[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 115 (Tuesday, June 17, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25502-25508]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-10542]
[[Page 25502]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA-R06-RCRA-2022-0653; FRL-10104-02-R6]
Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste; Final Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is granting a
petition submitted by WRB Refining in Borger, Texas to exclude (or
``delist'') 7,000 cubic yards of F037 (petroleum refinery sludge)
solids to be removed from their stormwater storage tanks for a one-time
delisting. This determination is based on information the petitioner
provided to the Agency, completion of sampling, and risk assessment
using the Delisting Risk Assessment Software (DRAS) to determine
whether the waste poses a substantial present or potential hazard to
human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored,
transported or disposed of, or otherwise managed. This final rule
responds to a petition submitted by WRB Refinery to exclude stormwater
solids from the definition of a hazardous waste. If not delisted, the
stormwater solids are listed as F037 (primary oil/water/solids
separation sludge). After careful analysis of the petition and
evaluation of comments submitted by the public, the EPA has concluded
that the petitioned waste is not hazardous waste when disposed of in
Subtitle D landfills. This exclusion applies to the stormwater solids
generated at WRB Refinery Borger, 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 a Subtitle D landfill but
imposes testing conditions to ensure that the future-generated waste
remain qualified for delisting.
DATES: This rule is effective June 17, 2025
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: E'shala Dixon RCRA Permits & Solid
Waste Section (LCR-RP) Land, Chemical and Redevelopment Division, EPA
Region 6, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, TX 75270, phone number:
214-665-6592; email address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Overview Information
A. What action is the EPA finalizing?
B. Why is the EPA approving this delisting?
C. What are the limits of this exclusion?
D. How will WRB Refinery 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 WRB Refinery petition the EPA to
delist?
B. How did WRB Refinery sample and analyze the waste data in
this petition?
IV. Public Comments Received on the Proposed Exclusion
A. Who submitted comments on the proposed rule?
B. Comments and Responses
C. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Overview Information
A. What action is the EPA finalizing?
The EPA is finalizing:
1. The decision to grant WRB Refinery petition to have its
stormwater solids from the stormwater tanks excluded, or delisted, from
the definition of a hazardous waste, subject to certain continued
verification and monitoring conditions.
After evaluating the petition, the EPA proposed a rule on September
28, 2023 (88 FR 66742), to exclude the WRB Refinery waste from the
lists of hazardous wastes under 40 CFR 261.31 and 261.32. The comments
received on this rulemaking will be addressed as part of this decision.
B. Why is the EPA approving this delisting?
WRB Refinery petition requests an exclusion for F037 waste listing
pursuant to 40 CFR 260.20 and 260.22 and asserts that the petitioned
waste does not meet the criteria for which the EPA listed F037. WRB
Refinery also believes no additional constituents or factors could
cause the waste to be hazardous. The 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) through (4) (hereinafter, all sectional references are
to 40 CFR, unless otherwise indicated). In making the initial delisting
determination, the EPA evaluated the petitioned waste against the
listing criteria and factors cited in 261.11(a)(2) and (3). Based on
this review, the EPA agrees with the petitioner that the waste is non-
hazardous with respect to the original listing criteria. If the EPA had
found, based on this review, that the waste remained hazardous based on
the factors for which the waste was originally listed, the EPA would
have proposed to deny the petition. The 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. The 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. The EPA believes that the petitioned
waste does not meet the listing criteria and thus should not be a
listed waste. The EPA's proposed decision to delist waste from WRB
Refinery is based on the information submitted in support of this rule,
including descriptions of the wastes and analytical data from the
Borger, 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 one-time exclusion
applies to 7,000 cubic yards of stormwater solids from the stormwater
tanks.
D. How will WRB Refinery manage the waste if it is delisted?
Stormwater solids from the stormwater tanks will be dewatered
onsite and transported to an authorized solid waste landfill (e.g.,
RCRA Subtitle D landfill, commercial/industrial solid waste landfill,
etc.) for disposal.
E. When is the final delisting exclusion effective?
This rule is effective June 17, 2025. The Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 amended section 3010 of RCRA 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. This 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,
[[Page 25503]]
upon publication, under the Administrative Procedure Act, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d).
F. How does this final rule affect States?
Because the EPA is issuing the 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 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. 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.
The EPA has also authorized some States (for example: Louisiana,
Oklahoma and Illinois) to administer a delisting program in place of a
Federal program to make State delisting decisions. Therefore, this
exclusion does not apply in those authorized States. If WRB Refinery
transports the petitioned waste to or manages the waste in any State
with delisting authorization, WRB Refinery 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 the 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 40 CFR parts 260 through 266, 268 and
273. 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 the 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 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 WRB Refinery petition the EPA to delist?
In May 2020, WRB Refinery petitioned the EPA to exclude from the
lists of hazardous wastes contained in 261.31 and 261.32 solids from
stormwater tanks (F037) generated from its facility located in Borger,
Texas. The waste falls under the classification of listed waste
pursuant to 261.31 and 261.32. Specifically, in its petition, WRB
Refinery requested that the EPA grant a one-time exclusion for 7,000
cubic yards of solids.
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 Solids From Stormwater Tanks for Listing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Waste code Basis for listing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
F037.............................. Benzene, Benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene,
lead chromium.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. How did WRB Refinery sample and analyze the waste data in this
petition?
To support its petition, WRB Refinery submitted:
1. Historical information on waste generation and management
practice; and
2. Analytical results from nine samples with one duplicate for TCLP
and Totals concentrations of compounds of concerns (COC)s.
Table 2--Analytical Results/Maximum Allowable Delisting Concentration Solids From Stormwater Tanks WRB Refinery
Borger, Texas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum total Maximum TCLP Maximum TCLP
Chemical name concentration concentration delisting level
(mg/kg) (mg/l) (mg/L)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antimony.................................................. 3.24 <0.05 0.109
Arsenic................................................... 2.4 <0.05 0.00849
Barium.................................................... 84.9 1.34 36
Beryllium................................................. <0.478 <0.02 0.078
Cadmium................................................... <0.478 <0.05 0.0911
Chromium.................................................. 14.2 <0.05 2.27
Cobalt.................................................... 74.2 <0.05 .................
Lead...................................................... 74.2 1.42 0.702
Nickel.................................................... 5 <0.05 13.5
Selenium.................................................. <0.478 <0.05 3.41
Silver.................................................... <0.478 <0.05 8.61
Vanadium.................................................. 6.86 <0.05 3.77
Zinc...................................................... 76 0.565 197
Mercury................................................... 0.258 <0.0002 0.068
1,2-Dichlorobenzene....................................... <0.065 <0.005 9.3
1,3-Dichlorobenzene....................................... <0.065 0.005 .................
1,4-Dichlorobenzene....................................... <0.065 <0.005 0.475
2,4-Dimethylphenol........................................ <0.065 <0.005 11.3
2,4-Dinitrophenol......................................... <0.13 <0.005 1.16
2-Methylphenol............................................ <0.065 <0.005 28.9
[[Page 25504]]
3-Methylphenol............................................ <0.065 <0.005 28.9
4-Methylphenol............................................ <0.065 <0.005 28.9
4-Nitrophenol............................................. <0.032 <0.005 .................
Acenaphthene.............................................. 0.17 <0.0005 10.6
Anthracene................................................ <0.032 <0.005 25.9
Benz(a)anthracene......................................... <0.032 <0.005 0.07
Benzo(a)pyrene............................................ <0.032 <0.005 26.3
Benzo(b)fluoranthene...................................... <0.032 <0.005 224
Benzo(k)fluoranthene...................................... <0.032 <0.005 .................
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate................................ <0.065 <0.005 >10E+6
Chrysene.................................................. 0.032 <0.005 24.6
Di-n-butyl-phthalate...................................... <0.065 <0.005 24.6
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene..................................... <0.032 <0.005 >10E+6
Diethyl Phthalate......................................... <0.065 <0.005 1,000
Dimethyl Phthalate........................................ <0.065 <0.005 .................
Fluoranthene.............................................. <0.032 <0.005 2.46
Fluorene.................................................. <0.032 <0.005 4.91
Indeno(1,2,3, -cd)pyrene.................................. <0.032 <0.005 129
Napthalene................................................ <0.032 <0.005 0.0327
Phenanthrene.............................................. <0.032 <0.005 .................
Phenol.................................................... <0.065 <0.005 173
Pyrene.................................................... <0.032 <0.005 4.45
Pyridine.................................................. <0.065 <0.005 0.578
Quinoline................................................. <0.065 <0.005 .................
1,1,1,-Trichloroethane.................................... <0.0038 <0.1 11,600
1,1,-Dichloroethane....................................... <0.0038 <0.1 .................
1,1-Dichloroethene........................................ <0.0038 <0.1 0.108
1,2-Dibromoethane......................................... <0.0038 <0.1 0.105
1,2-Dichloroethane........................................ <0.0038 <0.1 0.0905
1,4-Dioxane............................................... <0.076 <1 1.02
2-Butanone................................................ 0.0079 <0.2 347
4-Methyl-2-pentanone...................................... <0.076 <0.2 46.3
Acetone................................................... 0.039 <0.2 520
Benzene................................................... 0.0083 <0.1 0.077
Carbon disulfide.......................................... <0.00076 <0.2 56.4
Chlorobenzene............................................. <0.0038 <0.1 1.51
Chloroform................................................ <0.0038 <0.1 0.0801
Ethylbenzene.............................................. <0.0038 <0.1 10.8
Methyl tert-butyl ether................................... <0.0038 <0.1 .................
Styrene................................................... <0.0038 <0.1 1.51
Tetrachloroethene......................................... <0.0038 <0.1 0.0204
Toluene................................................... <0.0038 <0.1 15.1
Trichloroethene........................................... <0.0038 <0.1 0.0775
Xylenes, Total............................................ <0.0038 >10E+6 9.56
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
A. Who submitted comments on the proposed rule?
The EPA received three public comments on February 16, 2023,
proposed rule via regulations.gov. The comments and responses are
addressed below.
B. Comments and Responses
Comment 1: ``I appose this rule/exception being passed through.
When you take the table and look at some chemical that make up this
storm drain runoff products there are some very hazardous chemicals
that make up these products. One chemical that make up this product is
Beryllium. Beryllium can be lethal in humans and cause a variety of
health concerns. According to the EPA website ``beryllium is toxic at
0.002 milligrams per kilogram body weight per day (mg/kg/d)''
(Beryllium compounds-US EPA). Using this equation the average size man
weighing 200 lbs can only be exposed to .4mg a day. That is roughly
146mg a year. The refinery is requesting that they be allowed to dump
.91mg per kg a year''.
Response: The Delisting Risk Assessment Software (DRAS) is a worst-
case scenario tool that was created by the EPA. This tool is utilized
for the petitioner to input their analysis from their sample into the
tool to verify there are no exceedances within the waste that would
prove the waste to be hazardous. Upon sample results and date inputted
into the DRAS, Beryllium is not a constituent of concern and did not
show an exceedance within the samples.
For a chemical-specific inputs for Beryllium, see Table A-1-30 in
Appendix A of the DRAS Technical Support Document. As noted in the
proposal, the EPA evaluated the risk that the waste would be disposed
of as a non-hazardous waste in a landfill. We considered transport of
waste constituents through groundwater, surface water and air. We
evaluated
[[Page 25505]]
Petitioners analysis of the petitioned waste using the Delisting Risk
Assessment Software (DRAS) to predict the concentration of hazardous
constituents that might be released from the petitioned waste and to
determine if the waste would pose a threat to human health and the
environment. The DRAS software and associated documentation can be
found at www.epa.gov/hw/hazardous-waste-delisting-risk-assessment-sodtware-dras.
To predict the potential for release to groundwater from landfilled
wastes and subsequent routes of exposure to a receptor, the DRAS uses
dilution attenuation factors derived from the EPA's Composite Model for
leachate migration with transformation products. From a release to
groundwater, the DRAS considers routes of exposure to a human receptor
through ingestion of contaminated groundwater, inhalation from
groundwater while showering and dermal contact from groundwater while
bathing.
From a release to surface water by erosion of waste from an open
landfill into storm water run-off, DRAS evaluates the exposure to a
human receptor by fish ingestion and ingestion of drinking water. From
a release of waste particles and volatile emissions to air from the
surface of an open landfill, DRAS considers routes of exposure of
inhalation of volatile constituents, inhalation of particles, and air
deposition of particles on residential soil and subsequent ingestion of
the contaminated soil by a child. The technical support document and
the users guide to DRAS are available at https://www.epa.gov/hazardous-waste-delisting-risk-assessment-software-dras.
Comment 2: ``Although I am not sure where I stand overall on
delisting the waste in question, I do believe that the process in which
this decision was made were appropriate. I trust the EPA in its
decision to approve delisting the waste and removal of solids at WRB
Refining LP in Borger, Texas. The how this decision was made could have
been a lot more careless. However, the EPA took a lot into
consideration and tested multiple samples from the petitioner's
facility and agreed with the petitioner that the wastes are
nonhazardous. It also did an environmental justice evaluation.
Environmental justice is often overlooked when it comes to making
decisions concerning discarding waste. This proposed rule is a great
example of how to go about making such decisions while taking
caution.''
Response: Thank you for your comment. As part of the delisting
program, we require the petitioners to submit multiple spatial samples
to the EPA to see the characteristics of the waste during different
seasons of the year, the results with the highest detection limits are
then inputted into the DRAS to make sure the waste does not have
exceedances. The delisting program requires multiple steps and an
intense overview of the petition to ensure the protection of human
health and the environment.
Comment 3: ``I believe that not to consider stormwater as a
hazardous waste is a bold statement, but since a lot of measure are
taken to ensure this is not a health hazard for animals and for humans.
I think if it keeps being measured how many toxic chemicals this
stormwater has before being disposed somewhere else. Since the
groundwater waste is going to be disposed in a landfill that is
permitted to manage industrial waste, this can give sense of safety,
but it is not truly known how this landfill will manage and treat this
waste, and if it will do it correctly to ensure that no animals have
contact or do not get poisoned by the stormwater. Stormwater usually
has many toxic chemicals that can pollute water sources such as oil,
pesticides, antifreeze, grease and other types of chemicals that can be
dangerous and poisonous to the environment and the wildlife that
inhabit these water sources. Also, one of the consequences is that they
can cause toxic algae blooms that sink and decompose in the waste
removing oxygen from it. Animals and other organisms can't live in
water with low dissolved oxygen levels. It can also contaminate
drinking water supplies if not treated properly. These consequences
should be kept in mind before agreeing, as the public, to these types
of petitions. If stormwater is treated properly in a treatment plant
this can reduce how hazardous this might be. Since the stormwater that
the petitioner wants to delist as a possible hazard has such small
amounts of these toxic chemicals, it makes sense why the EPA thinks to
delist this waste. One of the examples of this small amount is Arsenic,
which is a solid that occurs naturally in water and soil but that is
also produced industrially in big quantities. The amount of Arsenic
that is considered as a hazard is 6.1 while the amount of arsenic that
the stormwater in this facility has been 0.1. However, all these
amounts need to be tested each time the facility wants to dispose of
them, to ensure that it is still not considered a hazard, which is one
of the rules of the EPA to consider the petition of the facility. I
think if it is proved the stormwater waste from this facility is
treated properly in this landfill, it is safe to say this would not be
a hazard for humans or wildlife.''
Response 3: Thank you for your comment. As mentioned in your
comment, if the EPA approves the petition, the petitioner will have to
submit semi-annual analysis of the waste the first year to prove to the
EPA that the waste is still within the requirements instilled into the
petition, and during the life span of the petition the petitioner is
required to submit analysis to prove the waste is still meeting the
requirements within the petition. The goal at the EPA is to protect
human health and the environment. Please, also note that nonhazardous
landfills in Texas are subject to State laws and regulations governing
operation and closure. Non-hazardous solid waste is regulated under
Subtitle D of RCRA. Regulations established under Subtitle D ban open
dumping of waste and set minimum Federal criteria for the operation of
municipal waste and industrial waste landfills, including design
criteria, location restrictions, financial assurance, corrective action
(cleanup), and closure requirement. Texas is authorized to implement
the Subtitle D program in lieu of the EPA. Please see the response to
Comment 1, of this preamble, for additional information regarding the
EPA's risk assessment using DRAS.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional Information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.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 action is exempt from review by the Office of Management and
Budget because it is a rule of particular applicability, not general
applicability. The action approves a modification of an existing
delisting petition under RCRA for the petitioned waste at a particular
facility.
B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation
This action is not subject to Executive Order 14192 because it is a
rule of particular applicability and exempt from review under Executive
Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
[[Page 25506]]
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501) because it only applies to a particular
facility.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Because this 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)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action does nor contain any unfunded mandate as described in
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (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.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This 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.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have Tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This action applies only to a particular
facility on non-Tribal land. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this action.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This 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.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This action does not involve technical standards as described by
the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272)
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is exempt from the CRA because it is a rule of
particular applicability.
Lists of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 261
Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Recycling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Helena Healy,
Director, Land, Chemicals and Redevelopment Division.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the EPA amends 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. Amend table 1 of appendix IX, by adding an entry for ``WRB Refinery
LP'' 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
WRB Refining LP...................... Borger, TX............. Stormwater Solids (F037) generated at a maximum
generation of 7,000 cubic yards.
(1) Delisting Levels: All leachable constituent
concentrations must not exceed the following
levels. The petitioner must use the method
specified in 40 CFR 261.24 to measure
constituents in the waste leachate (mg/L).
Stormwater Solids Leachate: Acenaphthene-219;
Anthracene-534; Antimony-2.52; Arsenic-0.266;
Barium-7.13; Benz(a) anthracene-10.5;
Benzo(a)pyrene-3,960; Benzene-1.59; 2-Cadmium-
2.23; Carbon disulfide-1,150; Chromium-1;
Chrysene-1,050; Cobalt-5.56; Di-n-butyl-
phthalate-507; Ethylbenzene-16.2; Fluoranthrene-
50.7; Fluorene-101; Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene-
371000000000; Lead-14.7; Mercury-1.34;
Naphthalene-1.95; Nickel-279; Pyrene-91.7;
Selenium-18.10; Silver-179; Toluene-311;
Vanadium-85.6; Xylenes, Total-177; Zinc-4,060.
(2) Waste Holding and Handling:
(A) All stormwater solids from tank clean
outs must be tested to assure they have met
the concentrations described in paragraph
(1). Solids that do not meet the
concentrations must be disposed of as
hazardous waste.
(B) Levels of constituents measured in the
samples of the solids that do not exceed the
levels set forth in paragraph (1) are non-
hazardous. WRB Refining can manage and
dispose the non-hazardous stormwater solids
according to all applicable solid waste
regulations.
(C) WRB Refining must maintain a record of
the actual volume of the stormwater solids
to be disposed in the Subtitle D or on-site
landfill according to the requirements in
paragraph (4).
(3) Changes in Operating Conditions: If WRB
Refining significantly changes the process
described in its petition or starts any
processes that may or could affect the
composition or type of waste generated as
established under paragraph (1) (by
illustration, but not limitation, changes in
equipment or operating conditions of the
treatment process), they must notify the EPA in
writing; they may no longer handle the wastes
generated from the new process as nonhazardous
until the test results of the wastes meet the
delisting levels set in paragraph (1) and they
have received written approval to do so from
the EPA.
[[Page 25507]]
(4) Data Submittals: WRB Refining must submit
the information described below. If WRB
Refining fails to submit the required data
within the specified time or maintain the
required records on-site for the specified
time, the EPA, at its discretion, will consider
this sufficient basis to reopen the exclusion
as described in paragraph (5) WRB Refining
must:
(A) Submit the data obtained through
paragraph (3) to the Chief, RCRA Permits &
Solid Waste Section, Mail Code, (6LCR-RP) US
EPA Region 6, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500,
Dallas, TX 75270 within the time specified.
Data may be submitted via email to the
technical contact for the delisting program.
(B) Compile records of operating conditions
and analytical data from paragraph (3),
summarized, and maintained on-site for a
minimum of five years.
(C) Furnish these records and data when the
EPA or the State of Texas request 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. If any of this information is
determined by the 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 the 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, WRB Refining possesses or is
otherwise made aware of any environmental
data (including but not limited to leachate
data or ground water monitoring data) or any
other data relevant to the delisted waste
indicating that any constituent identified
for the delisting verification testing is at
level higher than the delisting level
allowed by the Division Director in granting
the petition, then the facility must report
the data, in writing, to the Division
Director within 10 days of first possessing
or being made aware of that data.
(B) If the verification testing of the waste
does not meet the delisting requirements in
paragraph 1, WRB Refining 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 WRB Refining fails to submit the
information described in paragraphs (4),
(5)(A) or (5)(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 Agency action to
protect human health 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 does require Agency
action, 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 Agency
action is not necessary. The facility shall
have 10 days from the date of the Division
Director's notice to present such
information.
(E) Following the receipt of information from
the facility described in paragraph (5)(D)
or (if no information is presented under
paragraph (5)(D)) the initial receipt of
information described in paragraphs (4),
(5)(A) or (5)(B), the Division Director will
issue a final written determination
describing the Agency actions that are
necessary to protect human health 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: WRB Refining 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 written notification to any
State Regulatory Agency to which, or through
which they will transport the delisted waste
described above for disposal, 60 days before
beginning such activities. If WRB Refining
transports the excluded waste to or manages
the waste in any State with delisting
authorization, WRB Refining must obtain
delisting authorization from that State
before it can manage the waste as
nonhazardous in the State.
(B) Update the one-time written notification
if they ship the delisted waste to a
different disposal facility.
[[Page 25508]]
(C) Failure to provide the notification will
result in a violation of the delisting
variance and a possible revocation of the
exclusion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2025-10542 Filed 6-16-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P