[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 72 (Wednesday, April 15, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18354-18361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-10005]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 261

[SW-FRL-5996-2]


Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of 
Hazardous Waste; Proposed Exclusion

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule and request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
grant a petition submitted by Kokoku Steel Cord Corporation in 
Scottsburg, Indiana to exclude (or ``delist'') certain solid wastes 
generated by its wastewater treatment plant from the lists of hazardous 
wastes contained in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 
Subpart D of Part 261. Since submitting the petition, Kokoku Steel Cord 
has been bought by American Steel Cord, a division of Michelin North 
America, Inc. and the name of the facility has been changed to American 
Steel Cord. American Steel Cord has stated that no changes have 
occurred in the raw material or the processes generating the waste as 
described in the original petition. American Steel Cord has adopted the 
petition as its own, and has certified that all information contained 
in the original petition and in subsequent submittals is true, 
accurate, and complete. This action responds to a ``delisting'' 
petition submitted under Sec. 260.20, which allows any person to 
petition the Administrator to modify or revoke any provision of Parts 
260 through 266, 268 and 273, and under Sec. 260.22, which specifically 
provides generators the opportunity to petition the Administrator to 
exclude a waste on a ``generator-specific'' basis from the hazardous 
waste lists. This proposed decision is based on an evaluation of waste-
specific information provided by the petitioner. If this proposed 
decision is finalized, the petitioned waste will be conditionally 
excluded from the requirements of the hazardous waste regulations under 
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

DATES: EPA is requesting public comments on this proposed decision. 
Comments must be received in writing by June 1, 1998. Comments 
postmarked after the close of the comment period will be stamped 
``late.''
    Any person may request a hearing on this proposed decision by 
filing a request with Norman R. Niedergang, Director, Waste, Pesticides 
and Toxics Division, at the address below, by May 15, 1998. The request 
must contain the information prescribed in Sec. 260.20(d).

ADDRESSES: Two copies of any comments should be sent to Judy Kleiman, 
Waste Management Branch (DRP-8J), U.S. EPA Region 5, 77 W. Jackson 
Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604.
    Requests for a hearing should be addressed to Norman R. Niedergang, 
Director, Waste, Pesticides and Toxics Division (D-8J), U.S. EPA Region 
5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604.
    The RCRA regulatory docket for this proposed rule is located at the 
U.S. EPA Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604, and is 
available for viewing from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. Call Judy Kleiman at (312) 886-1482 
for appointments. The public may copy material from the regulatory 
docket at $0.15 per page.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information concerning 
this notice, contact Judy Kleiman at the address above or at (312) 886-
1482.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Authority

    On January 16, 1981, as part of its final and interim final 
regulations implementing Section 3001 of RCRA, EPA published an amended 
list of hazardous wastes from non-specific and specific sources. This 
list has been amended several times, and is published in Secs. 261.31 
and 261.32. These wastes are listed as hazardous because they typically 
and frequently exhibit one or more of the characteristics of hazardous 
wastes identified in Subpart C of Part 261 (i.e., ignitability, 
corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity) or meet the criteria for listing 
contained in Sec. 261.11(a)(2) or (a)(3).
    Individual waste streams may vary, however, depending on raw 
materials, industrial processes, and other factors. Thus, while a waste 
that is described in these regulations generally is hazardous, a 
specific waste from an individual facility meeting the listing 
description may not be. For this reason, Secs. 260.20 and 260.22 
provide an exclusion procedure, allowing a person to demonstrate that a 
specific waste from a particular generating facility should not be 
regulated as a hazardous waste.
    To have its waste excluded, a petitioner must show that the waste 
generated at the facility does not meet any of the criteria for which 
the waste was listed. See Sec. 260.22(a)(1) and the background 
documents for the listed wastes. In addition, the Hazardous and Solid 
Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984 require EPA to consider any

[[Page 18355]]

factors (including additional constituents) other than those for which 
the waste was listed, if there is a reasonable basis to believe that 
such additional factors could cause the waste to be hazardous. See 
Sec. 260.22(a)(2). Accordingly, a petitioner also must demonstrate that 
the waste does not exhibit any of the hazardous waste characteristics 
(i.e., ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity), and must 
present sufficient information for EPA to determine whether the waste 
contains any other constituents at hazardous levels. Although a waste 
which is ``delisted'' (i.e., excluded) has been evaluated to determine 
whether or not it exhibits any of the characteristics of hazardous 
waste, a generator remains obligated under RCRA to determine whether or 
not its waste remains non-hazardous based on the hazardous waste 
characteristics.
    In addition, residues from the treatment, storage, or disposal of 
listed hazardous wastes and mixtures containing listed hazardous wastes 
are also considered hazardous wastes. See Sec. 261.3(a)(2)(iv) and 
(c)(2)(I), referred to as the ``mixture'' and ``derived-from'' rules, 
respectively. Such wastes are also eligible for exclusion and remain 
hazardous wastes until excluded. On December 6, 1991, the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia vacated the ``mixture/derived 
from'' rules and remanded them to EPA on procedural grounds. Shell Oil 
Co. v. EPA, 950 F.2d 741 (D.C. Cir. 1991). On March 3, 1992, EPA 
reinstated the mixture and derived-from rules, and solicited comments 
on other ways to regulate waste mixtures and residues (57 FR 7628). EPA 
plans to address issues related to waste mixtures and residues in a 
future rulemaking.

B. Approach Used to Evaluate This Petition

    American Steel Cord's petition requests a delisting for a listed 
hazardous waste. In making the initial delisting determination, EPA 
evaluated the petitioned waste against the listing criteria and factors 
cited in Sec. 261.11(a). Based on this review, EPA tentatively agreed 
with the petitioner, pending public comment, 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 then evaluated the waste with respect to other factors or 
criteria to assess whether there is a reasonable basis to believe that 
other factors could cause the waste to be hazardous. EPA considered 
whether the waste is acutely toxic, and considered the concentration of 
the constituents in the waste, the toxicity of the constituents, 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.
    For this delisting determination, EPA used the gathered information 
to identify plausible exposure routes (i.e., ground water, surface 
water, air) for hazardous constituents present in the petitioned waste. 
EPA determined that disposal in a Subtitle D landfill is the most 
reasonable, worst-case disposal scenario for American Steel Cord's 
petitioned waste, and that the major exposure route of concern would be 
ingestion of contaminated ground water. Therefore, EPA used a fate and 
transport model to predict the maximum concentrations of hazardous 
constituents that may be released from the petitioned waste after 
disposal and to determine the potential impact of the disposal of 
American Steel Cord's petitioned waste on human health and the 
environment. Specifically, EPA used the maximum estimated waste volume 
and the health based numbers as inputs to estimate maximum allowable 
leachate concentrations in the ground water at a hypothetical receptor 
well down gradient from the disposal site at an assumed risk of 
10-6 used in delisting decision-making for the hazardous 
constituents of concern. The maximum concentrations detected in the 
leachate were then compared directly to the maximum allowable levels 
determined by the volume dependent dilution attenuation factor times 
the health-based level.
    EPA believes that this fate and transport model represents a 
reasonable worst-case scenario for disposal of the petitioned waste in 
a landfill, and that a reasonable worst-case scenario is appropriate 
when evaluating whether a waste should be relieved of the protective 
management constraints of RCRA Subtitle C (Parts 260 through 266 and 
268). The use of a reasonable worst-case scenario results in 
conservative values for the compliance-point concentrations and ensures 
that the waste, once removed from hazardous waste regulation, should 
not pose a threat to human health or the environment.
    EPA also considers the applicability of ground-water monitoring 
data during the evaluation of delisting petitions. In this case, EPA 
determined that it would be inappropriate to request ground-water 
monitoring data because American Steel Cord currently disposes of the 
petitioned waste off-site. For petitioners using off-site management, 
EPA believes that, in most cases, the ground water monitoring data 
would not be meaningful. Most commercial land disposal facilities 
accept waste from numerous generators. Any ground water contamination 
or leachate would be characteristic of the total volume of waste 
disposed of at the site. In most cases, EPA believes that it would be 
impossible to isolate ground water impacts associated with any one 
waste disposed of in a commercial landfill. Therefore, the EPA did not 
request ground water monitoring data from American Steel Cord.
    From the evaluation of the delisting petition, a list of 
constituents was developed for annual verification testing. Proposed 
maximum allowable leachable concentrations for these constituents were 
derived by back-calculating from the delisting health-based levels 
through the proposed fate and transport model. These concentrations 
(i.e., ``delisting levels'') are part of the verification testing 
conditions of this proposed exclusion.
    Finally, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 
specifically require EPA to provide notice and an opportunity for 
comment before granting or denying a final exclusion. Thus, a final 
decision will not be made until all timely public comments (including 
those at public hearings, if any) on today's proposal are addressed.

II. Disposition of Delisting Petition

    American Steel Cord is located at Route 1 Box 357K, Scottsburg, 
Indiana, 47170.

A. Petition for Exclusion

    American Steel Cord, located in Scottsburg, Indiana, manufactures 
steel cord for use in steel belted radial tires. In the manufacturing 
process, rods of raw carbon steel are cleaned and drawn down by a 
series of dies to reduce the diameter and produce a thin wire. The wire 
is then electrically plated, first with a non-cyanidic base coat of 
copper followed by a non-cyanidic coat of zinc. The wastewater 
treatment plant (WWTP) filter press sludge generated from this process 
is presently listed as EPA Hazardous Waste No. F006: ``Wastewater 
treatment sludges from electroplating operations except from the 
following processes: (1) Sulfuric acid anodizing of aluminum; (2) tin 
plating on carbon steel; (3) zinc plating (segregated basis) on carbon 
steel; (4) aluminum or zinc-alumiuum plating on

[[Page 18356]]

carbon steel; (5) cleaning/stripping associated with tin, zinc and 
aluminum plating on carbon steel; and (6) chemical etching and milling 
of aluminum.'' The constituents of concern for EPA Hazardous Waste No 
F006 are cadmium, hexavalent chromium, nickel, and cyanide (complexed) 
(see appendix VII of part 261).
    American Steel Cord petitioned to exclude its WWTP filter press 
sludge because it believes that the petitioned waste does not meet any 
of the criteria under which the waste was listed and that there are no 
additional constituents or factors that could cause the waste to be 
hazardous. Review of this petition included consideration of the 
original listing criteria, as well as the additional factors required 
by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. See Section 
222 of HSWA, 42 USC 6921(f), and Sec. 260.22.

B. Background

    On September 1, 1993, Kokoku Steel Cord Corporation, now American 
Steel Cord petitioned EPA to exclude an annual volume of 500 cubic 
yards of WWTP filter press sludge from the list of hazardous wastes 
contained in Sec. 261.31. American Steel Cord subsequently provided 
additional information to complete its petition and to amend the annual 
volume of petitioned waste to 950 cubic yards. In support of its 
petition, American Steel Cord submitted detailed descriptions and 
schematic diagrams of its manufacturing and wastewater treatment 
processes, and analytical testing results for representative samples of 
the petitioned waste, including (1) the hazardous characteristics of 
ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity; (2) total 
constituent analysis for the eight toxicity characteristic metals 
listed in Sec. 261.24 plus nickel and Toxicity Characteristic Leaching 
Procedure (TCLP, SW-846 Method 1311) analyses for the eight toxicity 
characteristic metals, plus copper, nickel, thallium, vanadium, and 
zinc; (3) total constituent analyses for 121 volatile and semi-volatile 
organic compounds and TCLP analyses for those compounds detected; (4) 
total constituent analysis for sulfide and cyanide; (5) TCLP analyses 
for cyanide; and (6) analysis for total oil and grease, and percent 
solids.
    American Steel Cord produces steel cord for use in steel belted 
radial tires. Raw carbon steel rods are cleaned in a hydrochloric acid 
bath and then placed into two cold water rinses. The effluent from the 
cold water rinses is pumped to the holding tanks of the WWTP. The steel 
rod is placed into a hot water rinse and then into a bonder solution 
which puts a zinc coating on the rod. The rod is rinsed and placed into 
a neutralization tank, then heated and cooled in preparation for the 
dry drawing process. There is no discharge of materials to the 
wastewater treatment plant from the hot water rinse tank, bonder tank, 
bonder rinse tank or the neutralization tank. Sludges from the bottoms 
of these tanks are shipped off-site for disposal.
    The wire is hydraulically pulled or ``drawn'' through a series of 
six dies followed by a series of seven dies. Each die extrudes the wire 
out to a smaller diameter. There are no materials discharged to the 
wastewater treatment plant from the dry draw process. After the wire 
has been reduced to the proper diameter, it is fed into a furnace at 
1,000 degrees C to burn off any impurities remaining on the wire. The 
wire is then pulled through a 30% sulfuric acid bath followed by a 
water rinse. Splashes from either of these tanks are pumped into the 
`strong acid tank'. Water from the rinse tank is continually pumped 
directly to the WWTP holding tanks. The steel wire is then put into a 
15% sodium hydroxide bath and rinse. Splashes are pumped into the 
`strong alkaline tank'. Next, the wire is electrically plated with a 
non-cyanidic base coat of copper. The wire is then rinsed and 
electroplated with a non-cyanidic coat of zinc. The zinc plating is 
followed by a water rinse. Effluent from the copper rinse and the zinc 
rinse are pumped to the WWTP holding tanks. Splashes from the copper 
plating and copper rinse tanks are collected in the `strong copper 
tank' and splashes from the zinc plating and zinc rinse tanks are 
collected in the `strong acid tank'. The strong acid tank, the strong 
copper tank, and the strong alkaline tank are pumped to the WWTP 
holding tanks on a regular basis.
    The plated wire is fed into a diffusion fluidized bed furnace to 
form a brass plating. After the wire is brassed, the diameter is 
further reduced by a wet draw process through a series of dies 
containing a lubricating material. The wire is then stranded or twisted 
together to form a wire cord according to specifications.
    Treatment at the WWTP is a batch operation. The wastewaters 
collected from the various processes in the two holding tanks are 
neutralized by the addition of a lime slurry in a neutralization tank 
where the pH is carefully controlled between 9.5 and 10.5. The water is 
then pumped into a clarifier where polymers are added to aid 
flocculation. Effluent from the clarifier is discharged to the City of 
Scottsburg's Wastewater Treatment Plant under an NPDES permit. Sludge 
from the clarifier is pumped into two solids holding tanks. When the 
holding tanks are full, the sludge is pumped to a plate filter press 
and dewatered. Effluent from the filter press is either discharged to 
the Scottsburgh Treatment Plant or it is pumped to the head of the 
plant for retreatment. The filtercake falls off or is scraped from the 
plates into two hoppers and is transferred to a roll-off dumpster. The 
filtercake is currently being disposed of as hazardous waste off site.
    American Steel Cord submitted a signed certification stating that, 
based on projected annual waste generation, the maximum annual 
generation rate of WWTP filter press sludge (filtercake) will not 
exceed 950 cubic yards (approximately 950 tons) per year. The EPA 
reviews a petitioner's estimates and, on occasion, has requested a 
petitioner to reevaluate the estimated waste generation rate. EPA 
accepts American Steel Cord's estimate.

C. Waste Analysis

    American Steel Cord developed a list of analytical constituents 
based on a review of facility processes, Material Safety Data Sheets 
for raw materials and chemical additives used in the manufacturing 
process, and recommendations contained in EPA delisting guidance. See 
Petitions to Delist Hazardous Wastes, A Guidance Manual, dated March 
1993.
    For American Steel Cord's petition, the WWTP filtercake sludge was 
sampled once a week for 4 weeks. Samples were collected on February 2, 
February 9, February 18, March 3, 1993, April 22, May 4, May 21, and 
June 11, 1993. In response to a request by the EPA, American Steel Cord 
also collected additional samples of the filtercake on January 23, 
January 29, February 5, and February 11, 1997 using the same procedures 
as for the previous samples. Since the filter press is run only on a 
batch basis, the collection of samples was done over a period of time 
in order to characterize temporal variability. At each sampling event, 
the two hoppers were each divided into 6 sections and a sample was 
taken at various depths from each of the 12 sections. All samples were 
collected with a trowel. Each sample was packed in an appropriately 
labeled bottle. The 12 grab samples collected were composited by the 
lab.
    To quantify the total constituent and leachate concentrations, 
American Steel Cord used SW-846 methods 7061 and

[[Page 18357]]

7061A1 for arsenic; methods 7080 and 7080A for barium; 
method 7130 for cadmium; method 7190 for chromium; method 7210 for 
copper; method 7420 for lead; methods 7470, 7470A and 7471 for mercury; 
method 7520 for nickel; methods 7741 and 7741A for selenium; methods 
7760 and 7760A for silver; method 7840 for thallium; method 7910 for 
vanadium; method 7950 for zinc; methods 9010 and 9010A for total 
cyanide; methods 9030 and 9030A for sulfide; methods 8240 and 8260 for 
volatile organic compounds; and method 8270 for semi-volatile organic 
compounds. Using SW-846 method 9071, American Steel Cord determined 
that the samples of the petitioned waste had a maximum oil and grease 
content of 199 mg/kg. American Steel Cord also used these methods on 
the leachate obtained using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching 
Procedure (SW-846 method 1311), as described below, to determine 
leachable levels of cyanide, metals, volatile organic compounds, and 
semi-volatile organic compounds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A letter at the end of the method number indicates the 
method has been updated since originally promulgated in SW-846. 
Additional samples collected in 1997 were analyzed by the most 
current version of the method. For constituents which were 
subsequently analyzed by updated versions of a method, both versions 
of the method are noted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Characteristic testing of the samples included analysis of reactive 
cyanide (SW-846 Method 7.3.3.2) and reactive sulfide (SW-846 Method 
7.3.4.2).
    Table 1 presents the maximum total and leachate concentrations for 
13 metals, total and leachate concentration for cyanide, and total 
sulfide. Table 1 also includes maximum total concentrations for 
reactive cyanide and reactive sulfide.
    The detection limits presented in Table 1 represent the lowest 
concentrations quantifiable by American Steel Cord when using the 
appropriate SW-846 methods to analyze its waste. (Detection limits may 
vary according to the waste and waste matrix being analyzed, i.e., the 
``cleanliness'' of waste matrices varies and ``dirty'' waste matrices 
may cause interferences, thus raising detection limits.)

   Table 1.--Maximum Total Constituent and Leachate Concentrations \1\  
                        [WWTP Filtercake Sludge]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Total        TCLP   
                                                 constituent   leachate 
            Inorganic constituents              analyses(mg/   analyses 
                                                     kg)        (mg/l)  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenic.......................................         4.9          .003
Barium........................................        32.8         2.1  
Cadmium.......................................          .7         0.15 
Chromium (total)..............................        14           0.26 
Copper........................................      1990           0.1  
Lead..........................................        28           0.16 
Mercury.......................................         0.1         0.001
Nickel........................................       109           0.73 
Selenium......................................         0.02        0.002
Silver........................................         1.13        0.02 
Thallium......................................         8.0        <2    
Vanadium......................................         6.0        <2    
Zinc..........................................    21,000           1.48 
Cyanide (total)...............................        15            .06 
Sulfide (total)...............................        96          NA    
Cyanide (reactive)............................          .25       NA    
Sulfide (reactive)............................        34         NA     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These levels represent the highest concentration of each constituent
  found in any one sample. These levels do not necessarily represent the
  specific levels found in one sample.                                  
< Denotes that the constituent was not detected at the detection limit  
  specified in the table.                                               
NA Denotes that the constituent was not analyzed.                       

    American Steel Cord analyzed the samples of petitioned waste for 58 
volatile and 63 semi-volatile organic compounds. Table 2 presents the 
maximum total and leachate concentrations for all detected organic 
constituents in American Steel Cord's waste samples.

    Table 2.--Maximum Total Constituent and Leachate Concentrations 1   
                        [WWTP Filtercake Sludge]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Total        TCLP   
                                                 constituent   leachate 
              Organic constituents                 analyses    analyses 
                                                   (mg/kg)      (mg/l)  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acetone........................................         .247        .736
Anthracene.....................................         .264       <.05 
Butyl benzyl phthlate..........................       NA            .1  
Carbon disulfide...............................         .021       <.005
carbon tetrachloride...........................         .177       <.005
Chloroform.....................................         .020        .042
1,4-Dichlorobenzene............................        <.16         .014
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene.........................       NA            .022
Fluoranthene...................................         .166       <.05 
Methylene chloride.............................         .100        .065
Naphthalene....................................        1.848        .009
Phenanthrene...................................         .297       <.05 
Styrene........................................        <.01         .014
Tetrachloroethene..............................        <.01         .008
Toluene........................................        <.005        .017
Xylenes........................................         .022        .033 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These levels represent the highest concentration of each constituent
  found in any one sample. These levels do not necessarily represent the
  specific levels found in one sample.                                  
< Denotes that the constituent was not detected at the detection limit  
  specified in the table.                                               

    EPA does not generally verify submitted test data before proposing 
delisting decisions. The sworn affidavit submitted with the petition 
binds the petitioner to present truthful and accurate results.

D. EPA Evaluation

    EPA has reviewed the sampling procedures used by American Steel 
Cord and has determined that they satisfy EPA criteria for collecting 
representative samples. EPA considered the appropriateness of 
alternative waste management scenarios for American Steel Cord's WWTP 
filter press sludge and decided, based on the information provided in 
the petition, that disposal in a Subtitle D landfill is the most 
reasonable, worst-case scenario for this waste. Under a landfill 
disposal scenario, the major exposure route of concern for any 
hazardous constituents would be ingestion of contaminated ground water. 
EPA, therefore, evaluated American Steel Cord's petitioned waste using 
the modified EPA Composite Model for Landfills (EPACML) which predicts 
the potential for ground water contamination from wastes that are 
landfilled. See 56 FR 32993 (July 18, 1991), 56 FR 67197 (December 30, 
1991), and the RCRA public docket for these notices for a detailed 
description of the EPACML model, the disposal assumptions, and the 
modifications made for delisting. This model, which includes both 
unsaturated and saturated zone transport modules, was used to predict 
reasonable, worst-case contaminant levels in ground water at a 
compliance point (i.e., a receptor well serving as a drinking-water 
supply). Specifically, the model estimated the dilution/attenuation 
factor (DAF) resulting from subsurface processes such as three-
dimensional dispersion and dilution from ground water recharge for a 
specific volume of waste. The DAFs generated using the EPACML

[[Page 18358]]

vary from a maximum of 100 for smaller annual volumes of waste (i.e., 
less than 1,000 cubic yards per year) to DAFs approaching ten for 
larger volume wastes (i.e., 400,000 cubic yards per year).
    Typically, EPA uses the maximum annual waste volume to derive a 
petition-specific DAF. American Steel Cord's maximum waste volume of 
950 cubic yards per year corresponds to a DAF of 100. EPA's evaluation 
used a DAF of 100 times the health based level (HBL) used in delisting 
decision making to determine the maximum allowable leachate 
concentrations for American Steel Cord's waste (see Table 3).

       Table 3.--EPACML: Maximum Allowable Leachate Concentrations      
                        [WWTP Filtercake Sludge]                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Maximum                               
                                 leachate       Levels of               
    Inorganic and organic     concentrations   regulatory       HBL 1   
        constituents           in waste (mg/  concern  (mg/             
                                    l)             l)                   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenic.....................         0.003             5           0.05 
Barium......................         2.1             200           2    
Cadmium.....................          .15               .5          .005
Chromium (total)............          .26             10           0.1  
Copper......................          .1             130           1.3  
Lead........................          .16              1.5          .015
Mercury.....................          .001              .2          .002
Nickel......................          .73             10           0.1  
Selenium....................          .002             5            .05 
Silver......................          .02             20            .2  
Zinc........................         1.48          1,000          10    
Cyanide.....................          .06             20            .2  
Acetone.....................          .736           400           4    
Benzo butyl phthlate........          .1              10            .1  
Chloroform..................          .042            10            .01 
1,4-Dichlorobenzene.........          .0014            7.5          .075
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene......         0.022             7            .07 
Methylene chloride..........          .065              .5          .005
Naphthalene.................          .009           100           1.0  
Styrene.....................          .014            10           0.1  
Tetrachloroethene...........          .008              .5          .005
Toluene.....................          .017           100           1.0  
Xylene......................          .033         1,000         10     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See ``Docket Report on Health-Based Levels and Solubilities Used in 
  the Evaluation of Delisting Petitions,'' December 1994, located in the
  RCRA public docket for today's notice.                                

    For inorganic constituents, the maximum reported leachate 
concentrations of arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium (total), copper, 
lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, and zinc in the WWTP 
filtercake sludge were well below the maximum allowable leachate 
concentrations. EPA did not evaluate the mobility of the remaining 
inorganic constituents (i.e., thallium and vanadium) from American 
Steel Cord's waste because they were not detected in the leachate using 
the appropriate analytical test methods (see Table 1). EPA believes 
that it is inappropriate to evaluate non-detectable concentrations of a 
constituent of concern in its modeling efforts if the non-detectable 
value was obtained using the appropriate analytical method. If a 
constituent cannot be detected (when using the appropriate analytical 
method with an adequate detection limit), EPA assumes that the 
constituent is not present and therefore does not present a threat to 
human health or the environment.
    EPA also evaluated the potential hazards of the organic 
constituents detected in the TCLP extract of the samples (i.e., 
acetone, butyl benzyl phthlate, chloroform, 1,4-dichlorobenzene 1,2-
dichloroethene, methylene chloride, naphthalene, styrene, 
tetrachloroethene, toluene, 1,2,4-trimethyl benzene, and xylene). The 
maximum leachate concentrations detected are significantly below the 
calculated maximum allowable levels.
    After reviewing American Steel Cord's processes, EPA accepts 
American Steel Cord's analysis that no other hazardous constituents, 
other than those tested for, are likely to be present in the waste, and 
that any migration of hazardous constituents from the waste would 
result in concentrations below delisting health-based levels of 
concern. In addition, on the basis of test results and information 
provided by American Steel Cord pursuant to Sec. 260.22, EPA concludes 
that the petitioned waste does not exhibit any of the characteristics 
of ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity.
    In its evaluation of American Steel Cord's petition, EPA also 
considered the potential impact of the petitioned waste via non-ground 
water routes (i.e., air emission and surface runoff). With regard to 
airborne dispersal, EPA believes that no appreciable air releases are 
likely from American Steel Cord's waste under any likely disposal 
conditions. Therefore, there is no substantial present or potential 
hazard to human health from airborne exposure to constituents from 
American Steel Cord's petitioned waste.
    EPA also considered the potential impact of the petitioned wastes 
via a surface water route. EPA believes that containment structures at 
municipal solid waste landfills can effectively control surface water 
run-off, as the Subtitle D regulations (see 56 FR 50978, October 9, 
1991) prohibit pollutant discharges into surface waters. Furthermore, 
the concentrations of any hazardous constituents in the run-off will 
tend to be lower than the extraction procedure test results reported in 
today's notice because of the aggressive acidic media used for 
extraction in the TCLP. EPA believes that, in general, leachate derived 
from the waste is unlikely to directly enter a surface water

[[Page 18359]]

body without first traveling through the saturated subsurface where 
dilution/attenuation of hazardous constituents will also occur. 
Leachable concentrations provide a direct measure of the solubility of 
a toxic constituent in water, and are indicative of the fraction of the 
constituent that may be mobilized in surface water, as well as ground 
water. The reported TCLP data show that the constituents which might 
leach from American Steel Cord's waste and be released to surface water 
would not be likely to exceed the health-based levels of concern. EPA, 
therefore, concludes that American Steel Cord's waste is not a 
significant hazard to human health or the environment via the surface 
water exposure pathway.

E. Conclusion

    Based on descriptions of the process from which the petitioned 
waste is derived, descriptions of American Steel Cord's wastewater 
treatment process, and analytical characterization of the petitioned 
waste, EPA believes that American Steel Cord has successfully 
demonstrated that the petitioned waste is not hazardous. EPA, 
therefore, proposes to grant an exclusion to American Steel Cord for 
its WWTP filtercake sludge described in its petition as EPA Hazardous 
Waste No. F006. If made final, the proposed exclusion will apply only 
to 950 cubic yards (approximately equivalent to 950 tons) of petitioned 
waste generated annually, on a calendar year basis. The facility must 
treat waste generated in excess of 950 cubic yards per year as 
hazardous. If either the manufacturing or treatment processes are 
altered such that an adverse change in waste composition occurs (e.g., 
higher levels of hazardous constituents), this exclusion would no 
longer be valid.
    Although management of the waste covered by this petition would be 
removed from Subtitle C jurisdiction upon final promulgation of an 
exclusion, this exclusion applies only where this waste is disposed of 
in a Subtitle D landfill which is permitted, licensed, or registered by 
a State to manage municipal or industrial solid waste.

F. Verification Testing Conditions

    EPA is proposing to require American Steel Cord to demonstrate on 
an annual basis that the constituents of concern in the petitioned 
waste do not exceed the levels of concern in paragraph 1 below. These 
levels are based on delisting health-based values and a DAF of 100. 
American Steel Cord must analyze four representative samples of the 
WWTP filtercake sludge on an annual, calendar-year basis using methods 
with appropriate detection levels and quality control procedures. If 
the level of any constituent measured in any sample of WWTP filtercake 
sludge exceeds the levels set forth in paragraph 1 below, then the 
waste is hazardous and must be managed in accordance with Subtitle C of 
RCRA.
1. Delisting Levels
    Concentrations measured in the TCLP extract of the waste of the 
following constituents must not exceed the following levels (mg/l).
    Arsenic--5; Barium--200; Cadmium--.5; Chromium --10; Copper-- 130; 
Lead--1.5; Mercury--.2; Nickel--10; Selenium--5; Silver--20; Zinc--
1,000; Acetone--400; Benzo butyl phthlate--10; Chloroform-- 10; 1,4-
Dichlorobenzene--7.5; cis-1,2-Dichloroethane--7; Methylene 
chloride--.5; Naphthalene--100; Styrene--10; Tetrachloroethene--.5; 
Toluene--100; Xylene--1,000.
2. Changes in Operating Conditions
    If American Steel Cord significantly changes the manufacturing or 
treatment process or the chemicals used in the manufacturing or 
treatment process, American Steel Cord may handle the WWTP filtercake 
sludge generated from the new process under this exclusion after the 
facility has demonstrated that the waste meets the levels set in 
paragraph 1 and that no new hazardous constituents listed in Appendix 
VIII of Part 261 have been introduced.
3. Data Submittals
    The data obtained through annual verification testing or paragraph 
2 must be submitted to U.S. EPA Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, 
IL 60604, within 60 days of sampling. Records of operating conditions 
and analytical data must be compiled, summarized, and maintained on 
site for a minimum of five years and must be made available for 
inspection. All data must be accompanied by a signed copy of the 
certification statement in 260.22(i)(12).

III. Effect on State Authorizations

    This proposed exclusion, if promulgated, would be issued under the 
Federal (RCRA) delisting program. States, however, may impose more 
stringent regulatory requirements than EPA, pursuant to section 3009 of 
RCRA. These more stringent requirements may include a provision which 
prohibits a Federally-issued exclusion from taking effect in the State. 
Because a petitioner's waste may be regulated under a dual system 
(i.e., both Federal (RCRA) and State (non-RCRA) programs), petitioners 
are urged to contact State regulatory authorities to determine the 
current status of their wastes under the State laws.
    Furthermore, some States are authorized to administer a delisting 
program in lieu of the Federal program (i.e., to make their own 
delisting decisions). Therefore, this proposed exclusion, if 
promulgated, may not apply in those authorized States. If the 
petitioned waste will be transported to any State with delisting 
authorization, American Steel Cord must obtain delisting authorization 
from that State before the waste may be managed as nonhazardous in the 
State.

IV. Effective Date

    This rule, if made final, will become effective immediately upon 
such final publication. 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,  if finalized, would reduce the existing 
requirements for a person generating a hazardous waste. In light of the 
unnecessary hardship and expense that would be imposed on this 
petitioner by an effective date six months after publication and the 
fact that a six-month deadline is not necessary to achieve the purpose 
of Section 3010, EPA believes that this exclusion should be effective 
immediately upon final publication. These reasons also provide a basis 
for making this rule effective immediately, upon final publication, 
under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 USC 553(d).

V. Regulatory Impact

    Under Executive Order 12291, EPA must judge whether a regulation is 
``major'' and therefore subject to the requirement of a Regulatory 
Impact Analysis. The proposal to grant an exclusion is not major, since 
its effect, if promulgated, would be to reduce the overall costs and 
economic impact of EPA's hazardous waste management regulations. This 
reduction would be achieved by excluding waste generated at a specific 
facility from EPA's lists of hazardous wastes, thereby enabling this 
facility to manage its waste as non-hazardous. There is no additional 
impact, therefore, due to today's proposed rule. This proposal is not a 
major regulation; therefore, no Regulatory Impact Analysis is required.

[[Page 18360]]

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, 
whenever an agency is required to publish a general notice of 
rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make 
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis which 
describes the impact of the rule on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). 
The Administrator or delegated representative may certify, however, 
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    This rule, if promulgated, will not have an adverse economic impact 
on small entities since its effect would be to reduce the overall costs 
of EPA's hazardous waste regulations. Accordingly, I hereby certify 
that this proposed regulation, if promulgated, will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
This regulation, therefore, does not require a regulatory flexibility 
analysis.

VII. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Information collection and record-keeping requirements associated 
with this proposed rule have been approved by the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1980 (P.L. 96-511, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been assigned OMB 
Control Number 2050-0053.

VIII. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(UMRA), Public Law 104-4, which was signed into law on March 22, 1995, 
EPA generally must prepare a written statement for rules with Federal 
mandates that may result in estimated costs to State, local, and tribal 
governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million 
or more in any one year. When such a statement is required for EPA 
rules, under section 205 of the UMRA, EPA must identify and consider 
alternatives, including the least costly, most cost-effective or least 
burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. EPA 
must select that alternative, unless the Administrator explains in the 
final rule why it was not selected or it is inconsistent with law. 
Before EPA establishes regulatory requirements that may significantly 
or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it 
must develop under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency 
plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small 
governments, giving them meaningful and timely input in the development 
of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental 
mandates, and informing, educating, and advising them on compliance 
with the regulatory requirements. The UMRA generally defines a Federal 
mandate for regulatory purposes as one that imposes an enforceable duty 
upon State, local or tribal governments or the private sector. EPA 
finds that today's proposed delisting decision is deregulatory in 
nature and does not impose any enforceable duty upon State, local or 
tribal governments or the private sector. In addition, the proposed 
delisting does not establish any regulatory requirements for small 
governments and so does not require a small government agency plan 
under UMRA section 203.

IX. The Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as amended by 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 
(``CRA'') 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. Rules of particular 
applicability are exempt, however, from the CRA. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). 
Inasmuch as this action affects only one facility, it would be a rule 
of particular applicability which is exempt from the requirements of 
the CRA and the EPA is not required to submit a rule report regarding 
today's action under section 801.

X. Children's Health Protection

    Under Executive Order (``EO'') 13045, for all ``significant'' 
regulatory actions as defined by EO 12866, EPA must provide an 
evaluation of the environmental health or safety effect of a proposed 
rule on children and an explanation of why the proposed rule is 
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible 
alternatives considered by EPA. This proposal is not a significant 
regulatory action and is exempt from EO 13045.

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: March 25, 1998.
Norman R. Niedergang,
Director, Waste, Pesticides and Toxics Division.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR Part 261 is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 261--IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

    1. The authority citation for Part 261 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, 6922, and 6938.

    2. In Table 1 of Appendix IX of Part 261 it is proposed to add the 
following waste stream in alphabetical order by facility to read as 
follows:

Appendix IX to Part 261--Wastes Excluded Under Secs. 260.20 and 
260.22.

                               Table 1.--Wastes Excluded From Non-Specific Sources                              
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Facility                             Address                              Waste description           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                
                  *              *              *              *              *              *              *   
American Steel Cord           Scottsburg, Indiana.....................  Dewatered wastewater treatment plant    
 Corporation.                                                            (WWTP) filtercake (EPA Hazardous Waste 
                                                                         No. F006) generated from electroplating
                                                                         operations at a maximum annual rate of 
                                                                         950 cubic yards per year, after (insert
                                                                         publication date of the final rule).   

[[Page 18361]]

                                                                                                                
                                                                        1. Verification Testing: American Steel 
                                                                         Cord must implement an annual testing  
                                                                         program to demonstrate that the        
                                                                         constituent concentrations measured in 
                                                                         the TCLP extract of the waste do not   
                                                                         exceed the following levels (mg/1).    
                                                                         Arsenic--5; Barium--200; Cadmium--.5;  
                                                                         Chromium--10; Copper--130; Lead--1.5;  
                                                                         Mercury--.2; Nickel--10; Selenium--5;  
                                                                         Silver--20; Zinc--1,000; Cyanide--20;  
                                                                         Acetone--400; Benzo butyl phthlate--10;
                                                                         Chloroform--10; 1,4-Dichlorobenzene--  
                                                                         7.5; cis-1,2-Dichloroethene--7;        
                                                                         Methylene chloride--.5; Naphthalene--  
                                                                         100; Styrene--10; Tetrachloroethene--  
                                                                         .5; Toluene--100; Xylene--1,000.       
                                                                        2. Changes in Operating Conditions: If  
                                                                         American Steel Cord changes the        
                                                                         manufacturing or treatment process or  
                                                                         the chemicals used in the manufacturing
                                                                         or treatment process, American Steel   
                                                                         Cord may handle the WWTP filtercake    
                                                                         sludge generated from the new process  
                                                                         under this exclusion after the facility
                                                                         has demonstrated that the waste meets  
                                                                         the levels set forth in paragraph 1 and
                                                                         that no new hazardous constituents     
                                                                         listed in Appendix VIII of Part 261    
                                                                         have been introduced.                  
                                                                        3. Data Submittals: The data obtained   
                                                                         through annual verification testing or 
                                                                         paragraph 2 must be submitted to U.S.  
                                                                         EPA Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Blvd.,     
                                                                         Chicago, IL 60604, within 60 days of   
                                                                         sampling. Records of operating         
                                                                         conditions and analytical data must be 
                                                                         compiled, summarized, and maintained on
                                                                         site for a minimum of five years and   
                                                                         must be made available for inspection. 
                                                                         All data must be accompanied by a      
                                                                         signed copy of the certification       
                                                                         statement in 260.22(I)(12).            
                                                                                                                
                  *              *              *              *              *              *              *   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 98-10005 Filed 4-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P