exclude (or
``delist'') up to 140 cubic yards of sludge per year generated by its
wastewater treatment plant from the list of hazardous wastes.
[[Page 69029]]
The Agency has decided to grant the petition based on an evaluation
of waste-specific information provided by PPI. This decision
conditionally excludes the petitioned waste from the requirements of
hazardous waste regulations under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA).
We conclude that PPI's petitioned waste is nonhazardous with
respect to the original listing criteria and that there are no other
factors which would cause the waste to be hazardous when disposed of in
a Subtitle D landfill which is permitted, licensed, or registered by a
State to manage industrial solid waste.
DATES: This rule is effective on March 1, 2010 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comment by January 29, 2010. If EPA
receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
RCRA-2009-0908 by one of the following methods:
http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Todd Ramaly, Land and Chemicals Division, (Mail
Code: LR-8J), EPA Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604.
Hand Delivery: Todd Ramaly, Land and Chemicals Division,
EPA Region 5, 8th Floor, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. Please contact Todd Ramaly at (312) 353-9317.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-RCRA-
2009-0908. 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. 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 docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information may not be 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 www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA
Records Center, EPA Region 5, 7th Floor, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago,
IL 60604. The EPA Record Center is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. We recommend you telephone
Todd Ramaly at (312) 353-9317 before visiting the EPA Record Center.
The public may copy material from the regulatory docket at $0.15 per
page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Ramaly, Land and Chemicals
Division, Mail Code LR-8J, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region
5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604; telephone number: (312) 353-
9317; fax number: (312) 582-5190; e-mail address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information in this section is organized
as follows:
I. Overview Information
II. Background
A. What Is a Listed Waste?
B. What Is a Delisting Petition?
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 PPI Petition EPA To Delist?
B. How Does PPI Generate the Waste?
C. How Did PPI Sample and Analyze the Waste?
D. What Were the Results of PPI's Analysis of the Waste?
E. How Did EPA Evaluate the Risk of Delisting This Waste?
F. What Did EPA Conclude About PPI's Waste?
G. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?
IV. Conditions for Exclusion
A. How Will PPI Manage the Waste If It Is Delisted?
B. What Are the Maximum Allowable Concentrations of Hazardous
Constituents in the Waste?
C. How Frequently Must PPI Test the Waste?
D. What Data Must PPI Submit?
E. What Happens If PPI Fails To Meet the Conditions of the
Exclusion?
F. What Must PPI Do If the Process Changes?
V. How Would This Action Affect States?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Overview Information
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is granting a
petition submitted for the Professional Plating, Incorporated (PPI)
facility located in Brillion, Wisconsin to exclude or delist an annual
volume of 140 cubic yards of F019 wastewater treatment sludges from the
lists of hazardous waste set forth in Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (40 CFR) 261.32 and 261.33. PPI claims that the petitioned
waste does not meet the criteria for which EPA listed it, and that
there are no additional constituents or factors which could cause the
waste to be hazardous.
Based on our review described in section III, we agree with the
petitioner that the waste is nonhazardous. We reviewed the description
of the process which generates the waste and the analytical data
submitted by PPI. We believe that the petitioned waste does not meet
the criteria for which the waste was listed, and that there are no
other factors which might cause the waste to be hazardous.
II. Background
A. What Is a Listed Waste?
The 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 the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The EPA has amended this
list several times and published it in 40 CFR 261.31 and 261.32.
We list 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. Sec. 261.11(a)(2) or (3).
[[Page 69030]]
B. What Is a Delisting Petition?
Individual waste streams may vary 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.
A procedure to exclude or delist a waste is provided in 40 CFR
260.20 and 260.22 which allows a person, or a facility to submit a
petition to the EPA or to an authorized State, demonstrating that a
specific waste from a particular generating facility is not hazardous.
In a delisting petition, the petitioner must show that a waste does
not meet any of the criteria for listed wastes in 40 CFR 261.11 and
that the waste does not exhibit any of the hazardous waste
characteristics of ignitability, reactivity, corrosivity, or toxicity.
The petitioner must present sufficient information for us to decide
whether any factors in addition to those for which the waste was listed
warrant retaining it as a hazardous waste. (See Sec. 260.22, 42 U.S.C.
6921(f) and the background documents for the listed wastes.)
If a delisting petition is granted, the generator remains obligated
under RCRA to confirm that the waste remains nonhazardous.
C. What Factors Must EPA Consider in Deciding Whether To Grant a
Delisting Petition?
In reviewing this petition, we considered the original listing
criteria and the additional factors required by the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). See sec. 222 of HSWA, 42 U.S.C.
6921(f), and 40 CFR 260.22(d)(2)-(4). We evaluated the petitioned waste
against the listing criteria and factors cited in Sec. Sec.
261.11(a)(2) and (3).
Besides considering the criteria in 40 CFR 260.22(a), Sec. Sec.
261.11(a)(2) and (3), 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 we
listed the waste if these additional factors could cause the waste to
be hazardous.
Our decision to delist waste from PPI's facility is based on our
evaluation of the waste for factors or criteria which could cause the
waste to be hazardous. These factors included: (1) Whether the waste is
considered acutely toxic; (2) the toxicity of the constituents; (3) the
concentration of the constituents in the waste; (4) the tendency of the
constituents to migrate and to bioaccumulate; (5) the persistence in
the environment of any constituents once released from the waste; (6)
plausible and specific types of management of the petitioned waste; (7)
the quantity of waste produced; and (8) waste variability.
EPA must also consider as hazardous wastes mixtures containing
listed hazardous wastes and wastes derived from treating, storing, or
disposing of listed hazardous waste. See 40 CFR 261.3(a)(2)(iv) and
(c)(2)(i), called the ``mixture'' and ``derived-from'' rules,
respectively. Mixture and derived-from wastes are also eligible for
exclusion but remain hazardous until excluded.
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Waste Information and Data
A. What Waste Did PPI Petition EPA To Delist?
On June 23, 2009, PPI petitioned EPA to exclude an annual volume of
140 cubic yards of F019 wastewater treatment sludges generated at its
facility in Brillion, Wisconsin from the list of hazardous wastes
contained in 40 CFR 261.31. F019 is defined in Sec. 261.32 as
``Wastewater treatment sludges from the chemical conversion coating of
aluminum except from zirconium phosphating in aluminum can washing when
such phosphating is an exclusive conversion coating process.'' PPI
claims that the petitioned waste does not meet the criteria for which
F019 was listed and that there are no other factors which would cause
the waste to be hazardous.
B. How Does PPI Generate the Waste?
The F019 is generated from the rinse waters and overflows of two
zinc phosphating lines used for conversion coating aluminum parts. The
aluminum parts are spray cleaned, immersion cleaned, and cleaned with a
phosphoric acid prior to conversion coating. The rinse waters from
these steps do not contribute to the petitioned waste. Rinse waters and
overflows from the zinc phosphating step and the remaining steps in the
treatment line are the only wastewaters contributing to the petitioned
waste. Zinc phopshating includes several acids and nickel- and
manganese-compounds. The parts are sealed with compounds containing
fluorine, zirconium, and ammonium hydroxide. Lastly, epoxy-based and
acrylic paint films are cathodically electrodeposited on the aluminum
parts.
The combined rinse waters and overflows from these process steps go
to an on-site wastewater treatment plant dedicated to the F019
wastewater. The pH of the wastewater is adjusted to 9.0 standard units
with either sulfuric acid or sodium hydroxide. Coagulants containing
polymers, calcium chloride, and potassium chloride are added to assist
in precipitating wastewater contaminants. A polyacrylamide anionic
flocculant is added to gather the coagulum into clumps large enough to
settle at the bottom of a clarifier. The clarified water is discharged
to the sewer and the settled sludge is pumped to a sludge thickening
tank and then through a plate and frame filter press.
Process vessels for both zinc phosphating lines (epoxy-coating and
acrylic-coating) are periodically cleaned out with the resulting
sludges also pressed by the plate and frame filter press dedicated to
the F019 water treatment process.
C. How Did PPI Sample and Analyze the Waste?
Six sludge samples were collected each on a monthly basis from
April through October 2008. Sludge accumulated in a roll-off box and
was sampled representing sludge collected over a period of
approximately 4 weeks each. Two sludge samples representing clean-out
of the epoxy-coating line were collected on August 25 and on October
20, 2008 in order to characterize sludge generated from clean-out
activities. Sludge generated from the clean-out of the acrylic-coating
line was sampled on August 11, 2008. PPI collected one composite and
one grab sample of sludge from each roll-off box during each sampling
event. Composite samples consisted of four individual full-depth core
grab samples mixed together to form one sample.
PPI analyzed all composite samples using the following methodology:
(1) Total constituent analysis and Toxicity Characteristic Leaching
Procedure (TCLP) for metals in Appendix IX of 40 CFR part 264, (Test
Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods--SW-846--
Methods 6010B and 1311 \1\); (2) total constituent and TCLP analysis
for sulfide (SW-846 Methods 9030A and 1311); (3) total constituent and
TCLP analysis for cyanide (SW-846 Methods 9010 and 1311 \2\); (4) total
constituent and TCLP analysis for fluoride (SW-846 Methods 9056 and
1311); (5) flashpoint (SW-846 Method 1010); (6) pH (SW-846 Method
9040); and (7) oil & grease (SW-846 Method 9070).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Method 7471 was substituted for Method 6010 for mercury.
\2\ Deionized water was used as the extraction fluid instead of
the fluid specified in the method.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PPI screened the first two of the six monthly composite samples and
one each of the composite samples of clean-out sludges for: (1) Total
constituent and
[[Page 69031]]
TCLP analysis for 120 semi-volatile organic compounds (SW-846 Methods
8270 and 1311); (2) total constituent and TCLP analysis for
formaldehyde (SW-846 Methods 8315 and 1311); (3) total constituent and
TCLP analysis for acrylamide (SW-846 Methods 8032 and 1311); (4) TCLP
analysis for metals in Appendix IX of 40 CFR part 264, substituting the
TCLP extraction fluid with deionized water in order to assess
leachability under pH-neutral conditions (SW-846 Methods 6010B and
1311); and (5) TCLP analysis for metals in Appendix IX of 40 CFR part
264, substituting the TCLP extraction fluid with a buffered alkaline
solution in order to assess leachability under alkaline conditions (SW-
846 Methods 6010B and 1311). PPI analyzed two of the six monthly full-
depth core grab samples and one each of the grab samples of clean-out
sludges for total constituent and TCLP analysis for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) (SW-846 Method 8260 and SW-846 Method 1311). This
screening analysis was performed to check for unexpected organic
compounds in the waste as well as identify pH-dependence of metals in
leachate in the event landfill leachates with neutral or alkaline pH
result in higher concentrations. Detections of organic compounds were
insignificant and the remainder of the sludge samples were not analyzed
for these parameters.
Metals of concern were generally preferentially leached by the
acidic TCLP test. The exception, barium, leached more in some samples
under alkaline conditions. However, detections of all metals, including
barium, were so far below concentrations of concern that the remainder
of the samples were not tested at neutral and alkaline leaching
conditions.
D. What Were the Results of PPI's Analysis of the Waste?
The table below presents the maximum observed total and leachate
concentrations for all detected constituents for which maximum
allowable total and/or TCLP concentration were available. Total
concentrations are expressed in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).
Leachate concentrations are expressed in milligrams per liter (mg/L).
The table also includes the results of analysis for the constituents
for which F019 was listed, chromium and cyanide. PPI submitted a signed
a statement certifying accuracy and responsibility of the results. See
40 CFR 260.22(i)(12).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum observed concentration Maximum allowable
---------------------------------- concentration
Constituent detected -------------------------------- GW (mg/L)
Total (mg/kg) TCLP (mg/L) Total (mg/kg) TCLP (mg/L)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volatile Organic Compounds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
acetone....................... 0.33 \V\ 0.113 NA 26,300 3.38
acrolein...................... 0.277 <0.5 6,850 NA 0.000504
benzene....................... 0.00142 \I\ <0.05 224,000 \1\ 0.05 0.00133
bromomethane.................. 1.16 <0.05 247,000 NA 0.0262
butanol....................... 0.510 \12\ <25 NA 2,920 3.75
carbon disulfide.............. <12 \IV\ 0.0039 NA 2,850 3.17
chloromethane................. 0.05 \I\ <0.05 NA 306 0.393
ethylbenzene.................. <1.2 0.0034 NA 549 0.7
formaldehyde.................. 86.1 <10.0 4,150 631 0.811
methyl ethyl ketone........... 0.0365 \I\ 0.0820 NA 200 22.5
methylene chloride............ <2.4 0.028 882,000 4.0 0.005
methyl isobutyl ketone........ 0.644 <0.5 NA 2,340 3.0
trimethylbenzene, 1,2,4-...... 0.000652 \I\ \I\ 0.00530 NA 34.2 0.0448
xylenes....................... <2.4 \I\ 0.0116 NA 484 0.617
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Semivolatile Organic Compounds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
benzyl alcohol................ 27.7 0.036 NA 14,600 18.8
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate.... 2.82 <0.02 NA NA 0.00321
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
barium........................ 132 0.26 NA \1\ 100 2.0
boron......................... 114 1.24 NA 6,570 7.5
chromium...................... 153 <1.25 \3\ 22,700 \1\ 5.0 0.1
cobalt........................ 333 <1.25 30,300 10.4 0.0113
copper........................ 422 0.49 NA 1,180 1.3
lead.......................... 54.9 <1.25 NA \1\ 5.0 0.015
manganese..................... 15,100 25.2 NA 815 0.9
mercury....................... 0.0182 <0.0002 98.1 \1\ 0.2 0.00145
nickel........................ 7,380 37.1 NA 638 0.75
strontium..................... 10,200 \C\ 5.13 NA 19,700 22.5
zinc.......................... 89,400 30.2 NA 10,300 11.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Miscellaneous Parameters
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cyanide....................... 16.3 <0.05 NA 156 200
sulfide....................... 85.1 NR NA NA NA
fluoride...................... 740 22.6 NA 1,980 2,250
pH (corrosivity).............. 5.9-8.11
2 < pH < 12.5 NA
flashpoint (ignitability)..... > 200 [deg]F
< 140 [deg]F NA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These levels represent the highest concentration of each constituent found in any sample and do not necessarily
represent the concentrations found in a single sample.
[[Page 69032]]
\1\--Based on the toxicity characteristic in 40 CFR 261 subpart C.
\2\--Includes both n-butanol and t-butanol.
\3\--Based on a mixture at a ratio of 1:6 hexavalent to trivalent chromium.
\V\--Present in blank.
NA--Maximum allowable not calculated or much higher than expected to be present.
<--Denotes that the constituent was not detected at the quantitation level.
\I\--Estimated value, below practicable quantitation limit.
\C\--Calibration check verification or quality control sample exceeded upper control limit.
NR--Analysis not run.
E. How Did EPA Evaluate the Risk of Delisting This Waste?
For this delisting determination, we assumed that the waste would
be disposed in a Subtitle D landfill and we considered transport of
waste constituents through ground water, surface water and air. We
evaluated PPI's petitioned waste using the Agency's Delisting Risk
Assessment Software (DRAS) to predict the concentration of hazardous
constituents that might be released from the petitioned waste and to
determine if the waste would pose a threat. To predict the potential
for release to groundwater from landfilled wastes and subsequent routes
of exposure to a receptor, the DRAS uses dilution attenuation factors
(DAFs) derived from EPA's Composite Model for leachate migration with
Transformation Products (CMTP). From a release to groundwater, the DRAS
considers routes of exposure to a human receptor of ingestion of
contaminated groundwater, inhalation from groundwater while showering
and dermal contact from groundwater while bathing.
From a release to surface water by erosion of waste from an open
landfill into storm water run-off, DRAS evaluates the exposure to a
human receptor by fish ingestion and ingestion of drinking water. From
a release of waste particles and volatile emissions to air from the
surface of an open landfill, DRAS considers routes of exposure of
inhalation of volatile constituents, inhalation of particles, and air
deposition of particles on residential soil and subsequent ingestion of
the contaminated soil by a child.
For a detailed description of the DRAS program and revisions see
the Delisting Technical Support Document, DRAS version 3.0 Update
Summary, and DRAS version 3.0 User's Guide available in the docket for
today's action.
At a target cancer risk of 1x10-\6\ and a target hazard
quotient of one, the DRAS program determined maximum allowable
concentrations for each constituent in both the waste and the leachate
at an annual waste volume of 140 cubic yards. We used the maximum
estimated annual waste volume and the maximum reported total and
leachate concentrations as inputs for DRAS. If, using an appropriate
analytical method, a constituent was not detected in any sample nor in
the leachate of any sample, it was considered not to be present in the
waste.
F. What Did EPA Conclude About PPI's Waste?
The maximum reported leachate concentrations and the maximum
reported total concentrations of the hazardous constituents found in
this waste are presented in the table above. The table also presents
the maximum allowable concentrations. The concentrations of all
constituents in both the waste and the leachate are below the allowable
levels of concern calculated by the DRAS program at the target risk
levels. We therefore conclude that PPI's wastewater treatment sludge is
not a substantial or potential hazard to human health and the
environment when disposed of in a Subtitle D landfill. Once the
exclusion becomes effective, PPI must dispose of this waste in a
Subtitle D landfill permitted or licensed by a State.
G. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?
EPA is publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule because
we view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse
comment. The exclusion applies to a very small waste stream generated
at a single facility and rigorous chemical analysis of the waste
indicated that concentrations of chemicals and elements in the waste
were far below levels of concern. If EPA receives adverse comment, we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the
public that the rule will not take effect. Any parties interested in
commenting must do so at this time.
IV. Conditions for Exclusion
A. How Will PPI Manage the Waste If It Is Delisted?
If the petitioned waste is delisted, PPI must dispose of it in a
Subtitle D landfill which is permitted, licensed, or registered by a
State to manage industrial waste.
B. What Are the Maximum Allowable Concentrations of Hazardous
Constituents in the Waste?
The following parameters were selected for ongoing verification
because of their prevalence in the waste relative to the maximum
allowable concentrations. Concentrations measured in the TCLP (or OWEP,
where appropriate) extract of the waste of these constituents must not
exceed the following concentrations (mg/l): chromium--5, cobalt--10.4;
manganese--815; and nickel--638.
C. How Frequently Must PPI Test the Waste?
PPI must analyze a representative sample of the wastewater
treatment sludges on an annual basis to demonstrate that leachate
concentrations do not exceed the levels of concern in Section IV.B.
above. PPI must use methods with appropriate detection levels with
appropriate quality control procedures. SW-846 Method 1311 must be used
for generation of the leachate extract used in the testing of the
delisting levels if oil and grease comprise less than 1% of the waste.
SW-846 Method 1330A must be used for generation of the leaching extract
if oil and grease comprise 1% or more of the waste. SW-846 Method 9071B
must be used for determination of oil and grease. SW-846 Methods 1311,
1330A, and 9071B are incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 260.11.
D. What Data Must PPI Submit?
PPI must submit the data obtained through annual verification
testing to U.S. EPA Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604,
upon the anniversary of the effective date of this exclusion. PPI must
compile, summarize, and maintain on site records of operating
conditions and analytical data. PPI must make these records available
for inspection. All data must be accompanied by a signed copy of the
certification statement in 40 CFR 260.22(i)(12).
E. What Happens If PPI Fails To Meet the Conditions of the Exclusion?
If PPI violates the terms and conditions established in the
exclusion,
[[Page 69033]]
the Agency may start procedures to withdraw the exclusion.
If any testing of the waste does not meet the maximum allowable
concentrations described in section IV.B. above or other data
(including but not limited to leachate data or groundwater monitoring
data) relevant to the delisted waste indicates that any constituent is
at a level in the leachate higher than the specified maximum allowable
concentration, or is in groundwater at a concentration higher than the
groundwater concentrations used in the risk evaluation, PPI must notify
the Agency within 10 days of first possessing or being made aware of
the data. Maximum allowable groundwater concentrations (mg/L) are as
follows: chromium--0.1; cobalt--0.0113; manganese--0.9; and nickel--
0.75.
The exclusion will be suspended and the waste managed as hazardous
until PPI has received written approval from the Agency to continue the
exclusion. PPI may provide sampling results which support the
continuation of the delisting exclusion.
The EPA has the authority under RCRA and the Administrative
Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. sec. 551 (1978) et seq. to reopen a delisting
decision if we receive new information indicating that the conditions
of this exclusion have been violated, or are otherwise not being met.
F. What Must PPI Do If the Process Changes?
If PPI significantly changes the manufacturing or treatment process
or the chemicals used in the manufacturing or treatment process, PPI
may not handle the wastewater treatment sludge generated from the new
process under this exclusion until it has demonstrated to the EPA that
the waste meets the levels set in section IV.B. and that no new
hazardous constituents listed in Appendix VIII of 40 CFR part 261 have
been introduced. PPI must manage wastes generated after the process
change as hazardous waste until PPI has received written notice from
EPA that the delisting is reinstated.
V. How Would This Action Affect the States?
Because EPA is issuing today's exclusion under the Federal RCRA
delisting program, only States subject to Federal RCRA delisting
provisions would be affected. This exclusion may not be effective in
States which have received our authorization 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. These more stringent requirements may include a provision that
prohibits a Federally issued exclusion from taking effect in the State.
We urge petitioners to contact the State regulatory authority to
establish the status of their wastes under the State law.
EPA has also authorized some States to administer a 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. If PPI manages the waste in any State with delisting
authorization, PPI must obtain delisting authorization from that State
before it can manage the waste as nonhazardous in that State.
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 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 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 DRAS, which considers health and safety
risks to 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
Hazardous waste, Recycling, and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: Sec. 3001(f) RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921(f).
[[Page 69034]]
Dated: November 9, 2009.
Margaret M. Guerriero,
Director, Land and Chemicals Division.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 261 is 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. Table 1 of Appendix IX to Part 261 is amended by adding the
following waste stream in alphabetical order by facility to read as
follows:
Appendix IX to Part 261--Wastes Excluded Under Sec. Sec. 260.20 and
260.22
Table 1--Wastes Excluded From Non-Specific Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Address Waste description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Professional Plating, Incorporated Brillion, Wisconsin............... Wastewater treatment sludges, F019,
which are generated at the Professional
Plating, Incorporated (PPI) Brillion
facility at a maximum annual rate of
140 cubic yards per year. The sludge
must be disposed of in a Subtitle D
landfill which is licensed, permitted,
or otherwise authorized by a State to
accept the delisted wastewater
treatment sludge. The exclusion becomes
effective as of March 1, 2010.
1. Delisting Levels: The constituent
concentrations measured in a leachate
extract may not exceed the following
levels (mg/L): chromium--5, cobalt--
10.4; manganese--815; and nickel--638.
2. Annual Verification Testing: To
verify that the waste does not exceed
the specified delisting levels, PPI
must collect and analyze, annually, one
waste sample for the constituents in
Section 1. using methods with
appropriate detection levels and
elements of quality control. SW-846
Method 1311 must be used for generation
of the leachate extract used in the
testing of the delisting levels if oil
and grease comprise less than 1% of the
waste. SW-846 Method 1330A must be used
for generation of the leaching extract
if oil and grease comprise 1% or more
of the waste. SW-846 Method 9071B must
be used for determination of oil and
grease. SW-846 Methods 1311, 1330A, and
9071B are incorporated by reference in
40 CFR 260.11.
3. Changes in Operating Conditions: PPI
must notify the EPA in writing if the
manufacturing process, the chemicals
used in the manufacturing process, the
treatment process, or the chemicals
used in the treatment process
significantly change. PPI must handle
wastes generated after the process
change as hazardous until it has
demonstrated that the wastes continue
to meet the maximum allowable
concentrations in Section 1. and that
no new hazardous constituents listed in
appendix VIII of part 261 have been
introduced and it has received written
approval from EPA.
4. Reopener Language--(a) If, anytime
after disposal of the delisted waste,
PPI possesses or is otherwise made
aware of any data (including but not
limited to leachate data or groundwater
monitoring data) relevant to the
delisted waste indicating that any
constituent is at a concentration in
the waste or waste leachate higher than
the maximum allowable concentrations in
Section 1. above or is in the
groundwater at a concentration higher
than the maximum allowable groundwater
concentrations in Paragraph (e), then
PPI must report such data, in writing,
to the Regional Administrator within 10
days of first possessing or being made
aware of that data.
(b) Based on the information described
in paragraph (a) and any other
information received from any source,
the Regional Administrator will make a
preliminary determination as to whether
the reported information requires
Agency 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 Regional Administrator
determines that the reported
information does require Agency action,
the Regional Administrator will notify
the facility in writing of the actions
the Regional Administrator believes are
necessary to protect human health and
the environment. The notice shall
include a statement of the proposed
action and a statement providing PPI
with an opportunity to present
information as to why the proposed
Agency action is not necessary or to
suggest an alternative action. PPI
shall have 30 days from the date of the
Regional Administrator's notice to
present the information.
(d) If after 30 days PPI presents no
further information, the Regional
Administrator will issue a final
written determination describing the
Agency actions that are necessary to
protect human health or the
environment. Any required action
described in the Regional
Administrator's determination shall
become effective immediately, unless
the Regional Administrator provides
otherwise.
(e) Maximum allowable groundwater
concentrations (mg/L) are as follows:
chromium--0.1; cobalt--0.0113;
manganese--0.9; and nickel--0.75.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 69035]]
[FR Doc. E9-30994 Filed 12-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P