[Federal Register: July 30, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 146)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 44652-44659]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30jy03-12]
[[Page 44652]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[SW-FRL-7537-5]
Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste Final Exclusion
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA (also, ``the Agency'' or ``we'' in this preamble) is
granting petitions to exclude (or ``delist'') wastewater treatment
plant sludge from conversion coating on aluminum generated by six
automobile assembly facilities in the State of Michigan from the list
of hazardous wastes. The facilities include three plants owned and
operated by General Motors Corporation (GM) (Pontiac East-Pontiac,
Hamtramck-Detroit, Flint Truck-Flint), one plant owned and operated by
GM with an onsite wastewater treatment plant owned by the City of
Lansing and operated by Trigen/Cinergy-USFOS of Lansing LLC (Lansing
Grand River-Lansing), and two plants owned and operated by Ford Motor
Company (Wixom Assembly Plant-Wixom, Michigan Truck/Wayne Integrated
Stamping and Assembly Plant-Wayne).
Today's action conditionally excludes the petitioned wastes from
the requirements of hazardous waste regulations under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) when disposed of in a lined
Subtitle D landfill which is permitted, licensed, or registered by a
State to manage industrial solid waste. The exclusions were proposed on
March 7, 2002 as part of an expedited process to evaluate these wastes
under a pilot project developed with the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality (MDEQ). The rule also imposes testing conditions
for wastes generated in the future to ensure that these wastes continue
to qualify for delisting.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on July 30, 2003.
ADDRESSES: The RCRA regulatory docket for this final rule, number R5-
MIECOS-03, is located at the U.S. EPA Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd.,
Chicago, IL 60604, and is available for viewing from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. Call Todd Ramaly at
(312) 353-9317 for appointments. The public may copy material from the
regulatory docket at $0.15 per page.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information concerning
this document, contact Todd Ramaly at the address above or at (312)
353-9317.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information in this section is organized
as follows:
I. Background
A. What is a delisting petition?
B. What regulations allow a waste to be delisted?
II. The Expedited Process for Delisting
A. Why was the expedited process developed for this waste?
B. What is the expedited process to delist F019?
III. EPA's Evaluation of These Petitions
A. What information was submitted in support of these petitions?
B. How did EPA evaluate the information submitted?
IV. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Exclusion
A. Who submitted comments on the proposed rule?
B. Comments Received and Responses From EPA
V. Final Rule Granting these Petitions
A. What decision is EPA finalizing?
B. What are the terms of this exclusion?
C. When is the delisting effective?
D. How does this action affect the states?
VI. Regulatory Impact
VII. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
A. What Is a Delisting Petition?
A delisting petition is a request from a generator to exclude waste
from the list of hazardous wastes under RCRA regulations. In a
delisting petition, the petitioner must show that waste generated at a
particular facility does not meet any of the criteria for which EPA
listed the waste as set forth in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations
(40 CFR) Sec. 261.11 and the background document for the waste. In
addition, a petitioner must demonstrate that the waste does not exhibit
any of the hazardous waste characteristics (that is, ignitability,
reactivity, corrosivity, and toxicity) and must present sufficient
information for us to decide whether factors other than those for which
the waste was listed warrant retaining it as a hazardous waste. (See 40
CFR 260.22, 42 U.S.C. 6921(f) and the background documents for a listed
waste.)
Generators remain obligated under RCRA to confirm that their waste
remains nonhazardous based on the hazardous waste characteristics even
if EPA has ``delisted'' the wastes and to ensure that future generated
wastes meet the conditions set.
B. What Regulations Allow a Waste To Be Delisted?
Under 40 CFR 260.20, 260.22, and 42 U.S.C. 6921(f), facilities may
petition the EPA to remove their wastes from hazardous waste control by
excluding them from the lists of hazardous wastes contained in 40 CFR
261.31 and 261.32. Specifically, 40 CFR 260.20 allows any person to
petition the Administrator to modify or revoke any provision of parts
260 through 266, 268, and 273 of 40 CFR. 40 CFR 260.22 provides a
generator the opportunity to petition the Administrator to exclude a
waste on a ``generator specific'' basis from the hazardous waste lists.
II. The Expedited Process for Delisting
A. Why Was the Expedited Process Developed for This Waste?
Automobile manufacturers are adding aluminum to automobiles, which
may result in increased fuel economy. However, when aluminum is
conversion coated in the automobile assembly process, the resulting
wastewater treatment sludge must be managed as EPA hazardous waste
F019. A number of automotive assembly plants use a similar
manufacturing process which generates a similar F019 waste likely to be
nonhazardous. This similarity of manufacturing processes and the
resultant wastes provides an opportunity for the automobile industry to
be more efficient in submitting delisting petitions and EPA in
evaluating them. Efficiency may be gained and time saved by using a
standardized approach for gathering, submitting and evaluating data.
Therefore, EPA, in conjunction with MDEQ, developed a pilot project to
expedite the delisting process. This approach to making delisting
determinations for this group of facilities is efficient while still
being consistent with current laws and regulations and protective of
human health and the environment.
By removing regulatory controls under RCRA, EPA is facilitating the
use of aluminum in cars. EPA believes that incorporating aluminum in
cars will be advantageous to the environment since lighter cars are
capable of achieving better fuel economy.
B. What Is the Expedited Process To Delist F019?
The expedited process to delist F019 is an approach developed
through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with MDEQ for gathering and
evaluating data in support of multiple petitions from automobile
assembly plants. The expedited delisting process is applicable to
wastes generated by automobile and light truck assembly plants in the
State of Michigan which use a similar manufacturing process and
generate similar F019 waste.
[[Page 44653]]
Based on available historical data and other information, the
expedited process identified 70 constituents which might be of concern
in the waste and provides that the F019 sludge generated by automobile
assembly plants may be delisted if the levels of the 70 constituents do
not exceed the allowable levels established for each constituent in
this rulemaking. The maximum annual quantity of waste generated by any
single facility which may be covered by an expedited delisting is 3,000
cubic yards, however, delisting levels were also proposed for smaller
quantities of waste (1,000 and 2,000 cubic yards).
This expedited delisting process provides an opportunity for the
automobile industry to be more efficient in preparing petitions and for
the EPA to be more efficient in evaluating them.
III. EPA's Evaluation of These Petitions
A. What Information Was Submitted in Support of These Petitions?
Each facility submitted certification that its process was the same
as the process described in the MOU with MDEQ. See 67 FR 10341, March
7, 2002. Each facility also submitted an assertion that its waste does
not meet the criteria for which F019 waste was listed and there are no
other factors which might cause the waste to be hazardous.
To support its petition, each facility collected 6 samples
representing waste generated over 6 weeks. Each sample: (1) Was
analyzed for total analyses of the 70 constituents of concern; (2) was
analyzed for Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP), SW-846
Method 1311, analyses of the 70 constituents of concern; (3) was
analyzed for oil and grease; (4) with more than 1% oil and grease was
analyzed for leachable metals using the Extraction Procedure for Oily
Wastes (OWEP), SW-846 Method 1330A, in lieu of Method 1311; (5) was
analyzed for total constituent analyses for sulfide and cyanide; (6)
was measured of pH and determination that waste is not corrosive (see
40 CFR 261.22); and (7) had a determination made that the waste was not
reactive or ignitable. (See 40 CFR 261.21 and 40 CFR 261.23.) All
sampling and analysis was done in accordance with the sampling and
analysis plan which is an appendix to the MOU and is available in the
docket for this rule. The data submitted included the appropriate QA/QC
information as required in the sampling and analysis plan and was
validated by a third party.
A few minor changes in the sampling approach were made prior to the
sampling. Instead of sampling from six different roll-off boxes, which
would have required multiple sampling events or long-term storage of
full roll-off boxes, the facilities were allowed to fill 55-gallon
drums with aliquots from each discharge from the filter press so that
each drum represented a week's worth of sludge. All drums were then
sampled on the same day shortly after the end of the six-week period.
The maximum values of constituents detected in any sample of the waste
water treatment plant sludge are summarized in the following table
along with the maximum allowable concentrations in the waste. The table
also includes the maximum allowable levels in groundwater, as evaluated
by the Delisting Risk Assessment Software (DRAS). The groundwater
levels used by DRAS are the more conservative of either the Safe
Drinking Water Act Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) or the value
calculated by DRAS based on target risk levels.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum concentration detected and maximum allowable delisting level (DL) Maximum
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- allowable
Constituent groundwater
Ford Ford GM LGR DL (2,000 GM GM Flint GM DL (3,000 concentration
Wayne Wixom yd 3) Hamtramck Truck Pontiac yd 3) ([mu]g/L)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Constituents in Leachate (mg/L):
acetone.......................................... 0.39J <0.1 <0.1 228 0.98 0.82 0.42 171 3,750
n-butyl alcohol.................................. <0.2 <0.2 0.52 228 2.8 <1.0 <0.2 171 3,750
ethylbenzene..................................... 0.009 0.033 0.007 42.6 0.028 <0.01 0.003 31.9 700
formaldehyde..................................... 0.55 0.27 1.2 84.2 3 0.32 0.62 63 1,380
methyl ethyl ketone.............................. <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 200 <0.13 0.6 <0.05 200 22,600
toluene.......................................... 0.004 0.13 <0.1 60.8 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 45.6 1,000
trichloroethene.................................. <0.002 0.003 <0.002 0.304 <0.005 <0.01 <0.002 0.228 5.00
xylene........................................... 0.096 0.4 <0.05 608 0.23 <0.25 <0.05 456 10,000
bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate...................... <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.0896 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.0671 1.47
butyl benzyl phthalate........................... <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 92.9 0.013 <0.1 <0.1 69.6 1,450
naphthalene...................................... <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 15 0.021 0.001 0.002 11.2 246
p-cresol......................................... 1.25 0.079 0.006 11.4 0.56 0.29 0.1 8.55 188
antimony......................................... 0.0088J <0.5 <0.5 0.659 0.24 0.22 0.29 0.494 6.00
arsenic.......................................... 0.0135J 0.23 0.008 0.3 0.0107 0.0071 0.0045 0.224 4.87
barium........................................... 0.59J 0.72 0.76 100 0.57 1.68 0.5 100 2,000
beryllium........................................ <0.041 <0.005 <0.005 1.33 0.001 <0.029 <0.062 0.998 4.00
cadmium.......................................... 0.016J 0.003J 0.015 0.48 0.007 0.014 0.16 0.36 5.00
chromium......................................... 0.031J <0.05 0.043 4.95 0.056 0.53 0.28 3.71 100
cobalt........................................... 0.027J 0.009J 0.13 72.1 0.032 0.035 0.027 54 2,250
lead............................................. 0.14J 0.019J <0.1 5 0.069 1.33 0.24 5 15.0
mercury.......................................... 0.0002J <0.0002 <0.0002 0.2 <0.0003 <0.0006 0.0004 0.2 2.00
nickel........................................... 33.4J 2.86 58.3 90.5 19 28.3 23.7 67.8 750
selenium......................................... 0.51J <0.4 0.15 1.0 0.29 0.27 0.56 1.0 50.0
silver........................................... 0.022J 0.008J 0.019 5.0 <0.06 0.021 <0.088 5.0 187
thallium......................................... 0.0029J <0.2 0.062 0.282 0.0014 <0.0178 0.0021 0.211 2.00
tin.............................................. 6.31 <0.5 <0.5 721 19.7 9.3 16.6 540 22,500
vanadium......................................... 0.01J <0.02 <0.02 67.6 0.008 0.017 0.03 50.6 263
zinc............................................. 6.495 0.87 23.9 898 74.1 17 5.43 673 11,300
Total Constituent Concentration in Waste (mg/kg):
butanol.......................................... <2.5 <2.5 6.3 NS 20 22 9.8 NS
[[Page 44654]]
ethylbenzene..................................... <0.5 1.5 0.62 NS 2.8 <0.5 <0.5 NS
formaldehyde..................................... 11 5.3 24 689 60 6.4 12 535
methyl chloride.................................. <2.5 <2.5 0.84 3,720 <0.25 <0.25 <0.25 2,890
methyl ethyl ketone.............................. <2.5 <2.5 <2.5 NS <2.5 25 <2.5 NS
toluene.......................................... <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 NS 5.8 <0.5 1.5 NS
xylene........................................... 2.1 11 3.3 NS 18 <1.5 <1.5 NS
bis (2ethylhexyl) phthalate...................... 32J <15 18 NS 30 <15 <15 NS
butyl benzyl phthalate........................... <75 <75 <38 NS 290 <75 <75 NS
di-n-octyl phthalate............................. 27J <15 18 NS 31 <15 <15 NS
p-cresol......................................... 23 <15 18 NS <15 <15 <15 NS
naphthalene...................................... <15 <15 <7.5 NS 34 <15 <15 NS
antimony......................................... <100 <100 <30 NS 174 <20 <50 NS
arsenic.......................................... 12J 25 18 8,140 15 10 22 7,740
barium........................................... 306 496 57 NS 253 694 139 NS
beryllium........................................ <1 1.3 <1 NS <1 <1 <1 NS
cadmium.......................................... <1 4.7 <1 NS 1.1 <1 1.1 NS
chromium......................................... 48.5 92 758 NS 88 223 582 NS
cobalt........................................... 2.6 4.1 5.1 NS 2.3 <1 5.1 NS
lead............................................. 39.5 46 <10 NS 498 485 266 NS
mercury.......................................... 0.052 0.34 0.088 8.92 0.13 <0.1 0.04 6.34
nickel........................................... 1,170 1,270 2,460 NS 551 520 901 NS
selenium......................................... <10 17 <20 NS <20 <20 21 NS
silver........................................... <10 <10 <2 NS 1.9 <1 <8 NS
thallium......................................... <50 <50 <20 NS <20 <20 <20 NS
tin.............................................. 156.5 154 2,120 NS 1,040 242 500 NS
vanadium......................................... <5 13 9 NS 25 6.7 19 NS
zinc............................................. 9,810 2,660 6,230 NS 9,180 3,130 8,690 NS
cyanide.......................................... <0.5 <0.5 0.68 NS <0.5 11 0.76 NS
sulfide.......................................... 231 <10 <10 NS 529 69 296 NS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS--not specified.
J--the numerical value is an estimated quantity.
DL--delisting level.
<--not detected at the specified concentration.
Note.--These levels represent the highest constituent concentration found in any one sample and do not necessarily represent the specific levels found
in one sample.
B. How Did EPA Evaluate the Information Submitted?
EPA compared the analytical results submitted by each facility to
the maximum allowable levels calculated by the DRAS and set forth in
the proposed rule (March 7, 2002, 67 FR 10341). All constituents
compared favorably to the allowable levels, although acrylamide,
arsenic, antimony and thallium required supplemental analyses to
determine that they were not present at levels which would pose a
threat.
Acrylamide: Samples were initially analyzed for acrylamide using
SW-846 Method 8316. The levels reported using method 8316 were in
excess of the delisting levels, although the data validation report
stated that this analytical method was not sufficiently selective for
acrylamide in the sludge. Acrylamide is a trace contaminant in the
flocculant-aide used at waste water treatment plants. The facilities
submitted a detailed mass balance which concluded that the maximum
possible acrylamide that could be in the sludge would be much lower
than the reported detections. Rather than accept a mass balance in lieu
of the reported analytical results, EPA required further supplemental
analyses by a more sensitive method using SW-846 Method 8032A in
Selected Ion Monitoring (SIM) mode. Four additional samples
representing two days of waste were collected at each facility. No
acrylamide was detected above the level of concern.
Arsenic, Thallium, and Antimony: Estimated levels of leachable
arsenic reported in some samples exceeded the delisting level, while
estimated levels of leachable thallium and antimony in some samples,
resulted in an aggregate hazard index (HI) in excess of 1.0. Samples
which were reanalyzed for these constituents using the more sensitive
Method 6020 were well below the allowable levels both individually and
in the aggregate. The sample from GM-Lansing Grand River was not
reanalyzed for thallium and when combined with the nickel in these
samples, the hazard index remained in excess of one at an annual volume
of 3,000 cubic yards. To assure that the total HI remains below one, GM
has requested that the annual volume of delisted waste at the Lansing
Grand River plant be changed to 2,000 cubic yards, since the estimated
risk from this waste decreases as the volume decreases.
Hexachlorobenzene, hexachlorobutadiene, pentachlorophenol, and 2,4
dinitrotoluene: The initial detection levels for these constituents
were significantly higher than the allowable levels. To achieve lower
detection levels for these constituents, samples from each facility
were reanalyzed by Method 8270 using selective ion monitoring (SIM)
mode. These constituents were not detected using this more sensitive
method, although some detection levels were still above the allowable
delisting level. We believe the analysis indicates these constituents
are not present in the waste.
Methyl methacrylate: Ford did not analyze the samples for methyl
methacrylate. For the annual volume
[[Page 44655]]
which Ford will be disposing, the allowable concentration for methyl
methacrylate is too high to be a practical concern.
IV. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Exclusion
A. Who Submitted Comments on the Proposed Rule?
The EPA received public comments on the proposed notice published
on March 7, 2002 from Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, Honda of
America Mfg., Inc., Alcoa Inc., and The Aluminum Association. All
commenters were supportive of the proposal and suggested expanding the
project and revising the listing.
B. Comments Received and Responses from EPA
(1) EPA should revise the F019 listing to specify that wastewater
treatment sludge from zinc phosphating operations is not within the
scope of the listing. Data gathered as a result of the Expedited
Delisting Project together with the available historical data, should
provide enough data to fully characterize this waste and to justify a
revision of the listing.
The Agency is now considering revising the F019 listing. EPA is
examining the data collected as a result of this project, as well as
past data, as a basis for a possible revision to the F019 listing.
(2) EPA should issue an interpretive rule clarifying that zinc
phosphating operations are outside the scope of the F019 listing.
An interpretive rule presents administrative and technical
difficulties. A revision to the listing will require a rulemaking
process. See response to comment (1) above.
(3) Automobile assembly facilities outside of Michigan would like
to take advantage of the precedent set by this expedited delisting
project to delist F019 generated by similar operations in other states
and regions.
The Agency believes that the expedited delisting procedures and
requirements set forth in this proposal are appropriate for similar
automotive assembly facilities outside the State of Michigan, subject
to the discretion of the regulatory agency (state or region).
(4) Alternatives to landfilling like recycling should be allowed
within the petition process.
The Agency does not delist wastes which are recycled because the
model used to estimate risk is based only on disposal of waste in a
Subtitle D landfill. The risk which might result from any other
scenario is not evaluated by the delisting program. However, the Agency
encourages safe recycling, and variances and exclusions from the
definition of solid and hazardous wastes are available for wastes which
are recycled.
(5) Analytical methods should be specified in the pre-approved
common sampling plan instead of requiring each participant to submit a
site-specific list of methods.
Allowing the petitioner to choose an analytical method which meets
the data quality objectives specific to the delisting petition provides
flexibility. Data quality objectives will vary depending on the
allowable levels which are a function of the volume of petitioned
waste. The Agency believes that the flexibility of performance based
methods results in better data.
(6) Detection limits should not be required prior to sampling since
they cannot be adequately predicted without a way to estimate matrix
effects.
Although matrix effects cannot be assessed in advance of laboratory
analysis, a laboratory should be able to provide estimated detection
levels and reporting levels which are lower than, or at least equal to,
the allowable delisting level for each constituent.
(7) Since the process generating the sludge is extremely stable,
verification sampling should be conducted on an annual, instead of
quarterly, basis. The requirement that any process change be promptly
reported and the exclusion suspended until EPA gives written approval
that the delisting can continue is an adequate safeguard justifying the
decrease in sample event frequency.
Verification data submitted in conjunction with past delistings of
this waste have shown significant variation on a quarterly basis over
longer periods of time. Annual sampling would not detect such
variations. Once enough verification data are collected to support a
statistical analysis, a change in the frequency of verification
sampling and/or sampling parameters may be considered.
(8) The final Federal Register should make it clear that assembly
plants that manufacture light trucks are also eligible for the project.
Today's notice specifically defines eligible facilities as
inclusive of manufacturers of light trucks.
(9) The table of maximum allowable levels in the March 7, 2002
proposed rule contains errors in the columns for vinyl chloride.
The error was caused by a missing space or tab in the table.
Although vinyl chloride was not detected in the waste at any of the six
facilities, the maximum allowable concentrations proposed for 1,000
cubic yards of waste should have been a total of 178 milligrams per
kilogram (mg/kg) and 0.00384 milligrams per liter (mg/L) in the TCLP.
For 2,000 cubic yards of waste, 115 mg/kg total and 0.00234 mg/L TCLP
were proposed. For 3,000 cubic yards of waste, 89.4 mg/kg total and
0.00175 mg/L TCLP were proposed.
V. Final Rule Granting these Petitions
A. What Decision Is EPA Finalizing?
Today the EPA is finalizing exclusions to conditionally delist
wastewater treatment plant sludge from conversion coating on aluminum
generated at the following facilities: (1) General Motors Corporation,
Pontiac East Plant, in Pontiac, Michigan (3,000 cubic yards annually);
(2) General Motors Corporation, Hamtramck Plant, in Detroit, Michigan
(3,000 cubic yards annually); (3) General Motors Corporation, Flint
Truck, in Flint, Michigan (3,000 cubic yards annually); (4) General
Motors Corporation, City of Lansing, and Trigen/Cinergy-USFOS of
Lansing LLC, Lansing Grand River Plant, in Lansing, Michigan (2,000
cubic yards annually); (5) Ford Motor Company, Wixom Assembly Plant, in
Wixom, Michigan (2,000 cubic yards annually); and (6) Ford Motor
Company, Michigan Truck/Wayne Integrated Stamping and Assembly Plant,
in Wayne, Michigan (2,000 cubic yards annually).
On March 7,2002, EPA proposed to exclude or delist these wastewater
treatment sludges from the list of hazardous wastes in 40 CFR 261.31
and accepted public comment on the proposed rule (67 FR 10341). EPA
considered all comments received, and for reasons stated in both the
proposal and this document, we believe that these wastes should be
excluded from hazardous waste control.
B. What Are the Terms of This Exclusion?
The facilities must dispose of the waste in a lined Subtitle D
landfill which is permitted, licensed, or registered by a state to
manage industrial waste. The facilities must verify on a quarterly
basis that the concentrations of the constituents of concern do not
exceed the allowable levels set forth in this exclusion by obtaining
and analyzing a representative sample of the waste according to the
current waste analysis plan modified to include the improved
methodologies discussed in section III. B.
The list of constituents for verification is a subset of those
initially tested for and is based on the occurrence of
[[Page 44656]]
constituents at the majority of facilities and the concentrations
relative to the allowable levels. Since all the facilities include
significant amounts of nickel in the leachate and nickel combines with
thallium targeting the liver and cadmium targeting the kidney, the
total hazard index from nickel and thallium combined and/or nickel and
cadmium combined shall not exceed 1.0.
This exclusion applies only to the maximum annual volumes cited in
section V.A. of this preamble and is effective only if all conditions
contained in this rule are satisfied.
C. When Is the Delisting Effective?
This rule is effective July 30, 2003. The Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 amended section 3010 of RCRA to allow rules to
become effective in less than six months when the regulated community
does not need the six-month period to come into compliance. This rule
reduces rather than increases the existing requirements and, therefore,
is effective immediately upon publication under the Administrative
Procedure Act, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
D. How Does This Action Affect the States?
Today's exclusion is being issued under the federal RCRA delisting
program. Therefore, only states subject to federal RCRA delisting
provisions would be affected. This exclusion is not effective in states
which have received authorization to make their own delisting
decisions. Also, the exclusion may not be effective in states having a
dual system that includes federal RCRA requirements and their own
requirements. EPA allows states to impose their own 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.
Because a dual system (that is, both federal (RCRA) and state (non-
RCRA) programs) may regulate a petitioner's waste, 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 a participating facility transports the
petitioned waste to or manages the waste in any state with delisting
authorization, it must obtain a delisting from that state before it can
manage the waste as nonhazardous in the state.
VI. Regulatory Impact
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), these
rules are not of general applicability and therefore are not regulatory
actions subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.
Because these rules are each of particular applicability relating to a
particular facility, they are 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 each of the rules will affect only
a particular facility, each rule will not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as specified in section 203 of UMRA, or
communities of tribal governments, as specified in Executive Order
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). For the same reason, each rule
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 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). These rules also are not subject to Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because they are not economically
significant.
These rules do not involve technical standards; thus, the
requirements of section 12(c) 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 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996),
in issuing these rules, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. These rules do not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
VII. Congressional Review Act
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 Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States. EPA will submit a report containing these rules and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, the Comptroller General of the United States prior to
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. Each of these
rules is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). These
rules will become effective on the date of publication in the Federal
Register.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 261
Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Recycling, and Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: Sec. 3001(f) RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921(f).
Dated: July 21, 2003.
Margaret M. Guerriero,
Acting Director, Waste, Pesticides and Toxics 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. In Table 1 of Appendix IX of part 261 the following wastestreams are
added in alphabetical order by facility to read as follows:
Appendix IX to Part 261--Wastes Excluded Under Sec. Sec. 260.20 and
260.22
[[Page 44657]]
Table 1.--Wastes Excluded From Non-Specific Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility and address Waste description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Ford Motor Company, Michigan Truck Plant and Wayne
Integrated Stamping and Assembly Plant.
--Wayne, Michigan............................... Waste water treatment plant sludge, F019, that is
generated by Ford Motor Company at the Wayne Integrated
Stamping and Assembly Plant from wastewaters from both
the Wayne Integrated Stamping and Assembly Plant and the
Michigan Truck Plant, Wayne, Michigan at a maximum annual
rate of 2,000 cubic yards per year. The sludge must be
disposed of in a lined landfill with leachate collection,
which is licensed, permitted, or otherwise authorized to
accept the delisted wastewater treatment sludge in
accordance with 40 CFR part 258. The exclusion becomes
effective as of July 30, 2003.
1. Delisting Levels: (A) The TCLP concentrations measured
in any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/L):
Antimony--0.659; Arsenic--0.3; Cadmium--0.48; Chromium--
4.95; Lead--5; Nickel--90.5; Selenium--1; Thallium--
0.282; Tin--721; Zinc--898; p-Cresol--11.4; and
Formaldehyde--84.2. (B) The total concentrations measured
in any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/
kg): Mercury--8.92; and Formaldehyde--689. (C) The sum of
the ratios of the TCLP concentrations to the delisting
levels for nickel and thallium and for nickel and cadmium
shall not exceed 1.0.
2. Quarterly Verification Testing: To verify that the
waste does not exceed the specified delisting levels, the
facility must collect and analyze one waste sample on a
quarterly basis.
3. Changes in Operating Conditions: The facility 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. The facility must handle
wastes generated after the process change as hazardous
until it has demonstrated that the wastes continue to
meet the delisting levels 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. Data Submittals: The facility must submit the data
obtained through verification testing or as required by
other conditions of this rule to both U.S. EPA Region 5,
Waste Management Branch (DW-8J), 77 W. Jackson Blvd.,
Chicago, IL 60604 and MDEQ, Waste Management Division,
Hazardous Waste Program Section, at P.O. Box 30241,
Lansing, Michigan 48909. The quarterly verification data
and certification of proper disposal must be submitted
annually upon the anniversary of the effective date of
this exclusion. The facility must compile, summarize, and
maintain on site for a minimum of five years records of
operating conditions and analytical data. The facility
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).
5. Reopener Language--(a) If, anytime after disposal of
the delisted waste, the facility 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 level in the leachate higher than the
specified delisting level, or is in the groundwater at a
concentration higher than the maximum allowable
groundwater concentration in paragraph (e), then the
facility 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 the
facility with an opportunity to present information as
to why the proposed Agency action is not necessary or
to suggest an alternative action. The facility shall
have 30 days from the date of the Regional
Administrator's notice to present the information.
(d) If after 30 days the facility 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 (ug/
L): Antimony--6; Arsenic--4.87; Cadmium--5; Chromium--
100; Lead--15; Nickel--750; Selenium--50; Thallium--2;
Tin--22,500; Zinc--11,300; p-Cresol--188; and
Formaldehyde--1,380.
Ford Motor Company, Wixom Assembly Plant:
--Wixom, Michigan............................... Waste water treatment plant sludge, F019, that is
generated by Ford Motor Company at the Wixom Assembly
Plant, Wixom, Michigan at a maximum annual rate of 2,000
cubic yards per year. The sludge must be disposed of in a
lined landfill with leachate collection, which is
licensed, permitted, or otherwise authorized to accept
the delisted wastewater treatment sludge in accordance
with 40 CFR Part 258. The exclusion becomes effective as
of July 30, 2003. The conditions in paragraphs (2)
through (5) for Ford Motor Company--Michigan Truck Plant
and Wayne Integrated Stamping Plant--Wayne, Michigan also
apply.
Delisting Levels: (A) The TCLP concentrations measured in
any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/L):
Antimony--0.659; Arsenic--0.3; Cadmium--0.48; Chromium--
4.95; Lead--5; Nickel--90.5; Selenium--1; Thallium--
0.282; Tin--721; Zinc--898; p-Cresol--11.4; and
Formaldehyde--84.2. (B) The total concentrations measured
in any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/
kg): Mercury--8.92; and Formaldehyde--689. (C) The sum of
the ratios of the TCLP concentrations to the delisting
levels for nickel and thallium and for nickel and cadmium
shall not exceed 1.0.
[[Page 44658]]
General Motors Corporation, Flint Truck:
--Flint, Michigan............................... Waste water treatment plant sludge, F019, that is
generated by General Motors Corporation at Flint Truck,
Flint, Michigan at a maximum annual rate of 3,000 cubic
yards per year. The sludge must be disposed of in a lined
landfill with leachate collection, which is licensed,
permitted, or otherwise authorized to accept the delisted
wastewater treatment sludge in accordance with 40 CFR
part 258. The exclusion becomes effective as of July 30,
2003. The conditions in paragraphs (2) through (5) for
Ford Motor Company--Michigan Truck Plant and Wayne
Integrated Stamping Plant--Wayne, Michigan also apply.
Delisting Levels: (A) The TCLP concentrations measured in
any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/L):
Antimony--0.494; Arsenic--0.224; Cadmium--0.36; Chromium--
3.71; Lead--5; Nickel--67.8; Selenium--1; Thallium--
0.211; Tin--540; Zinc--673; p-Cresol--8.55; and
Formaldehyde--63. (B) The total concentrations measured
in any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/
kg): Mercury--6.34; and Formaldehyde--535. (C) The sum of
the ratios of the TCLP concentration to the delisting
level for nickel and thallium and for nickel and cadmium
shall not exceed 1.0.
General Motors Corporation, Hamtramck:
--Detroit, Michigan............................. Waste water treatment plant sludge, F019, that is
generated by General Motors Corporation at Hamtramck,
Detroit, Michigan at a maximum annual rate of 3,000 cubic
yards per year. The sludge must be disposed of in a lined
landfill with leachate collection, which is licensed,
permitted, or otherwise authorized to accept the delisted
wastewater treatment sludge in accordance with 40 CFR
part 258. The exclusion becomes effective as of July 30,
2003. The conditions in paragraphs (2) through (5) for
Ford Motor Company--Michigan Truck Plant and Wayne
Integrated Stamping Plant--Wayne, Michigan also apply. A
maximum allowable groundwater concentration of 3,750
[mu]g/L for n-butyl alcohol is added to paragraph (5)(e).
Delisting Levels: (A) The TCLP concentrations measured in
any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/L):
Antimony--0.494; Arsenic--0.224; Cadmium--0.36; Chromium--
3.71; Lead--5; Nickel--67.8; Selenium--1; Thallium--
0.211; Tin--540; Zinc--673; p-Cresol--8.55; Formaldehyde--
63; and n-Butyl alcohol--171. (B) The total
concentrations measured in any sample may not exceed the
following levels (mg/kg): Mercury--6.34; and
Formaldehyde--535. (C) The sum of the ratios of the TCLP
concentration to the delisting level for nickel and
thallium and for nickel and cadmium shall not exceed 1.0.
General Motors Corporation, Pontiac East:
--Pontiac, Michigan............................. Waste water treatment plant sludge, F019, that is
generated by General Motors Corporation at Pontiac East,
Pontiac, Michigan at a maximum annual rate of 3,000 cubic
yards per year. The sludge must be disposed of in a lined
landfill with leachate collection, which is licensed,
permitted, or otherwise authorized to accept the delisted
wastewater treatment sludge in accordance with 40 CFR
part 258. The exclusion becomes effective as of July 30,
2003. The conditions in paragraphs (2) through (5) for
Ford Motor Company--Michigan Truck Plant and Wayne
Integrated Stamping Plant--Wayne, Michigan also apply.
Delisting Levels: (A) The TCLP concentrations measured in
any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/L):
Antimony--0.494; Arsenic--0.224; Cadmium--0.36; Chromium--
3.71; Lead--5; Nickel--67.8; Selenium--1; Thallium--
0.211; Tin--540; Zinc--673; p-Cresol--8.55; and
Formaldehyde--63. (B) The total concentrations measured
in any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/
kg): Mercury--6.34; and Formaldehyde--535. (C) The sum of
the ratios of the TCLP concentrations to the delisting
levels for nickel and thallium and for nickel and cadmium
shall not exceed 1.0.
Trigen/Cinergy-USFOS of Lansing LLC at General
Motors Corporation, Lansing Grand River:
--Lansing, Michigan............................. Waste water treatment plant sludge, F019, that is
generated at General Motors Corporation's Lansing Grand
River (GM-Grand River) facility by Trigen/Cinergy-USFOS
of Lansing LLC exclusively from wastewaters from GM-Grand
River, Lansing, Michigan at a maximum annual rate of
2,000 cubic yards per year. The sludge must be disposed
of in a lined landfill with leachate collection, which is
licensed, permitted, or otherwise authorized to accept
the delisted wastewater treatment sludge in accordance
with 40 CFR Part 258. The exclusion becomes effective as
of July 30, 2003. The conditions in paragraphs (2)
through (5) for Ford Motor Company--Michigan Truck Plant
and Wayne Integrated Stamping Plant--Wayne, Michigan also
apply.
Delisting Levels: (A) The TCLP concentrations measured in
any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/L):
Antimony--0.659; Arsenic--0.3; Cadmium--0.48; Chromium--
4.95; Lead--5; Nickel--90.5; Selenium--1; Thallium--
0.282; Tin--721; Zinc--898; p-Cresol--11.4; and
Formaldehyde--84.2. (B) The total concentrations measured
in any sample may not exceed the following levels (mg/
kg): Mercury--8.92; and Formaldehyde--689. (C) The sum of
the ratios of the TCLP concentrations to the delisting
levels for nickel and thallium and for nickel and cadmium
shall not exceed 1.0.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 44659]]
[FR Doc. 03-19285 Filed 7-29-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P