Hazardous Waste Management System; Proposed Exclusion for Identifying and Listing Hazardous Waste, 30237-30243 [2021-11341]
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 107 (Monday, June 7, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30237-30243]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11341]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA-R10-RCRA-2021-0142; FRL-10023-45-Region 10]
Hazardous Waste Management System; Proposed Exclusion for
Identifying and Listing Hazardous Waste
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (also, ``the
Agency'' or ``we'' in this preamble) is proposing technical amendments
to an existing exclusion from the list of federal hazardous waste
(delisting) issued to the United States Department of Energy (Energy)
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. These modifications
address changes to the 200-Area Effluent Treatment System associated
with the delisting necessary to accept liquid effluents expected to be
generated from vitrification of certain low-activity mixed wastes at
the Hanford Federal Facility, or Hanford Site, in Richland, Washington.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 7, 2021. Requests
for an informal hearing must reach the EPA by June 22, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
RCRA-2021-0142 via www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions
for submitting comments. Due to restrictions related to COVID-19,
submission of comments via mail or hand delivery is not feasible at
this time.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-RCRA-
2021-0142. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless
[[Page 30238]]
the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or
otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to the EPA without going through www.regulations.gov
your email address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA
recommends that you include your name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any physical media you submit. If the
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Any person may request an informal hearing on this proposed
decision by filing a request with Timothy Hamlin, Director, Land,
Chemicals and Redevelopment Division, EPA, Region 10, 1200 6th Ave.,
Suite 155, M/S 15-H04, Seattle, Washington 98101. The request must
contain the information prescribed in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
CFR 260.20(d).
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information may not be publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only
in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available
electronically through www.regulations.gov. Due to restrictions related
to COVID-19, docket materials are not available in hard copy form at
this time. If you have further questions concerning docket materials,
we recommend you telephone Dr. David Bartus at (206) 553-2804.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. David Bartus, EPA, Region 10, 1200
6th Avenue, Suite 155, M/S 15-H04, Seattle, Washington 98101; telephone
number: (206) 553-2804; fax number (206) 553-8509; email address:
[email protected].
As discussed in Section V of this document, the Washington State
Department of Ecology is evaluating the Petitioner's request for this
modification under state authority. Information on Ecology's action may
be found at https://ecology.wa.gov/Waste-Toxics/Nuclear-waste/Public-comment-periods.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information in this section is organized
as follows:
I. Overview Information
II. Background
A. Hanford's 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility
B. Hanford's Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant
C. Changes to 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility Capability
III. The EPA's Evaluation of the Proposed Technical Amendments
A. Addition of Steam Stripping as a New Unit Operation
B. Changes to Treatability Envelope Demonstration Test
Requirements
C. Miscellaneous Changes and Updates
IV. When Would the EPA Finalize the Proposed Delisting Modification?
V. How Will This Action Affect States?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Overview Information
The EPA is proposing technical amendments to an existing exclusion
from the list of federally-listed wastes set forth in 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) 261.33 previously issued to the United States
Department of Energy (Energy) for the Hanford Federal Facility, or
Hanford Site in Richland, Washington. See 40 CFR part 261, appendix IX,
Table 2. This existing exclusion applies to treated effluent generated
by Hanford's 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF). As described
below, these amendments relate to the planned startup of the Hanford
Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant.
Based on our review described in Section III of this document, we
propose to approve the requested amendments.
II. Background
A. Hanford's 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility
The 200 Area ETF is a radioactive aqueous wastewater treatment
system located in the 200 East Area of the Hanford Site that provides
treatment for a variety of aqueous mixed waste. This aqueous waste
includes process condensate from the 242-A Evaporator, Hanford landfill
leachates, and other aqueous waste generated from onsite remediation
and waste management activities, potentially carrying a range of listed
and characteristic dangerous waste numbers.\1\ The 200 Area ETF
consists of a primary and a secondary treatment train. The primary
train includes treatment processes to treat both organic and inorganic
waste constituents, including ultraviolet oxidation (UV/OX), reverse
osmosis, ion exchange, pH adjustment and filtration. The secondary
treatment train manages backwash from the primary treatment train
filters, ion exchange regeneration, and the stream from the reverse
osmosis system that is retained by the reverse osmosis membrane, also
known as retentate. Construction of the 200 Area ETF began in 1992 with
waste management operations beginning in November of 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Washington State Department of Ecology is authorized to
implement their dangerous waste regulations at Washington
Administrative Code (WAC) 173-303 in lieu of the federal hazardous
waste system, except for certain requirements, such as the state
counterparts to the federal delisting regulations at 40 CFR 260.20
and 22. Under the dangerous waste program, dangerous wastes are a
superset of federal hazardous wastes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treated effluent from the 200 Area ETF is discharged to the State
Approved Land Disposal Site, or SALDS, located north of the 200 West
Area of the Hanford Site. This disposal unit allows tritium remaining
in the treated effluent to naturally decay in the subsurface--it is not
authorized to accept dangerous waste. To this end, the EPA issued an
exclusion from the list of hazardous wastes to Energy in 1995. See 60
FR 6054, February 1, 1995. This exclusion was amended by the EPA in
2005. See 70 FR 44496, August 3, 2005.
B. Hanford's Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant
The Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) is intended to
process and stabilize much of the 56 million gallons of radioactive and
chemical waste currently stored at the Hanford Site. As originally
envisioned, the WTP would treat high-level and low-activity radioactive
waste simultaneously. To begin treating waste as soon as practicable,
Energy developed an approach to treat low-activity waste prior to the
start-up of the WTP pre-treatment and the high-level waste facilities.
This approach is called direct-feed low-activity waste, or DFLAW, and
is focused on sending low-activity waste from the tank farms directly
to the WTP Low-Activity Waste (LAW) Facility. A new Effluent Management
Facility (EMF) has been constructed at the WTP to manage effluents
generated from the WTP LAW Facility during DFLAW. The EMF is needed to
evaporate the liquid secondary waste generated by the off-gas
[[Page 30239]]
treatment system associated with the two WTP LAW Facility vitrification
melters. Evaporator process condensate from the EMF, combined with WTP
LAW Facility caustic scrubber effluents, will receive treatment at the
200 Area ETF, with the resulting treated effluent disposed of at the
SALDS. The waste stream transferred from WTP to the 200 Area ETF is
referred to as the WTP DFLAW effluent waste stream.
C. Changes to 200 Area Effluent Treatment Facility Capability
Through the design and permitting of the WTP complex, Energy
identified several additional constituents it expected to be present in
WTP DFLAW effluent waste stream which are not typically found in wastes
managed by the 200 Area ETF, or are present at levels above the current
capabilities of the 200 Area ETF. Most of these additional constituents
are within the existing treatment capabilities of the 200 Area ETF, and
do not require special consideration. One constituent, acetonitrile,
which is formed in the WTP LAW Facility vitrification melters, is
predicted to be present at levels in excess of the current capability
of the 200 Area ETF, as reflected in the current organic treatability
envelope documented in Table C-2 of the delisting petition dated
November 29, 2001. Within the 200 Area ETF, the UV/OX system treats
organic compounds, including but not limited to acetonitrile. However,
acetonitrile is not easily degraded through UV/OX. Table C-2 in the
November 29, 2001 petition shows an electrical energy per order (EE/O)
of magnitude destruction of 50. EE/O reflects the relative difficulty
for destruction of the organic constituent in the UV/OX unit.
Constituents in Table C-2 with an EE/O of 40 or higher are considered
hard to treat organics. After examining various options for addressing
this issue, Energy determined that the addition of supplemental organic
treatment in the form of a steam stripper to the 200-ETF to separate
acetonitrile from treated effluents would be the preferred approach to
ensuring additional constituents associated with the WTP DFLAW effluent
waste stream can be effectively managed at the 200 Area ETF.
To accommodate the addition of the proposed steam stripper unit to
the 200 Area ETF, two technical amendments are necessary to the current
delisting. First, the list of unit operations in Condition (1)(d)(iv)
of the current delisting must be amended to include steam stripping.
Second, a new condition is necessary to establish a mechanism whereby
Energy can operate the 200 Area ETF outside of the existing
treatability envelope to gather demonstration test data to increase the
treatability envelope concentration for acetonitrile to accommodate the
predicted level in the WTP DFLAW effluent waste stream.
III. The EPA's Evaluation of the Proposed Technical Amendments
A. Addition of Steam Stripping as a New Unit Operation
In support of its request to modify the existing 200 Area ETF
delisting, Energy has provided the EPA with an engineering report
documenting the design and expected level of performance of the
proposed steam stripper (docket entries EPA-R10-RCRA-2021-0142-DRAFT-
0003 and EPA-R10-RCRA-2021-0142-DRAFT-0005). These reports include both
a detailed process flow diagram for, and results of process simulation
of the proposed steam stripper. This information provides assurance
that, if the steam stripper is added to the 200 Area ETF primary
treatment train, the overall treatment system can effectively treat the
expected WTP DFLAW effluent waste stream and allow for successful
verification of all existing delisting criteria, including but not
limited to acetonitrile. Energy must also receive authorization to
construct and operate the proposed supplemental organic treatment
system from the Washington State Department of Ecology through their
authorized dangerous waste permitting program, as well as other
applicable state permits.
B. Changes to Treatability Envelope Demonstration Test Requirements
The existing 200 Area ETF delisting rule includes a mechanism,
documented in Condition (1)(b), that allows Energy to modify the 200
Area ETF treatability envelope specified in Tables C-1 and C-2 of the
November 29, 2001 delisting petition to reflect changes in treatment
technology or operating practices upon written approval of the Regional
Administrator. As stated in the rule, ``Data supporting modified
envelopes must be based on at least four influent waste stream
characterization data points and corresponding treated effluent
verification sample data points for wastes managed under a particular
waste processing strategy.'' This mechanism will be used to expand the
existing treatability envelope for acetonitrile but will require
operation of the 200 Area ETF outside the existing approved
treatability envelope, which is otherwise not provided for in the
delisting rule. To address this issue, the EPA is proposing to include
a new condition (1)(c) that establishes a mechanism that will allow
operation outside of the approved treatability envelope for purposes of
gathering demonstration test data to amend the treatability envelope at
a later time.
The purpose of this new mechanism is to allow the EPA an
opportunity to perform a forward-looking technical evaluation of how
the 200 Area ETF will be operated during the demonstration test in
order to support a finding that, to a reasonable degree of certainty,
delisting exclusion limits can be satisfied during the demonstration
test. This mechanism requires Energy to provide the EPA with an
engineering report and a demonstration test plan. The engineering
report must document that the 200 Area ETF can be reasonably expected
to produce treated effluent during the period of interim approval which
satisfies the delisting levels in Condition (5).\2\ The engineering
report shall include, but is not limited to, engineering calculations,
process modelling results, or performance data provided by equipment
manufacturers. The demonstration test plan will complement the
engineering report by documenting the composition of the waste feed to
be used during the demonstration test, how the demonstration test will
be conducted, how demonstration test sampling and analysis will be
conducted, and a schedule for conducting the demonstration test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In practice, the engineering report expected to be submitted
in connection with a proposed demonstration treatment plan is likely
to be similar, if not identical to the engineering report included
in the docket supporting this proposed modification of the existing
200 Area ETF delisting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA will review these submittals to determine whether the
demonstration test will yield data suitable for establishing an
expanded treatability envelope for the target constituents, and that
delisting exclusion limits will be satisfied during the demonstration
test. Provided that this review demonstrates that these criteria can be
met to a reasonable degree of certainty, the EPA will provide written
interim approval to Energy to proceed with the demonstration test
according to the approved demonstration test plan. The effect of
interim approval shall be limited to relief from the requirement of
operating within the treatability envelope specified in Tables C-1 and
C-2 of the November 29, 2001 delisting petition, as amended, during the
period of demonstration testing. Once demonstration test data are
available, Energy will then submit a completion
[[Page 30240]]
report. The EPA's written approval of the completion report shall be
considered approval of the modified treatability envelope pursuant to
Condition (1)(b).
C. Miscellaneous Changes and Updates
The EPA is also proposing to make several minor changes to address
typographical errors, amend section numbering to reflect addition of a
new condition, and to amend selected references to treatability
envelopes in Tables C-1 and C-2 that may be updated to accommodate WTP
DFLAW effluent waste stream to include the phrase ``as amended.'' The
EPA is also correcting certain references to Tables C-1 and C-2 to
properly characterize their function as defining inorganic and organic
treatability envelope data.
IV. When would the EPA finalize the proposed delisting modification?
40 CFR 260.20(c) requires the EPA to provide notice and an
opportunity for comment before granting or denying a final exclusion.
Thus, the EPA will not make a final decision or grant an exclusion
until it has addressed all timely public comments on today's proposal,
including any at public hearings.
Since this proposed rule is limited to technical amendments that
apply to future activities, and is limited to a specific process and
waste stream at the Hanford Site, the regulated community does not need
a six-month period to come into compliance in accordance with section
3010(b) of RCRA, as amended by the Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984.
V. How will this Action affect states?
Because the EPA is proposing to issue this exclusion under the
federal RCRA delisting regulations, only states subject to federal RCRA
delisting provisions will be affected. This exclusion may not be
effective in states which have received authorization from the EPA to
make their own delisting decisions.
The EPA allows states to impose their own non-RCRA regulatory
requirements that are more stringent than the EPA's, under section 3009
of RCRA. These more stringent requirements may include a provision that
prohibits a federally issued exclusion from taking effect in the state.
We urge petitioners to contact their state regulatory authorities to
establish the status of their wastes under their respective state laws.
The EPA has also authorized some states to administer a delisting
program in place of the federal program, that is, to make state
delisting decisions. Therefore, this exclusion does not apply in those
authorized states. If the Petitioner manages the waste in any state
with delisting authorization, the Petitioner must obtain delisting
authorization or other determination from the receiving state before it
can manage the waste as nonhazardous in that state.
While Washington State has received final authorization to
implement most of its dangerous waste program regulations in lieu of
the federal program, including the listing and identification of listed
waste codes associated with the petitioned wastes, it has not been
authorized to implement its delisting regulations program in lieu of
the federal program. The EPA notes that Washington State has provisions
in the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-303-910(3) similar to
the federal provisions upon which this delisting is based. These
provisions are in effect as a matter of state law. Thus, the Petitioner
must seek approval from Washington State at the state level in addition
to this proposed delisting.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This proposed action is exempt from review by the Office of
Management and Budget because it is a proposed rule of particular
applicability, not general applicability. The proposed action addresses
modifications to an existing delisting petition under RCRA for the
petitioned waste at a particular facility.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed action 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 only applies to a particular facility.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Because this proposed rule is of particular applicability relating
to a particular facility, it is not subject to the regulatory
flexibility provision of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.).
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This proposed action does not contain any unfunded mandate as
described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) and
does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action
imposes no new enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This proposed action 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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This proposed action does not have tribal implications as specified
in Executive Order 13175. This proposed action applies only to a
particular facility on non-tribal land. Thus, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive
Order 12866, and because the EPA does not believe the environmental
health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
This proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This proposed action does not involve technical standards as
described by the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of
1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA has determined that this proposed action does not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations, low-income populations, and/or
indigenous peoples. The EPA has determined that this proposed action
will not have
[[Page 30241]]
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.
K. Congressional Review Act
This proposed action is exempt from the Congressional Review Act (5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.) because it is a rule of particular applicability.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 261
Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Recycling, and Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Timothy Hamlin,
Director, Land, Chemicals and Redevelopment Division.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 261 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 Appendix IX to Part 261, amend Table 2, under the entry ``United
States Department of Energy (Energy)'' by:
0
a. Revising Conditions (1)(a)(i) and (ii), and (1)(b);
0
b. Redesignating Conditions (1)(c) and (d) as Conditions (1)(d) and(e);
0
c. Adding a new Conditions (1)(c);
0
d. Revising the newly designated Conditions (1)(e)(iv); and
0
e. In Conditions (5) under the entry for ``Organic Constituents'' by:
0
i. Removing the entry ``Dichloroisopropyl ether'' and adding an entry
``Dichloroisopropyl ether--6.0 x 10-2'' in its place; and
0
ii. Removing the entry ``[Bis(2-Chloroisopropyl) either]--6.0 x
10-2; and
0
ii. Removing the entry ``Arochlor [total of Arochlors 1016, 1221, 1232,
1242, 1248, 1254, 1260]--5.0 x 10-4'' and adding an entry
``Aroclor [total of Aroclors 1016, 1221, 1232, 1242, 1248, 1254,
1260]--5.0 x 10-4 in its place.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Appendix IX to Part 261--Wastes Excluded Under Sec. Sec. 260.20 and
260.22
* * * * *
Table 2--Wastes Excluded From Specific Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Address Waste description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
United States Department of Richland, * * *
Energy (Energy). Washington.
................. Conditions:
(1) * * *
(a) * * *
(i) Complete
sufficient
characterization of
the waste stream to
demonstrate that the
waste stream is
within the
treatability
envelope of 200 Area
ETF as specified in
Tables C-1 and C-2
of the delisting
petition dated
November 29, 2001,
as amended. Results
of the waste stream
characterization and
the treatability
evaluation must be
in writing and
placed in the
facility operating
record, along with a
copy of Tables C-1
and C-2 of the
November 29, 2001
petition, as
amended. Waste
stream
characterization may
be carried out in
whole or in part
using the waste
analysis procedures
in the Hanford
Facility RCRA
Permit, WA7 89000
8967;
(ii) Prepare a
written waste
processing strategy
specific to the
waste stream, based
on the ETF process
model documented in
the November 29,
2001 petition, the
March 31, 2021
modification
request, and Tables
C-1 and C-2 of the
November 29, 2001
petition, as
amended. For waste
processing
strategies
applicable to waste
streams for which
organic envelope
data is provided in
Table C-2 of the
November 29, 2001
petition, as
amended, Energy
shall use envelope
data specific to
that waste stream,
if available.
Otherwise, Energy
shall use the
minimum envelope in
Table C-2.
(b) Energy may modify
the 200 Area ETF
treatability
envelope specified
in Tables C-1 and C-
2 of the November
29, 2001 delisting
petition, as
amended, to reflect
changes in treatment
technology or
operating practices
upon written
approval of the
Regional
Administrator.
Requests for
modification shall
be accompanied by an
engineering report
detailing the basis
for a modified
treatment envelope.
Data supporting
modified envelopes
must be based on at
least four influent
waste stream
characterization
data points and
corresponding
treated effluent
verification sample
data points for
wastes managed under
a particular waste
processing strategy.
Treatment
efficiencies must be
calculated based on
a comparison of
upper 95 percent
confidence level
constituent
concentrations. Upon
written EPA approval
of the engineering
report, the
associated inorganic
and organic
treatment efficiency
data may be used in
lieu of those in
Tables C-1 and C-2
for purposes of
condition (1)(a)(i).
[[Page 30242]]
(c) Where operation
of the 200 Area ETF
for purposes of
gathering data
supporting a
modified
treatability
envelope pursuant to
Condition (1)(b)
requires operation
outside of an
existing
treatability
envelope or where a
new treatability
envelope is to be
proposed, Energy may
request interim
approval to conduct
such demonstration
testing for purposes
of developing a new
or modified
treatability
envelope. Such a
request must include
the following
documentation:
(i) An Engineering
Report documenting
the basis for a
modified
treatability
envelope. The
Engineering Report
shall, based on best
available
information,
document that
operation of the 200
Area ETF during the
period of interim
approval can be
reasonably expected
to produce treated
effluent satisfying
the delisting levels
in Condition (5).
The Engineering
Report shall
include, but is not
limited to,
engineering
calculations,
process modelling
results, or
performance data
provided by
equipment
manufacturers;
(ii) A demonstration
test plan
documenting the
following:
(A) The quantity and
characterization of
the waste stream to
be used in
conducting
demonstration
testing, and
information that
will be included in
the waste processing
strategy required by
Condition (1)(a)(ii)
for the
demonstration
testing. The test
plan shall document,
to a reasonable
degree of certainty,
that data gathered
from the
demonstration
testing will be
suitable for use in
modifying the
treatability
envelope pursuant to
Condition (1)(b).
The test plan may
include provisions
for ``spiking'' the
demonstration test
waste feed to ensure
that a waste feed
meeting the
requirements of the
test plan is
available;
(B) A sampling and
analysis plan with
supporting
systematic planning
documentation (e.g.,
Data Quality
Objectives) and with
an associated
Quality Assurance
Project Plan, for
all sampling and
analysis specific to
the demonstration
testing. A minimum
of four independent
sample sets over the
course of the
demonstration test
are required from
both the influent to
the 200 Area ETF and
the effluent to the
verification tanks;
(C) A schedule for
conducting the
demonstration
testing. The
demonstration
testing schedule may
be based on
functional criteria
in addition to or in
lieu of fixed
calendar dates. The
testing schedule may
contain
contingencies for
revising the test
plan should
additional testing
be required to
obtain the required
performance data
points.
Energy may not
commence
demonstration
testing until
written interim
approval is obtained
from the Regional
Administrator. The
effect of interim
approval shall be
limited to relief
from the requirement
of operating within
the treatability
envelope specified
in Tables C-1 and C-
2 of the November
29, 2001 delisting
petition, as
amended, during the
period of
demonstration
testing. Interim
approval shall
remain in effect
only for the
duration of the
demonstration
testing as
documented in the
required testing
schedule. Within 60
days following
completion of
demonstration
testing, or such
other time as may be
approved in writing
by the EPA, Energy
shall submit a
written completion
report documenting
analysis of data
gathered during the
demonstration test.
Energy may request
an extension of
interim approval for
the period of time
between completion
of the demonstration
testing and final
approval of the
modified
treatability
envelope. The EPA
may approve
amendments to the
demonstration test
plan, including the
associated schedule,
as necessary to
successfully
complete
demonstration
testing. The EPA's
written approval of
the completion
report shall be
considered approval
of the modified
treatability
envelope pursuant to
Condition (1)(b).
* * * * * * *
(e) * * *
(iv) Key unit
operations are
defined as
filtration, UV/OX,
reverse osmosis, ion
exchange, steam
stripping, and
secondary waste
treatment.
* * * * * * *
(5) * * *
Dichloroisopropyl
ether--6.0 x 10-2
[[Page 30243]]
* * * * * * *
Aroclor [total of
Aroclors 1016, 1221,
1232, 1242, 1248,
1254, 1260]--5.0 x
10-4
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2021-11341 Filed 6-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
