Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Final Exclusion, 17419-17423 [E9-8651]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
17419
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—WASTE EXCLUDED FROM NON-SPECIFIC SOURCES—Continued
Facility
Address
Waste description
(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 variance and possible revocation of the decision.
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–8646 Filed 4–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA–R06–RCRA–2008–0457; SW–FRL–
8787–8]
Hazardous Waste Management
System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Final Exclusion
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is granting a petition
submitted by Cooper Crouse-Hinds to
exclude (or delist) the sludge and filter
sand (called sludge hereinafter) from its
wastewater treatment plant (WWTP)
generated by Cooper Crouse-Hinds in
Amarillo, Texas from the lists of
hazardous wastes. This final rule
responds to the petition submitted by
Cooper Crouse-Hinds, to delist the
WWTP sludge with Hazardous Waste
Number, F006. After careful analysis
and use of the Delisting Risk
Assessment Software (DRAS), EPA has
concluded the petitioned waste is not
hazardous waste. This exclusion applies
to 816 cubic yards per year of the
WWTP sludge with Hazardous Waste
Number: F006. Accordingly, this final
rule excludes the petitioned waste from
the requirements of hazardous waste
regulations under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
when it is disposed in a Subtitle D
Landfill.
DATES: Effective Date: April 15, 2009.
ADDRESSES: The public docket for this
final rule is located at the
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,
Texas 75202, and is available for
viewing in EPA Freedom of Information
Act review room on the 7th floor from
8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. Call
(214) 665–6444 for appointments. The
reference number for this docket is
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:06 Apr 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
*
*
EPA–R06–RCRA–2008–0457. The
public may copy material from any
regulatory docket at no cost for the first
100 pages and at a cost of $0.15 per page
for additional copies.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Banipal, Section Chief of the Corrective
Action and Waste Minimization
Section, Multimedia Planning and
Permitting Division (6PD–C),
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,
Texas 75202. For technical information
concerning this notice, contact
Youngmoo Kim, Environmental
Protection Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross
Avenue, (6PD–C), Dallas, Texas 75202,
at (214) 665–6788, or
kim.youngmoo@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
information in this section is organized
as follows:
I. Overview Information
A. What action is EPA finalizing?
B. Why is EPA approving this action?
C. What are the limits of this exclusion?
D. How will Cooper Crouse-Hinds manage
the waste if it is delisted?
E. When is the final delisting exclusion
effective?
F. How does this final rule affect states?
II. Background
A. What is a delisting?
B. What regulations allow facilities to
delist a waste?
C. What information must the generator
supply?
III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Waste
Information and Data
A. What waste did Cooper Crouse-Hinds
petition EPA to delist?
B. How much waste did Cooper CrouseHinds propose to delist?
C. How did Cooper Crouse-Hinds sample
and analyze the waste data in this
petition?
IV. Public Comments Received on the
Proposed Exclusion
A. Who submitted comments on the
proposed rule?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Overview Information
A. What action is EPA finalizing?
After evaluating the petition, EPA
proposed on September 23, 2008, to
exclude the WWTP sludge from the lists
of hazardous waste under 40 CFR
261.31 and 261.32 (see 73 FR 54770).
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
EPA is finalizing the decision to grant
Cooper Crouse-Hinds’ delisting petition
to have its WWTP sludge managed and
disposed as non-hazardous waste
provided certain verification and
monitoring conditions are met.
B. Why is EPA approving this action?
Cooper Crouse-Hinds’ petition
requests a delisting from the F006 waste
listing under 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22.
Cooper Crouse-Hinds does not believe
that the petitioned waste meets the
criteria for which EPA listed it. Cooper
Crouse-Hinds also believes no
additional constituents or factors could
cause the waste to be hazardous. EPA’s
review of this petition included
consideration of the original listing
criteria and the additional factors
required by the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984. See section
3001(f) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921(f), and
40 CFR 260.22 (d)(1)–(4) (hereinafter all
sectional references are to 40 CFR
unless otherwise indicated). In making
the final delisting determination, EPA
evaluated the petitioned waste against
the listing criteria and factors cited in
§ 261.11(a) (2) and (a)(3). Based on this
review, EPA agrees with the petitioner
that the waste is non-hazardous with
respect to the original listing criteria. If
EPA had found, based on this review,
that the waste remained hazardous
based on the factors for which the waste
as originally listed, EPA would have
proposed to deny the petition. EPA
evaluated the waste with respect to
other factors or criteria to assess
whether there is a reasonable basis to
believe that such additional factors
could cause the waste to be hazardous.
EPA considered whether the waste is
acutely toxic, the concentration of the
constituents in the waste, their tendency
to migrate and to bioaccumulate, their
persistence in the environment once
released from the waste, plausible and
specific types of management of the
petitioned waste, the quantities of waste
generated, and waste variability. EPA
believes that the petitioned waste does
not meet the listing criteria and thus
should not be a listed waste. EPA’s final
decision to delist waste from Cooper
Crouse-Hinds’ facility is based on the
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
17420
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
information submitted in support of this
rule, including descriptions of the
wastes and analytical data from the
Amarillo, Texas facility.
C. What are the limits of this exclusion?
This exclusion applies to the waste
described in the petition only if the
requirements described in 40 CFR part
261, Appendix IX, Table 1 and the
conditions contained herein are
satisfied.
D. How will Cooper Crouse-Hinds
manage the waste if it is delisted?
The sludge from Cooper Crouse-Hinds
will be disposed of in a RCRA Subtitle
D landfill.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
E. When is the final delisting exclusion
effective?
This rule is effective April 15, 2009.
The Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 amended Section
3010 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6930(b)(1)
allows rules to become effective less
than six months after the rule is
published when the regulated
community does not need the six-month
period to come into compliance. That is
the case here because this rule reduces,
rather than increases, the existing
requirements for persons generating
hazardous waste. This reduction in
existing requirements also provides a
basis for making this rule effective
immediately, upon publication, under
the Administrative Procedure Act,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
F. How does this final rule affect states?
Because EPA is issuing this exclusion
under the Federal RCRA delisting
program, only states subject to Federal
RCRA delisting provisions will be
affected. This would exclude states
which have received authorization from
EPA to make their own delisting
decisions.
EPA allows states to impose their own
non-RCRA regulatory requirements that
are more stringent than EPA’s, under
section 3009 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6929.
These more stringent requirements may
include a provision that prohibits a
Federally issued exclusion from taking
effect in the state. Because a dual system
(that is, both Federal (RCRA) and State
(non-RCRA) programs) may regulate a
petitioner’s waste, EPA urges petitioners
to contact the State regulatory authority
to establish the status of their wastes
under the State law.
EPA has also authorized some states
(for example, Louisiana, Oklahoma,
Georgia, and Illinois) to administer a
RCRA delisting program in place of the
Federal program; that is, to make state
delisting decisions. Therefore, this
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:06 Apr 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
exclusion does not apply in those
authorized states unless that state makes
the rule part of its authorized program.
If Cooper Crouse-Hinds transports the
petitioned waste to or manages the
waste in any state with delisting
authorization, Cooper Crouse-Hinds
must obtain delisting authorization from
that state before it can manage the waste
as non-hazardous in the state.
II. Background
A. What is a delisting petition?
A delisting petition is a request from
a generator to EPA, or another agency
with jurisdiction, to exclude or delist
from the RCRA list of hazardous waste,
certain wastes the generator believes
should not be considered hazardous
under RCRA.
B. What regulations allow facilities to
delist a waste?
Under §§ 260.20 and 260.22, facilities
may petition EPA to remove their
wastes from hazardous waste regulation
by excluding them from the lists of
hazardous wastes contained in
§§ 261.31 and 261.32. Specifically,
§ 260.20 allows any person to petition
the Administrator to modify or revoke
any provision of 40 CFR parts 260
through 265 and 268. Section 260.22
provides generators the opportunity to
petition the Administrator to exclude a
waste from a particular generating
facility from the hazardous waste lists.
C. What information must the generator
supply?
Petitioners must provide sufficient
information to EPA to allow EPA to
determine that the waste to be excluded
does not meet any of the criteria under
which the waste was listed as a
hazardous waste. Based on the
information supplied by the generator,
the Administrator must determine
whether factors (including additional
constituents) other than those for which
the waste was listed could cause the
waste to be a hazardous waste. The
generator must also supply information
to demonstrate that the waste does not
exhibit any of the characteristics
defined in § 261.21–§ 261.24.
III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Waste
Information and Data
A. What waste did Cooper Crouse-Hinds
petition EPA to delist?
On March 13, 2008, Cooper CrouseHinds petitioned EPA to exclude from
the lists of hazardous wastes contained
in §§ 261.31 and 261.32, WWTP sludge
listed as F006 generated by its facility
located in Amarillo, Texas. The waste
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
falls under the classification of listed
waste pursuant to § 261.31.
B. How much waste did Cooper CrouseHinds propose to delist?
Specifically, in its petition, Cooper
Crouse-Hinds requested that EPA grant
an exclusion for 816 cubic yards per
year of WWTP sludge.
C. How did Cooper Crouse-Hinds
sample and analyze the waste data in
this petition?
To support its petition, Cooper
Crouse-Hinds submitted:
• Historical information on waste
generation and management practices;
• Results of the total constituents list
for 40 CFR part 264, Appendix IX
volatile and semi-volatile organic
compounds and metals. These wastes
were also analyzed for cyanide and
sulfide.
• Results of the constituent list for
appendix IX on Toxicity Characteristic
Leaching Procedure (TCLP) extract for
volatiles, semi-volatiles, and metals.
• Results from total oil and grease
analyses and multiple pH
measurements, and
• Results from four samples for total
concentrations of compounds of
concern (COCs).
IV. Public Comments Received on the
Proposed Exclusion
A. Who submitted comments on the
proposed rule?
No comments were received on the
Proposed Rule during the comment
period.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866,
‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review ’’ (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this rule is
not of general applicability and
therefore is not a regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). This
rule does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) because it
applies to a particular facility only.
Because this rule is of particular
applicability relating to a particular
facility, it is not subject to the regulatory
flexibility provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), or
to sections 202, 204, and 205 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (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
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
final rule does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’,
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply
to this rule.
Similarly, because this rule will affect
only a particular facility, this final rule
does not have tribal implications, as
specified in Executive Order 13175,
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000). Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this rule. This rule also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because the
Agency does not have reason to believe
the environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. The
basis for this belief is that the Agency
used the DRAS program, which
considers health and safety risks to
infants and children, to calculate the
maximum allowable concentrations for
this rule. This rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001)), because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866. This rule does not involve
technical standards; thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. As required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988,
‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’, (61 FR 4729,
February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule,
EPA has taken the necessary steps to
eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity,
minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for
affected conduct.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report which includes a
copy of the rule to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. Section 804
exempts from section 801 the following
types of rules: (1) Rules of particular
applicability; (2) rules relating to agency
management or personnel; and (3) rules
of agency organization, procedure, or
17421
practice that do not substantially affect
the rights or obligations of non-agency
parties 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not
required to submit a rule report
regarding today’s action under section
801 because this is a rule of particular
applicability.
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: March 13, 2009.
Connie Suttice,
Acting Director, Multimedia Planning and
Permitting Division Region 6.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 40 CFR part 261 is amended
as follows:
■
PART 261—IDENTIFICATION AND
LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
1. The authority citation for part 261
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921,
6922, and 6938.
2. In Table 1 of Appendix IX of Part
261, add the following waste stream (in
alphabetical order by facility to read as
follows:
■
Appendix IX to Part 261—Waste
Excluded Under §§ 260.20 and 260.22
TABLE 1—WASTE EXCLUDED FROM NON-SPECIFIC SOURCES
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Facility
Address
Waste description
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Cooper Crouse-Hinds .............. Amarillo, TX ...... Wastewater Treatment Sludge (Hazardous Waste No. F006) generated at a maximum annual rate of 816 cubic yards per calendar year after April 15, 2009 and disposed in Subtitle D Landfill.
For the exclusion to be valid, Cooper Crouse-Hinds must implement a verification testing
program that meets the following Paragraphs:
(1) Delisting Levels: All concentrations for those constituents must not exceed the maximum
allowable concentrations in mg/l specified in this paragraph.
WWTP Sludge Leachable Concentrations (mg/l):
(i) Inorganic Constituents:
Arsenic-0.0759; Barium-100; Cadmium-0.819; Copper-216; Iron-1.24; Manganese-145;
Nickel-119; Zinc-18.
(ii) Organic Constituents:
Benzene-0.5.
(2) Waste Holding and Handling:
(A) Waste classification as non-hazardous can not begin until compliance with the limits set
in paragraph (1) for WWTP sludge has occurred for two consecutive quarterly sampling
events.
(B) If constituent levels in any sample taken by Cooper Crouse-Hinds exceed any of the
delisting levels set in paragraph (1) for the WWTP sludge, Cooper Crouse-Hinds must do
the following:
(i) Notify EPA in accordance with paragraph (6) and
(ii) Manage and dispose WWTP sludge as hazardous waste generated under Subtitle C
of RCRA.
(3) Testing Requirements:
Upon this exclusion becoming final, Cooper Crouse-Hinds may perform quarterly analytical
testing by sampling and analyzing the WWTP sludge as follows:
(A) Quarterly Testing:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:06 Apr 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
17422
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—WASTE EXCLUDED FROM NON-SPECIFIC SOURCES—Continued
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Facility
Address
Waste description
(i) Collect two representative composite samples of the sludge at quarterly intervals
after EPA grants the final exclusion. The first composite samples may be taken at any
time after EPA grants the final approval. Sampling must be performed in accordance
with the sampling plan approved by EPA in support of the exclusion.
(ii) Analyze the samples for all constituents listed in paragraph (1). Any composite sample taken that exceeds the delisting levels listed in paragraph (1) for the sludge must
be disposed as hazardous waste in accordance with the applicable hazardous waste
requirements.
(iii) Within thirty (30) days after taking its first quarterly sample, Cooper Crouse-Hinds
will report its first quarterly analytical test data to EPA. If levels of constituents measured in the samples of the sludge do not exceed the levels set forth in paragraph (1)
of this exclusion for two consecutive quarters, Cooper Crouse-Hinds can manage and
dispose the non-hazardous WWTP sludge according to all applicable solid waste regulations.
(B) Annual Testing:
(i) If Cooper Crouse-Hinds completes the quarterly testing specified in paragraph (3)
above and no sample contains a constituent at a level which exceeds the limits set
forth in paragraph (1), Cooper Crouse-Hinds may begin annual testing as follows:
Cooper Crouse-Hinds must test two representative composite samples of the WWTP
sludge for all constituents listed in paragraph (1) at least once per calendar year.
(ii) The samples for the annual testing shall be a representative composite sample according to appropriate methods. As applicable to the method-defined parameters of
concern, analyses requiring the use of SW–846 methods incorporated by reference in
40 CFR 260.11 must be used without substitution. As applicable, the SW–846 methods might include Methods 0010, 0011, 0020, 0023A, 0030, 0031, 0040, 0050, 0051,
0060, 0061, 1010A, 1020B,1110A, 1310B, 1311, 1312, 1320, 1330A, 9010C, 9012B,
9040C, 9045D, 9060A, 9070A (uses EPA Method 1664, Rev. A), 9071B, and 9095B.
Methods must meet Performance Based Measurement System Criteria in which the
Data Quality Objectives are to demonstrate that samples of the WWTP sludge is representative for all constituents listed in paragraph (1).
(iii) The samples for the annual testing taken for the second and subsequent annual
testing events shall be taken within the same calendar month as the first annual sample taken.
(iv) The annual testing report should include the total amount of delisted waste in cubic
yards disposed as non-hazardous waste during the calendar year.
(4) Changes in Operating Conditions: If Cooper Crouse-Hinds significantly changes the process described in its petition or starts any processes that generate(s) the waste that may or
could affect the composition or type of waste generated (by illustration, but not limitation,
changes in equipment or operating conditions of the treatment process), it must notify
EPA in writing and it may no longer handle the wastes generated from the new process
as non-hazardous until the wastes meet the delisting levels set in paragraph (1) and it has
received written approval to do so from EPA.
Cooper Crouse-Hinds must submit a modification to the petition, complete with full sampling
and analysis, for circumstances where the waste volume changes and/or additional waste
codes are added to the waste stream, if it wishes to dispose of the material as non-hazardous.
(5) Data Submittals:
Cooper Crouse-Hinds must submit the information described below. If Cooper Crouse-Hinds
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). Cooper Crouse-Hinds must:
(A) Submit the data obtained through paragraph (3) to the Chief, Corrective Action and
Waste Minimization Section, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross Ave., Dallas, Texas, 75202, within the
time specified. All supporting data can be submitted on CD–ROM or comparable electronic media.
(B) Compile records of analytical data from paragraph (3), summarized, and maintained onsite for a minimum of five years.
(C) Furnish these records and data when either EPA or the State of Texas requests them
for inspection.
(D) Send along with all data a signed copy of the following certification statement, to attest
to the truth and accuracy of the data submitted:
‘‘Under civil and criminal penalty of law for the making or submission of false or fraudulent
statements or representations (pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Federal Code,
which include, but may not be limited to, 18 U.S.C. 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.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:06 Apr 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
17423
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 15, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—WASTE EXCLUDED FROM NON-SPECIFIC SOURCES—Continued
Facility
Address
Waste description
‘‘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) Re-opener:
(A) If, anytime after disposal of the delisted waste Cooper Crouse-Hinds possesses or is
otherwise made aware of any environmental data (including but not limited to leachate
data or ground water monitoring data) or any other data relevant to the delisted waste indicating that any constituent identified for the delisting verification testing is at level higher
than the delisting level allowed by the Division Director in granting the petition, then the
facility must report the data, in writing, to the Division Director within 10 days of first possessing or being made aware of that data.
(B) If either the quarterly or annual testing of the waste does not meet the delisting requirements in paragraph (1), Cooper Crouse-Hinds must report the data, in writing, to the Division Director within 10 days of first possessing or being made aware of that data.
(C) If Cooper Crouse-Hinds fails to submit the information described in paragraphs (5),
(6)(A) or (6)(B) or if any other information is received from any source, the Division Director will make a preliminary determination as to whether the reported information requires
EPA action to protect human health and/or the environment. Further action may include
suspending, or revoking the exclusion, or other appropriate response necessary to protect
human health and the environment.
(D) If the Division Director determines that the reported information requires action by EPA,
the Division Director will notify the facility in writing of the actions the Division Director believes are necessary to protect human health and the environment. The notice shall include a statement of the proposed action and a statement providing the facility with an opportunity to present information as to why the proposed EPA action is not necessary. The
facility shall have 10 days from the date of the Division Director’s notice to present such
information.
(E) Following the receipt of information from the facility described in paragraph (6)(D) or (if
no information is presented under paragraph (6)(D)) the initial receipt of information described in paragraphs (5), (6)(A) or (6)(B), the Division Director will issue a final written
determination describing EPA actions that are necessary to protect human health and/or
the environment. Any required action described in the Division Director’s determination
shall become effective immediately, unless the Division Director provides otherwise.
(7) Notification Requirements:
Cooper Crouse-Hinds 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 variance and a
possible revocation of the decision.
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–8651 Filed 4–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
[EPA–R05–RCRA–2008–0711; FRL–8788–9]
Wisconsin: Final Authorization of State
Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revision
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:06 Apr 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
*
*
SUMMARY: EPA is granting Wisconsin
final authorization of the changes to its
hazardous waste program under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). The agency published a
proposed rule on November 24, 2008 at
73 FR 70931 and provided for public
comment. The public comment period
ended on December 24, 2008. We
received no comments. No further
opportunity for comment will be
provided. EPA has determined that
these changes satisfy all requirements
needed to qualify for final authorization,
and is proposing to authorize the State’s
changes. This final rule authorizes the
renumbering and revision of
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
Wisconsin’s previously authorized
regulations.
DATES: The final authorization will be
effective on April 15, 2009.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R05–RCRA–2008–0711. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some of
the 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
E:\FR\FM\15APR1.SGM
15APR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 71 (Wednesday, April 15, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17419-17423]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8651]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA-R06-RCRA-2008-0457; SW-FRL-8787-8]
Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Final Exclusion
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is granting a petition
submitted by Cooper Crouse-Hinds to exclude (or delist) the sludge and
filter sand (called sludge hereinafter) from its wastewater treatment
plant (WWTP) generated by Cooper Crouse-Hinds in Amarillo, Texas from
the lists of hazardous wastes. This final rule responds to the petition
submitted by Cooper Crouse-Hinds, to delist the WWTP sludge with
Hazardous Waste Number, F006. After careful analysis and use of the
Delisting Risk Assessment Software (DRAS), EPA has concluded the
petitioned waste is not hazardous waste. This exclusion applies to 816
cubic yards per year of the WWTP sludge with Hazardous Waste Number:
F006. Accordingly, this final rule excludes the petitioned waste from
the requirements of hazardous waste regulations under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) when it is disposed in a Subtitle
D Landfill.
DATES: Effective Date: April 15, 2009.
ADDRESSES: The public docket for this final rule is located at the
Environmental Protection Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,
Texas 75202, and is available for viewing in EPA Freedom of Information
Act review room on the 7th floor from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. Call (214) 665-6444 for
appointments. The reference number for this docket is EPA-R06-RCRA-
2008-0457. The public may copy material from any regulatory docket at
no cost for the first 100 pages and at a cost of $0.15 per page for
additional copies.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Banipal, Section Chief of the
Corrective Action and Waste Minimization Section, Multimedia Planning
and Permitting Division (6PD-C), Environmental Protection Agency Region
6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202. For technical information
concerning this notice, contact Youngmoo Kim, Environmental Protection
Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, (6PD-C), Dallas, Texas 75202, at
(214) 665-6788, or kim.youngmoo@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information in this section is organized
as follows:
I. Overview Information
A. What action is EPA finalizing?
B. Why is EPA approving this action?
C. What are the limits of this exclusion?
D. How will Cooper Crouse-Hinds manage the waste if it is
delisted?
E. When is the final delisting exclusion effective?
F. How does this final rule affect states?
II. Background
A. What is a delisting?
B. What regulations allow facilities to delist a waste?
C. What information must the generator supply?
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Waste Information and Data
A. What waste did Cooper Crouse-Hinds petition EPA to delist?
B. How much waste did Cooper Crouse-Hinds propose to delist?
C. How did Cooper Crouse-Hinds sample and analyze the waste data
in this petition?
IV. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Exclusion
A. Who submitted comments on the proposed rule?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Overview Information
A. What action is EPA finalizing?
After evaluating the petition, EPA proposed on September 23, 2008,
to exclude the WWTP sludge from the lists of hazardous waste under 40
CFR 261.31 and 261.32 (see 73 FR 54770). EPA is finalizing the decision
to grant Cooper Crouse-Hinds' delisting petition to have its WWTP
sludge managed and disposed as non-hazardous waste provided certain
verification and monitoring conditions are met.
B. Why is EPA approving this action?
Cooper Crouse-Hinds' petition requests a delisting from the F006
waste listing under 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22. Cooper Crouse-Hinds does
not believe that the petitioned waste meets the criteria for which EPA
listed it. Cooper Crouse-Hinds also believes no additional constituents
or factors could cause the waste to be hazardous. EPA's review of this
petition included consideration of the original listing criteria and
the additional factors required by the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984. See section 3001(f) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921(f), and
40 CFR 260.22 (d)(1)-(4) (hereinafter all sectional references are to
40 CFR unless otherwise indicated). In making the final delisting
determination, EPA evaluated the petitioned waste against the listing
criteria and factors cited in Sec. 261.11(a) (2) and (a)(3). Based on
this review, EPA agrees with the petitioner that the waste is non-
hazardous with respect to the original listing criteria. If EPA had
found, based on this review, that the waste remained hazardous based on
the factors for which the waste as originally listed, EPA would have
proposed to deny the petition. EPA evaluated the waste with respect to
other factors or criteria to assess whether there is a reasonable basis
to believe that such additional factors could cause the waste to be
hazardous. EPA considered whether the waste is acutely toxic, the
concentration of the constituents in the waste, their tendency to
migrate and to bioaccumulate, their persistence in the environment once
released from the waste, plausible and specific types of management of
the petitioned waste, the quantities of waste generated, and waste
variability. EPA believes that the petitioned waste does not meet the
listing criteria and thus should not be a listed waste. EPA's final
decision to delist waste from Cooper Crouse-Hinds' facility is based on
the
[[Page 17420]]
information submitted in support of this rule, including descriptions
of the wastes and analytical data from the Amarillo, Texas facility.
C. What are the limits of this exclusion?
This exclusion applies to the waste described in the petition only
if the requirements described in 40 CFR part 261, Appendix IX, Table 1
and the conditions contained herein are satisfied.
D. How will Cooper Crouse-Hinds manage the waste if it is delisted?
The sludge from Cooper Crouse-Hinds will be disposed of in a RCRA
Subtitle D landfill.
E. When is the final delisting exclusion effective?
This rule is effective April 15, 2009. The Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 amended Section 3010 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C.
6930(b)(1) allows rules to become effective less than six months after
the rule is published when the regulated community does not need the
six-month period to come into compliance. That is the case here because
this rule reduces, rather than increases, the existing requirements for
persons generating hazardous waste. This reduction in existing
requirements also provides a basis for making this rule effective
immediately, upon publication, under the Administrative Procedure Act,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
F. How does this final rule affect states?
Because EPA is issuing this exclusion under the Federal RCRA
delisting program, only states subject to Federal RCRA delisting
provisions will be affected. This would exclude states which have
received authorization from EPA to make their own delisting decisions.
EPA allows states to impose their own non-RCRA regulatory
requirements that are more stringent than EPA's, under section 3009 of
RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6929. These more stringent requirements may include a
provision that prohibits a Federally issued exclusion from taking
effect in the state. Because a dual system (that is, both Federal
(RCRA) and State (non-RCRA) programs) may regulate a petitioner's
waste, EPA urges petitioners to contact the State regulatory authority
to establish the status of their wastes under the State law.
EPA has also authorized some states (for example, Louisiana,
Oklahoma, Georgia, and Illinois) to administer a RCRA delisting program
in place of the Federal program; that is, to make state delisting
decisions. Therefore, this exclusion does not apply in those authorized
states unless that state makes the rule part of its authorized program.
If Cooper Crouse-Hinds transports the petitioned waste to or manages
the waste in any state with delisting authorization, Cooper Crouse-
Hinds must obtain delisting authorization from that state before it can
manage the waste as non-hazardous in the state.
II. Background
A. What is a delisting petition?
A delisting petition is a request from a generator to EPA, or
another agency with jurisdiction, to exclude or delist from the RCRA
list of hazardous waste, certain wastes the generator believes should
not be considered hazardous under RCRA.
B. What regulations allow facilities to delist a waste?
Under Sec. Sec. 260.20 and 260.22, facilities may petition EPA to
remove their wastes from hazardous waste regulation by excluding them
from the lists of hazardous wastes contained in Sec. Sec. 261.31 and
261.32. Specifically, Sec. 260.20 allows any person to petition the
Administrator to modify or revoke any provision of 40 CFR parts 260
through 265 and 268. Section 260.22 provides generators the opportunity
to petition the Administrator to exclude a waste from a particular
generating facility from the hazardous waste lists.
C. What information must the generator supply?
Petitioners must provide sufficient information to EPA to allow EPA
to determine that the waste to be excluded does not meet any of the
criteria under which the waste was listed as a hazardous waste. Based
on the information supplied by the generator, the Administrator must
determine whether factors (including additional constituents) other
than those for which the waste was listed could cause the waste to be a
hazardous waste. The generator must also supply information to
demonstrate that the waste does not exhibit any of the characteristics
defined in Sec. 261.21-Sec. 261.24.
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Waste Information and Data
A. What waste did Cooper Crouse-Hinds petition EPA to delist?
On March 13, 2008, Cooper Crouse-Hinds petitioned EPA to exclude
from the lists of hazardous wastes contained in Sec. Sec. 261.31 and
261.32, WWTP sludge listed as F006 generated by its facility located in
Amarillo, Texas. The waste falls under the classification of listed
waste pursuant to Sec. 261.31.
B. How much waste did Cooper Crouse-Hinds propose to delist?
Specifically, in its petition, Cooper Crouse-Hinds requested that
EPA grant an exclusion for 816 cubic yards per year of WWTP sludge.
C. How did Cooper Crouse-Hinds sample and analyze the waste data in
this petition?
To support its petition, Cooper Crouse-Hinds submitted:
Historical information on waste generation and management
practices;
Results of the total constituents list for 40 CFR part
264, Appendix IX volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds and
metals. These wastes were also analyzed for cyanide and sulfide.
Results of the constituent list for appendix IX on
Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) extract for
volatiles, semi-volatiles, and metals.
Results from total oil and grease analyses and multiple pH
measurements, and
Results from four samples for total concentrations of
compounds of concern (COCs).
IV. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Exclusion
A. Who submitted comments on the proposed rule?
No comments were received on the Proposed Rule during the comment
period.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review ''
(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this rule is not of general
applicability and therefore is not a regulatory action subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) because it
applies to a particular facility only. Because this rule is of
particular applicability relating to a particular facility, it is not
subject to the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), or to sections 202, 204, and
205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (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
[[Page 17421]]
final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism'', (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this
rule.
Similarly, because this rule will affect only a particular
facility, this final rule does not have tribal implications, as
specified in Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. This rule also is
not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it is not economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency does not have reason to
believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this
action present a disproportionate risk to children. The basis for this
belief is that the Agency used the DRAS program, which considers health
and safety risks to infants and children, to calculate the maximum
allowable concentrations for this rule. This rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866. This rule does not involve technical
standards; thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do
not apply. As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform'', (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule,
EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and
ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal
standard for affected conduct.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report which includes a copy of the rule to
each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States. Section 804 exempts from section 801 the following types of
rules: (1) Rules of particular applicability; (2) rules relating to
agency management or personnel; and (3) rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not required
to submit a rule report regarding today's action under section 801
because this is a rule of particular applicability.
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: March 13, 2009.
Connie Suttice,
Acting Director, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division Region 6.
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, add the following waste
stream (in alphabetical order by facility to read as follows:
Appendix IX to Part 261--Waste Excluded Under Sec. Sec. 260.20 and
260.22
Table 1--Waste Excluded From Non-Specific Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Address Waste description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Cooper Crouse-Hinds................... Amarillo, TX.................. Wastewater Treatment Sludge (Hazardous
Waste No. F006) generated at a maximum
annual rate of 816 cubic yards per
calendar year after April 15, 2009 and
disposed in Subtitle D Landfill.
For the exclusion to be valid, Cooper
Crouse-Hinds must implement a
verification testing program that meets
the following Paragraphs:
(1) Delisting Levels: All concentrations
for those constituents must not exceed
the maximum allowable concentrations in
mg/l specified in this paragraph.
WWTP Sludge Leachable Concentrations (mg/
l):
(i) Inorganic Constituents:
Arsenic-0.0759; Barium-100; Cadmium-
0.819; Copper-216; Iron-1.24;
Manganese-145; Nickel-119; Zinc-18.
(ii) Organic Constituents:
Benzene-0.5.
(2) Waste Holding and Handling:
(A) Waste classification as non-
hazardous can not begin until
compliance with the limits set in
paragraph (1) for WWTP sludge has
occurred for two consecutive quarterly
sampling events.
(B) If constituent levels in any sample
taken by Cooper Crouse-Hinds exceed any
of the delisting levels set in
paragraph (1) for the WWTP sludge,
Cooper Crouse-Hinds must do the
following:
(i) Notify EPA in accordance with
paragraph (6) and
(ii) Manage and dispose WWTP sludge
as hazardous waste generated under
Subtitle C of RCRA.
(3) Testing Requirements:
Upon this exclusion becoming final,
Cooper Crouse-Hinds may perform
quarterly analytical testing by
sampling and analyzing the WWTP sludge
as follows:
(A) Quarterly Testing:
[[Page 17422]]
(i) Collect two representative
composite samples of the sludge at
quarterly intervals after EPA grants
the final exclusion. The first
composite samples may be taken at
any time after EPA grants the final
approval. Sampling must be performed
in accordance with the sampling plan
approved by EPA in support of the
exclusion.
(ii) Analyze the samples for all
constituents listed in paragraph
(1). Any composite sample taken that
exceeds the delisting levels listed
in paragraph (1) for the sludge must
be disposed as hazardous waste in
accordance with the applicable
hazardous waste requirements.
(iii) Within thirty (30) days after
taking its first quarterly sample,
Cooper Crouse-Hinds will report its
first quarterly analytical test data
to EPA. If levels of constituents
measured in the samples of the
sludge do not exceed the levels set
forth in paragraph (1) of this
exclusion for two consecutive
quarters, Cooper Crouse-Hinds can
manage and dispose the non-hazardous
WWTP sludge according to all
applicable solid waste regulations.
(B) Annual Testing:
(i) If Cooper Crouse-Hinds completes
the quarterly testing specified in
paragraph (3) above and no sample
contains a constituent at a level
which exceeds the limits set forth
in paragraph (1), Cooper Crouse-
Hinds may begin annual testing as
follows: Cooper Crouse-Hinds must
test two representative composite
samples of the WWTP sludge for all
constituents listed in paragraph (1)
at least once per calendar year.
(ii) The samples for the annual
testing shall be a representative
composite sample according to
appropriate methods. As applicable
to the method-defined parameters of
concern, analyses requiring the use
of SW-846 methods incorporated by
reference in 40 CFR 260.11 must be
used without substitution. As
applicable, the SW-846 methods might
include Methods 0010, 0011, 0020,
0023A, 0030, 0031, 0040, 0050, 0051,
0060, 0061, 1010A, 1020B,1110A,
1310B, 1311, 1312, 1320, 1330A,
9010C, 9012B, 9040C, 9045D, 9060A,
9070A (uses EPA Method 1664, Rev.
A), 9071B, and 9095B. Methods must
meet Performance Based Measurement
System Criteria in which the Data
Quality Objectives are to
demonstrate that samples of the WWTP
sludge is representative for all
constituents listed in paragraph
(1).
(iii) The samples for the annual
testing taken for the second and
subsequent annual testing events
shall be taken within the same
calendar month as the first annual
sample taken.
(iv) The annual testing report should
include the total amount of delisted
waste in cubic yards disposed as non-
hazardous waste during the calendar
year.
(4) Changes in Operating Conditions: If
Cooper Crouse-Hinds significantly
changes the process described in its
petition or starts any processes that
generate(s) the waste that may or could
affect the composition or type of waste
generated (by illustration, but not
limitation, changes in equipment or
operating conditions of the treatment
process), it must notify EPA in writing
and it may no longer handle the wastes
generated from the new process as non-
hazardous until the wastes meet the
delisting levels set in paragraph (1)
and it has received written approval to
do so from EPA.
Cooper Crouse-Hinds must submit a
modification to the petition, complete
with full sampling and analysis, for
circumstances where the waste volume
changes and/or additional waste codes
are added to the waste stream, if it
wishes to dispose of the material as
non-hazardous.
(5) Data Submittals:
Cooper Crouse-Hinds must submit the
information described below. If Cooper
Crouse-Hinds 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). Cooper Crouse-Hinds must:
(A) Submit the data obtained through
paragraph (3) to the Chief, Corrective
Action and Waste Minimization Section,
Multimedia Planning and Permitting
Division, U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross
Ave., Dallas, Texas, 75202, within the
time specified. All supporting data can
be submitted on CD-ROM or comparable
electronic media.
(B) Compile records of analytical data
from paragraph (3), summarized, and
maintained on-site for a minimum of
five years.
(C) Furnish these records and data when
either EPA or the State of Texas
requests them for inspection.
(D) Send along with all data a signed
copy of the following certification
statement, to attest to the truth and
accuracy of the data submitted:
``Under civil and criminal penalty of
law for the making or submission of
false or fraudulent statements or
representations (pursuant to the
applicable provisions of the Federal
Code, which include, but may not be
limited to, 18 U.S.C. 1001 and 42
U.S.C. 6928), I certify that the
information contained in or
accompanying this document is true,
accurate and complete.
``As to the (those) identified
section(s) of this document for which I
cannot personally verify its (their)
truth and accuracy, I certify as the
company official having supervisory
responsibility for the persons who,
acting under my direct instructions,
made the verification that this
information is true, accurate and
complete.
[[Page 17423]]
``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) Re-opener:
(A) If, anytime after disposal of the
delisted waste Cooper Crouse-Hinds
possesses or is otherwise made aware of
any environmental data (including but
not limited to leachate data or ground
water monitoring data) or any other
data relevant to the delisted waste
indicating that any constituent
identified for the delisting
verification testing is at level higher
than the delisting level allowed by the
Division Director in granting the
petition, then the facility must report
the data, in writing, to the Division
Director within 10 days of first
possessing or being made aware of that
data.
(B) If either the quarterly or annual
testing of the waste does not meet the
delisting requirements in paragraph
(1), Cooper Crouse-Hinds must report
the data, in writing, to the Division
Director within 10 days of first
possessing or being made aware of that
data.
(C) If Cooper Crouse-Hinds fails to
submit the information described in
paragraphs (5), (6)(A) or (6)(B) or if
any other information is received from
any source, the Division Director will
make a preliminary determination as to
whether the reported information
requires EPA action to protect human
health and/or the environment. Further
action may include suspending, or
revoking the exclusion, or other
appropriate response necessary to
protect human health and the
environment.
(D) If the Division Director determines
that the reported information requires
action by EPA, the Division Director
will notify the facility in writing of
the actions the Division Director
believes are necessary to protect human
health and the environment. The notice
shall include a statement of the
proposed action and a statement
providing the facility with an
opportunity to present information as
to why the proposed EPA action is not
necessary. The facility shall have 10
days from the date of the Division
Director's notice to present such
information.
(E) Following the receipt of information
from the facility described in
paragraph (6)(D) or (if no information
is presented under paragraph (6)(D))
the initial receipt of information
described in paragraphs (5), (6)(A) or
(6)(B), the Division Director will
issue a final written determination
describing EPA actions that are
necessary to protect human health and/
or the environment. Any required action
described in the Division Director's
determination shall become effective
immediately, unless the Division
Director provides otherwise.
(7) Notification Requirements:
Cooper Crouse-Hinds 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 variance and a possible
revocation of the decision.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E9-8651 Filed 4-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
