[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 58 (Thursday, March 26, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14666-14673]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-05876]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA-R06-RCRA-2025-13174; FRL-13174-01-R6]
Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
grant an exclusion from the list of hazardous waste to WRB Refining LP
(Petitioner) located in Borger, Texas. This action responds to a
petition to exclude (or delist) up to 700 cubic yards per year of F037
(petroleum refinery sludge) solids to be removed from stormwater
storage tanks for a continuous delisting. If EPA approves the petition
for delisting, the waste will be disposed of in a Subtitle D landfill.
EPA is proposing to grant the petition based on an evaluation of waste-
specific information provided by the Petitioner.
DATES: Comments on this proposed exclusion must be received by April
27, 2026.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Email: [email protected].
Instructions: The EPA must receive your comments by April 27, 2026.
Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-RCRA-2025-13174. The
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov, or email. The Federal regulations.gov website is
an ``anonymous access'' system, which means the EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without
going through https://regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment with any
CBI you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only
in hard copy.
[[Page 14667]]
You can view and copy the delisting petition and associated
publicly available docket materials through https://www.regulations.gov
at: EPA, Region 6, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, Texas 75270. The
EPA facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone
Harry Shah, at (214) 665-6457, before visiting the Region 6 office.
Interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make an
appointment with the office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: E'shala Dixon, RCRA Permits & Solid
Waste Section (LCR-RP), Land, Chemicals and Redevelopment Division, EPA
Region 6, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, TX 75270, telephone
number: (214) 665-6592; email address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Overview Information
II. Background
A. What is the history of the delisting program?
B. What is a delisting petition, and what does it require of a
Petitioner?
C. What factors must the EPA consider in deciding whether to
grant a delisting petition?
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Waste Information and Data
A. What waste did the Petitioner petition the EPA to delist?
B. How did the Petitioner generate the waste?
C. How did the Petitioner sample and analyze the petitioned
waste?
D. What factors did the EPA consider in deciding whether to
grant the delisting petition?
E. How did the EPA evaluate the risk of delisting this waste?
F. What did the EPA conclude?
IV. Conditions of Exclusion
A. How will the Petitioner manage the waste if it is delisted?
B. What is the maximum allowable concentration of hazardous
constituents in the waste?
C. How frequently must the Petitioner test the waste?
D. What data must the Petitioner submit?
E. What happens if the Petitioner fails to meet the conditions
of the exclusion?
F. What must the Petitioner do if the process changes?
V. When would the EPA finalize the proposed delisting exclusion?
VI. How would this action affect states?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
I. Overview Information
The EPA is proposing to grant a May 2020 petition submitted by WRB
Refining LP to exclude (or delist) up to 700 cubic yards annually of
F037 solids from stormwater tanks at their facility in Borger, Texas.
The Petitioner requested a one-time delisting of 7,000 cubic yards
of stormwater tank solids on the basis that the solids would not meet
the original criteria for F037, which would be classified as hazardous
waste due to ``carry over'' of waste codes resulting from RCRA's
``mixture and derived from rules.'' EPA granted that one-time delisting
request in 2025. In the Petition, Petitioners also requested a
continuous delisting for ongoing stormwater tank solids cleanout. This
proposal responds to that portion of the Petition and proposes to grant
a continuous delisting to clean out stormwater tanks annually.
II. Background
A. What is the history of the delisting program?
The EPA published an amended list of hazardous wastes from non-
specific and specific sources on January 16, 1981, as part of its final
and interim final regulations implementing section 3001 of RCRA. The
EPA has amended this list several times and codifies the list in 40 CFR
261.31 and 40 CFR 261.32.
The EPA lists these wastes as hazardous because (1) the wastes
typically and frequently exhibits one or more of the characteristics of
hazardous wastes identified in subpart C of 40 CFR part 261 (that is,
ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity), (2) the wastes
met the criteria for listing contained in 40 CFR 261.11(a)(2) or
(a)(3), or (3) the wastes are mixed with or derived from the treatment,
storage or disposal of such characteristic and listed waste and which
therefore become hazardous under 40 CFR 261.3(a)(2)(iv) or (c)(2)(i),
known as the mixture or derived-from rules, respectively.
Individual waste streams may vary, depending on raw materials,
industrial processes, and other factors. Thus, while a waste described
in part 261 regulations or resulting from the operation of the mixture
or derived-from rules generally is hazardous, a specific waste from an
individual facility may not be hazardous.
For this reason, 40 CFR 260.20 and 40 CFR 260.22 provide an
exclusion procedure, called delisting, which allows the petitioner to
prove that the EPA should not regulate a specific waste from a
particular generating facility as a hazardous waste.
B. What is a delisting petition, and what does it require of a
Petitioner?
A delisting petition is a request from a generator to the EPA or an
authorized state to exclude wastes from the list of hazardous wastes.
The generator petitions the EPA because it does not consider the waste
as hazardous under RCRA regulations.
For a delisting petition, the petitioner must demonstrate that the
wastes generated at a particular facility does not meet any of the
criteria for which the waste was listed. The criteria for which the EPA
lists a waste are in 40 CFR part 261.
In addition, under 40 CFR 260.22, a petitioner must prove that the
waste does not exhibit any of the hazardous waste characteristics (that
is, ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity) and must
present sufficient information for EPA to decide whether factors other
than those for which the wastes was listed warrant retaining it as a
hazardous waste.
Generators remain obligated under RCRA to confirm whether their
waste remains non-hazardous based on the hazardous waste
characteristics even if EPA has ``delisted'' the waste.
C. What factors must the EPA consider in deciding whether to grant a
delisting petition?
Besides considering the criteria in 40 CFR 260.22(a) and 3001(f) of
RCRA 42 U.S.C. 6921(f), EPA must consider any factors (including
additional constituents) aside from those for which EPA listed the
waste, if a reasonable basis exists that these additional factors could
cause the waste to be hazardous.
The EPA must also consider hazardous waste mixtures containing
listed hazardous waste and wastes derived from treating, storing, or
disposing of listed hazardous waste. See 40 CFR part 261.3 (a)(2)(iii)
and (iv) and (c)(2)(i), called the ``mixture'' and ``derived-from''
rules, respectively. These wastes are also eligible for
[[Page 14668]]
exclusion and remain hazardous wastes until they are excluded.
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Waste Information and Data
A. What waste did the Petitioner petition the EPA to delist?
In May 2020, WRB Refining LP petitioned the EPA to exclude from the
list of hazardous wastes contained in 40 CFR 261.31, 7,000 cubic yards
of stormwater tank solids (F037) generated from its facility in Borger,
Texas. EPA granted the Facility a one-time delisting approval in June
2025 to remove 7,000 cubic yards of waste for disposal in a subtitle D
landfill. In anticipation of more frequent cleanout of the stormwater
tanks, Petitioner also requested a continuous delisting of up to 700
cubic yards of stormwater tank solids annually.
B. How did the Petitioner generate the waste?
The Facility has been in operation for approximately 25 years.
Gasoline, diesel, aviation fuel, natural gas liquids, petroleum coke
and solvents are the principal products produced. The subject of this
delisting petition is solids to be removed from four wastewater tanks
(North Stormwater Tank, West Stormwater Tank, North Drop Out Basin, and
West Grit Trap) at the Facility.
The stormwater tank solids originate from operation of the
wastewater treatment system at the Facility. Petitioners explain that
to the extent possible, hydrocarbons present in refinery wastewaters
from various sources (e.g., crude oil, API separator sludge, DAF float,
etc.) are recovered through a ``slop system,'' which has the purpose of
oil recovery.
Oily waste streams are routed to the storage tanks from collection
system piping and/or smaller tanks for recovery. The recovered oil is
further processed within the refinery, and the separated wastewaters
are routed to downstream treatment units and ultimately discharged
through an NPDES/TPDES permitted outfall. In addition, refinery
stormwater flows to those same four stormwater tanks that are the
subject of this proposal. In general, stormwater from the northern
portion of the Natural Gas Liquids Plant flows to the North Drop Out
Basin for primary solids removal and then to the North Stormwater Tank
for secondary removal. Stormwater from the southern portion of the
Refinery flows to the West Grit Trap for primary solids removal and
then to the West Stormwater Tank for secondary removal. The Petition
explains that because these four tanks receive dry weather flows that
could be considered ``oily,'' the Petitioner has elected to classify
them as F037.
The solids within the four tanks are believed to be classified as
F037 when generated, WRB Refining LP assumes that solids removed from
the stormwater tanks bear the F037 (primary oil/water/solids separation
sludge) listing when generated.
In an effort to restore capacity of four stormwater tanks,
Petitioner will remove accumulated solids from the stormwater tanks
annually. This process will typically occur within a calendar year.
Stormwater solids will be removed using a variety of mechanical means,
which generally consists of dredging, excavating, and/or dewatering.
Mechanical equipment will be utilized to extract solids from the tanks.
C. How did the Petitioner sample and analyze the petitioned waste?
A total of eight acceptable sample results were provided by the
Petitioner. The EPA considered all eight samples of the stormwater tank
solids, and the landfill disposal scenario was modeled using the
Delisting Risk Assessment Software (DRAS). The worst-case scenario of
the constituents' concentrations for the F037 solids were used as input
in the model to determine if it would meet the hazardous waste criteria
for which it was listed. The maximum total and leachate concentrations
for the inorganic and organic constituents which were found in the
analytical data provided by the petitioner are presented in table 2.
Table 2--Analytical Results/Maximum Allowable Delisting Concentration Solids From Stormwater Tanks WRB Refining
LP Borger, Texas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum total Maximum TCLP Maximum TCLP
Chemical name concentration concentration (mg/ delisting level
(mg/kg) L) (mg/L)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antimony................................................ 3.46 0.0146 1.28E+6
Arsenic................................................. 5.25 0.0138 1.870E+4
Barium.................................................. 366 1.55 3.380E+7
Beryllium............................................... 0.0455 0.001 5.500E+5
Cadmium................................................. 0.0515 0.00345 7.070E+4
Chromium................................................ 40.40 0.002480 1.620E+4
Cobalt.................................................. 6.650 0.0177 1.470E+5
Lead.................................................... 150.0 0.0487 1.300E+7
Nickel.................................................. 220.0 0.071 9.460E+5
Selenium................................................ 1.000E-10 1.000E-10 4.970E+6
Silver.................................................. 0.04 0.001 7.310E+6
Vanadium................................................ 25.20 0.003 6.760E+6
Zinc.................................................... 465.0 1.380 1.870E+7
Mercury................................................. 0.079 0.000015 1.080E+7
1,2-Dichlorobenzene..................................... 0.0495 0.0002 4.850E+7
1,3-Dichlorobenzene..................................... 0.0495 0.00025 .................
1,4-Dichlorobenzene..................................... 0.085 0.0002 2.450E+6
2,4-Dimethylphenol...................................... 0.027 0.0002 7.780E+7
2,4-Dinitrophenol....................................... 0.037 0.0002 2.34E+7
4-Nitrophenol........................................... 155.0 0.003 .................
Acenaphthene............................................ 0.09 0.00015 1.380E+7
Anthracene.............................................. 0.16 0.00015 1.560E+7
Benz(a)anthracene....................................... 0.13 0.00015 7.510E+3
Benzo(a)pyrene.......................................... 0.095 0.0002 557
Benzo(b)fluoranthene.................................... 0.085 0.0002 4390
Benzo(k)fluoranthene.................................... 0.08 0.00035 52000
[[Page 14669]]
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate.............................. 0.6 0.0004 1.840E+8
Chrysene................................................ 0.17 0.0004 737000
Di-n-butyl-phthalate.................................... 0.002850 0.0004 468000
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene................................... 0.03050 0.0003 587
Diethyl Phthalate....................................... 0.0085 0.00035 2.52E+9
Dimethyl Phthalate...................................... 0.017 0.00025 .................
Fluoranthene............................................ 0.42 0.0002 4230000
Fluorene................................................ 0.085 0.0002 4230000
Indeno(1,2,3,-cd)pyrene................................. 0.06 0.0003 9540
Naphthalene............................................. 0.09 0.00235 141000
Phenanthrene............................................ 0.6 0.0002 .................
Phenol.................................................. 0.009 0.0002 5.070E+9
Pyrene.................................................. 0.46 0.00015 463000
Pyridine................................................ 0.0075 0.00015 3.600E+7
1,1,1,-Trichloroethane.................................. 0.00041 0.005 7.700E+8
1,1,-Dichloroethane..................................... 0.00041 0.004 5.910E+7
1,2-Dichloroethane...................................... 0.00049 0.005 257000
1,4-Dioxane............................................. 0.0165 0.41 2510000
Acetone................................................. 0.00165 0.02 4.490E+9
Benzene................................................. 0.095 0.006 759000
Carbon disulfide........................................ 0.013 0.009 5.150E+7
Chlorobenzene........................................... 0.00049 0.004 3.020E+7
Chloroform.............................................. 0.00041 0.05 134000
Ethylbenzene............................................ 0.00315 0.005 2000000
Styrene................................................. 0.00055 0.005 2.490E+8
Toluene................................................. 0.018 0.005 1.470E+8
Trichloroethene......................................... 1.000E+10 0.005 262000
Xylenes, Total.......................................... 0.0049 0.05 3.140E+8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
D. What factors did the EPA consider in deciding whether to grant the
delisting petition?
In reviewing this petition, we considered the original listing
criteria and the additional factors required by the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). See 222 of HSWA, 42 U.S.C. 6921(f),
and 40 CFR 260.22(d)(2) through (4). We evaluated the petitioned waste
against the listing criteria and factors cited in 40 CFR 261.22(a)(2)
and (3).
In addition to the criteria in 40 CFR 260.22(a), 261.11(a)(2) and
(3), 42 U.S.C. 6921(f), and in the background documents for the listed
wastes, the EPA also considered factors (including additional
constituents) other than those for which EPA listed the waste of these
additional factors could cause the waste to be hazardous.
Our proposed decision to grant the Facility's petition is based on
our evaluation of the wastes for factors or criteria which could cause
the waste to be hazardous. These factors included: (1) whether the
waste is considered acutely toxic; (2) the toxicity of the
constituents; (3) the concentrations of the constituents in the waste;
(4) the tendency of the constituents to migrate and to bioaccumulate;
(5) the persistence in the environment of any constituents once
released from the waste; (6) plausible and specific types of management
of the petitioned waste; (7) the quantity of waste produced; and (8)
waste variability.
The EPA must also consider hazardous wastes mixture containing
listed hazardous wastes and wastes derived from treating, storing, or
disposing of listed hazardous waste. See 40 CFR 261.3(a)(2)(iv) and
(c)(2)(i) called the ``mixture'' and ``derived-from'' rules,
respectively. Mixture and derived-from wastes are also eligible for
exclusion but remain hazardous until excluded.
E. How did the EPA evaluate the risk of delisting this waste?
For this proposed delisting determination, we 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 the Petitioner's
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 https://www.epa.gov/hw/hazardous-waste-delisting-risk-assessment-software-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 stormwater runoff, DRAS evaluates the exposure to a
human receptor by fish ingestion and ingestion of drinking water. From
the 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
[[Page 14670]]
soil and subsequent ingestion of the contaminated soil by a child.
F. What did EPA conclude?
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). In making the
initial delisting determination, the EPA evaluated the petitioned waste
against the listing criteria and factors cited in 40 CFR 261.11(a)(2)
and (a)(3). Based on this review, the EPA agrees with the Petitioner
that the petitioned waste is nonhazardous 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 propose 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 the waste from the Petitioner's facility is based on
the information submitted in support of this rule, including
description of the wastes and analytical data from the Facility, and
that is contained in the Petition and attachments, all of which are
included in the docket of this action.
IV. Conditions of Exclusion
A. How will the Petitioner manage the waste if it is delisted?
If the petitioned waste is delisted as proposed, the Petitioner
must dispose of the waste in a Subtitle D landfill which is permitted,
licensed, or registered by a state to manage industrial waste. The
Petitioners stated that, if the delisting is approved, the landfill
will likely be an onsite landfill (Notice of Registration Unit No. 045)
authorized under Title 30 of the Texas Administrative Code (TAC),
Chapter 335.
B. What is the maximum allowable concentrations of hazardous
constituents in the waste?
The EPA notes that in some instances the maximum allowable total
constituents' concentrations provided by the DRAS model exceed 100% of
the waste-these DRAS results are an artifact of the risk calculations
that do not have physical meaning. In instances where DRAS predicts a
maximum constituent greater than 100% of the waste (that is, greater
than 1,000,000 mg/kg or mg/L, respectively, for total and TCLP
concentrations), the EPA is not proposing to require the Petitioner to
perform sampling and analysis for that constituent and sampling type
(total or TCLP).
C. How frequently must the Petitioner test the waste?
The testing approach for this waste stream will be conducted as
generated. Prior to disposal of any future tank cleanouts, the
Petitioner must conduct sampling and analysis as described in the
delisting sampling and analysis plan and ensure that the waste does not
exceed the delisting parameters. If compliance with the delisting
parameters is demonstrated with analytical testing (TCLP analysis), the
Petitioner may dispose of the stormwater tank cleanouts in a Subtitle D
landfill. The annual volume of solids generated from the tank clean
outs may not exceed 700 cubic yards. The annual sampling report shall
include the volume of solids disposed of in the landfill, as well as
annual testing event data. The Petitioner should monitor and report
increasing trends of constituents which will affect the overall
compliance with the stormwater discharge permit.
D. What data must the Petitioner submit?
The Petitioner must submit the data obtained through verification
testing to the U.S. EPA Region 6, Office of Land, Chemicals and
Redevelopment Division, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, LCRRP, Dallas,
Texas 75270-2102, within 30 days after receiving the results from the
laboratory. These results may be submitted electronically to Harry
Shah, [email protected]. The Petitioner must make those records
available for inspection. All data must be accompanied by a signed copy
of the certification statement in 40 CFR 260.22(i)(12).
E. What happens if the Petitioner fails to meet the conditions of the
exclusion?
If this Petitioner violates the terms and conditions established in
the exclusion, the Agency may start procedures to withdraw the
exclusion. Additionally, the terms of the exclusion provide that ``any
waste volume for which representative composite sampling does not
reflect full compliance with the exclusion criteria must continue to be
managed as hazardous.''
If the testing of the waste does not demonstrate compliance with
the delisting concentrations described in section IV.C. above, or other
data (including but not limited to leachate data or groundwater
monitoring data from the final land disposal facility) relevant to the
delisted waste indicates that any constituent is at a concentration in
the waste above the specified delisting verification concentrations in
table 1, the Petitioner must notify the Agency within 10 days, or a
later date as the EPA may agree to in writing, after receiving the
final verification testing results from the laboratory or of first
possessing or being made aware of other relevant data. The EPA may
require the Petitioner to conduct additional verification sampling to
better define the volume of waste for which the corresponding
representative sample(s) do not reflect full compliance with delisting
exclusion levels, the exclusion by its terms does not apply, and the
waste must be managed as hazardous.
The EPA has the authority under RCRA and the Administrative
Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551 to reopen a delisting decision if we
receive new information indicating that the condition of this exclusion
have been violated or are otherwise not being met.
F. What must the Petitioner do if the process changes?
Any process changes or addition implemented at the Petitioner's
facility which would significantly impact the constituent concentration
of the waste must be reported to the EPA in accordance with Condition
VI. of the exclusion language.
V. When would the EPA finalize the proposed delisting exclusion?
HSWA specifically requires the EPA to provide notice and an
opportunity for public comments before granting or denying a final
exclusion. Thus, the EPA will not make a final decision or grant an
exclusion until it has addressed all timely public comments, including
any at public hearings. Upon receipt and consideration of all comments,
the EPA will publish its final determination as a final rule. Since
this rule would reduce the existing requirements for persons generating
hazardous wastes, the regulated community does not need
[[Page 14671]]
the six-month period to come into compliance in accordance with 3010 of
RCRA, as amended by HSWA.
VI. How would this action affect States?
Because EPA is proposing to issue this exclusion under the federal
RCRA delisting regulations, only states subject to federal RCRA
delisting provisions will be affected. This exclusion may not be
effective in states which have received authorization from the EPA to
make their own delisting decisions.
RCRA allows states to impose more stringent regulatory requirements
from RCRA's under 3009 of RCRA. These more stringent requirements may
include a provision that prohibits a federally issued exclusion from
taking effect in the state. We urge Petitioners to contact the state
regulatory authority to establish the status of its wastes under the
state law.
The EPA has also authorized some states to administer a delisting
program in place of the federal program, that is, to make state
delisting decisions. Therefore, this exclusion does not apply in those
states. If the Petitioner manages wastes in any state with delisting
authorization, the Petitioner must obtain delisting authorization or
other determination from the receiving state before it can manage the
wastes as nonhazardous in that state.
VII. 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 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 not 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 Tribe 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).
Lists of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 261
Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, Recycling, and Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Eunice Varughese,
Director, Land, Chemicals and Redevelopment Division.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 261 as follows:
PART 261--IDENTIFICATION AND LISTING OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
0
1. The authority citation for part 261 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6921, 6922, 6924(y) and
6938.
0
2. Amend table 1 of appendix IX to part 261 by revising the entry ``WRB
Refining 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
700 cubic yards
annually.
[[Page 14672]]
(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:
Antimony-1280000;
Arsenic-.18700;
Barium-33800000;
Benz(a) anthracene-
7510; Benzo(a)pyrene-
557 Benzene-759000;
Cadmium-70700; Carbon
disulfide-51500000;
Chromium-.162000;
Chrysene-737000;
Cobalt-147000; Di-n-
butyl-phthalate-
4680000; Ethylbenzene-
2000000;
Fluoranthrene-258000;
Fluorene-4230000;
Indeno (1,2,3-
cd)pyrene-9540 Lead-
13000000; Mercury-
.13000000;
Naphthalene-141000;
Nickel-946000; Pyrene-
463000; Selenium-
4970000; Silver-
7310000; Toluene-
147000000; Vanadium-
6760000; Xylenes,
Total- 314000000;
Zinc-18700000.
(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 LP can
manage and dispose
the non-hazardous
stormwater solids
according to all
applicable solid
waste regulations.
(C) WRB Refining LP
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 LP
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.
(4) Data Submittals:
WRB Refining LP must
submit the
information described
below. If WRB
Refining LP 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 LP 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 LP
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 a
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 LP 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
LP 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.
[[Page 14673]]
(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 LP 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 LP
transports the
excluded waste to
or manages the
waste in any state
with delisting
authorization, WRB
Refining LP must
obtain delisting
authorization from
that state before
it can manage the
waste as
nonhazardous in
that state.
(B) Update the one-
time written
notification if
they ship the
delisted waste to
a different
disposal facility.
(C) Failure to
provide the
notification will
result in a
violation of the
delisting variance
and a possible
revocation of the
exclusion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2026-05876 Filed 3-25-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P