Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Final Rule, 54713-54717 [E8-22170]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
must be printed on each piece claimed
at the respective price. The basic
required marking must be placed in the
postage area (printed or produced as
part of, or directly below or to the left
of, the permit imprint indicia or meter
stamp or impression). Optionally, the
basic required marking may be printed
on the shipping address label as service
indicators composed of a service icon
and service banner (see Exhibit 2.2.1):
a. The service icon that identifies the
marking will be a 1-inch solid black
square. If the service icon is used, it
must appear in the upper left corner of
the shipping label.
b. The service banner must appear
directly below the postage payment area
and the service icon, and it must extend
across the shipping label. If the service
banner is used, the appropriate marking
(e.g., ‘‘PARCEL SELECT’’, ‘‘MEDIA
MAIL’’) must be preceded by the text
‘‘USPS’’ and must be printed in
minimum 20-point bold sans serif
typeface, uppercase letters, centered
within the banner, and bordered above
and below by minimum 1-point
separator lines. There must be a 1⁄16inch clearance above and below the text.
[Revise the heading of exhibit 2.2.1 as
follows:]
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Exhibit 2.2.1 Marking Indicator
Examples
[Revise Exhibit 2.2.1 by replacing
‘‘USPS PARCEL POST’’ WITH ‘‘USPS
PARCEL SELECT’’.]
Parcel Select
*
*
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
*
16:35 Sep 22, 2008
Jkt 214001
Mail Preparation
*
*
*
*
*
1.0 General Information for Mail
Preparation
*
*
*
*
*
1.8 Parcel Select Markings
[Revise text of 1.8 as follows:]
Each piece in a Parcel Select mailing
must bear a price marking. Markings
must appear in either the postage area
described in 402.2.2.1 or in the address
area on the line directly above or two
lines above the address if the marking
appears alone (when no other
information appears on that line). The
‘‘Parcel Post’’ marking is not allowed on
any Parcel Select mailpiece. The
following product markings are
required:
a. Destination Entry—‘‘Parcel Select’’.
b. BMC Presort—‘‘Parcel Select BMC
Presort’’ or ‘‘Parcel Select BMC PRSRT’’.
c. OBMC Presort (Inter-BMC)—
‘‘Parcel Select OBMC Presort’’ or
‘‘Parcel Select OBMC PRSRT’’.
d. Barcoded Intra-BMC and Barcoded
Inter-BMC—‘‘Parcel Select Barcoded’’ or
‘‘Parcel Select BC’’.
*
*
*
*
*
Neva Watson,
Attorney, Legislative.
[FR Doc. E8–22075 Filed 9–22–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
2.2.2 Parcel Select Markings
[Revise the text in 2.2.2 as follows:]
Each piece in a Parcel Select mailing
must bear a price marking. Markings
must appear in either the postage area
described in 2.2.1 or in the address area
on the line directly above or two lines
above the address if the marking
appears alone (when no other
information appears on that line). The
‘‘Parcel Post’’ marking is not allowed on
any Parcel Select mailpiece. The
following product markings are
required:
a. Destination Entry—‘‘Parcel Select’’.
b. BMC Presort—‘‘Parcel Select BMC
Presort’’ or ‘‘Parcel Select BMC PRSRT’’.
c. OBMC Presort (Inter-BMC)—
‘‘Parcel Select OBMC Presort’’ or
‘‘Parcel Select OBMC PRSRT’’.
d. Barcoded Intra-BMC and Barcoded
Inter-BMC—‘‘Parcel Select Barcoded’’ or
‘‘Parcel Select BC’’.
[Delete 2.2.3 in its entirety and
renumber current 2.2.4 through 2.2.7 as
2.2.3 through 2.2.6]
*
*
*
*
*
450
455
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA–R06–RCRA–2008–0455; SW–FRL–
8713–3]
Hazardous Waste Management
System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Final Rule
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is issuing a final rule to
add the name of Structural Metals, Inc,
to the exclusion granted to Conversion
Systems Inc., (CSI) on June 13, 1995. As
described in the exclusion issued to CSI
in paragraph (1)(B), the Agency shall
add the location of the treatment facility
and the name of the steel mill
contracting CSI’s services. This rule
adds the location of U.S. Ecology, Texas
Ecology in Robstown, Texas as the
treatment facility and Structural Metals,
Inc. as the steel mill contracting the
services of CSI. This rule also updates
the 1995 exclusion to include
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
54713
Paragraphs (6) and (7), the Delisting
Reopener language and Notification
Requirements; and other updates
regarding the disposal and submission
of Quality Assurance Plan prior to
submission of data for a new facility.
DATES: This rule is effective September
23, 2008.
ADDRESSES: The public docket for this
direct final rule is located at 1445 Ross
Avenue in the FOIA Review Room,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06–
RCRA–2008–0455. All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://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 https://
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 direct final
rule, EPA–R06–RCRA–2008–0455, is
available for viewing from 9 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays. The public may copy
material from the regulatory docket at
$0.15 per page. 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. The public may copy
material from any regulatory docket at
no cost for the first 100 pages and at a
cost of $0.15 per page for additional
copies.
For
further technical information
concerning this document or for
appointments to view the docket,
contact Michelle Peace, Environmental
Protection Agency, Multimedia
Planning and Permitting Division,
RCRA Branch, Mail Code: 6PD–C, 1445
Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202, by
calling 214–665–7430 or by e-mail at
peace.michelle@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
On June
13, 1995 (60 FR 31107), EPA finalized
a conditional multiple site exclusion to
Conversion Systems Inc., in Horsham,
Pennsylvania. In 1995, CSI petitioned
EPA for a multiple site exclusion for
chemically stabilized electric arc
furnace dust (CSEAFD) resulting from
the Super DetoxTM process as modified
by CSI. The original Super DetoxTM
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
54714
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
process was developed by Bethlehem
Steel Corporation and used at its
Johnstown and Steelton, Pennsylvania
facilities. Specifically, CSI was granted
the exclusion for CSEAFD generated at
the existing Sterling, Illinois facility at
Northwestern Steel and future facilities
to be constructed. CSI initially planned
to construct twelve other facilities
nationwide. The resulting CSEAFD is
classified as K061 hazardous waste by
virtue of the derived from rule.
On March 20, 2006, CSI submitted a
K061 Delisting Initial Verification
Testing Report to EPA Region 6 in
accordance with paragraph 1(A) of the
exclusion. It lists Structural Metals Inc,
as the new source and U.S. Ecology in
Robstown, TX as the treatment location.
The data package included sampling
results from four (4) representative
composite samples of the waste. This
data was reviewed by EPA and also
evaluated using the Delisting Risk
Assessment Software (DRAS) currently
used to evaluate new petitions. All
constituent concentrations are below the
delisting levels published in the
exclusion and meet the current DRAS
delisting exit levels.
The Agency is also taking this time to
update the 1995 CSI exclusion to make
the following corrections and additions
to the exclusion:
(1) The address of the CSI facility has
changed from Horsham, PA and is now
located in Willow Grove, PA;
(2) Reports should be submitted to the
appropriate Regional Director or his/her
designee and no longer the EPA
Administrator;
(3) New facilities added to this
petition should submit and get EPA
approval of their Quality Assurance
Project Plans for the verification testing
prior to requesting addition to the
existing petition; and
(4) Paragraphs (6) and (7) are added to
the exclusion language.
The purpose of paragraph (6), the
Delisting Reopener Language, is to
require the facility 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. The petitioner must also use
this procedure, if the waste samples fail
to meet the levels found in paragraph
(3). 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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:35 Sep 22, 2008
Jkt 214001
This provision expressly requires the
petitioner to report differing site
conditions or assumptions used in the
petition. Additionally, it requires the
petitioner to report within 10 days of
discovery, instances where testing
indicates that delisting levels were not
achieved and the waste was
subsequently managed as nonhazardous waste. 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 § 268.6.
It is EPA’s position that it has the
authority under RCRA and the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5
U.S.C. 551, 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
section 553 (b)(3)(B).
EPA is also adding paragraph (7),
Notification Requirements. The
treatment facility is required to notify
State environmental agencies at least 60
days before beginning the transport and
disposal of delisted wastes. This
notification would be require for the
state where the treated waste is
generated as well as states through
which the waste is transported and
disposed.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
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
54715
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
1. The authority citation for part 261
continues to read as follows:
■
Environmental protection, Hazardous
waste, Recycling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921,
6922 and 6938.
Authority: Sec. 3001(f) RCRA, 42 U.S.C.
6921(f).
■
Dated: August 29, 2008.
Bill Luthans,
Acting Director, Multimedia Planning and
Permitting Division, EPA Region 6.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
■
2. Appendix IX to Part 261, Table 2—
Wastes Excluded from Specific Sources
is amended by adding the following
entry in alphabetical order to
‘‘Conversion Systems Inc.,’’ to read as
follows:
Appendix IX to Part 261—Wastes
Excluded Under §§ 260.20 and 260.22
*
*
*
*
*
TABLE 2—WASTES EXCLUDED FROM SPECIFIC SOURCES
Facility
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
*
Conversion Systems, Inc.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Address
Waste description
*
Willow Grove, PA
*
*
*
*
*
Chemically Stabilized Electric Arc Furnace Dust (CSEAFD) that is generated by Conversion Systems Inc.
(CSI) using the Super DetoxTM process as modified by CSI to treat EAFD (EPA Hazardous Waste No.
K061) at the following sites and that is disposed of in Subtitle C landfills:
Northwestern Steel, Sterling, Illinois after June 13, 1995.
Structural Metals, Inc. treated at U.S. Ecology, Robstown, Texas after September 23, 2008.
(1) Verification Testing Requirements: Sample collection and analyses, including quality control procedures must be performed using appropriate methods. As applicable to the method-defined parameters
of concern, analyses requiring the use of SW–846 methods incorporated by reference in 40 CFR
260.11 must be used without substitution. As applicable, the SW–846 methods might include Methods
0010, 0011, 0020, 0023A, 0030, 0031, 0040, 0050, 0051, 0060, 0061, 1010A, 1020B, 1110A, 1310B,
1311, 1312, 1320, 1330A, 9010C, 9012B, 9040C, 9045D, 9060A, 9070A (uses EPA Method 1664,
Rev. A), 9071B, and 9095B.
(A) Initial Verification Testing: During the first 20 operating days of full scale operation of a newly constructed Super DetoxTM treatment facility, CSI must analyze a minimum of four (4) composite samples
of CSEAFD representative of the full 20-day period. Composites must be comprised of representative
samples collected from every batch generated. The CSEAFD samples must be analyzed for the constituents listed in Condition (3). CSI must report the operational and analytical test data, including quality control information, obtained during this initial period no later than 60 days after the generation of
the first batch of CSEAFD.
(B) Addition of New Super DetoxTM Treatment Facilities to Exclusion: If the Agency’s review of the data
obtained during initial verification testing indicates that the CSEAFD generated by a specific Super
DetoxTM treatment facility consistently meets the delisting levels specified in Condition (3), the Agency
will publish a notice adding to this exclusion the location of the new Super DetoxTM treatment facility
and the name of the steel mill contracting CSI’s services. If the Agency’s review of the data obtained
during initial verification testing indicates that the CSEAFD generated by a specific Super DetoxTM
treatment facility fails to consistently meet the conditions of this exclusion, the Agency will not publish
the notice adding the new facility.
(C) Subsequent Verification Testing: For the Sterling, Illinois facility and any new facility subsequently
added to CSI’s conditional multiple-site exclusion, CSI must collect and analyze at least one composite
sample of CSEAFD each month. The composite samples must be composed of representative samples collected from all batches treated in each month. The composite samples must be composed representative samples collected from all batches treated in each month. These monthly representative
samples must be analyzed, prior to disposal of the CSEAFD, for the constituents listed in Condition
(3). CSI may, at its discretion, analyze composite samples gathered more frequently to demonstrate
that smaller batches of waste are non-hazardous.
(2) Waste Holding and Handling: CSI must store as hazardous all CSEAFD generated until verification
testing as specified in Conditions (1)(A) and (1)(C), as appropriate, is completed and valid analyses
demonstrate that Condition (3) is satisfied. If the levels of constituents measured in the samples of
CSEAFD do not exceed the levels set forth in Condition (3), then the CSEAFD is non-hazardous and
may be managed and disposed of in Subtitle D landfills. If constituent levels in a sample exceed any of
the delisting levels set in Condition (3), the CSEAFD generated during the time period corresponding
to this sample must be retreated until it meets these levels, or managed and disposed of in accordance with Subtitle C of RCRA. CSEAFD generated by a new CSI treatment facility must be managed
as a hazardous waste prior to the addition of the name and location of the facility to the exclusion.
After addition of the new facility to the exclusion, CSEAFD generated during the verification testing in
Condition (1)(A) is also non-hazardous, if the delisting levels in Condition (3) are satisfied.
16:35 Sep 22, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
54716
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—WASTES EXCLUDED FROM SPECIFIC SOURCES—Continued
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Facility
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Address
*
16:35 Sep 22, 2008
Waste description
(3) Delisting Levels: All leachable constituents for those metals must not exceed the following levels
(ppm): Antimony-0.06; Arsenic-0.50; Barium-7.6; Beryllium-0.010; Cadmium-0.050; Chromium-0.33;
Lead-0.15; Mercury-0.009; Nickel-1.00; Selenium-0.16; Silver-0.30; Thallium-0.020; Vanadium-2.0;
Zinc-70. Metal concentrations must be measured in the waste leachate by the method specified in 40
CFR 261.24.
(4) Changes in Operating Conditions: After initiating subsequent testing described in Condition (1)(C), if
CSI significantly changes the stabilization process established under Condition (1) (e.g., use of new
stabilization reagents), CSI must notify the Agency in writing. After written approval by EPA, CSI may
handle CSEAFD generated from the new process as non-hazardous, if the wastes meet the delisting
levels set in Condition (3).
(5) Data Submittals: CSI must submit the information described below. If CSI 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). CSI
must:
(A) At least one month prior to operation of a new Super DetoxTM treatment facility, CSI must notify, in
writing, the EPA Regional Administrator or his designee, when the new Super DetoxTM treatment facility is scheduled to be on-line. The data obtained through paragraph 1(A) must be submitted to the Regional Administrator or his designee within the time period specified. All supporting data can be submitted on CD–ROM or some comparable electronic media.
(B) CSI shall submit and receive EPA approval of the Quality Assurance Project Plan for data collection
for each new facility added to this exclusion prior to conducting sampling events in paragraph 1(A).
(C) Compile records of analytical data from paragraph (3), summarized, and maintained on-site for a
minimum of five years.
(D) Furnish these records and data when either EPA or the State agency requests them for inspection.
(E) Send along with all data a signed copy of the following certification statement, to attest to the truth
and accuracy of the data submitted. ‘‘Under civil and criminal penalty of law for the making or submission of false or fraudulent statements or representations (pursuant to the applicable provisions of the
Federal Code, which include, but may not be limited to, 18 U.S.C. 1001 and 42 U.S.C. 6928), I certify
that the information contained in or accompanying this document is true, accurate and complete.
As to the (those) identified section(s) of this document for which I cannot personally verify its (their) truth
and accuracy, I certify as the company official having supervisory responsibility for the persons who,
acting under my direct instructions, made the verification that this information is true, accurate and
complete. 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 CSI, the treatment facility, or the steel
mill possess or is otherwise made aware of any data (including but not limited to leachate data or
ground water monitoring data) relevant to the delisted waste indicating that any constituent identified
for the delisting verification testing is at a level higher than the delisting level allowed by EPA in granting the petition, then the facility must report the data, in writing, to EPA within 10 days of first possessing or being made aware of that data.
(B) If subsequent verification testing of the waste as required by paragraph 1(C) does not meet the
delisting requirements in paragraph 3 and the waste is subsequently managed as non-hazardous
waste, CSI must report the data, in writing, to EPA within 10 days of first possessing or being made
aware of that data.
(C) If CSI fails to submit the information described in paragraphs (5), (6)(A) or (6)(B) or if any other information is received from any source, EPA will make a preliminary determination as to whether the reported information requires 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 EPA determines that the reported information requires action, EPA will notify the facility in writing of
the actions it 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 explaining why the proposed EPA action is not necessary. The facility shall have
10 days from the date of EPA’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), EPA will issue a final written determination describing the actions that are necessary
to protect human health and/or the environment. Any required action described in EPA’s determination
shall become effective immediately, unless EPA provides otherwise.
(7) Notification Requirements: CSI or the treatment facility must do the following before transporting the
delisted waste. Failure to provide this notification will result in a violation of the delisting petition and a
possible revocation of the decision.
(A) Provide a one-time written notification to any state Regulatory Agency to which or through which it
will transport the delisted waste described above for disposal, 60 days before beginning such activities.
(B) Update the one-time written notification if it ships the delisted waste into a different disposal facility.
(C) Failure to provide this notification will result in a violation of the delisting exclusion and a possible
revocation of the decision.
*
*
*
*
*
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 23, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
[FR Doc. E8–22170 Filed 9–22–08; 8:45 am]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Background
The BLM has specific authority to
charge fees for processing applications
and other documents relating to public
lands under Section 304 of the Federal
Land Policy and Management Act of
1976 (FLPMA), 43 U.S.C. 1734. In 2005,
the BLM published a final cost recovery
rule (70 FR 58854) establishing or
revising certain fees and service charges,
and establishing the method it would
use to adjust those fees and service
charges on an annual basis.
At 43 CFR 3000.12(a), the regulations
provide that the BLM will annually
adjust fees established in Subchapter C
according to changes in the Implicit
Price Deflator for Gross Domestic
Product (IPD–GDP), which is published
quarterly by the U.S. Department of
Commerce. (See also 43 CFR 3000.10.)
Because the fee recalculations are
simply based on a mathematical
formula, we have changed the fees in a
final rule without providing opportunity
for notice and comment. This final rule
will allow the BLM to update these fees
and service charges by October 1 of this
year, as required by the 2005 regulation.
The public had an opportunity to
comment on this procedure during the
comment period on the original cost
recovery rule, and this new rule simply
administers the procedure set forth in
those regulations. The Department of
the Interior, therefore, for good cause
finds under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and (d)(3)
that notice and public comment
procedures are unnecessary, and that
the rule may be effective less than 30
days after publication.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
43 CFR Part 3000
[WO–310–1310–PP–24 1A]
RIN 1004–AE01
Minerals Management: Adjustment of
Cost Recovery Fees
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
mineral resources regulations to update
some fees that cover the BLM’s cost of
processing certain documents relating to
its mineral programs and some filing
fees for mineral-related documents.
These updates include fees for actions
such as lease applications, name
changes, corporate mergers, and lease
consolidations.
DATES: Effective date: This final rule is
effective October 1, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim
Spisak, Chief, Division of Fluid
Minerals, 202–452–5061, or Cynthia
Ellis, Regulatory Affairs Specialist, (202)
452–5012. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may leave a message for these
individuals with the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–
800–877–8339, 24 hours a day, 7 days
a week.
ADDRESSES: You may send inquiries or
suggestions to Director (630), Bureau of
Land Management, MS–LS 401, 1849 C
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240;
Attention: RIN 1004–AE01.
Discussion of Final Rule
BLM’s first fee update rule became
effective on October 1, 2007. 72 FR
50882 (Sept. 5, 2007). The fee updates
effective each October 1 are based on
54717
the IPD–GDP for the 4th Quarter of the
preceding calendar year. See 72 FR
50882. This fee update is based on the
IPD–GDP for 4th Quarter 2007, thus
reflecting inflation over the four
calendar quarters since 4th Quarter
2006.
This rule also includes a minor
amendment to BLM’s stated method of
rounding numbers to arrive at the final
fee. The final 2005 and 2007 rules stated
that values would be rounded ‘‘to the
nearest $5.00.’’ 70 FR 58855; 72 FR
50884. In this rule we adjust for the first
time the geothermal nomination fee of
$100 plus $0.10 per acre nominated.1
Because rounding the adjusted value for
a fee of $0.10 to the nearest $5.00 cannot
be sensibly implemented, we will round
values for fees under $1.00 to the
nearest penny. Pursuant to the
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
section 553(b)(B), BLM finds that notice
and public comment procedure on this
point are unnecessary because this is a
minor revision that is consistent with
general business practices. Moreover,
BLM did not receive any comments on
rounding when it proposed to round
fees down or up to the nearest $5.00 in
the 2005 proposed rule. 70 FR 41540.
The Attorney General’s Manual on the
APA states that the term ‘‘unnecessary’’
in 5 U.S.C. section 553(b)(B) ‘‘refers to
the issuance of a minor rule or
amendment in which the public is not
particularly interested.’’ FEDERAL
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
SOURCEBOOK 63 (William F. Funk,
Jeffrey S. Lubbers & Charles Pou, Jr.,
eds., ABA Publishing 3d ed. 2000). BLM
has determined that this amendment
falls within that category.
The calculations that resulted in the
new fees are included in the table
below.
FIXED COST RECOVERY FEES FY09
Existing
fee 2
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Document/action
Oil & Gas (parts 3100, 3110, 3120, 3130, 3150):
Noncompetitive lease application .....................................................
Competitive lease application ...........................................................
Assignment and transfer of record title or operating rights ..............
Overriding royalty transfer, payment out of production ....................
Name change, corporate merger or transfer to heir/devisee ...........
Lease consolidation ..........................................................................
Lease renewal or exchange .............................................................
Lease reinstatement, Class I ............................................................
Leasing under right-of-way ...............................................................
Geophysical exploration permit application—Alaska .......................
Renewal of exploration permit—Alaska ...........................................
Geothermal (part 3200):
1 When the 2007 cost recovery fee update rule
was issued, we did not update this fee because it
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:35 Sep 22, 2008
Jkt 214001
Existing
value 3
$360
140
80
10
185
395
360
70
360
25
25
IPD–GDP
increase 4
New value 5
$357.88
138.88
80.12
10.68
186.95
395.27
357.88
69.44
357.88
....................
....................
$9.20
3.57
2.06
0.27
4.80
10.16
9.20
1.78
9.20
....................
....................
$367.08
142.45
82.18
10.95
191.75
405.43
367.08
71.22
367.08
....................
....................
had been in effect less than one year. 72 FR 50884
n.9 (table).
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\23SER1.SGM
23SER1
New fee 6
$365
140
80
10
190
405
365
70
365
7 25
8 25
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 23, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54713-54717]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22170]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA-R06-RCRA-2008-0455; SW-FRL-8713-3]
Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Final Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing a final
rule to add the name of Structural Metals, Inc, to the exclusion
granted to Conversion Systems Inc., (CSI) on June 13, 1995. As
described in the exclusion issued to CSI in paragraph (1)(B), the
Agency shall add the location of the treatment facility and the name of
the steel mill contracting CSI's services. This rule adds the location
of U.S. Ecology, Texas Ecology in Robstown, Texas as the treatment
facility and Structural Metals, Inc. as the steel mill contracting the
services of CSI. This rule also updates the 1995 exclusion to include
Paragraphs (6) and (7), the Delisting Reopener language and
Notification Requirements; and other updates regarding the disposal and
submission of Quality Assurance Plan prior to submission of data for a
new facility.
DATES: This rule is effective September 23, 2008.
ADDRESSES: The public docket for this direct final rule is located at
1445 Ross Avenue in the FOIA Review Room, identified by Docket ID No.
EPA-R06-RCRA-2008-0455. All documents in the electronic docket are
listed in the https://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 https://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 direct final
rule, EPA-R06-RCRA-2008-0455, is available for viewing from 9 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. The public may
copy material from the regulatory docket at $0.15 per page. 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. The public may copy
material from any regulatory docket at no cost for the first 100 pages
and at a cost of $0.15 per page for additional copies.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further technical information
concerning this document or for appointments to view the docket,
contact Michelle Peace, Environmental Protection Agency, Multimedia
Planning and Permitting Division, RCRA Branch, Mail Code: 6PD-C, 1445
Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202, by calling 214-665-7430 or by e-mail at
peace.michelle@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 13, 1995 (60 FR 31107), EPA
finalized a conditional multiple site exclusion to Conversion Systems
Inc., in Horsham, Pennsylvania. In 1995, CSI petitioned EPA for a
multiple site exclusion for chemically stabilized electric arc furnace
dust (CSEAFD) resulting from the Super DetoxTM process as
modified by CSI. The original Super DetoxTM
[[Page 54714]]
process was developed by Bethlehem Steel Corporation and used at its
Johnstown and Steelton, Pennsylvania facilities. Specifically, CSI was
granted the exclusion for CSEAFD generated at the existing Sterling,
Illinois facility at Northwestern Steel and future facilities to be
constructed. CSI initially planned to construct twelve other facilities
nationwide. The resulting CSEAFD is classified as K061 hazardous waste
by virtue of the derived from rule.
On March 20, 2006, CSI submitted a K061 Delisting Initial
Verification Testing Report to EPA Region 6 in accordance with
paragraph 1(A) of the exclusion. It lists Structural Metals Inc, as the
new source and U.S. Ecology in Robstown, TX as the treatment location.
The data package included sampling results from four (4) representative
composite samples of the waste. This data was reviewed by EPA and also
evaluated using the Delisting Risk Assessment Software (DRAS) currently
used to evaluate new petitions. All constituent concentrations are
below the delisting levels published in the exclusion and meet the
current DRAS delisting exit levels.
The Agency is also taking this time to update the 1995 CSI
exclusion to make the following corrections and additions to the
exclusion:
(1) The address of the CSI facility has changed from Horsham, PA
and is now located in Willow Grove, PA;
(2) Reports should be submitted to the appropriate Regional
Director or his/her designee and no longer the EPA Administrator;
(3) New facilities added to this petition should submit and get EPA
approval of their Quality Assurance Project Plans for the verification
testing prior to requesting addition to the existing petition; and
(4) Paragraphs (6) and (7) are added to the exclusion language.
The purpose of paragraph (6), the Delisting Reopener Language, is
to require the facility 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. The petitioner must also use this
procedure, if the waste samples fail to meet the levels found in
paragraph (3). 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 the petitioner to report
differing site conditions or assumptions used in the petition.
Additionally, it requires the petitioner to report within 10 days of
discovery, instances where testing indicates that delisting levels were
not achieved and the waste was subsequently managed as non-hazardous
waste. 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 Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 551, 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 section 553 (b)(3)(B).
EPA is also adding paragraph (7), Notification Requirements. The
treatment facility is required to notify State environmental agencies
at least 60 days before beginning the transport and disposal of
delisted wastes. This notification would be require for the state where
the treated waste is generated as well as states through which the
waste is transported and disposed.
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 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
[[Page 54715]]
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: August 29, 2008.
Bill Luthans,
Acting Director, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, EPA
Region 6.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations 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. Appendix IX to Part 261, Table 2--Wastes Excluded from Specific
Sources is amended by adding the following entry in alphabetical order
to ``Conversion Systems Inc.,'' to read as follows:
Appendix IX to Part 261--Wastes Excluded Under Sec. Sec. 260.20 and
260.22
* * * * *
Table 2--Wastes Excluded From Specific Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Address Waste description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Conversion Systems, Inc................. Willow Grove, PA........... Chemically Stabilized Electric Arc
Furnace Dust (CSEAFD) that is generated
by Conversion Systems Inc. (CSI) using
the Super Detox\TM\ process as modified
by CSI to treat EAFD (EPA Hazardous
Waste No. K061) at the following sites
and that is disposed of in Subtitle C
landfills:
Northwestern Steel, Sterling, Illinois
after June 13, 1995.
Structural Metals, Inc. treated at U.S.
Ecology, Robstown, Texas after September
23, 2008.
(1) Verification Testing Requirements:
Sample collection and analyses,
including quality control procedures
must be performed using appropriate
methods. As applicable to the method-
defined parameters of concern, analyses
requiring the use of SW-846 methods
incorporated by reference in 40 CFR
260.11 must be used without
substitution. As applicable, the SW-846
methods might include Methods 0010,
0011, 0020, 0023A, 0030, 0031, 0040,
0050, 0051, 0060, 0061, 1010A, 1020B,
1110A, 1310B, 1311, 1312, 1320, 1330A,
9010C, 9012B, 9040C, 9045D, 9060A, 9070A
(uses EPA Method 1664, Rev. A), 9071B,
and 9095B.
(A) Initial Verification Testing: During
the first 20 operating days of full
scale operation of a newly constructed
Super Detox\TM\ treatment facility, CSI
must analyze a minimum of four (4)
composite samples of CSEAFD
representative of the full 20-day
period. Composites must be comprised of
representative samples collected from
every batch generated. The CSEAFD
samples must be analyzed for the
constituents listed in Condition (3).
CSI must report the operational and
analytical test data, including quality
control information, obtained during
this initial period no later than 60
days after the generation of the first
batch of CSEAFD.
(B) Addition of New Super Detox\TM\
Treatment Facilities to Exclusion: If
the Agency's review of the data obtained
during initial verification testing
indicates that the CSEAFD generated by a
specific Super Detox\TM\ treatment
facility consistently meets the
delisting levels specified in Condition
(3), the Agency will publish a notice
adding to this exclusion the location of
the new Super Detox\TM\ treatment
facility and the name of the steel mill
contracting CSI's services. If the
Agency's review of the data obtained
during initial verification testing
indicates that the CSEAFD generated by a
specific Super Detox\TM\ treatment
facility fails to consistently meet the
conditions of this exclusion, the Agency
will not publish the notice adding the
new facility.
(C) Subsequent Verification Testing: For
the Sterling, Illinois facility and any
new facility subsequently added to CSI's
conditional multiple-site exclusion, CSI
must collect and analyze at least one
composite sample of CSEAFD each month.
The composite samples must be composed
of representative samples collected from
all batches treated in each month. The
composite samples must be composed
representative samples collected from
all batches treated in each month. These
monthly representative samples must be
analyzed, prior to disposal of the
CSEAFD, for the constituents listed in
Condition (3). CSI may, at its
discretion, analyze composite samples
gathered more frequently to demonstrate
that smaller batches of waste are non-
hazardous.
(2) Waste Holding and Handling: CSI must
store as hazardous all CSEAFD generated
until verification testing as specified
in Conditions (1)(A) and (1)(C), as
appropriate, is completed and valid
analyses demonstrate that Condition (3)
is satisfied. If the levels of
constituents measured in the samples of
CSEAFD do not exceed the levels set
forth in Condition (3), then the CSEAFD
is non-hazardous and may be managed and
disposed of in Subtitle D landfills. If
constituent levels in a sample exceed
any of the delisting levels set in
Condition (3), the CSEAFD generated
during the time period corresponding to
this sample must be retreated until it
meets these levels, or managed and
disposed of in accordance with Subtitle
C of RCRA. CSEAFD generated by a new CSI
treatment facility must be managed as a
hazardous waste prior to the addition of
the name and location of the facility to
the exclusion. After addition of the new
facility to the exclusion, CSEAFD
generated during the verification
testing in Condition (1)(A) is also non-
hazardous, if the delisting levels in
Condition (3) are satisfied.
[[Page 54716]]
(3) Delisting Levels: All leachable
constituents for those metals must not
exceed the following levels (ppm):
Antimony-0.06; Arsenic-0.50; Barium-7.6;
Beryllium-0.010; Cadmium-0.050; Chromium-
0.33; Lead-0.15; Mercury-0.009; Nickel-
1.00; Selenium-0.16; Silver-0.30;
Thallium-0.020; Vanadium-2.0; Zinc-70.
Metal concentrations must be measured in
the waste leachate by the method
specified in 40 CFR 261.24.
(4) Changes in Operating Conditions:
After initiating subsequent testing
described in Condition (1)(C), if CSI
significantly changes the stabilization
process established under Condition (1)
(e.g., use of new stabilization
reagents), CSI must notify the Agency in
writing. After written approval by EPA,
CSI may handle CSEAFD generated from the
new process as non-hazardous, if the
wastes meet the delisting levels set in
Condition (3).
(5) Data Submittals: CSI must submit the
information described below. If CSI
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). CSI must:
(A) At least one month prior to operation
of a new Super Detox\TM\ treatment
facility, CSI must notify, in writing,
the EPA Regional Administrator or his
designee, when the new Super Detox\TM\
treatment facility is scheduled to be on-
line. The data obtained through
paragraph 1(A) must be submitted to the
Regional Administrator or his designee
within the time period specified. All
supporting data can be submitted on CD-
ROM or some comparable electronic media.
(B) CSI shall submit and receive EPA
approval of the Quality Assurance
Project Plan for data collection for
each new facility added to this
exclusion prior to conducting sampling
events in paragraph 1(A).
(C) Compile records of analytical data
from paragraph (3), summarized, and
maintained on-site for a minimum of five
years.
(D) Furnish these records and data when
either EPA or the State agency requests
them for inspection.
(E) Send along with all data a signed
copy of the following certification
statement, to attest to the truth and
accuracy of the data submitted. ``Under
civil and criminal penalty of law for
the making or submission of false or
fraudulent statements or representations
(pursuant to the applicable provisions
of the Federal Code, which include, but
may not be limited to, 18 U.S.C. 1001
and 42 U.S.C. 6928), I certify that the
information contained in or accompanying
this document is true, accurate and
complete.
As to the (those) identified section(s)
of this document for which I cannot
personally verify its (their) truth and
accuracy, I certify as the company
official having supervisory
responsibility for the persons who,
acting under my direct instructions,
made the verification that this
information is true, accurate and
complete. 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 CSI, the
treatment facility, or the steel mill
possess or is otherwise made aware of
any data (including but not limited to
leachate data or ground water monitoring
data) relevant to the delisted waste
indicating that any constituent
identified for the delisting
verification testing is at a level
higher than the delisting level allowed
by EPA in granting the petition, then
the facility must report the data, in
writing, to EPA within 10 days of first
possessing or being made aware of that
data.
(B) If subsequent verification testing of
the waste as required by paragraph 1(C)
does not meet the delisting requirements
in paragraph 3 and the waste is
subsequently managed as non-hazardous
waste, CSI must report the data, in
writing, to EPA within 10 days of first
possessing or being made aware of that
data.
(C) If CSI fails to submit the
information described in paragraphs (5),
(6)(A) or (6)(B) or if any other
information is received from any source,
EPA will make a preliminary
determination as to whether the reported
information requires 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 EPA determines that the reported
information requires action, EPA will
notify the facility in writing of the
actions it 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
explaining why the proposed EPA action
is not necessary. The facility shall
have 10 days from the date of EPA'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), EPA
will issue a final written determination
describing the actions that are
necessary to protect human health and/or
the environment. Any required action
described in EPA's determination shall
become effective immediately, unless EPA
provides otherwise.
(7) Notification Requirements: CSI or the
treatment facility must do the following
before transporting the delisted waste.
Failure to provide this notification
will result in a violation of the
delisting petition and a possible
revocation of the decision.
(A) Provide a one-time written
notification to any state Regulatory
Agency to which or through which it will
transport the delisted waste described
above for disposal, 60 days before
beginning such activities.
(B) Update the one-time written
notification if it ships the delisted
waste into a different disposal
facility.
(C) Failure to provide this notification
will result in a violation of the
delisting exclusion and a possible
revocation of the decision.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 54717]]
[FR Doc. E8-22170 Filed 9-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
