Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste, 45736-45740 [2017-21112]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
45736
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
available electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov.
*
[FR Doc. 2017–21113 Filed 9–29–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
For
technical information regarding the
Samsung Austin Semiconductor
petition, contact Michelle Peace at 214–
665–7430 or by email at
peace.michelle@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
information in this section is organized
as follows:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA–R06–RCRA–2017–0254; FRL–9968–
61–Region 6]
Hazardous Waste Management
System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is granting a petition
submitted by Samsung Austin
Semiconductor (Samsung) to exclude
from hazardous waste control (or delist)
a certain solid waste. This final rule
responds to the petition submitted by
Samsung to have the copper filter cake
from the electroplating process
excluded, or delisted from the definition
of a hazardous waste. The Copper filter
cake is listed as F006, wastewater
treatment sludges from electroplating
operations. The basis of the listing is
cadmium, hexavalent chromium, nickel,
and cyanide (complexed). After careful
analysis and evaluation of comments
submitted by the public, the EPA has
concluded that the petitioned wastes are
not hazardous waste when disposed of
in Subtitle D landfills. This exclusion
applies to the copper filter cake
generated at Samsung Austin
Semiconductor’s Austin, Texas facility.
Accordingly, this final rule excludes the
petitioned waste from the requirements
of hazardous waste regulations under
the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) when disposed of
in Subtitle D landfills, but imposes
testing conditions to ensure that the
future-generated wastes remain
qualified for delisting.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
October 2, 2017.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R06–RCRA–2017–0254. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. 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, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:21 Sep 29, 2017
Jkt 244001
I. Overview Information
A. What action is EPA finalizing?
B. Why is EPA approving this delisting?
C. What are the limits of this exclusion?
D. How will Samsung Austin
Semiconductor 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 Data
A. What waste and how much did
Samsung Austin Semiconductor petition
EPA to delist?
B. How did Samsung Austin
Semiconductor sample and analyze the
waste data in this petition?
IV. Public Comments Received on the
Proposed Exclusion
Who submitted comments on the proposed
rule?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Overview Information
A. What action is EPA finalizing?
The EPA is finalizing:
(1) The decision to grant Samsung
Austin Semiconductor’s petition to have
its copper filter cake excluded, or
delisted, from the definition of a
hazardous waste, subject to certain
continued verification and monitoring
conditions; and
(2) To use the Delisting Risk
Assessment Software v.3.0.35 to
evaluate the potential impact of the
petitioned waste on human health and
the environment. The Agency used this
model to predict the concentration of
hazardous constituents released from
the petitioned waste, once it is
disposed.
After evaluating the petition, EPA
proposed a rule, on July 14, 2017, to
exclude the Samsung Austin
Semiconductor copper filter cake waste
from the lists of hazardous wastes under
§§ 261.31 and 261.32. There were no
comments received on this rulemaking.
B. Why is EPA approving this delisting?
Samsung’s petition requests an
exclusion from the F006 waste listing
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
pursuant to 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22.
Samsung does not believe that the
petitioned waste meets the criteria for
which EPA listed it. Samsung also
believes no additional constituents or
factors could cause the waste to be
hazardous. EPA’s review of this petition
included consideration of the original
listing criteria and the additional factors
required by the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA).
See section 3001(f) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C.
6921(f), and 40 CFR 260.22 (d)(1)–(4)
(hereinafter all sectional references are
to 40 CFR unless otherwise indicated).
In making the initial delisting
determination, EPA evaluated the
petitioned waste against the listing
criteria and factors cited in
§ 261.11(a)(2) and (3). Based on this
review, EPA agrees with the petitioner
that the waste is non-hazardous, with
respect to the original listing criteria. If
EPA had found, based on this review,
that the waste remained hazardous
based on the factors for which the waste
was originally listed, EPA would have
proposed to deny the petition. EPA
evaluated the waste with respect to
other factors or criteria to assess
whether there is a reasonable basis to
believe that such additional factors
could cause the waste to be hazardous.
EPA considered whether the waste is
acutely toxic, the concentration of the
constituents in the waste, their tendency
to migrate and to bioaccumulate, their
persistence in the environment once
released from the waste, plausible and
specific types of management of the
petitioned waste, the quantities of waste
generated, and waste variability. EPA
believes that the petitioned waste does
not meet the listing criteria and thus
should not be a listed waste. EPA’s
proposed decision to delist waste from
Samsung is based on the information
submitted in support of this rule,
including descriptions of the wastes and
analytical data from the Austin, 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 Table 1 of
part 261, appendix IX and the
conditions contained herein are
satisfied. The conditional exclusion
applies to 750 cubic yards of copper
filter cake sludge generated annually
from the Samsung Austin
Semiconductor facility in Austin, TX.
D. How will Samsung Austin
Semiconductor manage the waste if it is
delisted?
Storage containers of the copper filter
cake will be transported to an
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
authorized, solid waste landfill (e.g.,
RCRA Subtitle D landfill, commercial/
industrial solid waste landfill, etc.) for
disposal. Any plans for recycling must
be addressed through the Hazardous
Waste Recycling regulations.
E. When is the final delisting exclusion
effective?
This rule is effective October 2, 2017.
The Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 amended section
3010 of RCRA to allow rules to become
effective in less than six months when
the regulated community does not need
the six-month period to come into
compliance. That is the case here
because this rule reduces, rather than
increases, the existing requirements for
persons generating hazardous wastes.
These reasons also provide 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 would be
affected. This would exclude two
categories of States: States having a dual
system that includes Federal RCRA
requirements and their own
requirements, and States who have
received our authorization to make their
own delisting decisions.
Here are the details: We allow states
to impose their own non-RCRA
regulatory requirements that are more
stringent than EPA’s, under section
3009 of RCRA. These more stringent
requirements may include a provision
that prohibits a Federally issued
exclusion from taking effect in the State.
Because a dual system (that is, both
Federal (RCRA) and State (non-RCRA)
programs) may regulate a petitioner’s
waste, we urge petitioners to contact the
State regulatory authority to establish
the status of their wastes under the State
law.
EPA has also authorized some States
(for example, Louisiana, Georgia,
Illinois) to administer a delisting
program in place of the Federal
program, that is, to make State delisting
decisions. Therefore, this exclusion
does not apply in those authorized
States. If Samsung Austin
Semiconductor transports the petitioned
waste to or manages the waste in any
State with delisting authorization,
Samsung Austin Semiconductor must
obtain delisting authorization from that
State before they can manage the waste
as nonhazardous in the State.
II. Background
A. What is a delisting?
A delisting petition is a request from
a generator to EPA or another agency
with jurisdiction to exclude from the list
of hazardous wastes, wastes the
generator does not consider hazardous
under RCRA.
B. What regulations allow facilities to
delist a waste?
Under 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22,
facilities may petition the EPA to
remove their wastes from hazardous
waste control 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 parts 260 through 266,
268 and 273 of title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. Section 260.22
provides generators the opportunity to
petition the Administrator to exclude a
waste on a ‘‘generator-specific’’ basis
from the hazardous waste lists.
C. What information must the generator
supply?
Petitioners must provide sufficient
information to EPA to allow the 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. In addition, the
Administrator must determine, where
45737
he/she has a reasonable basis to believe
that factors (including additional
constituents) other than those for which
the waste was listed could cause the
waste to be a hazardous waste, that such
factors do not warrant retaining the
waste as a hazardous waste.
III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Waste Data
A. What waste and how much did
Samsung Austin Semiconductor petition
EPA to delist?
In November 2015, Samsung
petitioned EPA to exclude from the lists
of hazardous wastes contained in
§§ 261.31 and 261.32, filter cake (F006)
generated from its facility located in
Austin, Texas. The waste falls under the
classification of listed waste pursuant to
§§ 261.31 and 261.32. Specifically, in its
petition, Samsung requested that EPA
grant a conditional exclusion for 750
cubic yards of F006 filter cake.
The 40 CFR part 261 appendix VII
hazardous constituents which are the
basis for listing can be found in
Table 1.
TABLE 1—EPA WASTE CODES FOR
COPPER FILTER CAKE AND THE
BASIS FOR LISTING
Waste code
Basis for listing
F006 .............
Cadmium, hexavalent chromium, nickel, cyanide
(complexed).
B. How did Samsung Austin
Semiconductor sample and analyze the
waste data in this petition?
To support its petition, Samsung
Austin Semiconductor submitted:
(1) Historical information on waste
generation and management practices;
and
(2) Analytical results from eight
samples for total and TCLP
concentrations of compounds of
concern (COC)s;
TABLE 2—ANALYTICAL RESULTS/MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DELISTING CONCENTRATION COPPER FILTER CAKE SAMSUNG
AUSTIN SEMICONDUCTOR, AUSTIN, TEXAS
Maximum total
concentration
(mg/kg)
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
Constituent
Acetone ..................................................................................................................................
Arsenic ...................................................................................................................................
Barium ....................................................................................................................................
Cadmium ................................................................................................................................
Carbon disulfide .....................................................................................................................
Chromium ..............................................................................................................................
Chromium(VI) (+6) .................................................................................................................
Cobalt .....................................................................................................................................
Copper ...................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:21 Sep 29, 2017
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Maximum
TCLP
concentration
(mg/L)
0.0013
3.6
5.30
0.75
2.7
42
1.7
1.6
14600
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
0.24
0.098
0.13
0.004
0.043
0.12
0.072
0.035
5.4
Maximum
TCLP delisting
level
(mg/L)
2070.0
1.66
100.0
0.362
224.75
5.0
5.0
1.36
97.1
45738
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—ANALYTICAL RESULTS/MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DELISTING CONCENTRATION COPPER FILTER CAKE SAMSUNG
AUSTIN SEMICONDUCTOR, AUSTIN, TEXAS—Continued
Maximum total
concentration
(mg/kg)
Constituent
Lead .......................................................................................................................................
Nickel .....................................................................................................................................
Selenium ................................................................................................................................
Silver ......................................................................................................................................
Thallium .................................................................................................................................
Tin ..........................................................................................................................................
Toluene ..................................................................................................................................
Vanadium ...............................................................................................................................
Zinc ........................................................................................................................................
Maximum
TCLP
concentration
(mg/L)
6.3
25.7
1.4
0.95
1.7
7.6
2.5
25.8
43.0
0.11
0.078
0.072
0.0012
ND
ND
ND
0.014
0.21
Maximum
TCLP delisting
level
(mg/L)
2.45
53.8
1.0
5.0
0.1458
22.5
60.1
14.36
797
Notes: These levels represent the highest constituent concentration found in any one sample and does not necessarily represent the specific
level found in one sample.
IV. Public Comments Received on the
Proposed Exclusion
Who submitted comments on the
proposed rule?
The EPA received no public
comments on the July 14, 2017,
proposed rule.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
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
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:21 Sep 29, 2017
Jkt 244001
Similarly, because this rule will affect
only a particular facility, this rule does
not have tribal implications, as specified
in Executive Order 13175,
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000). Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this rule. This rule also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because the
Agency does not have reason to believe
the environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. The
basis for this belief is that the Agency
used DRAS, which considers health and
safety risks to children, to calculate the
maximum allowable concentrations for
this rule. This rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001)), because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866. This rule does not involve
technical standards; thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. As required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988,
‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’, (61 FR 4729,
February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule,
EPA has taken the necessary steps to
eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity,
minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for
affected conduct.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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. Executive Order (E.O.)
12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994))
establishes Federal executive policy on
environmental justice. Its main
provision directs Federal agencies, to
the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make
environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this rule will
not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income
populations because it does not affect
the level of protection provided to
human health or the environment. The
Agency’s risk assessment did not
identify risks from management of this
material in an authorized, solid waste
landfill (e.g., RCRA Subtitle D landfill,
commercial/industrial solid waste
landfill, etc.). Therefore, EPA believes
that any populations in proximity of the
landfills used by this facility should not
be adversely affected by common waste
management practices for this delisted
waste.
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
List 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: September 19, 2017.
Wren Stenger,
Director, Multimedia 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
45739
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921,
6922, 6924(y) and 6938.
2. In table 1 of appendix IX to part 261
add the entry ‘‘Samsung’’ in
alphabetical order to read as follows:
■
Appendix IX to Part 261—Wastes
Excluded Under §§ 260.20 and 260.22
1. The authority citation for part 261
continues to read as follows:
■
TABLE 1—WASTES EXCLUDED FROM NON-SPECIFIC SOURCES
Address
Waste description
*
Samsung ..........
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
Facility
*
Austin, TX .........
*
*
*
*
*
Copper Filter Cake (EPA Hazardous Waste Numbers F006) generated at a maximum rate of 750 cubic
yards annually.
For the exclusion to be valid, Samsung must implement a verification testing program for each of the
waste streams 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.
Copper Filter Cake. Leachable Concentrations (mg/l): Acetone—2070.0; Arsenic—1.66; Barium—100.0;
Cadmium—0.362; Carbon Disulfide—224.75; Chromium—5.0; Chromium (VI)—5.0; Cobalt—1.36; Copper—97.1; Lead—2.45; Nickel—53.8; Selenium—1.0; Silver—5.0; Thallium—0.01458; Tin—22.5; Toluene—60.1; Vanadium—14.36; Zinc—797
(2) Waste Holding and Handling:
(A) Waste classification as non-hazardous cannot begin until compliance with the limits set in paragraph (1) for the Copper Filter cake is verified.
(B) If constituent levels in any sample and retest sample taken by Samsung exceed any of the
delisting levels set in paragraph (1) for the Copper Filter cake, Samsung must do the following:
(i) notify EPA in accordance with paragraph (5) and
(ii) manage and dispose the Copper Filter cake as hazardous waste generated under Subtitle C
of RCRA.
(3) Testing Requirements:
Samsung must perform analytical testing by sampling and analyzing the Copper Filter cake as follows:
(i) Collect a representative sample of the Copper Filter cake for analysis of all constituents listed
in paragraph (1) prior to disposal.
(ii) The samples for the annual testing shall be a representative 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 Samsung Copper filter cake is representative for all constituents listed in paragraph (1).
(4) Data Submittals:
Samsung must submit the information described below. If Samsung 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).
Samsung must:
(A) Submit the data obtained through paragraph 3 to the Section Chief, 6MM–RP, Multimedia Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200, 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:21 Sep 29, 2017
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
45740
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—WASTES 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.’’
(5) Reopener:
(A) If any time after disposal of the delisted waste Samsung possesses or is otherwise made aware of
any environmental data (including but not limited to underflow water 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 verification testing (and retest, if applicable) of the waste does not meet the delisting
requirements in paragraph 1, Samsung 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 Samsung fails to submit the information described in paragraphs (5),(6)(A) or (6)(B) or if any
other information is received from any source, the Division Director will make a preliminary determination as to whether the reported information requires EPA action to protect human health and/or
the environment. Further action may include suspending, or revoking the exclusion, or other appropriate response necessary to protect human health and the environment.
(D) If the Division Director determines that the reported information requires action by EPA, the Division Director will notify the facility in writing of the actions the Division Director believes are necessary to protect human health and the environment. The notice shall include a statement of the
proposed action and a statement providing the facility with an opportunity to present information as
to why the proposed EPA action is not necessary. The facility shall have 10 days from receipt of the
Division Director’s notice to present such information.
(E) Following the receipt of information from the facility described in paragraph (6)(D) or (if no information is presented under paragraph (6)(D)) the initial receipt of information described in paragraphs
(5), (6)(A) or (6)(B), the Division Director will issue a final written determination describing EPA actions that are necessary to protect human health and/or the environment. Any required action described in the Division Director’s determination shall become effective immediately, unless the Division Director provides otherwise.
(6) Notification Requirements:
Samsung 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) For onsite disposal, a notice should be submitted to the State to notify the State that disposal of
the delisted materials has begun.
(C) Update one-time written notification, if it ships the delisted waste into a different disposal facility.
(D) Failure to provide this notification will result in a violation of the delisting exclusion and a possible
revocation of the decision.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; reallocation.
*
[FR Doc. 2017–21112 Filed 9–29–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
NMFS is reallocating the
projected unused amount of the 2017
Atka mackerel incidental catch
allowance (ICA) for the Bering Sea
subarea and Eastern Aleutian district
(BS/EAI) to the Amendment 80
cooperative allocations in the Bering
Sea and Aleutian Islands management
area (BSAI). This action is necessary to
allow the 2017 total allowable catch of
Atka mackerel in the BSAI to be fully
harvested.
DATES: Effective 12 hrs Alaska local time
(A.l.t.), September 27, 2017 through
2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Whitney, 907–586–7228.
SUMMARY:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 161020985–7181–02]
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
RIN 0648–XF712
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Reallocation of Atka
Mackerel in the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:21 Sep 29, 2017
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
NMFS
manages the groundfish fishery in the
BSAI according to the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area (FMP) prepared by
the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council under authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act.
Regulations governing fishing by U.S.
vessels in accordance with the FMP
appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600
and 50 CFR part 679.
The 2017 Atka mackerel ICA for the
BS/EAI is 1,000 metric tons (mt) and
2017 Atka mackerel total allowable
catch allocated to the Amendment 80
cooperatives is 26,694 mt as established
by the final 2017 and 2018 harvest
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 189 (Monday, October 2, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45736-45740]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21112]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA-R06-RCRA-2017-0254; FRL-9968-61-Region 6]
Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is granting a
petition submitted by Samsung Austin Semiconductor (Samsung) to exclude
from hazardous waste control (or delist) a certain solid waste. This
final rule responds to the petition submitted by Samsung to have the
copper filter cake from the electroplating process excluded, or
delisted from the definition of a hazardous waste. The Copper filter
cake is listed as F006, wastewater treatment sludges from
electroplating operations. The basis of the listing is cadmium,
hexavalent chromium, nickel, and cyanide (complexed). After careful
analysis and evaluation of comments submitted by the public, the EPA
has concluded that the petitioned wastes are not hazardous waste when
disposed of in Subtitle D landfills. This exclusion applies to the
copper filter cake generated at Samsung Austin Semiconductor's Austin,
Texas facility. Accordingly, this final rule excludes the petitioned
waste from the requirements of hazardous waste regulations under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) when disposed of in
Subtitle D landfills, but imposes testing conditions to ensure that the
future-generated wastes remain qualified for delisting.
DATES: This final rule is effective on October 2, 2017.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R06-RCRA-2017-0254. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. 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, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available electronically
through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information regarding
the Samsung Austin Semiconductor petition, contact Michelle Peace at
214-665-7430 or by email at peace.michelle@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 delisting?
C. What are the limits of this exclusion?
D. How will Samsung Austin Semiconductor 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 Data
A. What waste and how much did Samsung Austin Semiconductor
petition EPA to delist?
B. How did Samsung Austin Semiconductor sample and analyze the
waste data in this petition?
IV. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Exclusion
Who submitted comments on the proposed rule?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Overview Information
A. What action is EPA finalizing?
The EPA is finalizing:
(1) The decision to grant Samsung Austin Semiconductor's petition
to have its copper filter cake excluded, or delisted, from the
definition of a hazardous waste, subject to certain continued
verification and monitoring conditions; and
(2) To use the Delisting Risk Assessment Software v.3.0.35 to
evaluate the potential impact of the petitioned waste on human health
and the environment. The Agency used this model to predict the
concentration of hazardous constituents released from the petitioned
waste, once it is disposed.
After evaluating the petition, EPA proposed a rule, on July 14,
2017, to exclude the Samsung Austin Semiconductor copper filter cake
waste from the lists of hazardous wastes under Sec. Sec. 261.31 and
261.32. There were no comments received on this rulemaking.
B. Why is EPA approving this delisting?
Samsung's petition requests an exclusion from the F006 waste
listing pursuant to 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22. Samsung does not believe
that the petitioned waste meets the criteria for which EPA listed it.
Samsung also believes no additional constituents or factors could cause
the waste to be hazardous. EPA's review of this petition included
consideration of the original listing criteria and the additional
factors required by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
(HSWA). See section 3001(f) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6921(f), and 40 CFR
260.22 (d)(1)-(4) (hereinafter all sectional references are to 40 CFR
unless otherwise indicated). In making the initial delisting
determination, EPA evaluated the petitioned waste against the listing
criteria and factors cited in Sec. 261.11(a)(2) and (3). Based on this
review, EPA agrees with the petitioner that the waste is non-hazardous,
with respect to the original listing criteria. If EPA had found, based
on this review, that the waste remained hazardous based on the factors
for which the waste was originally listed, EPA would have proposed to
deny the petition. EPA evaluated the waste with respect to other
factors or criteria to assess whether there is a reasonable basis to
believe that such additional factors could cause the waste to be
hazardous. EPA considered whether the waste is acutely toxic, the
concentration of the constituents in the waste, their tendency to
migrate and to bioaccumulate, their persistence in the environment once
released from the waste, plausible and specific types of management of
the petitioned waste, the quantities of waste generated, and waste
variability. EPA believes that the petitioned waste does not meet the
listing criteria and thus should not be a listed waste. EPA's proposed
decision to delist waste from Samsung is based on the information
submitted in support of this rule, including descriptions of the wastes
and analytical data from the Austin, 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 Table 1 of part 261, appendix IX and
the conditions contained herein are satisfied. The conditional
exclusion applies to 750 cubic yards of copper filter cake sludge
generated annually from the Samsung Austin Semiconductor facility in
Austin, TX.
D. How will Samsung Austin Semiconductor manage the waste if it is
delisted?
Storage containers of the copper filter cake will be transported to
an
[[Page 45737]]
authorized, solid waste landfill (e.g., RCRA Subtitle D landfill,
commercial/industrial solid waste landfill, etc.) for disposal. Any
plans for recycling must be addressed through the Hazardous Waste
Recycling regulations.
E. When is the final delisting exclusion effective?
This rule is effective October 2, 2017. The Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 amended section 3010 of RCRA to allow rules to
become effective in less than six months when the regulated community
does not need the six-month period to come into compliance. That is the
case here because this rule reduces, rather than increases, the
existing requirements for persons generating hazardous wastes. These
reasons also provide 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 would be affected. This would exclude two categories of
States: States having a dual system that includes Federal RCRA
requirements and their own requirements, and States who have received
our authorization to make their own delisting decisions.
Here are the details: We allow states to impose their own non-RCRA
regulatory requirements that are more stringent than EPA's, under
section 3009 of RCRA. These more stringent requirements may include a
provision that prohibits a Federally issued exclusion from taking
effect in the State. Because a dual system (that is, both Federal
(RCRA) and State (non-RCRA) programs) may regulate a petitioner's
waste, we urge petitioners to contact the State regulatory authority to
establish the status of their wastes under the State law.
EPA has also authorized some States (for example, Louisiana,
Georgia, Illinois) to administer a delisting program in place of the
Federal program, that is, to make State delisting decisions. Therefore,
this exclusion does not apply in those authorized States. If Samsung
Austin Semiconductor transports the petitioned waste to or manages the
waste in any State with delisting authorization, Samsung Austin
Semiconductor must obtain delisting authorization from that State
before they can manage the waste as nonhazardous in the State.
II. Background
A. What is a delisting?
A delisting petition is a request from a generator to EPA or
another agency with jurisdiction to exclude from the list of hazardous
wastes, wastes the generator does not consider hazardous under RCRA.
B. What regulations allow facilities to delist a waste?
Under 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22, facilities may petition the EPA to
remove their wastes from hazardous waste control 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 parts 260 through
266, 268 and 273 of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Section 260.22 provides generators the opportunity to petition the
Administrator to exclude a waste on a ``generator-specific'' basis from
the hazardous waste lists.
C. What information must the generator supply?
Petitioners must provide sufficient information to EPA to allow the
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. In
addition, the Administrator must determine, where he/she has a
reasonable basis to believe that factors (including additional
constituents) other than those for which the waste was listed could
cause the waste to be a hazardous waste, that such factors do not
warrant retaining the waste as a hazardous waste.
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Waste Data
A. What waste and how much did Samsung Austin Semiconductor petition
EPA to delist?
In November 2015, Samsung petitioned EPA to exclude from the lists
of hazardous wastes contained in Sec. Sec. 261.31 and 261.32, filter
cake (F006) generated from its facility located in Austin, Texas. The
waste falls under the classification of listed waste pursuant to
Sec. Sec. 261.31 and 261.32. Specifically, in its petition, Samsung
requested that EPA grant a conditional exclusion for 750 cubic yards of
F006 filter cake.
The 40 CFR part 261 appendix VII hazardous constituents which are
the basis for listing can be found in Table 1.
Table 1--EPA Waste Codes for Copper Filter Cake and the Basis for
Listing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Waste code Basis for listing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
F006................................ Cadmium, hexavalent chromium,
nickel, cyanide (complexed).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. How did Samsung Austin Semiconductor sample and analyze the waste
data in this petition?
To support its petition, Samsung Austin Semiconductor submitted:
(1) Historical information on waste generation and management
practices; and
(2) Analytical results from eight samples for total and TCLP
concentrations of compounds of concern (COC)s;
Table 2--Analytical Results/Maximum Allowable Delisting Concentration Copper Filter Cake Samsung Austin
Semiconductor, Austin, Texas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum total Maximum TCLP Maximum TCLP
Constituent concentration concentration delisting level
(mg/kg) (mg/L) (mg/L)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acetone...................................................... 0.0013 0.24 2070.0
Arsenic...................................................... 3.6 0.098 1.66
Barium....................................................... 5.30 0.13 100.0
Cadmium...................................................... 0.75 0.004 0.362
Carbon disulfide............................................. 2.7 0.043 224.75
Chromium..................................................... 42 0.12 5.0
Chromium(VI) (+6)............................................ 1.7 0.072 5.0
Cobalt....................................................... 1.6 0.035 1.36
Copper....................................................... 14600 5.4 97.1
[[Page 45738]]
Lead......................................................... 6.3 0.11 2.45
Nickel....................................................... 25.7 0.078 53.8
Selenium..................................................... 1.4 0.072 1.0
Silver....................................................... 0.95 0.0012 5.0
Thallium..................................................... 1.7 ND 0.1458
Tin.......................................................... 7.6 ND 22.5
Toluene...................................................... 2.5 ND 60.1
Vanadium..................................................... 25.8 0.014 14.36
Zinc......................................................... 43.0 0.21 797
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: These levels represent the highest constituent concentration found in any one sample and does not
necessarily represent the specific level found in one sample.
IV. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Exclusion
Who submitted comments on the proposed rule?
The EPA received no public comments on the July 14, 2017, proposed
rule.
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 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 rule does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. This rule also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because
it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866,
and because the Agency does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. The basis for this belief is that
the Agency used DRAS, which considers health and safety risks to
children, to calculate the maximum allowable concentrations for this
rule. This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not
a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. This rule
does not involve technical standards; thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 of
Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'', (61 FR 4729, February
7, 1996), in issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to
eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation,
and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report which includes a copy of the rule to
each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States. Section 804 exempts from section 801 the following types of
rules: (1) Rules of particular applicability; (2) rules relating to
agency management or personnel; and (3) rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties (5 U.S.C. 804(3)). EPA is not
required to submit a rule report regarding today's action under section
801 because this is a rule of particular applicability. Executive Order
(E.O.) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal executive
policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs Federal
agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States.
EPA has determined that this rule will not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations because it does not affect the level of
protection provided to human health or the environment. The Agency's
risk assessment did not identify risks from management of this material
in an authorized, solid waste landfill (e.g., RCRA Subtitle D landfill,
commercial/industrial solid waste landfill, etc.). Therefore, EPA
believes that any populations in proximity of the landfills used by
this facility should not be adversely affected by common waste
management practices for this delisted waste.
[[Page 45739]]
List 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: September 19, 2017.
Wren Stenger,
Director, Multimedia 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
0
1. The authority citation for part 261 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, 6922, 6924(y) and
6938.
0
2. In table 1 of appendix IX to part 261 add the entry ``Samsung'' in
alphabetical order to read as follows:
Appendix IX to Part 261--Wastes Excluded Under Sec. Sec. 260.20 and
260.22
Table 1--Wastes Excluded From Non-Specific Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Address Waste description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Samsung....................... Austin, TX................... Copper Filter Cake (EPA Hazardous Waste Numbers
F006) generated at a maximum rate of 750 cubic
yards annually.
For the exclusion to be valid, Samsung must
implement a verification testing program for
each of the waste streams 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.
Copper Filter Cake. Leachable Concentrations (mg/
l): Acetone--2070.0; Arsenic--1.66; Barium--
100.0; Cadmium--0.362; Carbon Disulfide--224.75;
Chromium--5.0; Chromium (VI)--5.0; Cobalt--1.36;
Copper--97.1; Lead--2.45; Nickel--53.8;
Selenium--1.0; Silver--5.0; Thallium--0.01458;
Tin--22.5; Toluene--60.1; Vanadium--14.36; Zinc--
797
(2) Waste Holding and Handling:
(A) Waste classification as non-hazardous
cannot begin until compliance with the limits
set in paragraph (1) for the Copper Filter
cake is verified.
(B) If constituent levels in any sample and
retest sample taken by Samsung exceed any of
the delisting levels set in paragraph (1) for
the Copper Filter cake, Samsung must do the
following:
(i) notify EPA in accordance with paragraph
(5) and
(ii) manage and dispose the Copper Filter
cake as hazardous waste generated under
Subtitle C of RCRA.
(3) Testing Requirements:
Samsung must perform analytical testing by
sampling and analyzing the Copper Filter cake
as follows:
(i) Collect a representative sample of the
Copper Filter cake for analysis of all
constituents listed in paragraph (1) prior
to disposal.
(ii) The samples for the annual testing
shall be a representative 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 Samsung Copper filter cake is
representative for all constituents listed
in paragraph (1).
(4) Data Submittals:
Samsung must submit the information described
below. If Samsung 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).
Samsung must:
(A) Submit the data obtained through paragraph
3 to the Section Chief, 6MM-RP, Multimedia
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200,
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 45740]]
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.''
(5) Reopener:
(A) If any time after disposal of the delisted
waste Samsung possesses or is otherwise made
aware of any environmental data (including
but not limited to underflow water 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 verification testing (and
retest, if applicable) of the waste does not
meet the delisting requirements in paragraph
1, Samsung 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 Samsung fails to submit the information
described in paragraphs (5),(6)(A) or (6)(B)
or if any other information is received from
any source, the Division Director will make a
preliminary determination as to whether the
reported information requires EPA action to
protect human health and/or the environment.
Further action may include suspending, or
revoking the exclusion, or other appropriate
response necessary to protect human health
and the environment.
(D) If the Division Director determines that
the reported information requires action by
EPA, the Division Director will notify the
facility in writing of the actions the
Division Director believes are necessary to
protect human health and the environment. The
notice shall include a statement of the
proposed action and a statement providing the
facility with an opportunity to present
information as to why the proposed EPA action
is not necessary. The facility shall have 10
days from receipt of the Division Director's
notice to present such information.
(E) Following the receipt of information from
the facility described in paragraph (6)(D) or
(if no information is presented under
paragraph (6)(D)) the initial receipt of
information described in paragraphs (5),
(6)(A) or (6)(B), the Division Director will
issue a final written determination
describing EPA actions that are necessary to
protect human health and/or the environment.
Any required action described in the Division
Director's determination shall become
effective immediately, unless the Division
Director provides otherwise.
(6) Notification Requirements:
Samsung 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) For onsite disposal, a notice should be
submitted to the State to notify the State
that disposal of the delisted materials has
begun.
(C) Update one-time written notification, if
it ships the delisted waste into a different
disposal facility.
(D) Failure to provide this notification will
result in a violation of the delisting
exclusion and a possible revocation of the
decision.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-21112 Filed 9-29-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
